Lines Thread

[joesuffP 1,746]

Maybe to replace Sheahan after he is moved for Yandle

[e_prime 1,936]

Maybe to replace Sheahan after he is moved for Yandle

So now we're getting Yandle and Vermette from the 'Yotes?

For Sheahan and what else?

That'd be bordering on the biggest "hockey trade" we've seen in ages... and by we I mean, the Detroit Red Wings.

Is Holland even capable of making a trade like that?

Lines:

Z centering Franzen and Nyquist

Datsyuk centering Helm and Weiss

Tatar - Sheahan - Jurco

Miller - Glendennninining - Abs

Kronwall - Smith

Dekeyser - Quincey

Ericsson - XO

[rick zombo 3,739]

So now we're getting Yandle and Vermette from the 'Yotes?

For Sheahan and what else?

That'd be bordering on the biggest "hockey trade" we've seen in ages... and by we I mean, the Detroit Red Wings.

Is Holland even capable of making a trade like that?

No kidding eh.

I wouldn't trade Sheahan for Vermette straight up, especially if he's a rental looking for 6M per.

[Jesusberg 1,256]

I dunno. I'm jonesing for a big trade, but if Helm and Franzen are our most expendable forwards, then we're in pretty good shape. And, realistically, Holland couldn't get much for those two even if he wanted to. I mean, that's not me trying to knock them, I'm just saying - I can't imagine there's much trade value between the two of them. And are we really that eager to move Helm so we can bring in...Mitch Callahan? A fourth-line winger who can't play center, can't skate like Helm, probably can't work like Helm can in a top-six role, isn't significantly bigger than Helm or Glendening, and has all of nine minutes of NHL experience? I get that Helm being pushed into a winger role is maybe less than ideal, and I get that Franzen is streaky and way past his prime, but replacing those two with Callahan and Pulkkinen doesn't really make us a better team. I know the idea is we'd be getting Yandle or Green, but, again, little trade value. If we're being honest, Yandle is going to cost at least one of Nyquist/Tatar/Mantha, and giving Franzen and/or Helm to a conference rival for a rental who's almost inevitably going to make a killing in free agency (and/or circle back to the Caps, meaning we will have given the Caps Franzen and/or Helm for nothing, unless we manage to win the Cup) doesn't strike me as smart asset management.

I think if we're going to get anything of real worth for a guy like Franzen, our trade partner probably needs to be very short on high-end goal-scorers but good enough that they're maybe one goal-scorer away from being one of the few truly elite teams in the league. So...Nashville? Ryan Ellis?

Honestly, it's not about bringing in Callahan, so much as it is about giving guys proper roles. I do think you're underestimating Callahan's skill set, but that's another story.

I might be in the minority here, but I can't understand why Stephen Weiss is starting games on the fourth line. If the idea in the new NHL is to balance out scoring throughout a top 9, I'm putting the guy scoring at a .86 PPG click over Helm's .43. I don't think Callahan is better than Helm - I'm not that crazy. I do think he's more suited for a 4th line role on this team, though. Especially when it seems like Babcock is unwilling to play Weiss over Helm, and that he keeps going back to wanting Abdelkader 2.0.

I fully admitted: "My ideal (and totally unrealistic, because people probably wouldn't take on Mule's contract) package would be Franzen, Helm and Smith for someone like Green or Yandle."

I know it's not realistic, but those two guys are my ideal candidates to be moved. Even if they're not being replaced by Pulkkinen and Callahan, guys like Mantha, AA and Larkin are going to be on Detroit before you know it - surely before Mule's contract is up. Maybe the assets are off, but I'm starting to lean toward the, "we should bring in a capable defender now" mentality. Some of the guys on the team right now are playing below expectation (at least my expectation), and others on the way might need some more time to become impact players.

I'm not against adding someone like Ellis, but I'm not sure about his availability. He's got 5 years of term, he's 3rd in TOI for Nashville now (playing above Jones) and the team is doing well. I mentioned Green and Yandle because of their current status, or the situation their team is in. The whole idea behind my suggestion is to add to the back-end, because our forwards seem to be a position of strength, with more on the way. I do think this team needs to make at least one younger winger available for trade, and one or more of the defensive prospects in order to shore up the blueline.

