• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Datsyukian-Deke

Kesler traded to Anaheim

Rate this topic

88 posts in this topic

I think they got fair return... obviously Anaheim comes out a (bit) better but I mean come on when your player gives a very small list of teams and the rumours are swirling, Benning's hands were tied

Getting back a serviceable d-man and a fairly young center who put up almost 50 points isn't a bad return, they wanted players who can play for their team and that's what they got

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well there goes that. Seems like a pretty good trade for both sides. Vancouver was trading within the division (typically requiring a larger return) and Kesler only approved limited teams (typically ending in a smaller return).

He's a good player and I'd have loved to have had him in the Winged Wheel. Oh well, on to the next one.

haroldsnepsts likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw plenty of coverage that reported the list Kesler originally gave Gillis during the season had 6 teams on it: Anaheim, Chicago, Colorado, Detroit, Pittsburgh, & Tampa Bay. From everything I've seen, the "only Anaheim or Chicago" scenarios came into play because those were the only two teams still in discussions with Benning.

I think we could have gotten Kesler to come here but I can just about guarantee they would have wanted Tatar or Nyquist plus others. Holland probably sees those two as not having the same dynamic as Kesler but I believe both are capable of putting up similar numbers as Kesler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate this, how come Kenny never does anything like this?

Because he didn't want to come here. Nothing Holland could have done. It was either Chicago or Anaheim.

STL-Wings and krsmith17 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't one of the one's that REALLY wanted Kesler to begin with, sure he would have been a nice addition, but I think that if we were on his short list, we could have had him for Tatar, Kindl and our first, and I would have been completely fine with that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this summarises the entire Kesler saga pretty well:

http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/canucks-were-doomed-to-be-fleeced-on-ryan-kesler-trade-from-the-start/

I don't think it's even because of the pieces that were dealt, but if you take a step back and look at what Benning had to work with and how truly disadvantaged he was from the start, I think he's done pretty well. Time will tell though I guess

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, for starters, Kesler only wanted to go to Anaheim or Chicago.

Vancouver took what they could get for him under the circumstances.

So part of it is that none of these guys ultimately want to play in Detroit. As painful as i may sound, would you rather live in Detroit playing for a bubble team or live in Anaheim, playing for a contender?

Def OC but I would commute to Staples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this summarises the entire Kesler saga pretty well:

http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/canucks-were-doomed-to-be-fleeced-on-ryan-kesler-trade-from-the-start/

I don't think it's even because of the pieces that were dealt, but if you take a step back and look at what Benning had to work with and how truly disadvantaged he was from the start, I think he's done pretty well. Time will tell though I guess

Agreed.

Kesler would apparently only waive his NTC for the Ducks or Hawks. It's hard to get much of a bidding war going that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because he didn't want to come here. Nothing Holland could have done. It was either Chicago or Anaheim.

True if a player has a NTC you are out if you aren't on that list. Given the difficult conditions I think both teams did very well here. Benning seems to be on fire today the Canucks are really tearing it down wow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, for starters, Kesler only wanted to go to Anaheim or Chicago.

Vancouver took what they could get for him under the circumstances.

So part of it is that none of these guys ultimately want to play in Detroit. As painful as i may sound, would you rather live in Detroit playing for a bubble team or live in Anaheim, playing for a contender?

I know you always get worked up about threads devolving into anti-Holland disasters, but as one who has become quite anti-Holland in recent years, I just wanted to point out that you're touching on one of the reasons I've lost faith in his ability to be an effective GM in Detroit.

Five years ago this team was still a destination franchise, and that afforded us an advantage in signing guys and leverage in trades. We are no longer a destination franchise, and we haven't been in several years. And given that we seem unwilling to overpay and still haven't proven that we're anything more than a playoff-maybe team that'll likely exit early, we seem to becoming less attractive of a destination every year.

Perhaps more than ever in the cap era, it's important to maintain that draw if you expect to be able to build from outside your organization. Despite the cliche line people drop nowadays about the importance of building from the draft, it's next to impossible to really put together a contender without making outside moves, especially if you don't plan on tanking for several years to hopefully get the chance to land even one guy who qualifies as truly elite talent in the draft amongst other core needs.

I get that we weren't going to land Parise and Suter. I gave Holland no s*** about that and still don't. I certainly don't care about not getting Kesler, as I've never been a Kesler slappy and it's obvious that we had no chance, so it'd be silly to get mad. What ultimately bothers me is that Holland had plenty of time early on to do more to shore of the core of this team, especially knowing Lidstrom was nearing the end and Stuart was likely gone at the end of his contract. When Rafalski retired, Holland should've done a lot more to immediately plug that hole, not because it's a hole that in and of itself needed to be plugged, but because in a year, you're losing at least one more core defenseman, and potentially your captain and one of the beat defensemen in the game, even past 40.

