2017 Draft

[DickieDunn 2,571]

Neither is Trouba but that doesn't stop people for getting all gushy for him.  Jacob Trouba has never, ever, ever, ever, played as a top defenseman in the NHL.  So if that's the standard we're holding against Shattenkirk then we'd all better be sure to apply it to whomever else is the pet of the day.

Trouba is young, Shattenkirk is not

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk

[kipwinger 8,522]

2 minutes ago, DickieDunn said:

Trouba is young, Shattenkirk is not

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk
 

So is Svechnikov, but you seem pretty sure he'll never amount to much.  What makes Trouba different?

[Dabura 12,207]

47 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Neither is Trouba but that doesn't stop people for getting all gushy for him.  Jacob Trouba has never, ever, ever, ever, played as a top defenseman in the NHL.  So if that's the standard we're holding against Shattenkirk then we'd all better be sure to apply it to whomever else is the pet of the day.

Trouba excelled in an expanded role this season. Logged big minutes, played in all situations, played against top talent, drove possession, put up points. He's 23, he's cost-controlled, and he's likely going to improve as a player in the coming years. Is he a proven #1 defenseman at this time? No. Nor is he a 28-year-old bottom-four power play specialist who's probably going to get 400 years x $500 billion from some drunk-ass GM.

[kipwinger 8,522]

Just now, Dabura said:

Trouba excelled in an expanded role this season. Logged big minutes, played in all situations, played against top talent, drove possession, put up points. He's 23, he's cost-controlled, and he's likely going to improve as a player in the coming years. Is he a proven #1 defenseman at this time? No. Nor is he a 28-year-old bottom-four power play specialist who's probably going to get 400 years x $500 billion from some drunk-ass GM.

Excelled is a bit strong here.  He was better than in previous seasons sure, but that's because up to this point he's been a fairly disappointing for a top ten draft pick.  His excellent season you're describing came about because Tyler Myers got hurt, saw Trouba afforded all the ice time and special teams time a guy could ask for, and he scored 33 points.  Lol.  That's not exactly excellent.

He had a worse year in almost every meaningful category than a guy like Dmitry Orlov, yet nobody is out there suggesting we should trade top prospects for Orlov.  Why?  Because Trouba (for whatever reason) is a darling around here and Orlov is relatively unknown.  It's baffling to me the way people describe Trouba despite that fact that in every measurable way he's only pretty good.  Not a "top defenseman".  Not "excelling".  Not anything superlative.  Just good.  And you don't trade your organization's top prospects for someone who is merely good. 

[DickieDunn 2,571]

So is Svechnikov, but you seem pretty sure he'll never amount to much.  What makes Trouba different?

Trouba is an established defenseman. Svechnikov is unknown. He might be a star, he might be a third liner, but most likely he will be a second line winger. Most prospects end up somewhere below their ceiling. Given the number of players the Wings have at wing and the lack of top pair d-men they have, it's worth the risk.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk

[kipwinger 8,522]

7 minutes ago, DickieDunn said:

Trouba is an established defenseman. Svechnikov is unknown. He might be a star, he might be a third liner, but most likely he will be a second line winger. Most prospects end up somewhere below their ceiling. Given the number of players the Wings have at wing and the lack of top pair d-men they have, it's worth the risk.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk
 

Kevin Shattenkirk is an "established defenseman".  So what?  Regardless of how you mince words, you're suggesting Svech is expendible because he's all "potential" and then whitewashing the fact that Trouba hasn't done much of note in his career by saying he's "young" (i.e. he's got "potential"). 

Or where you suggesting Trouba is an "established" top pair defenseman?  Because that's demonstrably false.  He's literally never, ever, played regularly on the top pair in his NHL career. 

Edited May 18, 2017 by kipwinger

[DickieDunn 2,571]

Last year he played more minutes a game than ever before, 24:57 as game.  He was tied with Enstrom as the top PK D at 2:59 a game and was their #2 PP d-man.  In 60 games he had 8 goals and 25 assists, so 3 fewer points than Green in 12 fewer games, and 20 more points than any other Detroit defenseman at an age where Detroit still has their defensmene "over ripening" in Grand Rapids.  You're saying he wouldn't be a big step up from what we already have?  Please, he'd be Detroit's best defenseman by a long way.

