Larkin or Mantha?

[nawein 324]

He also costs 6 million, and isn't at a position of huge need right now. Plus it would take more than Larkin stright up to get him. You'd be paying a hefty price for a guy that isn't having a much better offensive year than Darren Helm, that we probably couldn't afford to resign (6 million qualifying offer and he's been a pain in negotiations so far in his career), and that doesn't really pull us any closer to being a cup contender. I'd move Larkin for a defenseman version of O'Reilly, but not O'Reilly. He just doesn't really provide anything we don't already have a enough of. He doesn't fill a huge need. And we'd have to give up a lot of assests for him.

[kipwinger 8,522]

He also costs 6 million, and isn't at a position of huge need right now. Plus it would take more than Larkin stright up to get him. You'd be paying a hefty price for a guy that isn't having a much better offensive year than Darren Helm, that we probably couldn't afford to resign (6 million qualifying offer and he's been a pain in negotiations so far in his career), and that doesn't really pull us any closer to being a cup contender. I'd move Larkin for a defenseman version of O'Reilly, but not O'Reilly. He just doesn't really provide anything we don't already have a enough of. He doesn't fill a huge need. And we'd have to give up a lot of assests for him.

I wasn't implying that you'd trade them straight up. I was implying that O'Reilly is the kind of guy I'd want back if I was sending Larkin in a trade. As far as the other stuff...I don't care about his cap hit (we've got money), its always easier to re-sign a guy if you're a good team (Colorado), and players that good always make you better. Comparing him to Helm is laughable. You said you haven't seen him much, you should. He's a really good hockey player.

[DickieDunn 2,571]

Exactly my question... Who is potentially available that you would trade Mantha or Larkin for right now? I personally wouldn't for O'Reilly or Yandle. For a Ryan Johansen or Sean Monahan type of player, I would. So yes, there are players that I would trade them for, but not for any of the players that would be available... Why are you so fixated on saying that Mantha, Larkin, Nyquist, Tatar, Jurco, Pulkkinen, Sheahan, etc, etc, etc. are not untouchable. They're all obviously available in the right deal. The problem is, that deal is never going to become available...

I'm not sure who would be available, but Seguin wasn't available until he was moved, so you never know. Someone like Tavares gets fed up with playing for a loser, demands a trade and wants to go to Detroit. I'd trade Larkin or Mantha, Pulkinnen, and a D prospect to get that deal done without thinking twice.

[PumpkinEscobar 136]

I think the Wings are so enamored with both that I don't think either will go anywhere anytime soon

[wings4thecup06 504]

I'm not sure who would be available, but Seguin wasn't available until he was moved, so you never know. Someone like Tavares gets fed up with playing for a loser, demands a trade and wants to go to Detroit. I'd trade Larkin or Mantha, Pulkinnen, and a D prospect to get that deal done without thinking twice.

I don't think Tavares is getting fed up anymore.......

[nawein 324]

I wasn't implying that you'd trade them straight up. I was implying that O'Reilly is the kind of guy I'd want back if I was sending Larkin in a trade. As far as the other stuff...I don't care about his cap hit (we've got money), its always easier to re-sign a guy if you're a good team (Colorado), and players that good always make you better. Comparing him to Helm is laughable. You said you haven't seen him much, you should. He's a really good hockey player.

I just compared their offensive outputs this year because they're similar and that Helms spot is who's he'd play in if we we're to trade for him. And you said he works hard, and is relentless and solid defensively. All things Helm is. So I was under the impression he's a more offensivle gifted Darren Helm. Which yeah, I'd love to have. I've also read several reports on the guy that say he's a 2-, 3+ line player. Which puts him slightly better than Helm. If it's that laughable, I apologize, I'll try to catch some games.

As far as money, Nyquist, Smith and Jurco all need raises and if we can add a top defenseman, we actually might be closer to the cap than a lot of people think.

And trading a top prospect + for a position we don't really need to upgrade seems pointless to me.

[krsmith17 7,191]

Dickie, like I've been saying since this conversation started, obviously I would trade either of these guys for a super-star talent in his early 20's, that's a no brainer, but those guys just aren't available. How difficult is that to understand? For what Holland is likely to be looking for / likely to get in a trade, a.k.a. a 2nd-3rd pairing right handed defenseman (even that's questionable) all of these guys are off the table. There's no way we land a Tavares or Seguin type player in a trade. Not gonna happen.

As for O'Reilly, I agree with nawein. I think he's a solid two-way center, but I wouldn't trade Larkin plus the other assets it would take to get him. For one, you're the one always saying we need to trade Weiss or Helm in a package for a winger or defenseman because we have too many centers, forcing them to play out of their natural position. Why would you now want to add another center, for a player who (I think) has a higher ceiling, plus other assets? It just doesn't make sense to me. That's making an unnecessary trade, just to make a trade in my opinion. Not to mention, as good as I believe O'Reilly to be, I do think he's overpaid, and on a good team, he's a second line center at best.

It's pretty crowded down the middle right now and I think we already have our O'Reilly in Sheahan. He has played over 300 more games at the same age, but I see them rounding out to be very similar type players. Both, great two-way players, and I believe Sheahan will provide similar offense and be a solid 50-60 point guy within a year or two.

[kipwinger 8,522]

Dickie, like I've been saying since this conversation started, obviously I would trade either of these guys for a super-star talent in his early 20's, that's a no brainer, but those guys just aren't available. How difficult is that to understand? For what Holland is likely to be looking for / likely to get in a trade, a.k.a. a 2nd-3rd pairing right handed defenseman (even that's questionable) all of these guys are off the table. There's no way we land a Tavares or Seguin type player in a trade. Not gonna happen.

As for O'Reilly, I agree with nawein. I think he's a solid two-way center, but I wouldn't trade Larkin plus the other assets it would take to get him. For one, you're the one always saying we need to trade Weiss or Helm in a package for a winger or defenseman because we have too many centers, forcing them to play out of their natural position. Why would you now want to add another center, for a player who (I think) has a higher ceiling, plus other assets? It just doesn't make sense to me. That's making an unnecessary trade, just to make a trade in my opinion. Not to mention, as good as I believe O'Reilly to be, I do think he's overpaid, and on a good team, he's a second line center at best.

It's pretty crowded down the middle right now and I think we already have our O'Reilly in Sheahan. He has played over 300 more games at the same age, but I see them rounding out to be very similar type players. Both, great two-way players, and I believe Sheahan will provide similar offense and be a solid 50-60 point guy within a year or two.

Because while a capable center, he's a better winger. He's like Zetterberg (or Kesler), his best offensive season (66 pts.) was on the wing. Something not true (or true to a much smaller extent) of Weiss or Helm. Again, he's a MUCH better player than Darren Helm. I'm not sure why this comparison is sticking around.

6 million is a little bit of an overpayment (thanks to that dumb Calgary offer sheet that drive his price up), but pretty close to what good second line centers go for these days. Especially if they're 23 years old and are only getting better. Filppula (5), Kreci (5.25) are good comparables.

I'd move Larkin plus Helm (plus whatever else) to get him. And I'd sleep very well knowing that my centers of the present were (some combination of) Datsyuk, Zetterberg, O'Reilly, Sheahan, and Glendening, and my centers of the future were O'Reilly, Athanasiou, Sheahan, Nosek, and Glendening.

Seriously, look at those last five centers. O'Reilly, Athanasiou, Sheahan, Nosek, Glendening. Fast, fast, fast, tenacious, hard working, and strong on the puck. That makes me drool when you add in the fact that our wingers are Tatar, Nyquist, Mantha, Abby, Jurco, Pulkkinen, etc. That team would skate you into the ground.

Edited January 29, 2015 by kipwinger

[Son of a Wing 1,644]

I like O'Reilly and think he would be a great fit in our system. He's a complete 200-foot player with offensive ability and is young.

Having said that, he is a truly a second line player with a first liner's contract.

6.2mil is a lot and he is a UFA after next season. Judging on his past contract negotiating I would put money on the fact he hits the market.

It will cost at least 7mil to lock him up and that is too much in my opinion and I have no interest in giving up assets for 1.5 years of service.

[kipwinger 8,522]

I like O'Reilly and think he would be a great fit in our system. He's a complete 200-foot player with offensive ability and is young.

Having said that, he is a truly a second line player with a first liner's contract.

6.2mil is a lot and he is a UFA after next season. Judging on his past contract negotiating I would put money on the fact he hits the market.

It will cost at least 7mil to lock him up and that is too much in my opinion and I have no interest in giving up assets for 1.5 years of service.

See, I disagree about the contract. The current one is a bit high. But that's because Colorado dicked him around and he doesn't want to be there. Secondly, the term was short. Sign him long term (which is a good investment), and that number comes down. He won't make 6-7 million on a 5+ year deal. He's just making that much because he's on 1-2 year deals. Also, I want to reiterate he's only 23. He's only going to get better. He's not even entering his prime. I'm not sure why everybody thinks he's reached his max potential. If he continues to improve and in a couple of years is putting up 60 pts. regularly and playing stud defense, which isn't unrealistic, how would he not be worth 6 million?