It doesn't take a genius to realize when you're in the best position to make a deal, and Holland let that time go by, like he's let other great opportunities slip by. He talks endlessly about prices being too high and not wanting to overpay, yet time and again, he's made bad deals for less effective, oftentimes older players, seemingly because of having a history with them. So instead of overpaying for stars that can make a difference, we overpay for mid-level talent that literally more often than not has been useless to us. And all the while, our image sinks further and further down.

I don't like the idea of overpaying any more than the next guy, but we wouldn't have had to if Holland had done more to maintain the core of this team when he was in the best position to do so. Furthermore, had we been more aggressive early on in our dip and gone harder after another guy that helps the team and raises your status, we'd likely be in a position to still be getting the better end of some of these trades and free agent signings.

It's not one thing that Holland's done that's caused me to lose faith in him, and truly, most of what shaped my perspective on him currently happened several years ago now. He's simply been in a free fall of bad decision-making since about 2009, and he seems completely unable to find a way to turn it around let alone slow it down. Has he been the victim of bad luck too? Sure. I don't think anyone expected the Weiss situation for example to go as poorly as it did, for example, but even with that, we ultimately made a good sized bet on a guy who we knew wasn't out of the woods on the injury front, so on some level, you almost have to question the signing, even if it's clearly in the hindsight category. Holland hasn't really done enough to buy the benefit of the doubt in recent years.

In the end, to me, I look back and I see that Holland clearly did absolutely nothing to maintain the status of the team when we lost three important players, and he's done nothing since to improve matters, and if anything, he has only made the situation worse with numerous blatantly embarrassing signings. Barring a home run of an off-season, now that we've been continually slipping for five years, I'm really at a point where I can't see Holland keeping his job past this season. Maybe the guy could still be great on another team, and maybe he'd be best taking on another role in the organization, advising someone who's more capable of making tough decisions and taking some chances that might have the potential to turn things around.

But any way you shake it, I just don't get how one can't objectively question on some level Ken Holland's current effectiveness given where we were five years ago and where we are now. When your status falls as far as ours has and we're as weak of a team as we are despite having a killer offensive core in Dats and Z, you've got to stop and ask what went wrong, and I don't see any way of not acknowledging Ken Holland's utter and complete inability to even come remotely close to maintaining the status we had for over twenty years.

When you can't even come up with a Stuart-level replacement after several years and you also lost Lidstrom and Rafalski, you're doing something wrong.

When you essentially throw cap space into the fire to burn by signing guys like Cleary and Sammy and Tootoo among others in recent years, when your defense is still in shambles after losing 3 of your 4 top guys, (not to mention the roster issues you create by having too many forwards) and you're still talking about not wanting to overpay for guys, you're doing something wrong.

It does suck that we aren't in a position to land favorable deals. It's a bummer. It is what it is now and there's no easy way out of the mess we're, and also no way that doesn't involve taking risks that my or may not come close to paying off, but we are in this position because Ken Holland's failed to stop, let alone even slow down the free fall this team is in. At some point you have to get serious and call a spade a spade and stop making excuses just because you can find a way to minimize the impact of individual deals or missed deals.

We're talking about a 5-year old trend of one way or another failing to slow the free fall.

5 years.

This is something that can't really be argued, and however you spin it, there's really no way to defend against it without suggesting that you're content to be mediocre. If that's enough for you, congratulations, but you shouldn't be shocked when Red Wings fans of all fans expect a little more out of their team than to limp into the playoffs on the weakening backs of Pav and Z or the adrenaline-fueled overachievements of Grand Rapids. I called the Holland naysaying crazy talk 4-5 years ago too, but at this point, you're just not being objective at all about the big picture if you're still defending Holland's current effectiveness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know you always get worked up about threads devolving into anti-Holland disasters, but as one who has become quite anti-Holland in recent years, I just wanted to point out that you're touching on one of the reasons I've lost faith in his ability to be an effective GM in Detroit.

Five years ago this team was still a destination franchise, and that afforded us an advantage in signing guys and leverage in trades. We are no longer a destination franchise, and we haven't been in several years. And given that we seem unwilling to overpay and still haven't proven that we're anything more than a playoff-maybe team that'll likely exit early, we seem to becoming less attractive of a destination every year.

Perhaps more than ever in the cap era, it's important to maintain that draw if you expect to be able to build from outside your organization. Despite the cliche line people drop nowadays about the importance of building from the draft, it's next to impossible to really put together a contender without making outside moves, especially if you don't plan on tanking for several years to hopefully get the chance to land even one guy who qualifies as truly elite talent in the draft amongst other core needs.

