PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 we needed Legwand. Babcock relegated him to the 4th line so he could control his point production, so when they lowballed him come July 1st, they could use only his red wing points as the excuse. David was smarter than that, even though his first choice was to end his career as a Red Wing. Nothing personal, just business. Now some of you might think this is crazy, tinfoil hat talk, but it has made so much clear to me. This must be why we're keeping Smith off the powerplay this year so that he won't inflate his value this year with all that scoring stuff. It also explains why we haven't played Cleary yet - If he scores his 30 goals, he'll be impossible to resign next year. Now we just have to get that Nyquist guy to stop scoring and Babcock's business plan will be going along perfectly. Hopefully these three aren't as smart as Legwand, though, or else they'll figure out what we're up to and run away to Ottawa for the big contracts. 3 nyqvististhefuture, number9 and krsmith17 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
number9 3,297 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 (edited) we needed Legwand. Babcock relegated him to the 4th line so he could control his point production, so when they lowballed him come July 1st, they could use only his red wing points as the excuse. David was smarter than that, even though his first choice was to end his career as a Red Wing. Nothing personal, just business. Yes, of course. We got him so that we could use him to keep the streak alive... by giving him low minutes with bad linemates. Do you hear yourself sometimes? Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't we not offer him a contract at all this summer?? Edited November 4, 2014 by number9 2 kipwinger and krsmith17 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dirtydangles 1,328 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 So.... Weiss for Jarnkrok? 1 nyqvististhefuture reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nev 1,085 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 Christ. That "back to Sweden" rumor has been debunked so many times it's not even funny and yet it still gets repeated. Both the Red Wings front office (Assistant GM Ryan Martin) as well as Jarnkrok himself have denied that this was ever a factor. Whatever else may come of this kid's career, he was NOT traded because he was a "back to Sweden" flight risk. The problem with the "debunking" is that there are quotes out there saying its true, and there are quotes out there saying it isn't true..... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CMatt89 63 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 Trade andersson for him Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
e_prime 1,936 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 I think the "rumor" was started by the Wings fans to help justify that what they perceived to be a terrible trade. Fixed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krsmith17 7,191 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 I was always really high on Jarnkrok, and for good reason. He has a ton of skill, and was the right handed, top 6 center we were looking for. He put up very solid numbers in the SEL and was really starting to find his game here in North America at the time of the trade. I remember hearing about the trade that was in the works for David Legwand and getting kind of excited that we were actually doing something, anything to better our injury depleted team, to make a run at a playoff spot. We had given up a draft pick and Patrick Eaves and an unknown prospect. The last player I thought was going the other way was Calle Jarnkrok. I thought maybe it was going to be Landon Ferraro or some other mid level prospect. I was very disappointed upon the announcement and could not believe that Kenny gave up our number one prospect, plus another role player and pick for a UFA... In saying all that, Jarnkrok is an undersized, skilled player and we have a ton of those in the system. Sheahan was considered by many, including myself to be below Sheahan in the pecking order, and I probably would have been more okay with the trade at the time, if we had traded Sheahan rather than Jarnkrok. I'm so glad Holland and co. knew better than to pull that trigger. Jarnkrok will be fine, and I still believe he has a future in the NHL, but I'm more okay with the trade now then I was at the time of the trade. He really didn't have a spot here, and management seen that and got a pretty decent return for him. I know a lot of people here don't care about the streak, but I do, and it is still alive today because of that trade, and for that I am happy. 1 jimmyemeryhunter reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
