should mrazek get #1 tag next season

[roboturner 562]

Hell, Mrazek is young, cheap, and has shown a lot this year. He'd bring a better return than Howard, and probably wouldn't hurt us long-term nearly as much as some might think.

[Hockeymom1960 5,107]

Howard in a package would get you whatever the same package without Howard would get plus a 2nd. Not going to help. Plus it limits your options only to teams looking for a goalie.

Howard is very, very far from our best trade asset.

Helm, Abby, Tatar, Nyquist, some of our prospects, picks, maybe Quincy or Ericsson, potentially Datsyuk or Zetterberg even. Hell, Mrazek is young, cheap, and has shown a lot this year. He'd bring a better return than Howard, and probably wouldn't hurt us long-term nearly as much as some might think.

Ah we're not getting rid of Mrazek.

[Buppy 1,720]

Best they could hope for straight up is a 3rd rounder. Goalies don't have much trade value.

Yes, not much value, which is exactly what I was saying. Though a 3rd at best would be the pessimistic end of the spectrum.

Ah we're not getting rid of Mrazek.

Yeah, because I was totally suggesting that we should. Totally.

[gcom007 1,465]

That other "ever-popular" Holland-mouthpiece spun a slightly different tune about Howard's fate with the Wings.

"The Wings will listen if teams want to talk trade (however shaky he looked in spring, Howard has a solid history, including the playoffs), but economically, there's no urgency to make a move. Mrazek is under contract for one more year at $737,5500, which generally is less than what it costs to hire a veteran backup goaltender. So if no team offers anything good for Howard during the off-season, the Wings could enter next season with both on board. It never hurts to have two guys pushing each other."

http://www.freep.com/story/sports/nhl/red-wings/2015/05/01/detroit-red-wings-petr-mrazek/26687233/

Smartest move if you ask me. Move Howard if the return is good. Otherwise, you likely have the best 1-2 punch in the game right now in terms of goaltending next year. Maybe move Howard at the deadline if Mrazek seems solid and a deal is there.

[kipwinger 8,756]

I'd be really careful about fully trusting Mrazek with the starting job right now. Not because he hasn't been excellent. But because our system limits shots to such a degree that it's a little easier for a young guy to come in and play well. Certainly he had huge games, where he faced a lot of shots and did well, but he also had a lot of games where he didn't face many at all.

If Babs leaves, and the system becomes less (excruciatingly) defensive, Mrazek will face more shots on average. And I'd feel more comfortable if we had a veteran like Howard there for insurance. If the kid plays well, then no sweat. And if he struggles at first, you're safe.

[BottleOfSmoke 5,965]

@CraigCustance: Jimmy Howard says he won't request trade. Looks forward to competing for starting job in Red Wings training camp.

@HeleneStJames: "Ask Kenny" Holland was Jimmy Howard response to what his future is with Wings

Edited May 1, 2015 by BottleOfSmoke

[Z Winged Dangler 2,082]

Easily ... Move howard and get a nice few additions will only help us be better and sign a veteran backup

Edmonton

San Jose

Philadelphia

Comes to mind right off the bat

Howard for Joe Thornton.

[brett 1,029]

dreaming. holland doesnt make trades

[MrazekFanBoy 223]

Howard in a package would get you whatever the same package without Howard would get plus a 2nd. Not going to help. Plus it limits your options only to teams looking for a goalie.

Howard is very, very far from our best trade asset.

Helm, Abby, Tatar, Nyquist, some of our prospects, picks, maybe Quincy or Ericsson, potentially Datsyuk or Zetterberg even. Hell, Mrazek is young, cheap, and has shown a lot this year. He'd bring a better return than Howard, and probably wouldn't hurt us long-term nearly as much as some might think.

okay your a fool lol one mrazek will not be traded this year, how would trading the best goalie prospect we've had IN forever help us in the long run. im not saying trade Howard but if any goailie is getting traded it will be him

[AtomicPunk 296]

Patrick Lalime.