Edited December 31, 2014 by Jesusberg

[krsmith17 7,191]

I agree with the first part, however I think that is over payment for Yandle and major over payment for Green, who would be a rental. Everyone knows that I'm a huge Smith supporter, and I hate seeing him in every trade package. He has been playing great lately, and he's only going to get better. That last game against Boston, he showed some great offensive instincts and I think he is just about ready to break out of his shell and putting up some more points. No I don't think he is ever going to be a number one defenseman, but I think he can and will be a great number 2/3 guy in the next year or two.

[LeftWinger 4,953]

So who are our roster players with any trade value?

Sheahan, Tatar, Nyquist, Helm, Smith, Dekeyser, Mrazek, Jurco. If a team wants a NHL player in return, its going to be one of those guys, then plus a prospect.

I would say Pav,Z, Weiss (NMC), Kronwall (NTC), Ericsson (NTC), Howard (NTC) aren't going to be asked to move and Franzen, Andersson, Kindl, Quincey, Lashoff, Miller, Cleary, Abby, Glenny, and Monster have little to NO trade value.

So if Holland is serious about upgrading his D corps, then its gonna have to cost one if not two of the players mentioned first. To me, of those 8 guys mentioned Nyquist is going to be the one who would be last to go and of the others I would trade Helm over Sheahan, Jurco over Tatar and Smith over Dekeyser. Mrazek is touchy since we really don't have another goalie who is this close to being NHL ready.

I read all the rumors about Sheahan being a piece most teams would want, usually I am dead set against it, but if it brought us that piece that was our absolute need, then I could be ok with it, but not for a rental or for just a RH'd d-man just because he is RH'd....like Petry. I admit, I do not know too much about Yandle, but I am sure it would cost us at least Sheahan and Smith in order to obtain Yandle. If Yandle was going to be the difference maker, then so be it. But I am not looking to gut GR in order to obtain Yandle, and for sure not for a rental like Green. But again, if Yandle is the piece we need, then maybe tossing in Pulk instead of Sheahan...I don't know.

I'd be interested to see what a package of Helm, Smith and Pulk could get them. Would Smith and Pulk be enough to get Yandle? I'd hate to acquire Green for that package and then be out next year when he wants top dollar and we could not afford him to stay. Even though Yandle has only one more year on his contract (and he probably would want top dollar to stay after) at least he has a full season to realize how great of an organization this is to play for and maybe it would sway his decision a bit more.

I would be fine with this deal:

to ARZ - Smith, Pulkkinen, 1st round pick

to DET - Yandle, 2nd round pick

...but over the summer we'd have to dump Kindl's salary and maybe Q's if possible because we are going to need a lot of cash to re-sign Nyquist. Jurco and Andersson would need to be re-signed as well as Jensen (who is out of exemptions next summer, another reason to dump Kindl.) Dumping Q for a quick pick would be helpful as well.

Kronwall - Yandle

Ericsson - Dekeyser

Jensen - Ouellet (or Q if he cannot be dumped)

Lashoff

I would include Marchenko in there instead of XO since he is also RH'd, but it seems that XO has passed Marchenko on the depth chart. I am not sure if Marchenko is slipping or what, maybe he could be included in a package if so. Even though Marchenko stills shows as our top defensive prospect, it is just strange that he never gets the call-up over XO. Backman could always be included in a package if he was going to a team that he was guaranteed to being playing for. Of our top NHL-ready (or nearly) defensemen, I think XO, Sproul and Jensen are the ones we will be seeing in Detroit the soonest. Marchenko still has a year of waiver exemption, so if something isn't done with him, we will looking at Jensen out of exemptions after this year, and ALL of Marchenko, Sproul AND XO out of expemtions at the end of 2016 season...then we will be in trouble. That is why if Holland is going to acquire a non-rental, or a defender with a couple of years left on the contract, it is important that by time the 2016-17 season comes around, he has room to keep XO and Sproul up, because someone WILL claim one of them.

