• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Datsyukian-Deke

Red Wings Target Mike Green

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

At this moment, I don't see what incentive the Caps have for moving Green - at least not until near the beginning of the year. Why move an asset when you don't have to? They'll likely try to drive his price up all off-season. I would assume that unless Detroit knocks MacLellan's socks off with an offer, he won't be moving Green any time soon.

As much as people think that Green's injury issues, Washington's number of defenders and closeness to the salary cap give Holland some leverage, I would have to think that MacLellan knows Holland is desperate for a RH guy. I don't see much leverage on Holland's end of this - just perhaps a chance to pay a little less because of those issues. It's the difference between giving up Nyquist/Mantha in a deal and Tatar/Jurco/Pulkkinen in one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People also seem to think Kindl has positive value in a trade. At his contract, I don't think that's the case.

Yea I see Kindl as more of a burden when trading. Like "please take this contract off our hands and we will give you more value".

If Ken Holland is really the top GM that he thinks he is, he will get Green without giving up Jurco/Nyquist/Mantha/Tatar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DeGraa55

People also seem to think Kindl has positive value in a trade. At his contract, I don't think that's the case.

Not only that but if Washington gets rid of green it's cause they have 8 defenseman...why would they want another one with more time left in contract??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because it's pretty well known that that's the starting point for many GMs we try and trade with....

That's the well known starting place when we were inquiring about guys under contract, like Myers and Yandle. Not for expiring contracts. Just because one trade scenario would require Mantha in return doesn't mean ALL trade scenarios would require Mantha in return.

Also, it's only been "reported" that the starting point is Mantha, Nyquist, Tatar, Jurco...by people like Helen St. James no less. The very same people that had Niskanen going for 6+ million a year, Ehrhoff going for 5 years, Boyle for 5.5 mil a season, and Vanek for over 7 million a year.

In short, the very same people who ALSO don't know s*** about the value of hockey players.

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the well known starting place when we were inquiring about guys under contract, like Myers and Yandle. Not for expiring contracts. Just because one trade scenario would require Mantha in return doesn't mean ALL trade scenarios would require Mantha in return.

Also, it's only been "reported" that the starting point is Mantha, Nyquist, Tatar, Jurco...by people like Helen St. James no less. The very same people that had Niskanen going for 6+ million a year, Ehrhoff going for 5 years, Boyle for 5.5 mil a season, and Vanek for over 7 million a year.

In short, the very same people who ALSO don't know s*** about the value of hockey players.

I didn't even mention Mantha. That would be ridiculous. I said Tatar or Pulkkinen plus Kndl(which is a dump and if anything has negative value) and a conditional pick on resigning.

I don't think that's out of line since I don't see us trading our 1st and we've got to give up something of value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont give a f*** what kind of points he can put up when he cant play defense.

He can't be much worse then some of the guys we have playing defense and he brings offensive skills to the table that our team simply doesn't have. Our powerplay would be drastically better with Green

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep Tatar over Jurco? Really?? Please tell me you're the only Wings fan that would do that... Jurco has top line winger written all over him. Tatar on the other hand is a middling 2nd, 3rd line winger. I guarantee when GM's are talking to Ken Holland, they are asking for Jurco long before Tatar is mentioned. But no need to worry because Green shouldn't cost anything close to any of those guys...

Ideally you'd like to keep them both, but if I had to choose one to trade, it would be Tatar. Not a knock on him at all, but Jurco is gonna be a special player. He has size and knows how to use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen a lot of Tatar or jurco as a trade item. Why not Anderson? Washington needs centers and you could add franzen and or a pick to get the deal done. Anderson is already an extra piece in our lineup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, literally half of our defense can NEITHER play defense NOR score points. He's at least an improvement in that regard.

The problem isn't the lack of ability to defend, it is a lack of ability to move the puck out of the zone. Green would make this team MUCH better at that. Pair him with a Kronwall or Ericsson and all will be fine.

I've seen a lot of Tatar or jurco as a trade item. Why not Anderson? Washington needs centers and you could add franzen and or a pick to get the deal done. Anderson is already an extra piece in our lineup

Andersson is definitely expendable, he just doesn't have any trade value. You might get a 4th round draft pick for him if you're lucky. Even that I feel is being generous. He is solid defensively, and can chip in points from time to time, but he is too slow. That will always hold him back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen a lot of Tatar or jurco as a trade item. Why not Anderson? Washington needs centers and you could add franzen and or a pick to get the deal done. Anderson is already an extra piece in our lineup

Anderson has no value and Franzen isn't going anywhere. He's a wing for life whether people like it or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't even mention Mantha. That would be ridiculous. I said Tatar or Pulkkinen plus Kndl(which is a dump and if anything has negative value) and a conditional pick on resigning.

I don't think that's out of line since I don't see us trading our 1st and we've got to give up something of value.

A decent prospect or two and a 2nd or 3rd round pick will likely get this done if two prospects and a first got Iginla as a rental. Pulkkinen (or Backman) and either A) a 2nd round pick, or B) a 3rd plus Callahan or Ferraro, would get this deal done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A decent prospect or two and a 2nd or 3rd round pick will likely get this done if two prospects and a first got Iginla as a rental. Pulkkinen (or Backman) and either A) a 2nd round pick, or B) a 3rd plus Callahan or Ferraro, would get this deal done.

Those would be fair. I could also see Pulkkinen + Jensen + 2nd/3rd.

I just wouldn't be that surprised to see Tatar traded either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be ok with giving up Backman or Jensen and Ferraro and a 3rd for a year of Green. Possibly resign him if he really impresses.

Well he would have to waive his NTC to come here so if we did make the trade he would, at least on some level, want to be a wing. I think it would be very likely he would re-sign with us after one year. Detroit may not be the top destination for UFA's any more but we def don't have problems keeping guys here once they play here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hell, sweeten the pot and give them Glendening or Andersson for the trouble and you might bring the price down a little more.

Fact is, they'd be helping us out by trading us Green. But we'll be helping them too. He's expensive, his cost/benefit ratio is probably not better than their other top four defensemen, and they need forwards that they don't have money for. If they can get a decent prospect or two and a pick OR a low end (cheap) roster player and a decent prospect, they'll be making out. If they expect to get an up and coming roster player (Nyquist, Tatar, Jurco) or a top end prospect (Mantha, Sproul, Ouellet) they're ******* nuts.


Those would be fair. I could also see Pulkkinen + Jensen + 2nd/3rd.

I just wouldn't be that surprised to see Tatar traded either.

I wouldn't be surprised to see him traded either. But if he was traded for Mike Green on an expiring contract then Ken Holland should be drawn, quartered, burned, buried, exhumed, drawn, quartered, and burned again for being a ******* toolbox.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont give a f*** what kind of points he can put up when he cant play defense.

we have enough guys that play too much defense already, we need someone to get the puck out, and what difference does it make that he isn't great defensively if he is rarely in his own end anyway? Rafalski was terrible defensively, yet we all loved him, and we need another guy like that. Green is a notch above rafalski IMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No way Pulk is involved. Give up the ONLY heavy shooting righty in the system for Mike Green???

Then who? No team is going to accept any combination of our bottom-tier (Kindl, Andersson, Glendening, Ferraro, Callahan, Jensen) no matter how many of them people want to throw in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then who? No team is going to accept any combination of our bottom-tier (Kindl, Andersson, Glendening, Ferraro, Callahan, Jensen) no matter how many of them people want to throw in.

cleary... if only we still had emdog.. lol seriously though, I would be ok with trading tatar, it would be fair and make both teams better

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