Let's see if he keeps it going next year and hold up a team when their goalie gets injured. I think he's the man for the job but let's wait a little more to make sure he is more like Lundquist and less like Lalime.

[nyqvististhefuture 1,002]

I'd be really careful about fully trusting Mrazek with the starting job right now. Not because he hasn't been excellent. But because our system limits shots to such a degree that it's a little easier for a young guy to come in and play well. Certainly he had huge games, where he faced a lot of shots and did well, but he also had a lot of games where he didn't face many at all.

If Babs leaves, and the system becomes less (excruciatingly) defensive, Mrazek will face more shots on average. And I'd feel more comfortable if we had a veteran like Howard there for insurance. If the kid plays well, then no sweat. And if he struggles at first, you're safe.

I'd feel way more comfortable with mrazek facing a ton of shots than howard Edited May 3, 2015 by nyqvististhefuture

[Buppy 1,720]

okay your a fool lol one mrazek will not be traded this year, how would trading the best goalie prospect we've had IN forever help us in the long run. im not saying trade Howard but if any goailie is getting traded it will be him

I'm genuinely surprised that so many people have such poor reading comprehension. Also surprised that all of the people who misunderstood my point are upset about Mrazek, rather than Datsyuk and Zetterberg.

[roboturner 562]

I'm genuinely surprised that so many people have such poor reading comprehension. Also surprised that all of the people who misunderstood my point are upset about Mrazek, rather than Datsyuk and Zetterberg.

Would you enlighten us as to what is not being comprehend? We're just going off of what you wrote. Here, I'll quote it for you again.

Howard in a package would get you whatever the same package without Howard would get plus a 2nd. Not going to help. Plus it limits your options only to teams looking for a goalie.

Howard is very, very far from our best trade asset.

Helm, Abby, Tatar, Nyquist, some of our prospects, picks, maybe Quincy or Ericsson, potentially Datsyuk or Zetterberg even. Hell, Mrazek is young, cheap, and has shown a lot this year. He'd bring a better return than Howard, and probably wouldn't hurt us long-term nearly as much as some might think.

If your point isn't trading Mrazek over Howard, what is it?? And what do Pavel and Hank have to do with it? Is it because you mentioned potentially trading them right before mentioning trading Mrazek? You're right, they have trade value. But no one is stupid enough to think they would actually get traded. That's why no one is upset about it.

Again, what exactly is being uncomprehend from what you wrote?

[jimmyemeryhunter 2,747]

I think he was just talking about value.

Like what we could actually get for them in the trade market, not that we should trade player a or player b.

[roboturner 562]

I think he was just talking about value.

Like what we could actually get for them in the trade market, not that we should trade player a or player b.

Yeah I got that, But in order to cash in on that value, you have to actually be willing to let go of the player.

Like I guess what I'm saying is, Crosby has enormous trade value. But if you are unwilling to actually trade him, his trade value is effectively zero. It only becomes actual value when you are willing to sell it. Does that make sense? haha

[Buppy 1,720]

Would you enlighten us as to what is not being comprehend? We're just going off of what you wrote. Here, I'll quote it for you again.

If your point isn't trading Mrazek over Howard, what is it?? And what do Pavel and Hank have to do with it? Is it because you mentioned potentially trading them right before mentioning trading Mrazek? You're right, they have trade value. But no one is stupid enough to think they would actually get traded. That's why no one is upset about it.

Again, what exactly is being uncomprehend from what you wrote?

The poster I was responding to said Howard was our best trade asset. I disagreed and gave a list of other players I believe would be better. Nowhere did I suggest that anyone, let alone Mrazek, actually should be traded.

To make it even simpler: I don't think either goalie should be traded right now.

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

The poster I was responding to said Howard was our best trade asset. I disagreed and gave a list of other players I believe would be better. Nowhere did I suggest that anyone, let alone Mrazek, actually should be traded.

To make it even simpler: I don't think either goalie should be traded right now.

I think there's a generally understood difference between asset and trade asset. When the other poster said that Howard was our best trade asset, do you honestly think that they meant he has the highest worth? Obviously teams would pay a much higher price for Datsyuk than Howard. That discussion is just like asking who's the best player.

