kickazz

There's a lot of strawman going on here. His issue has been that people have overestimated GR players. In reality he may be doing the same exact thing for Mantha. I don't know what Mantha will score because he's not even played a significant amount of games in the NHL yet. So yes it is far-fetched to predict he will score 20-25 goals in the NHL level, because AHL doesn't translate to NHL and we've seen it time and again. Years ago I (and number9) called it and said it's far-fetched to predict Pulkinen would score anywhere close to the goals people were predicting of him. I remember getting a lot of heat for it. And now I see the same people talking about throwing Pulkinen in a trade. Something that would have been blasphemy 2 years ago. I'm not sure why you feel the need to defend Mantha anyways. I mean Mantha could score 40 goals and I'd be ecstatic. My point was that it's hypocritical to point out others for hyping up GR players or 20 year olds (Larkin, AA) when someone does the same exact thing for Mantha. 20-25 goals would be a leading scorer on our team. That's hyping it up. Nothing wrong with it. But if someone is going to rag on others about making predictions for other players then it's hypocritical if they do the same.

I mean I guess you can "Lol" if you don't understand the concept. It's simple. There's a lack of available defenseman in the league. No one is trading their 1D that's actually a quality 1D. We have Fowler available, maybe Trouba, very unlikely that Barrie is but there's a chance. There will be a bidding war if Anaheim proceeds to trying to trade him. Plenty of trade partners for Anaheim, not many for Detroit. But you know, if you want to live the dream then do so. We all know Jurco's going to be a top six winger. And Pulkinnen is going to be a stud. And Smith will be the next Lidstrom.

Lol if you think Nyquist or Tatar get you Fowler. The package will include a top prospect at the very least. Ya'll are acting like the Wings are the only team that can offer a 2nd line Winger (in our case 3rd line wingers who happened to underproduce). There's teams that will throw that in and much more just to outbid the Wings. Holland wouldn't budge if that's the case. And I'd agree with him.

Lol 6 more goals on 24 less chances; 5% better PP percent, rank 1 vs 18. Like I said, you're nitpicking here. Anyways, whether or not it's "silly" to call Fowler mediocre, it doesn't change the fact that the trade would likely be a high risk, low reward scenario. If a trade happens to get a top D-man, it will be costly for us. And the way I see it, whatever move we make it likely will be a one time thing. I don't see Holland making more than one impactfull trade (if that). So make it count.

By assets, in this case I was alluding to the best of our prospect pool. So Mantha, AA, Svetchnikov. Which we would have to give up. If so, then it should be for someone who can legitimately make an significant impact for us. But if not, then someone who can at the very least have the higher potential (I've already said I think Trouba has the higher potential than Fowler given the differnces in their age and favorable numbers for Trouba in many of the stats). Resorting to Fowler and giving up the best trade asset doesn't sound like a solution to me. To me that sounds like going for the least best option (assuming Trouba is an option btw).

Let's not try to nitpick points here. Who was the top powerplay team in the league last year? Our offense was bad. Anaheim's was better overall and the best on special teams. 17 of Fowlers 28 points came on Anaheim's PP. Now bring him to the Red Wings version of 2015/16 PP and I'd like to see how his numbers would then be. Fowler is being overrated. He's not that good. Giving up our best assets for mediocrity is pointless when it won't really make a big enough impact. Maybe there was a point where I thought bringing Fowler in would be a good idea, but I've shifted my opinion on the matter after looking into his numbers and what we would have to give up.

See previous posts, it's in there somewhere. Once you complete your quest you can turn it in for some XP.

Top 2 in minutes, but not in quality. Not much different than DK being our top 2. Or Zetterberg being our 1C/2C in terms of minutes but not in quality. Besides, his 22 minutes didn't really pay off when they got eliminated by the 7th seed Nashville in the playoffs. So, I'm thinking, "22 minutes on a team that got KO'd 1st round by a 7th seeded team". See how I can twist the narrative too?

Ah okay. Well he's not that good at shot suppression, shot generation, pretty terrible shooting percent, not much of a possession juggernaut, seems to be on ice for more goals against than goals for, comparable to DK with shot blocking, and giving up the puck, doesn't really use his body much (had half the hits as DK did over the course of the season). But you know, he plays 22 minutes so he will fit nicely in the 1D role. None of the other stuff matters cause minutes. Fowler + DK will be the pair to get us the Cup. For the Red Wings yes, but between his season with Caps and then with the Wings his production went down. Probably because the Caps are a better team.