So yeah, I'd swap Svech or any other forward other than Larkin plus a 2nd or 3rd or a lower level prospect for him without thinking twice, and the only reason I wouldn't move Larkin for him is that he projects to be a center, and that's another hole the team has.

[kipwinger 8,522]

1 hour ago, DickieDunn said:

Last year he played more minutes a game than ever before, 24:57 as game.  He was tied with Enstrom as the top PK D at 2:59 a game and was their #2 PP d-man.  In 60 games he had 8 goals and 25 assists, so 3 fewer points than Green in 12 fewer games, and 20 more points than any other Detroit defenseman at an age where Detroit still has their defensmene "over ripening" in Grand Rapids.  You're saying he wouldn't be a big step up from what we already have?  Please, he'd be Detroit's best defenseman by a long way.

So yeah, I'd swap Svech or any other forward other than Larkin plus a 2nd or 3rd or a lower level prospect for him without thinking twice, and the only reason I wouldn't move Larkin for him is that he projects to be a center, and that's another hole the team has.

What's your point?  Kevin Shattenkirk would be Detroit's best defenseman by a long shot too.  You're just finding a bunch of post hoc justifications to advocate for someone based solely on the fact that you like them.  Nothing more.  None of that makes Trouba worth the price you're mentioning. 

I'm not saying Svech or anybody else is untouchable.  I don't think they are.  I just think if you're going to move the top prospects in your organization you'd better be getting someone really good.  Not someone who you hope might be really good one day. 

[Dabura 12,207]

7 hours ago, kipwinger said:

Excelled is a bit strong here.  He was better than in previous seasons sure, but that's because up to this point he's been a fairly disappointing for a top ten draft pick.  His excellent season you're describing came about because Tyler Myers got hurt, saw Trouba afforded all the ice time and special teams time a guy could ask for, and he scored 33 points.  Lol.  That's not exactly excellent.

He had a worse year in almost every meaningful category than a guy like Dmitry Orlov, yet nobody is out there suggesting we should trade top prospects for Orlov.  Why?  Because Trouba (for whatever reason) is a darling around here and Orlov is relatively unknown.  It's baffling to me the way people describe Trouba despite that fact that in every measurable way he's only pretty good.  Not a "top defenseman".  Not "excelling".  Not anything superlative.  Just good.  And you don't trade your organization's top prospects for someone who is merely good. 

Fact: Jacob Trouba is a very good defenseman.

Fact: Kevin Shattenkirk is a very good defenseman.

Fact: Neither Jacob Trouba nor Kevin Shattenkirk has established himself as a legit top-pairing defenseman.

"Yet you feel the Wings should pursue Trouba and not pursue Shattenkirk."

I think Trouba and Shattenkirk should both be on the Wings' radar. However, I'm assuming Shattenkirk is going to get something like $6M x 7 years. And that's my problem with him. It's not "Shattenkirk is not a proven top-pairing defenseman." It's "Shattenkirk is not a $6.5M x 7 player."

Trouba is 23 years old. His cap hit for next season is $3M. He took a step forward this season, showed that he can handle a big role. Considering how hard it is to succeed as a young NHL defenseman and also considering the fact that he was drafted 9th overall (if we're talking defensemen, anything outside of the top three is basically crapshoot territory), I don't feel he's been a disappointment at all. Maybe he's overrated. Maybe Shattenkirk is overrated. I dunno.

Do I consider trading Svechnikov for Trouba? Absolutely. Svechnikov is an unknown at this point in time. Trouba is a legitimate top-three NHL defenseman who, given his age, is probably only going to get better over the next few years. I think it's safe to say Trouba would immediately become our best defenseman and quite possibly our best young roster player, period. (Granted, that's not saying much.) Of course, Svechnikov by himself wouldn't get us Trouba.

You mention Orlov. A few of us discussed Orlov a few weeks ago, might've been in this very thread. If memory serves, everyone agreed that Orlov is very good and that he should be on the Wings' radar.

[Dabura 12,207]

19 hours ago, LeftWinger said:

It would be closer with Nyquist than Helm, which is what I was replying to. I'd send them Svech if needed.

Ah, my bad.

