Here is a simple two-step process I think we should all consider when arbitrarily comparing the Legwand trade to any/every potential trade we have yet to make...
1. The Legwand trade was bad, but would have been a lot better had he re-signed.
2. No-one (Including Mike Babcock or Ken Holland) wanted Legwand re-signed.
So why make the trade? First of all, at the time of the trade - he became our #1 Center and helped us make the playoffs to continue the streak - don't underestimate the chemistry Franzen, Legwand, Nyquist had and the streak they also went on. Forget the name on the back of the jersey but focus on what Legwand represented at the time, and understand any trade deadline deal where you acquire a #1 Center is going to cost you a decent prospect.
Yes - I get it, Legwand was a rental, and he has never been a #1 Center (but was forced into that role because of Injuries) so giving away our TOP center prospect was a HUGE overpayment...
WRONG - Why? Because Calle Jarnkrok was probably NEVER going to play for the Detroit Red Wings - much like what may happen with some of our Defense prospects in the coming years - You either risk losing them on waivers, or risk losing them to Europe when they can't crack your roster (see Adam Almqvist). In terms of Jarnkrok, he is what we already have a surplus of... undersized and a natural Center. Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Weiss, Helm, Glendenning, Sheahan, Andersson and Franzen are all natural centers ahead of Jarnkrok of the depth chart, plus most of them are on long-term contracts that expire way after Jarnkrok was going to stick around for.
Jarnkrok was never going to play for the Wings? We had so few centers in our prospect pool that we literally just drafted 5 of them and signed another from Europe. AND, until we drafted Larkin, not a single center prospect in our organization projected as having top six upside. Not one. So yeah, he'd probably have played a game or two.
Edited by kipwinger, 10 July 2014 - 01:57 PM.