Oh my bad, let me correct that to $12 million.

Fowler got his points on a "top team" like you yourself said. "A team that won their division". What's the guarantee he would do the same in an offensively defective team like ours? (see Mike Green). Fowler is maybe slightly better than DK. But not by much. For the record, I don't even think DK is a top 2 D-man. I've already said, Trouba is younger. He probably has bigger room to improve than both of them. If we had a choice between the 3, I'd hope the other two are higher on the list. Trouba is probably more worth the gamble imo if he's to come here to play top 2. Is he a top 2? Idk. But definitely a better risk-benefit situation than Fowler is. Plus he'd be cheaper over the course of the contract.

Part of the equation

I mean I would go for Trouba or Barrie, I just think Fowler is the lesser of the 3. Trouba is younger and likely has a higher upside. He'll also be cheaper in the long run for us. Barrie is similar in age to Fowler but significantly a better scorer. When I think of Fowler, I think of limbo. When I think of Trouba, I think how he hasn't even hit his prime yet or is close to it. When I think of Barrie I think of "holy s*** give me those 50 points on the blue line". Barrie is also the cheaper option for the long run. If we're giving away our 1st round pick then it should be a legit upgrade.

Why give up your best assets we possess for "better than what we have" If we're going all in it should probably be for someone who can make a significant impact. Not someone who would be a mediocre 1D. Mediocrity has been the biggest issue on this team for the past like 5 years. Let's pretend like we bring him in. In a couple years we would have $13+ million dedicated to DK and Fowler as our top pair. That's a joke.

Put it this way, on a team with a legit 1D, he wouldn't be one. We need a big upgrade imo. But. If we're going for Fowler type of mediocre production then I'd suggest go for someone younger like Trouba because he's only 22 (unlike Folwer). If we're going for someone with the similar age range as Fowler, then Tyson Barrie would probably be a better option. Fowler to me is an inferior option between those two.

So you think he's a number 1 then? I'm just trying to see what you think of him. If you're using his TOI to determine that then his production and numbers aren't all that good for a 1D. At least not the type of upgrade we need to make a significant impact. Remember you suggested they move one of Mantha, AA, Tatar plus either Smith or a second rounder for Fowler.

And where were your experts when Datsyuk and Zetterberg were under the radar for almost 2-3 years after coming into the NHL? Oh yeah they were high on Barret Jackman and Rick Dipietro. And we all know how those guys turned out.

Fowler will never be a top 2. And if a player isn't top 2 (something we need) then trading assets for him doesn't make any sense. Unless you think he is or will be top 2... and if you do then you're hyping him.

The most interesting man doesn't always shut up. But when he does, it's to avoid a LGW permaban.

He's as good or better than most of our D-men at least when looking at his age.

Lmao

The point isn't what Mantha will or won't do. Dickie takes issue when others talk about how 20 or so year olds like Larkin or AA will be great players but when it comes to Mantha he's doing the exact same thing. If anything at least Larkin and AA are proven NHL rookies, Mantha hasn't even sniffed more than 10 NHL games yet. To make ANY sort of prediction in Mantha's scoring rate is probably more far fetched than to make predictions on Larkin or AA.

Yeah that's overhyping lol. Guy hasn't even played like 20 games in the NHL and hes already scoring 20-25 and leading the Red Wings in goal scoring (with that range).

He probably thinks Eichel is at another level than Larkin because Eichel was picked number 2 and Larkin was picked number 15 and because the Canadian press overhyped McDavid and Eichel and whatever they say is the bible of hockey. Eichel and Larkin are at a similar level with Eichel having a bit of better season. McDavid is on another level. That's how their rookie seasons turned out to be. I mean Eichel could score 40 points less than Larkin and somehow Eichel will still be the better player because that's the hype train. Lol ignore math freak NERDY data but blindly follow the hockey press as if it's the second coming of christ, like a nerd. Nerds everywhere. EVERYWHERE.

Bit hypocritical here. You JUST made the point of overhyping 20 year olds and Mantha has played like 10 NHL games yet somehow he's has the ability to replace Nyquist and Tatar. It sounds like you're overhyping Mantha to me.