I get that we weren't going to land Parise and Suter. I gave Holland no s*** about that and still don't. I certainly don't care about not getting Kesler, as I've never been a Kesler slappy and it's obvious that we had no chance, so it'd be silly to get mad. What ultimately bothers me is that Holland had plenty of time early on to do more to shore of the core of this team, especially knowing Lidstrom was nearing the end and Stuart was likely gone at the end of his contract. When Rafalski retired, Holland should've done a lot more to immediately plug that hole, not because it's a hole that in and of itself needed to be plugged, but because in a year, you're losing at least one more core defenseman, and potentially your captain and one of the beat defensemen in the game, even past 40.

It doesn't take a genius to realize when you're in the best position to make a deal, and Holland let that time go by, like he's let other great opportunities slip by. He talks endlessly about prices being too high and not wanting to overpay, yet time and again, he's made bad deals for less effective, oftentimes older players, seemingly because of having a history with them. So instead of overpaying for stars that can make a difference, we overpay for mid-level talent that literally more often than not has been useless to us. And all the while, our image sinks further and further down.

I don't like the idea of overpaying any more than the next guy, but we wouldn't have had to if Holland had done more to maintain the core of this team when he was in the best position to do so. Furthermore, had we been more aggressive early on in our dip and gone harder after another guy that helps the team and raises your status, we'd likely be in a position to still be getting the better end of some of these trades and free agent signings.

It's not one thing that Holland's done that's caused me to lose faith in him, and truly, most of what shaped my perspective on him currently happened several years ago now. He's simply been in a free fall of bad decision-making since about 2009, and he seems completely unable to find a way to turn it around let alone slow it down. Has he been the victim of bad luck too? Sure. I don't think anyone expected the Weiss situation for example to go as poorly as it did, for example, but even with that, we ultimately made a good sized bet on a guy who we knew wasn't out of the woods on the injury front, so on some level, you almost have to question the signing, even if it's clearly in the hindsight category. Holland hasn't really done enough to buy the benefit of the doubt in recent years.

In the end, to me, I look back and I see that Holland clearly did absolutely nothing to maintain the status of the team when we lost three important players, and he's done nothing since to improve matters, and if anything, he has only made the situation worse with numerous blatantly embarrassing signings. Barring a home run of an off-season, now that we've been continually slipping for five years, I'm really at a point where I can't see Holland keeping his job past this season. Maybe the guy could still be great on another team, and maybe he'd be best taking on another role in the organization, advising someone who's more capable of making tough decisions and taking some chances that might have the potential to turn things around.

But any way you shake it, I just don't get how one can't objectively question on some level Ken Holland's current effectiveness given where we were five years ago and where we are now. When your status falls as far as ours has and we're as weak of a team as we are despite having a killer offensive core in Dats and Z, you've got to stop and ask what went wrong, and I don't see any way of not acknowledging Ken Holland's utter and complete inability to even come remotely close to maintaining the status we had for over twenty years.

When you can't even come up with a Stuart-level replacement after several years and you also lost Lidstrom and Rafalski, you're doing something wrong.

When you essentially throw cap space into the fire to burn by signing guys like Cleary and Sammy and Tootoo among others in recent years, when your defense is still in shambles after losing 3 of your 4 top guys, (not to mention the roster issues you create by having too many forwards) and you're still talking about not wanting to overpay for guys, you're doing something wrong.

It does suck that we aren't in a position to land favorable deals. It's a bummer. It is what it is now and there's no easy way out of the mess we're, and also no way that doesn't involve taking risks that my or may not come close to paying off, but we are in this position because Ken Holland's failed to stop, let alone even slow down the free fall this team is in. At some point you have to get serious and call a spade a spade and stop making excuses just because you can find a way to minimize the impact of individual deals or missed deals.

We're talking about a 5-year old trend of one way or another failing to slow the free fall.

5 years.

This is something that can't really be argued, and however you spin it, there's really no way to defend against it without suggesting that you're content to be mediocre. If that's enough for you, congratulations, but you shouldn't be shocked when Red Wings fans of all fans expect a little more out of their team than to limp into the playoffs on the weakening backs of Pav and Z or the adrenaline-fueled overachievements of Grand Rapids. I called the Holland naysaying crazy talk 4-5 years ago too, but at this point, you're just not being objective at all about the big picture if you're still defending Holland's current effectiveness.

I'll ask again, and maybe get an answer from some of the "Not a destination franchise" conspiracy theorists. I think fans think if they repeat it enough times it will make it so. The facts just don't support it.

Who are all these high quality players who have refused to play for the Red Wings? Kesler didn't have Boston on his list, does that make them not a "Destination Franchise". He didn't have the LA Kings, you know the team that's won two of the past three Stanley Cups? I guess they aren't a destination franchise either.

All the same fans bemoaning the loss of getting Kesler were the same ones whining we didn't get Bobby Ryan. How'd that work out for Ottawa? Made them a contender, eh? Luckily for Ryan, they were a destination franchise with a history of winning and a bright future.