[HockeytownRules19 902]

haha I didn't expect this topic to "explode" like this lol

It was only hypothetical, barring trading for a superstar I'm not trading either

[kipwinger 8,522]

haha I didn't expect this topic to "explode" like this lol

It was only hypothetical, barring trading for a superstar I'm not trading either

I think that's understood. As I've said already, I think everybody would agree that none of our quality prospects should be traded for a tin of beans. But it's always fun to speculate on guys' values and the types of packages you could put together around them.

[krsmith17 7,191]

Kip, I never compared O'Reilly to Helm, I compared him to what I believe Sheahan will become within a year or two. I think Sheahan is a second line center and will be a really good one, at what I think will be a cheaper price, in a couple years. I'm not saying that 6 million is crazy over-payment, but as you admit, it is over-payment, and I agree with Son of a Wing in that he will demand more money or go to a team that will pay him after his current contract is up. It would obviously take more than Helm and Larkin to get him here and Colorado are looking for help on defense, so maybe Smith, Helm and Larkin. I know you would be completely okay with that, but that is huge over-payment in my opinion.

You talk about our future top 5 centers being O'Reilly, Athanasiou, Sheahan, Nosek and Glendening and talk about how they're all fast, tenacious, hard working and strong on the puck, but that right there is what describes Larkin's game to a tee. You say how O'Reilly should be a good two-way center that puts up 60 points, but that's exactly what Larkin should be capable of as well. So why give up the extra assets for something that you already have in the system? To help the transition after Datsyuk and Zetterberg retire? I honestly believe that is a good 5 years away, and by that time Larkin will be the same age as O'Reilly is now, and well on his way. Don't get me wrong, I would like to have O'Reilly on this team, but I like having the home grown kid, plus Helm and Smith more...

[kipwinger 8,522]

Kip, I never compared O'Reilly to Helm, I compared him to what I believe Sheahan will become within a year or two. I think Sheahan is a second line center and will be a really good one, at what I think will be a cheaper price, in a couple years. I'm not saying that 6 million is crazy over-payment, but as you admit, it is over-payment, and I agree with Son of a Wing in that he will demand more money or go to a team that will pay him after his current contract is up. It would obviously take more than Helm and Larkin to get him here and Colorado are looking for help on defense, so maybe Smith, Helm and Larkin. I know you would be completely okay with that, but that is huge over-payment in my opinion.

You talk about our future top 5 centers being O'Reilly, Athanasiou, Sheahan, Nosek and Glendening and talk about how they're all fast, tenacious, hard working and strong on the puck, but that right there is what describes Larkin's game to a tee. You say how O'Reilly should be a good two-way center that puts up 60 points, but that's exactly what Larkin should be capable of as well. So why give up the extra assets for something that you already have in the system? To help the transition after Datsyuk and Zetterberg retire? I honestly believe that is a good 5 years away, and by that time Larkin will be the same age as O'Reilly is now, and well on his way. Don't get me wrong, I would like to have O'Reilly on this team, but I like having the home grown kid, plus Helm and Smith more...

Firstly, yes...I'd be totally fine trading Helm, Smith, and Larkin for O'Reilly. However, that's just the typical trade rumor overpayment bluster. Ryan O'Reilly isn't going to get that much in return. Hell, Rick Nash, Bobby Ryan, and Jason Spezza didn't get that much in return. Not sure why you think O'Reilly would be different.

Secondly, I feel like I'm talking in circles. I'd be willing to give up Larkin, plus those assets, because O'Reilly can help us now AND in years to come...while Larkin can only help us in the future. And in the future we won't have Dats, Zetterberg, or Kronwall. We might find that we're actually further away from the Cup by the time Larkin can make an impact. 5 years from now our leadership will be retired, Larkin will be a rookie, and O'Reilly will be 28 and on the front side of his prime. A guy like O'Reilly is the present AND the future, while Larkin is just the future.

If you trade for O'Reilly you can field this lineup tomorrow

Tatar-Dats-Abby

Z-O'Reilly-Nyquist

Weiss-Sheahan-Jurco/Franzen

Miller-Glendening-Andersson

And in a few years you'll still have

Tatar-O'Reilly-Mantha

Nyquist-Sheahan-Jurco

Pulkkinen-Athanasiou-Abby

Callahan-Glendening-Whoever.