When someone says trade asset there is an implicit assumption that the player is a non-essential piece that we could actually considering trading. You talked of Mrazek as trade asset and that is why everyone assumed (and I think rightfully) that you were suggesting Mrazek as a candidate for a trade.

I think we're all on the same page, though. Mrazek looks like he'll a have a great future here. As for the Howard trade talk, I do think it's something we should think about. It should be after Mrazek looks capable of holding the #1 spot so it's in the future, but still while Howard's retains value. 2 battling goalie will be good for next year, though.

Edited May 4, 2015 by PavelValerievichDatsyuk

[kliq 3,763]

I think we're all on the same page, though. Mrazek looks like he'll a have a great future here. As for the Howard trade talk, I do think it's something we should think about. It should be after Mrazek looks capable of holding the #1 spot so it's in the future, but still while Howard's retains value. 2 battling goalie will be good for next year, though.

Completely agree. Best case scenario for us is they both play great next year, Jimmy ups his trade value, then we trade him for something we need. I am a huge Jimmy fan, but we cant have a 5 million dollar backup for more then 1 year.

Edited May 4, 2015 by kliq

[Richdg 267]

Should Mrazek get the #1 tag next season? (IMO, Yes)

No. Having 2 good/great goalies is not an issue. Many teams don't have one. I realize that people love his style of play, but he didn't do any better than Howard over the course of the season. Their numbers are nearly equal, which is surprising with Howards poor play after his injury. Howard also had BETTER numbers in the PO's last season that Mrazek did this year. By numbers I am talking GAA and save %. Will Mrazek be a great G down the road? he should be, but there are no sure things. Lets wait until he is before we do anything rash.

[AtlantaHotWings 1,125]

No. Having 2 good/great goalies is not an issue. Many teams don't have one. I realize that people love his style of play, but he didn't do any better than Howard over the course of the season. Their numbers are nearly equal, which is surprising with Howards poor play after his injury. Howard also had BETTER numbers in the PO's last season that Mrazek did this year. By numbers I am talking GAA and save %. Will Mrazek be a great G down the road? he should be, but there are no sure things. Lets wait until he is before we do anything rash.

Or if some unreal deal comes knocking for Jimmy and we get a true sniper and RH rugged top 4 defenseman then we roll the dice with Sir Mrazek. Granted this is all in our NHL 2015/2016/Dreamworld.

[Buppy 1,720]

I think there's a generally understood difference between asset and trade asset. When the other poster said that Howard was our best trade asset, do you honestly think that they meant he has the highest worth? Obviously teams would pay a much higher price for Datsyuk than Howard. That discussion is just like asking who's the best player.

When someone says trade asset there is an implicit assumption that the player is a non-essential piece that we could actually considering trading. You talked of Mrazek as trade asset and that is why everyone assumed (and I think rightfully) that you were suggesting Mrazek as a candidate for a trade.

I think we're all on the same page, though. Mrazek looks like he'll a have a great future here. As for the Howard trade talk, I do think it's something we should think about. It should be after Mrazek looks capable of holding the #1 spot so it's in the future, but still while Howard's retains value. 2 battling goalie will be good for next year, though.

I understood what he meant. But there's also a difference between saying someone is a good trade asset and someone should be traded.

[AtomicPunk 296]

The difference between them is confidence in their game and with the team. Howard seems to give up goals at the worst times. Like 2 minutes after his team scores or in the shootouts. I have no confidence in him in shootouts and I bet his team is starting to lose it a little with him too. Mrazek played very well and made timely saves (except for the last 5 minutes of Game 2 against Tampa Bay).

[Rivalred 630]

Let them both rotate in

[DRW Dominance 255]

I see whoever is playing better getting the starts. I don't think whoever the coach is would label mrazek as #1.

[Krayzie_Bone 58]

Should Mrazek get the #1 tag next season? (IMO, Yes)

If Jimmy plays well I say let him have it back. Unless there is some way of trading Jimmy.