Who were all these big name free agents that the Wings signed year in and year out before?

Do I like all the moves that Holland has made? No. But fans expect Holland to keep all the youth, keep all the stars, and still trade for top quality talent and sign every free agent on the market all while having low draft picks year after year.

No franchise, in any sport, is a contender every single year for decades at a time. Get over it.

Edited by Playmaker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Super happy he didn't include Detroit in the list ... he is a me first kind of player, team mates voted someone else the A last year, basically stripping it away from him. So he pouted all year and wanted to be traded. Then he only gives GM 2 teams.

I saw plenty of coverage that reported the list Kesler originally gave Gillis during the season had 6 teams on it: Anaheim, Chicago, Colorado, Detroit, Pittsburgh, & Tampa Bay. From everything I've seen, the "only Anaheim or Chicago" scenarios came into play because those were the only two teams still in discussions with Benning.

To my knowledge, that was at last year's trade deadline with Gillis. When Benning took over, his agent said Chicago or Anaheim.

Edited by RedWingsRox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because he didn't want to come here. Nothing Holland could have done. It was either Chicago or Anaheim.

I wasn't referring specifically to Kesler, I meant making a trade for an impact player still in his prime. These guys seem to get traded every year, and we're always on the outside looking in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't referring specifically to Kesler, I meant making a trade for an impact player still in his prime. These guys seem to get traded every year, and we're always on the outside looking in.

If you are talking about Spezza nobody got the trade for him done because Murray's asking price seems to be way too high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised so many people want kesler on the wings. He has been pretty much invisible, when not injured, since '11.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are talking about Spezza nobody got the trade for him done because Murray's asking price seems to be way too high.

No not any specific player, but ever since the salary cap was instituted, countless impact players have been traded, as well as the rights to some good UFA's, and we haven't been a part of it. This is the perfect year to make a trade with the free agent market having a down year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No not any specific player, but ever since the salary cap was instituted, countless impact players have been traded, as well as the rights to some good UFA's, and we haven't been a part of it. This is the perfect year to make a trade with the free agent market having a down year.

Look I'm not disagreeing with you and like I've stated over ando ver again I think the Wings being of the premier teams (Original 6 baby), should be ifrontrunners on a every top UFA that fills a need for us, like we used to back in the days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll try again. Who were these top free agents that filled all these needs? Mike Modano? Dallas Drake? Jason Williams? Derian Hatcher? Uwe Krupp? Steve Duschene?

Hull and Robitaille? Yeah, we had a great team and we were able to add a couple of aging veterans who could rack up stats playing with other equally good players. There also was no cap then. That's why we could have a guy like Robitaille be our 3rd line center.

Marian Hossa? We've discussed his situation. Not typical.

Brian Rafalski. Another aging vet and Michigan native who we had the space to sign after Mathieu Schnieder left.

Who are all these other big name free agents we signed in their prime that filled needs for us?

It's funny when Holland signed aging veterans before, he was a genius, and now he's an idiot for wanting old guys.

If there's some major free agent I'm missing, clue me in.

I hate to break it to you, but EVERY year is going to be a weak free agent market. Players are signing long term deals, the "home team" gets an advantage and the cap levels the playing field on what other teams can offer.

Enough of the countless signings and impact players and all those guys we used to get. Name names. Give examples.

krsmith17 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll try again. Who were these top free agents that filled all these needs? Mike Modano? Dallas Drake? Jason Williams? Derian Hatcher? Uwe Krupp? Steve Duschene?

Hull and Robitaille? Yeah, we had a great team and we were able to add a couple of aging veterans who could rack up stats playing with other equally good players. There also was no cap then. That's why we could have a guy like Robitaille be our 3rd line center.

Marian Hossa? We've discussed his situation. Not typical.

Brian Rafalski. Another aging vet and Michigan native who we had the space to sign after Mathieu Schnieder left.

Who are all these other big name free agents we signed in their prime that filled needs for us?

It's funny when Holland signed aging veterans before, he was a genius, and now he's an idiot for wanting old guys.

If there's some major free agent I'm missing, clue me in.

I hate to break it to you, but EVERY year is going to be a weak free agent market. Players are signing long term deals, the "home team" gets an advantage and the cap levels the playing field on what other teams can offer.

Enough of the countless signings and impact players and all those guys we used to get. Name names. Give examples.

Agreed, some of the best moves we made over the years were trades.

Shannahan, Hasek, Igor, Lang, Stuart, Chelios etc.

Though it was exciting when Cujo signed with us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, some of the best moves we made over the years were trades.

Shannahan, Hasek, Igor, Lang, Stuart, Chelios etc.

Though it was exciting when Cujo signed with us.

I'm agreeing with everyone except there's an elephant in the room in your list…...

Lang??? Don't get me wrong, he played alright, but I didn't think he was anything special.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0