You're right. Larkin has all those assets. But he doesn't have them at the NHL level for at least three more years of college and one AHL season. That's a long time to wait when you're as close as we are right now.

[krsmith17 7,191]

You may think we could get an O'Reilly type of player for a package of Helm, Larkin and non roster players but I highly doubt it. The first thing the Aves should and most likely will be looking for in any potential trade for O'Reilly, is a legitimate top 4 defenseman. I don't see how adding another forward (area of strength) for a defenseman (area of weakness) gets us closer to the Cup...

I don't see us being over the top favorites this year, and I'm okay with that. I'd rather hold on to our assets, and continue building a legit annual Cup contender, which I think we're very close to doing. Yes, O'Reilly will help now and in the future, but we'd also be giving up other assets to go along with Larkin, which in the end I don't think makes us any better...

[kipwinger 8,522]

You may think we could get an O'Reilly type of player for a package of Helm, Larkin and non roster players but I highly doubt it. The first thing the Aves should and most likely will be looking for in any potential trade for O'Reilly, is a legitimate top 4 defenseman. I don't see how adding another forward (area of strength) for a defenseman (area of weakness) gets us closer to the Cup...

I don't see us being over the top favorites this year, and I'm okay with that. I'd rather hold on to our assets, and continue building a legit annual Cup contender, which I think we're very close to doing. Yes, O'Reilly will help now and in the future, but we'd also be giving up other assets to go along with Larkin, which in the end I don't think makes us any better...

Not sure where you're getting this from. I never said a "non roster player". I'd start with Helm, Larkin, 2nd but I'd give the 1st (since it will be a very late first anyway based on our record). Which should put us in the ballpark. I might even be willing to sweeten the pot with a mid level prospect too if need be (Jensen).

Secondly, obviously you and I dramatically differ on how we value Smith so I'm going to leave that out. Again, because I don't think it's necessary to trade him. But I could give a damn about losing "other assets" in Helm and unproven prospects as long as I'm getting a first rate player on the front end of his career. We'd be losing Helm and an unproven prospect for a guy that does all the same things as Helm PLUS scores. The only real loss is the (very late round) 1st, and Larkin (a great, yet unproven, prospect). Losing both those things would sting, but we've got the organization depth to do it and never miss a beat.

AND you'd be set down the middle for the next 7-10 years. Seriously, trading for O'Reilly means you never won't need another center for a VERY long time. Keeping Larkin means you MIGHT NOT need a center for a very long time.

That's why I do it. Every single time.

[Son of a Wing 1,644]

All this O'Reilly for Larkin+ talk is silly anyways.

Colorado doesn't need centers. They need a top 2-4 defenceman with comparable value and we don't have that to trade.

[Smite 399]

All this O'Reilly for Larkin+ talk is silly anyways.

Colorado doesn't need centers. They need a top 2-4 defenceman with comparable value and we don't have that to trade.

Do you think they will trade to have Quincy back?...... Sorry I could not resist.... IMO Q has been our best consistent D-man.

[kipwinger 8,522]

All this O'Reilly for Larkin+ talk is silly anyways.

Colorado doesn't need centers. They need a top 2-4 defenceman with comparable value and we don't have that to trade.

Agree. I've been talking in hypothetical this whole time. In no way to I think this actually happens. First, because of the reasons you said. And secondly, because I don't think Ken Holland would do a first rounder from a year ago wrong like that. Not his style.

[krsmith17 7,191]

Okay... I'm extremely confused Kip... I said you may think we can get O'Reilly for Helm, Larkin plus a non roster player (meaning a prospect or draft pick), then you go on to say, you're not sure where I'm getting that from, and then follow that up with, you'd add a 2nd (or a first)... Is a draft pick a roster player?... My point is and has been that they're going to be asking for more NHL ready players than just Helm, a prospect and a pick... like a top 4 defenseman...

Making that trade today, I think we're slightly better today, but much worse off in the long run. That's just my opinion, and I'm basing it on the fact that I believe Larkin is going to be a big time player in the NHL in 4-5 years. If it's Smith we're giving up, which I think we would have to, we're significantly worse now (my opinion), if it's the first round pick, it hurts our future, on top of the loss of Larkin.

Then you go on to agree with what Son of a Wing says, about it being silly to talk about because they'd be looking for a top 4 defenseman in return, which is what I said... Sometimes I think you just like to argue with me...