e_prime 1,936 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 ...could not believe that Kenny gave up our number one prospect, plus another role player and pick for a UFA... Was he really our number one prospect? Maybe our #1 C prospect? Our "#1C prospect behind Sheahan" Whatever it is... ...and no offense to you krsmith, but I hate when the title "#1 prospect" is thrown around about any player because that is certainly a debatable title. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krsmith17 7,191 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 At the time of the trade he absolutely was considered by most Wings fans and anyone who followed the Wings to be our number one prospect at any position. He was certainly ahead of Sheahan, who was considered by most people before last season, to have been another first round bust. He was definitely considered to have a higher ceiling than most guys in our system, even a highly regarded player such as Tatar. And to be honest, even though I wouldn't trade Tatar for Jarnkrok and I am glad we kept Tatar, I would not be at all surprised if Jarnkrok is the better player in 5 years from now... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WingedWheel91 271 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 Who cares about Calle Jarnkrok? I'd Rather have Dylan Larkin Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Euro_Twins 4,476 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 At the time of the trade he absolutely was considered by most Wings fans and anyone who followed the Wings to be our number one prospect at any position. He was certainly ahead of Sheahan, who was considered by most people before last season, to have been another first round bust. He was definitely considered to have a higher ceiling than most guys in our system, even a highly regarded player such as Tatar. And to be honest, even though I wouldn't trade Tatar for Jarnkrok and I am glad we kept Tatar, I would not be at all surprised if Jarnkrok is the better player in 5 years from now... I believe mantha was our number one prospect Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
number9 3,297 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 I believe mantha was our number one prospect Mantha #1? Hampus Melen says hi 3 kipwinger, evilmrt and Euro_Twins reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krsmith17 7,191 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 Maybe some had Mantha already jumped ahead of Jarnkrok at that point, but still even as a top 3 prospect and number one at the center position it was a bit of a blow. I'm over it though. I think it could have turned out a lot worse if we had gotten rid of Sheahan or any number of our other top prospects. Jarnkrok is very replaceable and like I said in another thread, I believe he may already be replaced in the system by Tomas Nosek. Same type skill set but a much bigger body. I just wish we still had Calle's right handed shot. Oh well... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FlashyG 1,799 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 At the time of the trade he absolutely was considered by most Wings fans and anyone who followed the Wings to be our number one prospect at any position. He was certainly ahead of Sheahan, who was considered by most people before last season, to have been another first round bust. He was definitely considered to have a higher ceiling than most guys in our system, even a highly regarded player such as Tatar. And to be honest, even though I wouldn't trade Tatar for Jarnkrok and I am glad we kept Tatar, I would not be at all surprised if Jarnkrok is the better player in 5 years from now... At the time of the trade Jarnkrok was most certainly not anywhere near the #1 prospect in the system by most fans, or by any reputable publications. He was well behind Mantha, Nyquist, Tatar, Mrazek. Jurco, and Sheahan. He was in a group along with Ouellet, Sproul, Marchenko etc. He was closer to 10th than 1st, especially considering the Wings brass felt Glendening was more ready to play in the NHL over him. As far as the rumors about him wanting to go home, he did eventually admit that he had considered returning to Sweden when he realized his chances of cracking the Wings line-up any time soon were remote. I don't think any sort of move was imminent though and I don't think he had vocalized those wishes so they likely had little to no impact on the Wings decision to trade him. I think he was dealt because he wasn't going to be able to crack the roster for years and they had a pressing need for a center right then, having lost their top 5 centers to injuries at the time. 1 marcaractac reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krsmith17 7,191 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 He definitely was no where near 10th in our prospect rankings. I already admitted that he may have been behind Mantha and maybe even Jurco but that's about it. And even that would have been debatable seeming how one guy was in his first year pro and the other still hadn't and STILL hasn't played a single game of pro. As for Nyquist and Tatar they were already graduated from prospect status long before the trade took place. Anyway, he was our number one center prospect playing in Grand Rapids, and that was a hard hit, but like I said numerous times, I'm now, quite okay with the trade and why it was made. I agree that it was made because he had little to no chance in making the big club any time soon. So good for the Wings in getting a return and good for Jarnkrok for getting his shot at the NHL. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mckinley25 677 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 The problem with the "debunking" is that there are quotes out there saying its true, and there are quotes out there saying it isn't true.....Who said it was true? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DickieDunn 2,571 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 Christ. That "back to Sweden" rumor has been debunked so many times it's not even funny and yet it still gets repeated. Both the Red Wings front office (Assistant GM Ryan Martin) as well as Jarnkrok himself have denied that this was ever a factor. Whatever else may come of this kid's career, he was NOT traded because he was a "back to Sweden" flight risk. Of course they denied it. Jarnkrok won't admit it because it would make him look bad and the Wings don't generally throw their players under the bus if they do say they want to go back to Europe. Just because they said it didn't happen doesn't mean that it didn't. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kipwinger 8,524 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 Of course they denied it. Jarnkrok won't admit it because it would make him look bad and the Wings don't generally throw their players under the bus if they do say they want to go back to Europe. Just because they said it didn't happen doesn't mean that it didn't. And just because some jackass in the rumor mill said something doesn't make it legit either. I'm basing my information on the guy himself and Wings management. While not 100% it's better than a completely unsubstantiated rumor. Is your point that there's no way of knowing 100%? If so, I agree. If your point is that because the Wings and Jarnkrok COULD be lying that there's something to the rumor, then I disagree. Isn't that how all rumors catch on? The fact that they can't be proven wrong doesn't mean that they're even remotely right. I'll take my information from the source. You take it from wherever you want. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rick zombo 3,739 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 I heard that Jarnkrok was underperforming because he was spening to much time with Lisa Ann. Just a rumour, I have no credible source. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kipwinger 8,524 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 I heard that Jarnkrok was underperforming because he was spening to much time with Lisa Ann. Just a rumour, I have no credible source. You can't prove that he's NOT spending time with Lisa Ann. And they both COULD be lying if they denied it. As such, it's theoretically plausible. Good enough for me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
haroldsnepsts 4,826 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 Please let's not drag this thread into another conversation about pornstars and hockey players. One is plenty. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rick zombo 3,739 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 Please let's not drag this thread into another conversation about pornstars and hockey players. One is plenty. Sorry. Just a joke. And just because some jackass in the rumor mill said something doesn't make it legit either. I'm basing my information on the guy himself and Wings management. While not 100% it's better than a completely unsubstantiated rumor. Is your point that there's no way of knowing 100%? If so, I agree. If your point is that because the Wings and Jarnkrok COULD be lying that there's something to the rumor, then I disagree. Isn't that how all rumors catch on? The fact that they can't be proven wrong doesn't mean that they're even remotely right. I'll take my information from the source. You take it from wherever you want. To be fair, I believe Bob MacKenzie started the rumour based on what he thought were credible sources. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BottleOfSmoke 5,965 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 Mantha #1? Hampus Melen says hi This is legit 2 evilmrt and Euro_Twins reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kipwinger 8,524 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 Sorry. Just a joke. To be fair, I believe Bob MacKenzie started the rumour based on what he thought were credible sources. Let that be further evidence that you shouldn't promote rumors based on unattributed "sources". Bob McKenzie isn't a bad commentator. But his job is to create discussion around hockey events, not necessarily be fair or accurate. Before Bob reports these types of things he should put a call in to a team, player, or agent. But that wouldn't be any fun would it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rick zombo 3,739 Report post Posted November 4, 2014 Let that be further evidence that you shouldn't promote rumors based on unattributed "sources". Bob McKenzie isn't a bad commentator. But his job is to create discussion around hockey events, not necessarily be fair or accurate. Before Bob reports these types of things he should put a call in to a team, player, or agent. But that wouldn't be any fun would it? Agreed. But you have to concede that McKenzie is more than just "some jackass in the rumour mill". Because it's McKenzie, he very well may have been on to something. It makes sense, post-trade, for both the Wings and Jarnkrok to deny the rumours. I'm not saying that this is what happened. And I really don't care ultimately. But it could have been true. 1 krsmith17 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites