Detroit interested in Marleau

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Look at the numbers closely. The only guys on that list who are not two-way forwards are Thornton and Cheechoo, and they are the only ones with a high +/- rating. Perhaps reflective of their crazy chemistry, which also resulted in a crazy number of points. Save Eckman, no one has a high enough +/- rating being a two-way forward. Guys like Marleau and McCauley constantly go up against the best forwards of the opposition, which results in them being on ice for more goals against, hence their weak +/- rating. In any case, there isn't a big difference between -3 and + 3.

+/- can be a useful stat but in this discussion it doesn't help determine who is the better player. San Jose was on an awful skid until Thornton came to town, while Datsyuk's team pretty much coasted during the regular season.

I guess i'm just not going to convince anybody on this one. For me, I don't need a smoking gun. Look at San Jose's stats from 2004 and 2006 (damn that lockout always rears its ugly head)

Marleau is the only top player who can't post a plus. There's no crazy da vinci code here, the writing is on the wall. You are right, there's not much difference between +3 and -3. However, when your top 10 scorers are all pluses (save McCaluley) and you are not, something is there. And it isn't like Marleau was -3. He wasn't -6, or -9 either. He was MINUS FREAKING 12!!!!!

Okay, i'm exhausted. There's a reason why Marleau is a team worst -12. And the reason is that he's not that good defensively. Of course nobody believes me and i've heard every excuse short of Marleau had to play 1 against 3 against every top line in the league so i'm letting the defensive aspect of the Datsyuk vs Marleau debate die. I don't know what else to say on this topic.

[FunkyBlueFish203 0]

If he wasn't that good defensively, Ron Wilson wouldn't keep putting him out there against top scorers.

I haven't checked out San Jose's lineup. Marleau was a -12, okay, others were +1 and +3 and whatever. Not a gigantic difference. Among all of those guys, he's likely the one with the most TOI, hence on ice for more of the mishaps.

[Andy Pred 48 337]

I guess i'm just not going to convince anybody on this one. For me, I don't need a smoking gun. Look at San Jose's stats from 2004 and 2006 (damn that lockout always rears its ugly head)

Marleau is the only top player who can't post a plus. There's no crazy da vinci code here, the writing is on the wall. You are right, there's not much difference between +3 and -3. However, when your top 10 scorers are all pluses (save McCaluley) and you are not, something is there. And it isn't like Marleau was -3. He wasn't -6, or -9 either. He was MINUS FREAKING 12!!!!!

Okay, i'm exhausted. There's a reason why Marleau is a team worst -12. And the reason is that he's not that good defensively. Of course nobody believes me and i've heard every excuse short of Marleau had to play 1 against 3 against every top line in the league so i'm letting the defensive aspect of the Datsyuk vs Marleau debate die. I don't know what else to say on this topic.

Don't worry mate I'm with you on this one, I pointed it out earlier about Dats better defensive play but hey what do I

know, i'm just a limey right. The big question is we seem to be looking for this 40+ goalscorer and some of us are willing to give up one of the elite playmakers to get him. Doesn't add up to me, say the deal goes thru as a straight

swap, Marleau gets us 30 goals, yippee.. oh wait a minute, we haven't got a player who was setting up 60 goals.

Seems a fair deal, except we could be 20-30 goals down on last season anyway which is where we were at before

we traded for him. End deal is, more ice time for Marleau = better personal stats but a - team stat.

Answer; we keep Datsyuk and bring up one of our youngsters to chip in. We keep cap space salary for the trade

at the deadline before the p/o start. This way 1 or maybe 2 of our younger guys have got 30-40 odd games behind

them with hopefully a few points in the bag and a taste of what its all about. And if at the end of next year Dats is playing hardball with his contract, let him go and my boy Filppulla will be ready to take over.

[bringback91 2]

then why chime in on a post that wasn't directed at you?

Oh, harold. Surely you've never done the same to anyone. Besides, "chimeing" in on posts is what most are here for.

[bringback91 2]

Not that much. Brind'Amour was tied for 67th in +/- for forwards at +8

If +/- isn't a factor, I'm curious as to what dictates the leauges best defensive forward. Is it voted on by a certain group or something.

