Value of trade assets.

[frankgrimes 1,836]

Ya, but if they really want him they would be willing to pay up. 
I don't understand why folks think when it's us shopping, we have to pay up to outbid people, but when someone actually really wants something we have, we aren't going to get crap for it. This is nothing directed towards anyone, it just seems a general concensus. Look what we had to give up for Legwand, when a team wants a player they offer up to make sure they get the player. If Chicago feels Vanek is their missing piece, a 25-30 1st round pick plus a legit chance at another Cup is not too expensive. Especially to the Bowman's.

Bowman is not Holland, Shero or Wilson. Chicago needs depth at some point. Vanek is a third liner on their team since when do they return a first round pick?

You don't understand the difference?
Wings needs: top defenseman, number 1 center - of course that's very costly
Hawks needs: depth - not even close to being as costly

Of course if someone offers that you take it and run with it but realistically a second round pick is still a solid return for him

Ya, but if they really want him they would be willing to pay up. 
I don't understand why folks think when it's us shopping, we have to pay up to outbid people, but when someone actually really wants something we have, we aren't going to get crap for it. This is nothing directed towards anyone, it just seems a general concensus. Look what we had to give up for Legwand, when a team wants a player they offer up to make sure they get the player. If Chicago feels Vanek is their missing piece, a 25-30 1st round pick plus a legit chance at another Cup is not too expensive. Especially to the Bowman's.

Bowman is not Holland, Shero or Wilson. Chicago needs depth at some point. Vanek is a third liner on their team since when do they return a first round pick?

You don't understand the difference?
Wings needs: top defenseman, number 1 center - of course that's very costly
Hawks needs: depth - not even close to being as costly

Of course if someone offers that you take it and run with it but realistically a second round pick is still a solid return for him

[krsmith17 7,191]

I agree LW. Vanek is ranked number 3 on TSN's "Trade Bait" list, behind Duchene and Hanzal. IF Holland is willing to shop Vanek, I think a first is definitely a possibility. Not guaranteed, but not that far of a stretch either. In saying that, TSN are also reporting that Holland "may not" be looking to move Vanek at the deadline, and instead may try to re-sign him. I really hope that isn't the case...

I think Vanek could be a good fit with the Rangers. I wonder if they would be willing to move prospect Sean Day in a trade for Vanek...

[kliq 3,755]

I think Vanek will get at least a 2nd round pick if we trade him. If Polak/Spalling for two 2nd round picks last year, I cant see Vanek getting anything less.

Top Players Traded 2016 NHL Trade Deadline:

Calgary Flames trade D Kris Russell to Dallas Stars for D Jyrki Jokipakka, D Brett Pollock and 2016 conditional 2nd-round pick

Arizona Coyotes trade trade F Mikkel Boedker to Colorado Avalanche in exchange for F Alex Tanguay, F Conner Bleackley and D Kyle Wood

Washington Capitals trade F Brooks Laich, D Connor Carrick, 2016 2nd-round pick to Toronto Maple Leafs in exchange for F Daniel Winnik, 2016 5th-round pick (previously acquired from Anaheim)

Carolina Hurricanes trade F Eric Staal to New York Rangers in exchange for F Aleksi Saarela, 2016 2nd-round pick, 2017 2nd-round pick

Edmonton Oilers trade D Justin Schultz to Pittsburgh Penguins in exchange for 2016 3rd-round pick

Montreal Canadiens trade Tomas Fleischmann, Dale Weise to Chicago Blackhawks for Phillip Danault, 2018 2nd-round pick

Winnipeg Jets trade Andrew Ladd, Matt Fraser and Jay Harrison to Chicago Blackhawks for Marko Dano, 2016 1st-round pick and conditional pick in 2018 Draft

Toronto Maple Leafs trade Roman Polak, Nick Spaling to San Jose Sharks for Raffi Torres, 2017 2nd-round pick, 2018 2nd-round pick

[kickazz 5,459]

Ughh i dont want a 2nd round. 

The thing with 2nd round picks is that they are basically a 3rd round pick if a team like Chicago gets him.  Like 58-60th overall?

I'd only do it if it was a 1st rounder because the 1st rounder would be closer to a 2nd round pick

Edited January 18, 2017 by kickazz

[frankgrimes 1,836]

1 hour ago, kickazz said:

Ughh i dont want a 2nd round. 

The thing with 2nd round picks is that they are basically a 3rd round pick if a team like Chicago gets him.  Like 58-60th overall?

I'd only do it if it was a 1st rounder because the 1st rounder would be closer to a 2nd round pick

 

You rather get nothing? Of course a first would be great plus a prospect even greater but I don't think that's realistic. Word should be out by now that Vanek, Green are more than just available in order to create some kind of bidding war but the Wings can't make the same mistake the Isles made by overpricing him  and hanging on till the last hour or so. If nobody offers a first then lower the price a bit till enough teams bite and then drive the price up a bit again.

Personally I'd rather get something instead of nothing again for a guy who is not part of the rebuild.

[DickieDunn 2,571]

On 1/10/2017 at 0:31 AM, nyqvististhefuture said:

 

Edited January 18, 2017 by DickieDunn
why can't I get rid of the quote box?

[marcaractac 3,963]

8 hours ago, frankgrimes said:

It isn't from a reputable source so I would take it with a grain of salt.