[kipwinger 8,522]

Okay... I'm extremely confused Kip... I said you may think we can get O'Reilly for Helm, Larkin plus a non roster player (meaning a prospect or draft pick), then you go on to say, you're not sure where I'm getting that from, and then follow that up with, you'd add a 2nd (or a first)... Is a draft pick a roster player?... My point is and has been that they're going to be asking for more NHL ready players than just Helm, a prospect and a pick... like a top 4 defenseman...

Making that trade today, I think we're slightly better today, but much worse off in the long run. That's just my opinion, and I'm basing it on the fact that I believe Larkin is going to be a big time player in the NHL in 4-5 years. If it's Smith we're giving up, which I think we would have to, we're significantly worse now (my opinion), if it's the first round pick, it hurts our future, on top of the loss of Larkin.

Then you go on to agree with what Son of a Wing says, about it being silly to talk about because they'd be looking for a top 4 defenseman in return, which is what I said... Sometimes I think you just like to argue with me...

I was always talking in hypothetical. I asked Dickie what kind of player he'd want in return if he was going to trade Mantha or Larkin, and then immediately suggested if I wanted to trade Larkin I'd want someone like O'Reilly in return. Go back and look. At no point did I ever suggest this was what we really should do, or that it was a realistic proposal.

We're about to have a very young, and yet very experienced team in the near future. I think if ever there was a time to "sacrifice the future for the now", it would be now. Trading and 18 year old, for a 23 year old with a nearly identical skill set, who's much more proven, is not a bad move.

This is all starting to sound a little bit like that time you said you wouldn't trade Brendan Smith for Keith Yandle because "Smith's going to be better than Yandle one day".

I'm done. You win.

[krsmith17 7,191]

I don't need to go back and look... It was what? An hour ago. My memory isn't that bad. I know you were just talking in hypotheticals, but so was I. And I was saying if that trade hypothetically were to happen, we would have to give up a top 4 defenseman. Then you argued that, by saying that other players like Spezza, Seguin and whoever else went for less. Then you agree with Son of a Wing when he says the exact same thing...

Also, good job in avoiding the first part of my response. I don't know about anyone else, but you're not making much sense to me here today... It seems like you're just trying to argue for arguments sake.

And as far as the whole Smith debate, that was long ago, I never said I wouldn't trade Smith for Yandle, I said I wouldn't trade Smith plus the other assets it would take to get Yandle. Just like this situation. I would trade Larkin or Helm or whoever for O'Reilly, just not all the assets combined that it would take to get him...

[kipwinger 8,522]

I don't need to go back and look... It was what? An hour ago. My memory isn't that bad. I know you were just talking in hypotheticals, but so was I. And I was saying if that trade hypothetically were to happen, we would have to give up a top 4 defenseman. Then you argued that, by saying that other players like Spezza, Seguin and whoever else went for less. Then you agree with Son of a Wing when he says the exact same thing...

Also, good job in avoiding the first part of my response. I don't know about anyone else, but you're not making much sense to me here today... It seems like you're just trying to argue for arguments sake.

And as far as the whole Smith debate, that was long ago, I never said I wouldn't trade Smith for Yandle, I said I wouldn't trade Smith plus the other assets it would take to get Yandle. Just like this situation. I would trade Larkin or Helm or whoever for O'Reilly, just not all the assets combined that it would take to get him...

I wasn't avoiding the first part of your last post. I misunderstood what you meant by "non roater player". Typically when people say "non roster player" it means a depth player or prospect. When then mean a pick, they say pick.

A good roster player (Helm), and high end prospect (Larkin), and a 1st round pick will get you a very good player on an expiring contract. Two roster players, a first rate prospect, and a first round pick is a lot. And I'm not sure why you think that's what it would take to get O'Reilly when other comparable players have gone for less.

[krsmith17 7,191]

What? Where did I say that it would take two roster players, plus Larkin, plus a first round pick? Have you been drinking Kip? lol. In all seriousness though, everything else I'll agree with. That is a good package that would land a very good player, of O'Reilly calibre, but we both agree that the Aves wouldn't be interested in that deal.

[kipwinger 8,522]

What? Where did I say that it would take two roster players, plus Larkin, plus a first round pick? Have you been drinking Kip? lol. In all seriousness though, everything else I'll agree with. That is a good package that would land a very good player, of O'Reilly calibre, but we both agree that the Aves wouldn't be interested in that deal.

You said it would take two roster players (Smith and Helm), plus Larkin. I'm disagreeing. I'm saying it will take less. One roster player, one prospect, and one pick. That's what I've been saying all long.