AndyPred, your not the only one. Just most of the time, in any thread about Dats, you'll get dominated with a flood of posts trying to rip down a great hockey player soley based on two playoff performances. As big of a detremant to the team they would try to lead you to believe, they never want to give any credit for his part in a Stanley Cup win. The guy is a great player, and yes I believe better than Patty. Just watch this season, no matter how well he performs night in and night out, it'll always be "Wait til the playoffs!! "

[RyanBarnes! 293]

No, at this point it doesn't. While Marleau is better than Datsyuk and we would need to send an additional pick or player to balance it out, including Kronwall in this deal makes this a deal far too favorable for the Sharks.

Clearly you're familiar with Carle and that would have to count for something, but I still think replacing Datsyuk with Marleau would have a bigger impact on this team than replacing Kronwall with Carle. Besides, there's no way Datsyuk plus a throw in would fetch Marleau. Datsyuk simply hasn't enough value to the Sharks for such a deal to go through.

If +/- isn't a factor, I'm curious as to what dictates the leauges best defensive forward. Is it voted on by a certain group or something.

Yes, the winner is selected in a poll by the Professional Hockey Writers' Association.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

Oh, harold. Surely you've never done the same to anyone. Besides, "chimeing" in on posts is what most are here for.

Considering how many times you've claimed I argue with you just for the sake of arguing, I find it a little funny that you felt the need to jump in to a conversation that didn't involve you just to say you felt he had made his point.

Chiming in with something even remotely related to the topic is what most are here for. But jumping in to say you think someone has made their point, not so much.

If you feel like arguing or complaining or whatever, PM me. Our lovers quarrels have already derailed too many threads as it is.

(Edited for clarity)

Edited September 12, 2006 by haroldsnepsts

[eva unit zero 271]

As I posted re: why Leetch doesn't make sense;

Schneider+Datsyuk=Marleau+McLaren?

Or perhaps

Schneider+Datsyuk+Williams=Marleau+McLaren+Grier?

[rage 24]

Null on all acounts.

How about that?

[norrisnick 1]

As I posted re: why Leetch doesn't make sense;

Schneider+Datsyuk=Marleau+McLaren?

Or perhaps

Schneider+Datsyuk+Williams=Marleau+McLaren+Grier?

All the players on the left have lower trade values than their counterparts on the right. That sort of makes the trades tricky to pull off...

[Son of a Wing 1,644]

How about:

Datsyuk and Schneider for Marleau and Murray/Davison

[eva unit zero 271]

All the players on the left have lower trade values than their counterparts on the right. That sort of makes the trades tricky to pull off...

Schneider, a top offensive defenseman is worth more to the Sharks (zero top offensive defensemen) than McLaren, a really solid defensive defenseman is worth to the Wings (3 really solid defensive defensemen) even though Schneider is older and makes more.

Datsyuk and Marleau, well, that's been hashed and rehashed.

Williams vs Grier? Williams is 26, Grier is almost 32. Williams costs only a few hundred thousand more, and scored more goals last season than Grier has scored in the last THREE seasons combined, or in any single season in his career. The same is true of assists and points.

With this trade, San Jose likely wouldn't put Bell on Thornton's line. Instead, You would likely see Williams or Michalek there, with Bell playing on the second line centered by Datsyuk, and the other wing being one of Williams or Michalek.

Before Bell was traded, weren't people saying to trade Hudler for Dats and put together a 'Bell-Dats-Williams' line? Well that's what San Jose would have. If it was a good idea for us as a first line, why not for them as a second line?

The only sticking point with the additions of Grier and Williams is something I hadn't previously realized; Grier was signed this summer as a UFA. So if Williams was in, we'd likely see some mid-round pick in return.

[Lou_Siffer 1]

As I posted re: why Leetch doesn't make sense;

Schneider+Datsyuk=Marleau+McLaren?

Or perhaps

Schneider+Datsyuk+Williams=Marleau+McLaren+Grier?