I don't think any combination of these players gets it done, though. Which is why I think Trouba, Orlov, et al. are pipe dreams. Ken Holland isn't trading Larkin, he's not trading Mantha, he's (probably) not trading Athanasiou. So, the best we could offer would be, like, Tatar + Saarijarvi. But, hey, maybe that's all it would take. Stranger things have happened.

Edited May 18, 2017 by Dabura

[kipwinger 8,522]

1 hour ago, Dabura said:

Fact: Jacob Trouba is a very good defenseman.

Fact: Kevin Shattenkirk is a very good defenseman.

Fact: Neither Jacob Trouba nor Kevin Shattenkirk has established himself as a legit top-pairing defenseman.

"Yet you feel the Wings should pursue Trouba and not pursue Shattenkirk."

I think Trouba and Shattenkirk should both be on the Wings' radar. However, I'm assuming Shattenkirk is going to get something like $6M x 7 years. And that's my problem with him. It's not "Shattenkirk is not a proven top-pairing defenseman." It's "Shattenkirk is not a $6.5M x 7 player."

Trouba is 23 years old. His cap hit for next season is $3M. He took a step forward this season, showed that he can handle a big role. Considering how hard it is to succeed as a young NHL defenseman and also considering the fact that he was drafted 9th overall (if we're talking defensemen, anything outside of the top three is basically crapshoot territory), I don't feel he's been a disappointment at all. Maybe he's overrated. Maybe Shattenkirk is overrated. I dunno.

Do I consider trading Svechnikov for Trouba? Absolutely. Svechnikov is an unknown at this point in time. Trouba is a legitimate top-three NHL defenseman who, given his age, is probably only going to get better over the next few years. I think it's safe to say Trouba would immediately become our best defenseman and quite possibly our best young roster player, period. (Granted, that's not saying much.) Of course, Svechnikov by himself wouldn't get us Trouba.

You mention Orlov. A few of us discussed Orlov a few weeks ago, might've been in this very thread. If memory serves, everyone agreed that Orlov is very good and that he should be on the Wings' radar.

You and I discussed Orlov, and WE agreed that he's very good.  Nobody else had ever mentioned him.  I bring him up precisely because he's the anti-Trouba.  A guy nobody nobody mentions despite the fact that he outperforms guy Jacob Trouba across the board.  Don't get it twisted, this isn't about Trouba being good.  There are plenty of defensemen as good or better than Trouba.  This is about Trouba being popular, which is a different thing.  That's why it's so annoying.  People don't want the best defenseman available, they want a guy they "like", and are willing to pay astronomical prices to get him. 

Look up Orlov's HERO.  It's better across the board than Shattenkirk AND Trouba.  So why no love for that guy around here?  Because a huge portion of LGW doesn't care about getting the best player, they want a team full of guys they like. 

Edited May 18, 2017 by kipwinger

[krsmith17 7,191]

Why would we spend time talking about players that haven't been rumored to be available though? There are 30+ defensemen in the league better than Trouba that no one ever mentions because there is literally zero chance any of them get moved.  The reason people talk about Trouba so much is because he's a local kid that would love to play for his hometown Red Wings. He was unhappy playing in Winnipeg (maybe that has changed), and there is a good chance that when he becomes a free agent, he would look long and hard at Detroit as a possible destination. Of course people "want" the best defensemen, but the best defensemen just aren't available. If Orlov were being shopped, of course people would want him. Do you think because people keep bringing up Trouba, they think he's a top 10 defenseman in the league, and would choose him over Karlsson, Hedman, Doughty, etc? Hell no. It's simply because even though it is very unlikely, there is an ever so slight possibility we could pry him out of Winnipeg. There's zero chance we could ever pry any of the aforementioned defensemen out of their respective cities.

But for what it's worth Trouba >>> Orlov & Shattenkirk. If for no other reason, age.

[DickieDunn 2,571]

3 hours ago, kipwinger said:

What's your point?  Kevin Shattenkirk would be Detroit's best defenseman by a long shot too.  You're just finding a bunch of post hoc justifications to advocate for someone based solely on the fact that you like them.  Nothing more.  None of that makes Trouba worth the price you're mentioning. 

I'm not saying Svech or anybody else is untouchable.  I don't think they are.  I just think if you're going to move the top prospects in your organization you'd better be getting someone really good.  Not someone who you hope might be really good one day. 