So unfortunately for Smith, he may be group in there with guys that need to ne moved in order to protect our upcoming kids. Smith may be very useful in acquiring Yandle, so that is why folks are always including him in scenarios. Right now in the 16-17 season, Kronwall, Ericsson and KIndl are all signed. You have to figure Dekeyser will be re-signed if they keep Smith (and re-sign him this season) and only let Q and Lashoff go, we are looking at this:

Kronwall, Ericsson, Kindl, Dekeyser, Smith. (add Jensen to that if he is kept around since he is already at this point out of exemptions.) Now you have Marchenko, Sproul and XO all out of exemptions. That is 9 defensemen for 7 spots. It's going to be a huge logjam. Even if Smith was traded for Yandle and assuming Holland gets Yandle to re-sign, we are still in the same jam with roster spots. So dumpin Kindl,Q and one of the three kids is going to be a necessity in order for any trade to work. Even if there is no trade, there will still be too many players and not enough spots on D. Not unless you dump Kindl before he contract is up. By not re-signing Q and Lashoff, and trading (or waiving Kindl) along with re-signing and keeping Smith around your 2016-2017 defense could look like:

Kronwall - Ericsson

Dekeyser - Ouellet

Smith - Marchenko

Sproul - Jensen

...still one too many anyway you slice it.

[Jesusberg 1,256]

I agree with the first part, however I think that is over payment for Yandle and major over payment for Green, who would be a rental. Everyone knows that I'm a huge Smith supporter, and I hate seeing him in every trade package. He has been playing great lately, and he's only going to get better. That last game against Boston, he showed some great offensive instincts and I think he is just about ready to break out of his shell and putting up some more points. No I don't think he is ever going to be a number one defenseman, but I think he can and will be a great number 2/3 guy in the next year or two.

I'm actually pro-Smith - I've wanted him on the 2nd PP unit all season long. For me, moving him comes down to two factors: his perceived trade value vs. other defenders on this team, and his role on this team in Babcock's eyes.

Kronwall, DeKeyser and Ericsson (for better or worse) won't be moved, IMO. Quincey, Kindl and Lashoff have little value. They may have some value, but it's certainly not enough to bring in a top 4 defender - it's arguable that Smith has that value. If anyone's got a chance to land the offensive guy the team needs, it's probably Smith.

While you and I may see that #3 upside, I'm not sure Mike Babcock does. Maybe he's still "breaking him in", but I don't think Babcock is putting Smith in situations that are showing his full potential. For him to refuse to use him on that 2nd PP with all the issues with Kindl... I just don't get it. It seems to me that Babcock is stuck on keeping him in that #5 role. He just doesn't seem to trust Smith - he even played Ouellet more than him the last game XO played, I think? (correct me if I'm wrong)

My point is, if Smith isn't going to be used in an offensive, top 4 role, I don't see how he's going to meet that potential. Maybe he does break out, and maybe he shows some real offensive potential... does Babcock reward his play, or does he continue to play the guys he trusts more? I'm inclined to believe the latter.

[_SP_ 129]

Let's take a look at pending free agent centers (typically the players you get in trades without selling the farm - ie. what it would cost to get ROR):

Brad Richards - Chicago's not giving him up because he's signed to a stupid cheap contract.

Shawn Horcoff - Not having a great season statistically or even in the eye test. More like a third-line guy.

Jarret Stoll - He is good on the PK along with Anze Kopitar and the Kings may not have room to re-sign him. Not a top-6 center, though.

Dan Briere - Age issue again. I don't believe he's playing center now anyway, I think he's on the wing?

Olli Jokinen - Along with the next three players, he's an eldersman on the Predators top-6. He's also old as ish and I don't think he's the guy we need.

Derek Roy - I think he's rather overrated, but what do I know. He's got 500+ career points, but only has two goals this year I believe?

Matt Cullen - He's been banged up, but he's traditionally been a top-6 center. Off my radar, personally. 38-years-old.

Mike Fisher - coming off Achilles' injury, he's not doing anything for us this year.

Antoine Vermette - Having a down year in Arizona, but I think that has more to do with the players around him. I'd target him.

Mike Ribeiro - I think he's still got what it takes to make a difference day in and day out. I would definitely want him for my 2nd line.