Why is it that i find almost all of your posts to be of the insane variety? Those trade proposals are just utterly ridiculous...im sorry. And wasnt it you who mentioned a Marleau for Schneider swap before? You VASTLY overrate Schneider's value.

[eva unit zero 271]

Why is it that i find almost all of your posts to be of the insane variety? Those trade proposals are just utterly ridiculous...im sorry. And wasnt it you who mentioned a Marleau for Schneider swap before? You VASTLY overrate Schneider's value.

I replied to a post about a Marleau-Schneider swap.

Schneider's alue to San Jose is far greater than his value to Detroit; remember--San Jose DOES NOT HAVE NICKLAS LIDSTROM.

Mathieu Schneider would, BY FAR, be the best offensive defenseman in San Jose, and probaly the best overall defenseman. Right now they have a bunch of guys who are skilled defensively and weak offensively. Our defense doesn't benefit as much by swapping Schneider for McLaren as theirs does swapping McLaren for Schneider.

Now, if I were to try and rebuild a proposal like this to, say, Los Angeles?

Replace McLaren with Miller, swap Marleau for Conroy. The Wings get better cap relief but weaker players, and it still might not be as likely LA would do this as San Jose would do the comparable package.

Why, you ask?

Well, LA has Rob Blake and Lubomir Visnovsky already as offensive guys without much defensive game. Miller is their second best defensive defenseman, and after him is Brent Sopel. Despite being a worse defensder and worse in general, Miller has more value to LA than McLaren has to San Jose, and Schneider is not as valuable to LA as he is to San Jose.

Conroy isn't quite the offensive whize Marleau is, but he brings Selke-type defense and a solid physical game. That said, Marleau is TONS faster and much younger.

Conroy is a player I have always liked, and if I could swap Dats and Schneider for him and a physical, defensive guy with Schneider's overall ability, I would do it in a SECOND.

[Lou_Siffer 1]

My problem is that its like you're not even factoring in age. You cant just look at Schneider's stats and say ok, he has alot of trade value because of this. The guy is 37 years old, not every guy around that age is able to sustain their level of play like Lidstrom. Theres always the high risk that this will be the year he really shows his age and breaks down. He's a short term acquisition, and because of that his value is diminished significantly. Now am i saying SJ wouldnt want him for a year? Absolutely not, im just saying theres no way they give up Kyle McLaren for him. If they felt they could move McLaren, they would look to exchange him for a younger offensive dman than Matt (like Sheldon Souray for an off the top of my head example). So that is why i felt your proposals were WAY off, because we also know that Marleau has alot more value than Datsyuk as well...which made the deals way too lopsided.

[Rice 42]

In response to the Schneider/Datsyuk proposals, why would San Jose trade Marleau (a fan favorite/franchise player) for two guys that are UFA's next season, one of them 37 years old?

[Son of a Wing 1,644]

In response to the Schneider/Datsyuk proposals, why would San Jose trade Marleau (a fan favorite/franchise player) for two guys that are UFA's next season, one of them 37 years old?

Not all trades are focused on building for the future. They desperately need a playoff quarterback and Carle is not ready to fill that roll all season. .....oh and I dont know why you seem to think Dasyuk is unrestricted next year.

[swedishconnection 36]

Not all trades are focused on building for the future. They desperately need a playoff quarterback and Carle is not ready to fill that roll all season. .....oh and I dont know why you seem to think Dasyuk is unrestricted next year.

because he simply is.

http://www.redwingscentral.com/features/orgchart.html

top player on the chart.

[Rice 42]

Not all trades are focused on building for the future. They desperately need a playoff quarterback and Carle is not ready to fill that roll all season. .....oh and I dont know why you seem to think Dasyuk is unrestricted next year.

Yeah, but if a teams getting completely ripped off by trading a franchise center like Marleau (who's signed through 07-08) and other players for two guys who might not be on their team next season (yes, Datsyuk is unrestricted next year), the Sharks wouldnt do it.