Trouba is a good young defenseman.  At 23, he still has room to grow, isn't a UFA for a few years, and has the potential to help the team for the next 12+ years.  

Shattenkirk is 27 and looking for his big pay day.  He's as good as he will ever likely be.  He'll have the ability to help the team for 7-8 years and be on the back end of his career for probably 3 or 4 of them.

See the difference?

[kipwinger 8,522]

16 minutes ago, DickieDunn said:

Trouba is a good young defenseman.  At 23, he still has room to grow, isn't a UFA for a few years, and has the potential to help the team for the next 12+ years.  

Shattenkirk is 27 and looking for his big pay day.  He's as good as he will ever likely be.  He'll have the ability to help the team for 7-8 years and be on the back end of his career for probably 3 or 4 of them.

See the difference?

I see that you seem to be all about "young guys, with room to grow, and could help the team for 12+ years" when they aren't currently on the team.  But if we're talking about the Wings' young guys, with room to grow, and could help the team for 12+ years you readily insinuate that they're not likely to ever reach that ceiling.  You're being awfully selective here.  Young guys with potential are GREAT as long as you like them, and if you don't then they're just one step away from being a total bust. 

I'm not against Jacob Trouba at all.  I think he's a decent player.  What bothers me is that his myth has grown to such proportions that he's now talked about as if he's some stud defenseman already and not a guy who very well may never turn into what you're pretending he already is.  He's infinitely more likely to be another Bouwmeester or Tyler Myers than he is to be another Doughty, Subban, or Josi.  If you want to take that risk, fine, but your stated reasons for doing so are completely phony.

Edit:  As a matter of fact, I remember when Jay Bouwmeester was on the block, and the rumor was that Detroit was offering "prospects" Tatar AND Nyquist for him.  A  good portion of LGW was all about that because "Tatar and Nyquist weren't guaranteed to be anything at the NHL level".  And while neither of them are superstars, I'm still glad we've got their combined 80+ points a season over anything Jay Bouwmeester would have provided to this team.

Edited May 18, 2017 by kipwinger

[LeftWinger 4,953]

If we could get ahold of Trouba and Fowler, we'd be set on D for a long time...but ya, neither will happen...ever.

[DickieDunn 2,571]

39 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

I see that you seem to be all about "young guys, with room to grow, and could help the team for 12+ years" when they aren't currently on the team.  But if we're talking about the Wings' young guys, with room to grow, and could help the team for 12+ years you readily insinuate that they're not likely to ever reach that ceiling.  You're being awfully selective here.  Young guys with potential are GREAT as long as you like them, and if you don't then they're just one step away from being a total bust. 

I'm not against Jacob Trouba at all.  I think he's a decent player.  What bothers me is that his myth has grown to such proportions that he's now talked about as if he's some stud defenseman already and not a guy who very well may never turn into what you're pretending he already is.  He's infinitely more likely to be another Bouwmeester or Tyler Myers than he is to be another Doughty, Subban, or Josi.  If you want to take that risk, fine, but your stated reasons for doing so are completely phony.

Edit:  As a matter of fact, I remember when Jay Bouwmeester was on the block, and the rumor was that Detroit was offering "prospects" Tatar AND Nyquist for him.  A  good portion of LGW was all about that because "Tatar and Nyquist weren't guaranteed to be anything at the NHL level".  And while neither of them are superstars, I'm still glad we've got their combined 80+ points a season over anything Jay Bouwmeester would have provided to this team.

Bouwmeester was older and on a big contract when they Flames were looking to trade him.  Trouba is 23 and on a reasonable deal.  Apples and oranges.

Trouba is a better defenseman at 23 than anyone the Wings have now, and Cholowski is the only one in the system with a reasonable chance of being better.  He's at least as good as older players like Shattenkirk.  Even if he never develops much more than he is, it's worth trading Svechnikov, or any other winger the Wings have.

It's not just Trouba, either.  He's just the one originally mentioned.  Detroit NEEDS two top pair defensemen.  A young guy like Trouba, Dumba, Brodin, Fowler, or anyone similar would help.

