• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
HockeytownRules19

Larkin or Mantha?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I was thinking about this today, especially with the Trade Deadline about a month away.

I know these are our two most untouchable prospects in the system... But, hypothetically, if you had to choose only 1 to keep, who would you choose? A potential franchise center in Larkin or a potential massive goal scorer in Mantha?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mantha. As I understand it, Larkin's greatest strength is his work ethic and smarts. But other than skating, the report on him is that he doesn't have dynamic offensive ability. As such, I doubt he ever tops out as a "franchise center".

Then again, a lot can change. I'm admittedly basing this off scouting reports and other people's projections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the first time I've heard Larkin described as a "potential franchise center". But odds are that neither player actually develops into a star, and for right now at least it looks like center will be a bigger area of need, so I could go either way. It would all depend on what we were getting in return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larkin has just scored17 points in the last 7 Michigan games. He is only 18, not saying he is going to be a scoring machine, but with a scoring machine like Mantha (projected) on his wing, he could be a setup machine...

Yzerman/Fedorov - Dastyuk/Zetterberg- Larkin/Mantha.

Yes, I went there. No way can EITHER of these two be traded. I would HATE to have to make a choice like that, one or the other....UGH!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before World Jr's I would say Mantha is the future, but Larkin really impressed me. He played a complete game and stepped it up a notch when they need him. I know this is not the question but for the frist time in many years I hope they do not do anything at the deadline. No one wants Kindl our top prospects have too much potential and they are projecting one of the deepest drafts this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Redundant meaning one is expendable in a trade? Because I entirely disagree with that.

No one said anything about expendable. Expendable implies unnecessary. Im saying that they are very similar players and if we are making tough decisions to make our team better, thats where id look to. Larkin looks like a good, 2 way center, which we'll be needing once Datsyuk retires. Mantha is a big, skilled, goal scoring winger, which weve lacked since Franzen died. We will need both those guys sooner than later. Nyquist and Tatar are average sized, left shooting, finesse wingers. Itd be nice to flip one of them to address a need somewhere else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also disagree on one of Tatar or Nyquist being redundant. I think Tatar's play-style is kind of a cross between Jiri Hudler and Darren Helm. Hudler in that he knows how to score goals from farther out, and they share a similar stature. But Tatar plays with a similar mentality to Darren Helm, in that he does not shy away from greasy areas, loves holding onto the puck, and is incredibly tenacous. Its that second aspect that I think gives Tatar real value to this team and can potentially make him a special player. He also fits perfectly into the fast-paced forecheck system that the Wings have utilized this year, and its been paying dividends for him.

Nyquist I'm actually kind of lost with. He definitely can score goals, but he's turning into a powerplay specialist. Half his points this year have come on the powerplay, and more than half of his goals have come with the man advantage. This could be a case of other teams playing him more tightly than last year when noone knew about him, and he has been struggling to adapt to the added pressure 5 on 5. But when there's more time and space (as there is on a powerplay), he's been able to capitalize. Hopefully with time Nyquist can become as effective 5 on 5 as he is on the powerplay, but until then, I think Tatar is more valuable to this team and has an added dimension to his game, but Nyquist has been able to make teams pay for penalties, and he's been doing it all year long. That, by extension, has been adding value to the guys on our team who can draw the penalties in the first place.

Anyway, so how they've been performing so far this year I'd say they're filling two very different roles.

Edited by Echolalia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also disagree on one of Tatar or Nyquist being redundant. I think Tatar's play-style is kind of a cross between Jiri Hudler and Darren Helm. Hudler in that he knows how to score goals from farther out, and they share a similar stature. But Tatar plays with a similar mentality to Darren Helm, in that he does not shy away from greasy areas, loves holding onto the puck, and is incredibly tenacous. Its that second aspect that I think gives Tatar real value to this team and can potentially make him a special player. He also fits perfectly into the fast-paced forecheck system that the Wings have utilized this year, and its been paying dividends for him.

Nyquist I'm actually kind of lost with. He definitely can score goals, but he's turning into a powerplay specialist. Half his points this year have come on the powerplay, and more than half of his goals have come with the man advantage. This could be a case of other teams playing him more tightly than last year when noone knew about him, and he has been struggling to adapt to the added pressure 5 on 5. But when there's more time and space (as there is on a powerplay), he's been able to capitalize. Hopefully with time Nyquist can become as effective 5 on 5 as he is on the powerplay, but until then, I think Tatar is more valuable to this team and has an added dimension to his game, but Nyquist has been able to make teams pay for penalties, and he's been doing it all year long. That, by extension, has been adding value to the guys on our team who can draw the penalties in the first place.

Anyway, so how they've been performing so far this year I'd say they're filling two very different roles.

I didnt say that they were clones, I said they are similar. For years, weve bemoaned the fact that we arent big enough, arent tough enough to play against, dont have any right shooters. Tatar and Nyquist are similar in the fact that they arent big, arent tough, both shoot left. Both of them have good value right now, lets move one to address others needs and become a better, more well rounded team.

I agree that Tatar is the one to keep. Id love to move Nyquist in a package for Burns or Wheeler. Imagine in two years...

Abdelkader - Zetterberg - Wheeler

Tatar - Sheahan - Jurco

Mantha - Datsyuk - Pulkkinen

Deadly.

Edited by Bannedforlife

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mantha - Larkin - Pulkkinen

Tatar - Sheahan - Nyquist

In 4-5 years, who wouldn't want to have that as a top 6?