Then, though, we go back to what I said before - what's the opportunity cost? What does it cost the Red Wings to get the Predators' top center when they're the #1 ranked team in the West right now?

Vermette should be significantly cheaper, given how poorly Arizona (yuck) is playing right now. But what's the verdict - what would it take?

From what I understand, Legwand is playing the wing on the first line.

Also, what do you all think of the list of centers that are going to be UFA's at the end of the year (the rentals you usually see moved at the deadline/in-season)?

Vermette seems to be the only viable option that would be moved. You don't usually see teams in a playoff position trading away their top-6 talent.

Weiss+Prospect+Pick? Does it cost you an additional NHL player too? Helm, Kindl, etc.? Do they want a defensive prospect?

I don't think he's signing an extension to stay out there. It's way far from home (Quebec City), the team is NOT trending upwards, and he's 32-years-old- he's not getting many more chances to play for a Stanley Cup or Team Canada. Flights are $300 round-trip from Detroit to home and back, his family can drive down for the weekend, etc. etc.

Short of going to Montreal, I don't see another team that is trending upward and still has star players like Detroit. Come here, be the #2 center, and make a huge push to win a Cup.

Sigh. I'm glad I'm not the GM.

[e_prime 1,936]

I still don't understand our "interest" in Vermette. Do we really need another two-way second line C?

We're not injury depleted like last year when we traded Eaves, a prospect and a pick for Legwand.

This year is it Helm, Pulks, and a pick for Vermette?

(Plucking names from the roster. Not a realistic representation of what I think it would take to get Vermette)

Anyway you make the trade... I would certainly hope not.

I didn't lose my s*** about the Legwand trade because I thought it was a necessary evil.

This year it would be absolute idiocy!

We're healthy *knock on wood* and we have plenty of depth at center.

Vermette is going to be a super expensive rental.

It would be costly to re-sign him.

Which would certainly mean cap woes for re-signing Nyquist, Jurco, Smith, etc.

No thank you!

We need a right handed offensive minded D-man and, at the right price, a top-six right handed "scoring" winger.

Oh wait, don't we have one of those, -- the right handed scoring winger -- down in GR.

Admittedly, we don't know that Pulks will have an immediate impact at the NHL level...but if we trade him to Arizona we'll certainly never know.

[rick zombo 3,739]

Check it out. Lines shuffled for practice in Vancouver today per KAHN!!!! twitter.

Tatar-Datsyuk-Abdelkader
Zetterberg-Sheahan-Nyquist
Franzen-Helm-Jurco
Miller-Glendening-Weiss

Weiss still on fourth line LOL

[sjr2012 439]

Check it out. Lines shuffled for practice in Vancouver today per KAHN!!!! twitter.

Weiss still on fourth line LOL

switch Weiss with helm and id be ok with those lines

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

Check it out. Lines shuffled for practice in Vancouver today per KAHN!!!! twitter.

Weiss still on fourth line LOL

I think Weiss is only going to get a shot if Helm or Sheahan get injured.

[Son of a Wing 1,644]

The Wheel Deal @Bill_Roose

Follow

Babcock says #RedWings will go with same personnel tonight, though line combinations will be jumbled. Weiss, Helm rejoin Datsyuk line.

2:25 PM - 6 Jan 2015

Sweet Jesus

[kipwinger 8,522]

The Wheel Deal @Bill_Roose

Follow

Babcock says #RedWings will go with same personnel tonight, though line combinations will be jumbled. Weiss, Helm rejoin Datsyuk line.

2:25 PM - 6 Jan 2015

Sweet Jesus

Oh, apparently Stephan Weiss "earned more ice time" somewhere between last night and today. Because that's what he needed to do, remember? Earn it.

I hope so badly that Weiss gets a goal tonight.

[Son of a Wing 1,644]

Our team philosophy in a nutshell...

"Our focus is to minimize mistakes," Quincey said. "Our job is not to win the game; it's to not lose the game.

http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2015/01/mike_babcock_red_wings_danny_d.html

Edited January 6, 2015 by haroldsnepsts
To add link

[rick zombo 3,739]

Our team philosophy in a nutshell...