Detroit has Tatar, Nyquist, Larkin, Mantha, Svechnikov, Smith, AA, Holmstrom, Ehn, and whoever they take in this year's draft as either established or potential top 6 forwards.  Most of them are wings.  They have Cholowski as a potential top pair defenseman, and he's probably 2 or 3 years away from the NHL, even without the Wings' overly cautious approach at development.  Why the F would you not trade from a position you're pretty well stocked at to get what you need?  How much better off would they be now if they had traded Sproul and Pulkkinen for a good young established NHL player 3 years ago?  But we can't do THAT because POTENTIAL!!!!!!

The one thing Dave Dombrowski did well for the Tigers is not get caught up in love for prospects.  You Id the ones you're 95+% sure will come close to their ceiling and trade the rest while they have peak value.  Hell, I remember people freaking out when they got Cabrera because they sent Cameron "5 tool future superstar" Maybin and Andrew "You can't trade a big lefty pitcher!" Miller to the Marlins.  

Edited May 18, 2017 by DickieDunn

[kipwinger 8,522]

14 minutes ago, DickieDunn said:

Bouwmeester was older and on a big contract when they Flames were looking to trade him.  Trouba is 23 and on a reasonable deal.  Apples and oranges.

Trouba is a better defenseman at 23 than anyone the Wings have now, and Cholowski is the only one in the system with a reasonable chance of being better.  He's at least as good as older players like Shattenkirk.  Even if he never develops much more than he is, it's worth trading Svechnikov, or any other winger the Wings have.

It's not just Trouba, either.  He's just the one originally mentioned.  Detroit NEEDS two top pair defensemen.  A young guy like Trouba, Dumba, Brodin, Fowler, or anyone similar would help.

Detroit has Tatar, Nyquist, Larkin, Mantha, Svechnikov, Smith, AA, Holmstrom, Ehn, and whoever they take in this year's draft as either established or potential top 6 forwards.  Most of them are wings.  They have Cholowski as a potential top pair defenseman, and he's probably 2 or 3 years away from the NHL, even without the Wings' overly cautious approach at development.  Why the F would you not trade from a position you're pretty well stocked at to get what you need?  How much better off would they be now if they had traded Sproul and Pulkkinen for a good young established NHL player 3 years ago?  But we can't do THAT because POTENTIAL!!!!!!

The one thing Dave Dombrowski did well for the Tigers is not get caught up in love for prospects.  You Id the ones you're 95+% sure will come close to their ceiling and trade the rest while they have peak value.  Hell, I remember people freaking out when they got Cabrera because they sent Cameron "5 tool future superstar" Maybin and Andrew "You can't trade a big lefty pitcher!" Miller to the Marlins.  

Tons of defensemen are better than what we have right now, doesn't mean I'd trade good prospects for them.  And I've elsewhere made trade proposals involving Nyquist/Tatar  for a defenseman, so stop acting like I'm against trading ANYONE for a defensive upgrade.  I'd be happy to move someone who's a little older to a team looking to win now for a defensive upgrade.  I'm not, however, interested in throwing away guys who we'll need a few years from now for a guy who's biggest asset is "he's better than what we have". 

Also, your Cabrera analogy is bull.  Cabrera was already a superstar player when we traded for him.  Trouba isn't even a top pair defenseman on his own team.  That's the sticking point.  You're acting like, and making trade proposals like, he's a better player than he is.  Would I trade Svech (and others) for Erik Karlsson?  That's a more apt comparison to Cabrera, which you well know.

Edited May 18, 2017 by kipwinger

[Fedorovfan 25]

2 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Why would we spend time talking about players that haven't been rumored to be available though? There are 30+ defensemen in the league better than Trouba that no one ever mentions because there is literally zero chance any of them get moved.  The reason people talk about Trouba so much is because he's a local kid that would love to play for his hometown Red Wings. He was unhappy playing in Winnipeg (maybe that has changed), and there is a good chance that when he becomes a free agent, he would look long and hard at Detroit as a possible destination. Of course people "want" the best defensemen, but the best defensemen just aren't available. If Orlov were being shopped, of course people would want him. Do you think because people keep bringing up Trouba, they think he's a top 10 defenseman in the league, and would choose him over Karlsson, Hedman, Doughty, etc? Hell no. It's simply because even though it is very unlikely, there is an ever so slight possibility we could pry him out of Winnipeg. There's zero chance we could ever pry any of the aforementioned defensemen out of their respective cities.