I know I am all about making trades for no reason :ninja: but honestly, lets upgrade through attrition. Unless something outrageous falls into our lap I like the direction the team is going from within... (of course if that top puck moving defenseman becomes available...then....aw crap! Back to indecision!!!!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mantha - Larkin - Pulkkinen

Tatar - Sheahan - Nyquist

In 4-5 years, who wouldn't want to have that as a top 6?

I know I am all about making trades for no reason :ninja: but honestly, lets upgrade through attrition. Unless something outrageous falls into our lap I like the direction the team is going from within... (of course if that top puck moving defenseman becomes available...then....aw crap! Back to indecision!!!!)

Tatar-Larkin-Mantha

Nyquist-Sheahan-Pulkkinen

Plus

Bertuzzi-Athanasiou-Nastasiuk

Zetterberg playing his last years on one vertebra, centering the 4th line with some combination of Jurco, Helm, Abby, and Glenny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didnt say that they were clones, I said they are similar. For years, weve bemoaned the fact that we arent big enough, arent tough enough to play against, dont have any right shooters. Tatar and Nyquist are similar in the fact that they arent big, arent tough, both shoot left. Both of them have good value right now, lets move one to address others needs and become a better, more well rounded team.

I agree that Tatar is the one to keep. Id love to move Nyquist in a package for Burns or Wheeler. Imagine in two years...

Abdelkader - Zetterberg - Wheeler

Tatar - Sheahan - Jurco

Mantha - Datsyuk - Pulkkinen

Deadly.

I mean, I understand where you're coming from, but while they're physically similar individuals, their play-style is different, and as a result of their play-style both Tatar and Nyquist are filling unique niches for the team that nobody else has been quite as succesful at. Tatar is the poster-boy for our tenacious forecheck system and is producing as a result. Nyquist is lethal on the powerplay and is producing as a result. Trading one of the two of them for someone who's physically different from them (ie right handed, 220 lbs, etc etc) will diversify the Wings' average body habitus and will make us more dynamic in that aspect, but there's no guarantee that this new player will be able to fill the niche of the player they'd be replacing. In other words, if we trade Nyquist for player X, are the Wings still going to be as dangerous as they currently are on the powerplay? Will other teams be able to rely more on hooks and interference penalties to nullify our 5v5 scoring chances? If its Tatar that's moved, will the other player be able to fit into the offensive system that Babcock is implementing and produce at the same rate? Maybe. But maybe not. Legwand didn't pan out. Weiss (while I'm still not willing to give up on him) is struggling to find a role in our system. There are no guarantees when we bring a new player in, and while it would be awesome to get more rightys onto the team, or heavier bodies that are stalwarts at the offensive crease, its a risk that I don't think is worth taking given where the Wings are at (top 10 in PP, PK, goals/game, goals against/game, 2nd in the Atlantic), and given where Tatar and Nyquist are developmentally. But of course this is just how I'm seeing things, and you're welcome to see it differently.

Edited by Echolalia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also disagree on one of Tatar or Nyquist being redundant. I think Tatar's play-style is kind of a cross between Jiri Hudler and Darren Helm. Hudler in that he knows how to score goals from farther out, and they share a similar stature. But Tatar plays with a similar mentality to Darren Helm, in that he does not shy away from greasy areas, loves holding onto the puck, and is incredibly tenacous. Its that second aspect that I think gives Tatar real value to this team and can potentially make him a special player. He also fits perfectly into the fast-paced forecheck system that the Wings have utilized this year, and its been paying dividends for him.

Nyquist I'm actually kind of lost with. He definitely can score goals, but he's turning into a powerplay specialist. Half his points this year have come on the powerplay, and more than half of his goals have come with the man advantage. This could be a case of other teams playing him more tightly than last year when noone knew about him, and he has been struggling to adapt to the added pressure 5 on 5. But when there's more time and space (as there is on a powerplay), he's been able to capitalize. Hopefully with time Nyquist can become as effective 5 on 5 as he is on the powerplay, but until then, I think Tatar is more valuable to this team and has an added dimension to his game, but Nyquist has been able to make teams pay for penalties, and he's been doing it all year long. That, by extension, has been adding value to the guys on our team who can draw the penalties in the first place.

Anyway, so how they've been performing so far this year I'd say they're filling two very different roles.I didnt say that they were clones, I said they are similar. For years, weve bemoaned the fact that we arent big enough, arent tough enough to play against, dont have any right shooters. Tatar and Nyquist are similar in the fact that they arent big, arent tough, both shoot left. Both of them have good value right now, lets move one to address others needs and become a better, more well rounded team.

I agree that Tatar is the one to keep. Id love to move Nyquist in a package for Burns or Wheeler. Imagine in two years...

Abdelkader - Zetterberg - Wheeler

Tatar - Sheahan - Jurco

Mantha - Datsyuk - Pulkkinen

Deadly.

Tatar is plenty tough. You mean they don't fight. Other people answered the rest about their playing styles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one said anything about expendable. Expendable implies unnecessary. Im saying that they are very similar players and if we are making tough decisions to make our team better, thats where id look to. Larkin looks like a good, 2 way center, which we'll be needing once Datsyuk retires. Mantha is a big, skilled, goal scoring winger, which weve lacked since Franzen died. We will need both those guys sooner than later. Nyquist and Tatar are average sized, left shooting, finesse wingers. Itd be nice to flip one of them to address a need somewhere else.

The only way I'd move either of these guys would be as part of a package to pull in a #1 defenceman (Suter, Weber, etc). It's not too often you get guys that can score goals like this. They might be carrying our offence for years to come.

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