"Our focus is to minimize mistakes," Quincey said. "Our job is not to win the game; it's to not lose the game.

Sure he wasn't just talking about his role and DeKeyser's role as a blueline tandem? That would make sense.

[kipwinger 8,522]

Our team philosophy in a nutshell...

"Our focus is to minimize mistakes," Quincey said. "Our job is not to win the game; it's to not lose the game.

This is unreal. I'm sure he's heard Babcock say this a hundred times too. I sure hope Quincey's just talking about the defense. That would be marginally more tolerable.

[rick zombo 3,739]

This is unreal. I'm sure he's heard Babcock say this a hundred times too. I sure hope Quincey's just talking about the defense. That would be marginally more tolerable.

If he was referring just to his own play, it would be more than tolerable. I'd actually condone this philosophy.

[kipwinger 8,522]

If he was referring just to his own play, it would be more than tolerable. I'd actually condone this philosophy.

Well ideally you'd like your top four defensemen to play defense AND help facilitate the offense (i.e. move the puck up to the forwards). But if I had to pick one or the other, for Kyle Quincey specifically, then yes, I'd rather he just play defense.

[Son of a Wing 1,644]

Sure he wasn't just talking about his role and DeKeyser's role as a blueline tandem? That would make sense.

That's exactly what he was describing.

I just see it translating to a team-wide philosophy.

Nobody wants to take a risk/shot/chance in fear of being "that guy" that cost his team a goal.

Don't get me wrong... defence comes before anything and everything.

I just don't like when people develop a habit of making decisions based on of fear of screwing up.

[rick zombo 3,739]

That's exactly what he was describing.

I just see it translating to a team-wide philosophy.

Nobody wants to take a risk/shot/chance in fear of being "that guy" that cost his team a goal.

Don't get me wrong... defence comes before anything and everything.

I just don't like when people develop a habit of making decisions based on of fear of screwing up.

Totally. And being "that guy" means you'd be chewing on straws in the Leino Lounge with Kindl, or you'd be chasing cars on Glendenning's wing.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

I think you guys are extrapolating an awful lot from a single quote by Quincey. Especially because it was in the context of him and Dekeyser as a pairing, which makes sense.

Kindl is a great example. He nearly singlehandedly cost the Wings a game, but still would be in the lineup were it not for his injury. I don't understand some of Babcock's decisions, but I haven't seen a lot of evidence that a couple gaffes gets you sent to the pressbox.

[kipwinger 8,522]

I think you guys are extrapolating an awful lot from a single quote by Quincey. Especially because it was in the context of him and Dekeyser as a pairing, which makes sense.

Even so, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect your second defensive pair to BOTH play defense AND contribute to offense. Provided, of course, that "winning the game" and "not losing the game" in Quincey's quote are synonymous with playing offense and defense respectively.

Edited January 6, 2015 by kipwinger

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

Even so, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect your second defensive pair to BOTH play defense AND contribute to offense. Provided, of course, that "winning the game" and "not losing the game" are Quincey's quote is synonymous with playing offense and defense respectively.

In general from the second pairing, I totally agree. But if we're specifically talking about Quincey and Dekeyser, I think not costing the team the game is the better focus.

Dekeyser has been doing great but is still growing into his role, and honestly hasn't shown a lot of offensive flashes. For Quincey, this is the most consistent hockey I've seen him play in a long time so I'm happy for him to keep doing whatever he's been doing.

And it's still just a single quote from Quincey. Who knows if they get that hammered into their skulls every game, or after a shift where one of them tried to jump into the play and got burned, one of the coaches got in their ear.

Extrapolating that one quote to a mindset or philosophy that's causing players not to make plays seems like confirmation bias to me.

[Son of a Wing 1,644]

I think you guys are extrapolating an awful lot from a single quote by Quincey. Especially because it was in the context of him and Dekeyser as a pairing, which makes sense.

I've felt this way for a while. Quincey just summed it up nicely for me when talking about his D pairing.

We play not to lose and our style of game reflects that. As do the results.

Our defence is stifling. We don't give up much but we're also not playing on instinct. We're playing safe and taking a ton of games to overtime.

It's working for now but I don't see it having long-term success for the playoffs.