But for what it's worth Trouba >>> Orlov & Shattenkirk. If for no other reason, age.

Trouba is >>>  Shattenkirk because if you watched the playoffs  Shattenkirk is not good at defending. At. All.

My pipe dream is the Wings swap (with players as well) first round pick with the Stars. Then draft Miko Heiskanen. He's the best dman in the draft and the closest to being nhl ready. He'll never make it to #9 

[nyqvististhefuture 1,002]

34 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Tons of defensemen are better than what we have right now, doesn't mean I'd trade good prospects for them.  And I've elsewhere made trade proposals involving Nyquist/Tatar  for a defenseman, so stop acting like I'm against trading ANYONE for a defensive upgrade.  I'd be happy to move someone who's a little older to a team looking to win now for a defensive upgrade.  I'm not, however, interested in throwing away guys who we'll need a few years from now for a guy who's biggest asset is "he's better than what we have". 

Also, your Cabrera analogy is bull.  Cabrera was already a superstar player when we traded for him.  Trouba isn't even a top pair defenseman on his own team.  That's the sticking point.  You're acting like, and making trade proposals like, he's a better player than he is.  Would I trade Svech (and others) for Erik Karlsson?  That's a more apt comparison to Cabrera, which you well know.

I'm also more for trading tatar and/or nyquist for defensive help .. theres a good chance when they'll be up for free agency we'll lose them for nothing or not much 

when larkin AA mantha svechnikov bertuzzi will be ready to take over that's when zetteberg will be going and hopefull the  nielsen contract ending and that's when I'm sure we'll bring trouba home

 

in the meantime overload on d draft picks and go for a few young d prospects off some teams and hope we pull a erat for forsberg type robbery

[kipwinger 8,522]

2 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Why would we spend time talking about players that haven't been rumored to be available though? There are 30+ defensemen in the league better than Trouba that no one ever mentions because there is literally zero chance any of them get moved.  The reason people talk about Trouba so much is because he's a local kid that would love to play for his hometown Red Wings. He was unhappy playing in Winnipeg (maybe that has changed), and there is a good chance that when he becomes a free agent, he would look long and hard at Detroit as a possible destination. Of course people "want" the best defensemen, but the best defensemen just aren't available. If Orlov were being shopped, of course people would want him. Do you think because people keep bringing up Trouba, they think he's a top 10 defenseman in the league, and would choose him over Karlsson, Hedman, Doughty, etc? Hell no. It's simply because even though it is very unlikely, there is an ever so slight possibility we could pry him out of Winnipeg. There's zero chance we could ever pry any of the aforementioned defensemen out of their respective cities.

But for what it's worth Trouba >>> Orlov & Shattenkirk. If for no other reason, age.

Firstly, your Trouba>>>Orlov & Shattenkirk statement is not supported by anything other than your fetish for a young player.  Which is asinine.  But I don't know why I'd expect anything less from a guy who once said Brendan Smith was untouchable because he was a "dynamic offensive defenseman". Or that Jurco was a "top six winger".  lol.  You're absolutely one of the worst around here for trying to justify personnel moves based on whether or not you "like" a guy. 

Secondly, Trouba ISN'T AVAILABLE EITHER.  There has been no credible source saying Trouba wants out of Winnipeg, or that Winnipeg wants to trade Trouba, since he signed his new contract.  Add to that the fact that Tim Cheveldayoff is the league's least frequent "trader" and the fact that Winnipeg AREN'T rebuilding.  There is no indication that this is likely.  You just REALLY WANT it to happen, so as usual, you're selectively using bits of information to justify it. 

Just more evidence of exactly the thing I'm talking about.  People willing to part with good assets, for marginal returns, because they irrationally like players who aren't as good as fans would like them to be. 

Edited May 18, 2017 by kipwinger

[kipwinger 8,522]

18 minutes ago, Fedorovfan said:

Trouba is >>>  Shattenkirk because if you watched the playoffs  Shattenkirk is not good at defending. At. All.

Out of curiousity, how do you define "defending" in the NHL?  Like, what exactly isn't Shattenkirk good at?

