• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
yztheman

Holland interview with Mickey comment about a trade

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Sproul. Unfortunately Babs already said kindls job is safe *sigh*

Sproul's already been cut and sent back down to Grand Rapids. Right now the defensemen left for the remaining preseason games are Ouellet, Marchenko, Jensen and Rome. Personally, I doubt anything comes of it. There don't seem to be many suitors for Kindl, and I doubt Holland is going to lose something for nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sproul's already been cut and sent back down to Grand Rapids. Right now the defensemen left for the remaining preseason games are Ouellet, Marchenko, Jensen and Rome. Personally, I doubt anything comes of it. There don't seem to be many suitors for Kindl, and I doubt Holland is going to lose something for nothing.

I know I just really like Sproul and his wicked shot, although I could settle for Jensen. All a moot point because Babs has basically eliminated any possibilty of any player being waived on defense when he said Lashoff and Kindl had no chance of losing their job to a prospect... so that's that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When/where did Babcock say that Kindl and Lashoff's roster spots were safe?

I think someone had posted a quote from one of Khan's articles. I can't remember the exact quote but I think people are reading too much of it in thinking Kindl and Lashoff's jobs are definitely safe. Has Kindl even made it through a season without being a healthy scratch?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think someone had posted a quote from one of Khan's articles. I can't remember the exact quote but I think people are reading too much of it in thinking Kindl and Lashoff's jobs are definitely safe. Has Kindl even made it through a season without being a healthy scratch?

Agreed. Here's the article. There's a lot of Babcockisms, which generally don't mean much at all, and Khan interpreted things in the most definite way possible. I'll be amazed if Kindl (and to a lesser degree Lashoff) aren't on a VERY short leash this season.

http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2014/09/mike_babcock_brian_lashoffs_jo.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. Here's the article. There's a lot of Babcockisms, which generally don't mean much at all, and Khan interpreted things in the most definite way possible. I'll be amazed if Kindl (and to a lesser degree Lashoff) aren't on a VERY short leash this season.

http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2014/09/mike_babcock_brian_lashoffs_jo.html

Thanks for finding it.

Yeah, re reading it that's a stretch from Khan based on what Babcock actually said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for finding it.

Yeah, re reading it that's a stretch from Khan based on what Babcock actually said.

It's a stretch for Kindl, but he explicitly says: ""Lash isn't in any trouble" [...] "Lash trained like crazy," Babcock said. "Lash is smart. Lash does a good job penalty killing. Lash is what he is." He's the 7th guy - comes cheap and is what a #7 should be.

He doesn't say anything about Kindl, specifically. Maybe that's where the opening lies. Personally, I hope one or more of the kids have fantastic games. I truly feel as if the defense needs a shake-up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a stretch for Kindl, but he explicitly says: ""Lash isn't in any trouble" [...] "Lash trained like crazy," Babcock said. "Lash is smart. Lash does a good job penalty killing. Lash is what he is." He's the 7th guy - comes cheap and is what a #7 should be.

He doesn't say anything about Kindl, specifically. Maybe that's where the opening lies. Personally, I hope one or more of the kids have fantastic games. I truly feel as if the defense needs a shake-up.

I agree. I think Lashoff is somewhat useful as a 7th D. Someone who it's ok to leave on the bench for half the season. You don't want any of the kids to be playing 20 games and sitting out the rest as the 7th D. Not good for their development.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a stretch for Kindl, but he explicitly says: ""Lash isn't in any trouble" [...] "Lash trained like crazy," Babcock said. "Lash is smart. Lash does a good job penalty killing. Lash is what he is." He's the 7th guy - comes cheap and is what a #7 should be.

He doesn't say anything about Kindl, specifically. Maybe that's where the opening lies. Personally, I hope one or more of the kids have fantastic games. I truly feel as if the defense needs a shake-up.

I see what you're saying, but saying "Lash isn't in any trouble" is still a long way off from claiming Lashoff and Kindl have no chance of losing their spot to a prospect.

Because in that article Echolalia posted Babcock says (emphasis mine):

"I like when we move the puck. I like when the puck gets going in a hurry. I like guys who can make good decisions and move it," Babcock said Thursday. "We're going to do everything we can to upgrade our D, so is that the guys who've been here in the past? Is that someone new? I don't know the answer for sure but I got two more opportunities to watch before we got to make decisions."

http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2014/10/mike_babcock_insists_red_wings.html

I think people's frustration with Babcock giving underperforming vets ice time is causing them to fixate too much on this one comment.

I'm not totally sure on this but I think Kindl has been a healthy scratch at some point every single season he's played for the Wings. After his poor performance last year, I can't see how that got him a guaranteed spot on the roster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see what you're saying, but saying "Lash isn't in any trouble" is still a long way off from claiming Lashoff and Kindl have no chance of losing their spot to a prospect.

Because in that article Echolalia posted Babcock says (emphasis mine):

http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2014/10/mike_babcock_insists_red_wings.html

I think people's frustration with Babcock giving underperforming vets ice time is causing them to fixate too much on this one comment.

I'm not totally sure on this but I think Kindl has been a healthy scratch at some point every single season he's played for the Wings. After his poor performance last year, I can't see how that got him a guaranteed spot on the roster.

I agree 100% with your take on Kindl - I think Khan was kind of reaching when he claimed Kindl was safe as well. My take on it is that Lashoff is safer than Kindl is, by however slim of a margin. Him sitting on the bench half the season limits his impact on the team. I think you factor in his position on the team, cap hit, expectations, etc. and it makes him a less likely candidate to be replaced. My best guess is that if/when the decision is made to bring up one of the younger guys, they're going to attempt to move Kindl first. If they find themselves stuck with his contract, I assume they'd waive Lashoff before waiving Kindl, if only because it feels like less of a loss and he's not as likely to be claimed.

Somewhere in there, Babs said he basically wants someone who's going to be a stable, 5-on-5 player. At this point, it would appear that either Ouellet or Marchenko are a much better bet than Kindl to offer that. We'll see if the brass has the... brass to pull the trigger.

Edit: Regardless of the actual outcome, I really want those three to have the game of their lives today. I want to see what management does when one or more of Ouellet, Marchenko and/or Jensen prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they belong on this team's blueline.

Edited by Jesusberg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Babcock was quoted as saying the following in the above mlive article:

"I like when we move the puck. I like when the puck gets going in a hurry. I like guys who can make good decisions and move it," Babcock said Thursday. "We're going to do everything we can to upgrade our D, so is that the guys who've been here in the past? Is that someone new? I don't know the answer for sure but I got two more opportunities to watch before we got to make decisions."

I feel like this paragraph has described Jensen to a tee in the preseason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In regards to Jensen, he is older and the time may be now for him. Would love to see him get a chance.

On another note, plenty of you poo-pooed him till now. Welcome to the bandwagon.

To be fair, a lot of people who follow prospects closely didn't know if he was going to get a fair shake. As you noted, he is a bit older and the injury last season set him back. Even Babcock admitted he didn't know all that much about Jensen:

"Jensen, to tell you the truth, coming into camp, I didn't know - I knew who he was, I'd seen him play and all that, but didn't know - but he's been very good, too."

It's fantastic to see that he created an opportunity for himself, but he was thought to be behind the top 4 defensive prospects, starting the season in Toledo. It was kind of just easy to disregard him, I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Babcock was quoted as saying the following in the above mlive article:

"I like when we move the puck. I like when the puck gets going in a hurry. I like guys who can make good decisions and move it," Babcock said Thursday. "We're going to do everything we can to upgrade our D, so is that the guys who've been here in the past? Is that someone new? I don't know the answer for sure but I got two more opportunities to watch before we got to make decisions."

I feel like this paragraph has described Jensen to a tee in the preseason.

not only does that describe jensen and some other of our prospects, it is the opposite of kindl and lashoff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will raise my hand and admit I didn't know sweet fa about Jensen really until camp and preseason. Good for him. But really, I thought our main guys were the big 4 (Ouellet, Marchenko, Sproul, Backman) and everyone after that was either nowhere near ready or just an afterthought.

Would really love the Wings to be gutsy and just go with Ouellet or Jensen to start the year with the Wings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, our mid-season "trade" or signing will be alfredson when his back is better - don't see anything else happening. Hope Holland doesn't kick his tires it might put him back on IR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given his track record, I dont think we want Holland making a trade.

Can I ask what his poor track record is? I'm guessing you will say the Legwand trade, which I dont think is fair yet as we dont know what Jarnkrok is going to become. Other then maybe the Quincey trade, I cant think of one that bad.

Hasek trade? Stuart trade? Schnieder trade? The Jurco/Ouellette draft pick trade?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given his track record, I dont think we want Holland making a trade.

Can I ask what his poor track record is? I'm guessing you will say the Legwand trade, which I dont think is fair yet as we dont know what Jarnkrok is going to become. Other then maybe the Quincey trade, I cant think of one that bad.

The Jarnkrok trade was a pure panic move based on the notion of him going back to Sweden stock didn't come true. You just don't trade a guy like him for 2 months of a third line center, when the team is in extreme need of defense

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Jarnkrok trade was a pure panic move based on the notion of him going back to Sweden stock didn't come true. You just don't trade a guy like him for 2 months of a third line center, when the team is in extreme need of defense

I agree with your conclusion, but for all the wrong reasons. I thought this "going back to Sweden" thing had been put to bed. He was never going back to Sweden. Nobody relevant said he was. And nobody in the organization thought he was. Ryan Martin explicitly stated that this was false. As did Jarnkrok. Can we please stop repeating conjectures over and over again if they've already been debunked?

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