Edited September 17, 2006 by ARice89

[eva unit zero 271]

My problem is that its like you're not even factoring in age. You cant just look at Schneider's stats and say ok, he has alot of trade value because of this. The guy is 37 years old, not every guy around that age is able to sustain their level of play like Lidstrom. Theres always the high risk that this will be the year he really shows his age and breaks down. He's a short term acquisition, and because of that his value is diminished significantly. Now am i saying SJ wouldnt want him for a year? Absolutely not, im just saying theres no way they give up Kyle McLaren for him. If they felt they could move McLaren, they would look to exchange him for a younger offensive dman than Matt (like Sheldon Souray for an off the top of my head example). So that is why i felt your proposals were WAY off, because we also know that Marleau has alot more value than Datsyuk as well...which made the deals way too lopsided.

If Schneider's production dropped by 50%, he would be equal to Souray.

Souray has scored more than 11 points twice in his career. McLaren has scored 14 or more points in all but two years--and in those years, he played less than 40 games and still scored 8 points.

Trading McLaren for the older, less consistent, less experienced, worse defensively Souray makes zero sense for the Sharks. Schneider, even if old, make more sense than Souray because even though he will decline, he's still going to put out a lot of offense. Playing on a Sharks unit with the guys like Hannan and Ehrhoff, he doesn't have to be Lidstrom defensively.

So while yes, it probably wouldn't go down Schneider/Dats for Marleau/McLaren, I remind you that was suggested as a potential 'two-in-one' sort ofthing that could solve a question that had been posed. I t was intended more as a starting point for a more realistic proposal than one of those pwfc 'omfg i made this NHL2k trade and the Wings should do it too!!!111ONE!1' deals

I don't think the value is that far off, but fine tuning might be required.

[norrisnick 1]

I don't think the value is that far off, but fine tuning might be required.

Probably, but I doubt you'd approve of tossing in Kronner...

[eva unit zero 271]

Probably, but I doubt you'd approve of tossing in Kronner...

The value is not that far off.

Unless you are suggesting switching Kronwall with Schneider. Which I think is too lopsided in favor of SJ. Datsyuk is not much older than Marleau, and their skill level is comparable. Kronwall is just as good as McLaren and is much younger and cheaper.

Personally, I think it would be silly to trade one of our centers for another center...but I've simply been working off the Datsyuk/Marleau and Schneider/Marleau ideas to find something within that realm that works.

I would prefer something that would bring back a winger instead of a center. Maybe something like Datsyuk/Schneider to the Isles for Hunter, Zhitnik, and a pick.

[Detroit # 1 Fan 2,204]

The value is not that far off.

Unless you are suggesting switching Kronwall with Schneider. Which I think is too lopsided in favor of SJ. Datsyuk is not much older than Marleau, and their skill level is comparable. Kronwall is just as good as McLaren and is much younger and cheaper.

Personally, I think it would be silly to trade one of our centers for another center...but I've simply been working off the Datsyuk/Marleau and Schneider/Marleau ideas to find something within that realm that works.

I would prefer something that would bring back a winger instead of a center. Maybe something like Datsyuk/Schneider to the Isles for Hunter, Zhitnik, and a pick.

Wow , if we gave up datsyuk & schneider for zhitnik & hunter , holland would be a baffon , & how you can say mclauren is better defensively then souray amazies me.

[eva unit zero 271]

Wow , if we gave up datsyuk & schneider for zhitnik & hunter , holland would be a baffon , & how you can say mclauren is better defensively then souray amazies me.

Schneider and Datsyuk are UFAs at the end of this season.

Yes, it would be downgrading in player ability, but we'd be getting a pick back as well, not to mention a skilled natural scoring winger who is gritty. Zhitnik is better defensively than Schneider as well--most posters on here would rather have a more defensively capable defenseman-like Zhitnik-than Schneider. While as far as players go we lose on straight up ability, getting two guys who are solid and a pick is better than getting nothing at all.

EDIT: McLaren is better defensively than Souray, and that's mainly a product of better mobility and positioning. Souray was badly exposed last season as a guy with poor positioning and slow feet, now that he can't latch on to guys.

Edited September 24, 2006 by eva unit zero

[Remember 19 0]

Hellooooooo wake up Kenny get off your desk and sign Yanic Perreault His is a good faceoff guy which we need and can score 22 goals dududu