[krsmith17 7,191]

45 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Firstly, your Trouba>>>Orlov & Shattenkirk statement is not supported by anything other than your fetish for a young player.  Which is asinine.  But I don't know why I'd expect anything less from a guy who once said Brendan Smith was untouchable because he was a "dynamic offensive defenseman". Or that Jurco was a "top six winger".  lol.  You're absolutely one of the worst around here for trying to justify personnel moves based on whether or not you "like" a guy. 

Secondly, Trouba ISN'T AVAILABLE EITHER.  There has been no credible source saying Trouba wants out of Winnipeg, or that Winnipeg wants to trade Trouba, since he signed his new contract.  Add to that the fact that Tim Cheveldayoff is the league's least frequent "trader" and the fact that Winnipeg AREN'T rebuilding.  There is no indication that this is likely.  You just REALLY WANT it to happen, so as usual, you're selectively using bits of information to justify it. 

Just more evidence of exactly the thing I'm talking about.  People willing to part with good assets, for marginal returns, because they irrationally like players who aren't as good as fans would like them to be. 

I've never said Smith was "untouchable". I never even said that he was a top pair defenseman, just that he had top 4 potential. He reached that potential. He is a top 4 defenseman. Jurco was extremely misused here and I believe that stunted his growth and he never got back on track. Maybe he became exactly what he was going to become, a complete bust. Whatever. You're right though, I do like certain players, and there are players that I'd like us to keep / go after. You base your opinion solely on stats / numbers? You completely block out any personal bias? That's impressive, you'd make a great GM. I'm a fan. I do fan things. You get upset when people do fan things...

By the way, I never once said that I would part with Svechnikov or Mantha or anyone else. I would have to think long and hard about it, but it would be a tough decision for sure. I would like to use one of Nyquist or Tatar or literally any defenseman in our system in a trade for a top pair defenseman. I've also mentioned several other defensemen I'd love to go after, and said it's very unlikely we have a shot at Trouba, so don't act as if I'm saying it's Trouba or bust...

[joesuffP 1,746]

idk Bouwmeester is a good dman I don't think the Blues regret that trade

Wings need a #1 but they also need a good top four or two when Green leaves. The D is wide open right now with Green and Kronwall being gone in 1-2 years. If Wings have a chance at any decent puck moving top four they have to be interested. The all or nothing trade approach at this point makes no sense because we just don't have the assets to make it worth it. Improving the D is going to take a number of moves

also I may be in the minority but I think it's possible to win a cup without having a superstar #1 defensemen. Having a lot of good depth dman is an approach I would be okay with Holland taking 

[DickieDunn 2,571]

If a team trades a good young D, they're not doing it for a package centering on Tatar or Nyquist. It takes high value assets to get a high value asset.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk

[Buppy 1,720]

4 hours ago, DickieDunn said:

If a team trades a good young D, they're not doing it for a package centering on Tatar or Nyquist. It takes high value assets to get a high value asset....

Wait, now...what? Your entire argument is that proven players are worth more than prospects, but now you're saying in this scenario that Svechnikov (a prospect) would be worth more than proven scorers Tatar or Nyquist?

While I would say there are some scenarios where a team would have a higher interest in Svech than the others (a team starting a rebuild, or trying to shed cap, or wanting an asset they don't need to protect and/or is waiver exempt), that is not the same as having more value, nor does Winnipeg fit those situations.

If anything, they are the exact opposite. The only reasons they might consider trading Trouba right now is either: They think doing so can make their team better, in which case they would prefer proven players, or they fear they will lose him for nothing, in which case they want whatever is the best they can get...(first choice likely being a direct replacement) which would again be proven players ahead of Svech at least. High draft pick would likely be acceptable.

A package centering on Tatar or Nyquist maybe wouldn't do it (though it might if they were looking to trade him to add a scoring winger), but if it doesn't then a package centering on Svech for sure wouldn't either. And if you're just looking to add value to a package centering on something like our 1st-rounder, Trouba isn't worth that much. Neither is Fowler or Orlov. Or Dumba. Probably not Barrie or Faulk either. Hamilton probably would be. 

We shouldn't be looking at proven players unless the cost is low, which pretty much none of the players talked about would be. We should be looking at high-end prospects and under-utilized players, good young players who might be had without giving up significant future assets. For the most part the only proven players that get traded are those who have proven they aren't franchise cornerstones.