Last time he got traded Isles wanted to much and got a second plus prospect. People expecting a first are asking for too much. The guy is a pure rental playing for another contract

 

Have to keep in mind that a first rounder from a contender is basically a second rounder. If Vanek keeps up his current scoring pace, he'll be worth a first to a team that has a legit shot at the cup.

Jets are having major goaltending issues. Hopefully, Holland will be in touch. This team HAS to dump salary whether they are in the playoff hunt or not. 

[DickieDunn 2,571]

When the Isles traded Vanek he was rumored to be looking for a huge contract.  That affects his value.  now he's likely to be pretty easy to re-sign should his new team want to keep him.  I don't know that he'll bring a a first, but a second and a prospect or a second and a lower pick should be a reasonable expectation.  But even if all they can get is a 3rd, you take it because it's better than nothing.  Ditto for Green.  Niether of these guys are going to help them win enough to matter in the short term and by the time a rebuild is finished they will be long gone.  Any pick or prospect that they bring in could help them in 3-5 years though, which is where the focus needs to be

3 minutes ago, marcaractac said:

 

Jets are having major goaltending issues. Hopefully, Holland will be in touch. This team HAS to dump salary whether they are in the playoff hunt or not. 

Howard is hurt and has a history of poor play following a long term injury.  Mrazek has been terrible. If I was looking for immediate help in net I wouldn't tough either of them.

[kickazz 5,459]

If Chicago wants Vanek, they better give us a 1st rounder. 

It's a sellers market in the NHL not a buyers market. 

 

[SwedeLundin77 460]

Rumor has it that Vanek really wants to stay with Detroit.  If they do stay in contention, I hope he's re-signed to 2-3 year contract.

I also wonder about trading him so he has a shot at a cup with the understanding that he'd sign with us in the offseason.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

Vanek is one of the few forwards we have that is actually good. Would rather re-sign him in the offseason if he wants to stay. I think he easily nets a late first, not sure what yall are smokin.

[SwedeLundin77 460]

Well trade block has to include Vanek, Miller, and Ott, and Smith.  They're all pending UFA's.

id also put Nyquist, Jurco, Sproul, Ericsson, Dekyser, and Mrazek or Howard out there.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 minute ago, SwedeLundin77 said:

Well trade block has to include Vanek, Miller, and Ott, and Smith.  They're all pending UFA's.

id also put Nyquist, Jurco, Sproul, Ericsson, Dekyser, and Mrazek or Howard out there.

Miller and Ott are not worth much. Smith should net at least something being a D-man.

Ericsson and Howard both have an NTC, and I doubt DK is ever traded.

[frankgrimes 1,836]

1 hour ago, marcaractac said:

Have to keep in mind that a first rounder from a contender is basically a second rounder. If Vanek keeps up his current scoring pace, he'll be worth a first to a team that has a legit shot at the cup.

Jets are having major goaltending issues. Hopefully, Holland will be in touch. This team HAS to dump salary whether they are in the playoff hunt or not. 

Well if it's a guy from the Caps, Hawks, Pens and company you are right but are they willing to do it? Not so sure so I would settle on an early second too that's all I'm saying. Being hellbent on getting that first at all costs implies the risk of losing the guy for nothing in the summer.

15 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Vanek is one of the few forwards we have that is actually good. Would rather re-sign him in the offseason if he wants to stay. I think he easily nets a late first, not sure what yall are smokin.

Yeah he is playing well which is great because it increases his trade value and might lead to more teams being interested in his services. Yeah sure let's re-sign another over 30  guy when the team needs less not more veterans. So not sure what some people who would like to bring him back are smoking...maybe the  same stuff like the people who wouldn't trade Green?

 

6 minutes ago, SwedeLundin77 said:

Well trade block has to include Vanek, Miller, and Ott, and Smith.  They're all pending UFA's.

id also put Nyquist, Jurco, Sproul, Ericsson, Dekyser, and Mrazek or Howard out there.

Vanek, Miller, Ott, Smith, Nyquist, Tatar, Mrazek, Sproul, Ericsson, Green, Kronner, Z (only if he wants another shot at the cup otherwise he deserves to stay), Marchenko. So basically everyone for picks and prospects

[DickieDunn 2,571]

What does keeping Vanek do?  Prevent the team from getting an asset that potentially helps long term and gives them a little better chance of sneaking into the playoffs to get thumped in the first round next year, assuming he doesn't disappear once he gets a multi year contract.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

4 minutes ago, frankgrimes said:

Well if it's a guy from the Caps, Hawks, Pens and company you are right but are they willing to do it? Not so sure so I would settle on an early second too that's all I'm saying. Being hellbent on getting that first at all costs implies the risk of losing the guy for nothing in the summer.

Yeah he is playing well which is great because it increases his trade value and might lead to more teams being interested in his services. Yeah sure let's re-sign another over 30  guy when the team needs less not more veterans. So not sure what some people who would like to bring him back are smoking...maybe the  same stuff like the people who wouldn't trade Green?

 

Vanek, Miller, Ott, Smith, Nyquist, Tatar, Mrazek, Sproul, Ericsson, Green, Kronner, Z (only if he wants another shot at the cup otherwise he deserves to stay), Marchenko. So basically everyone for picks and prospects

He's better than pretty much every young guy we've drafted and trained in the last 5+ years. But sure, unload him for that 2nd so we can draft another Martin Frk.

2 minutes ago, DickieDunn said:

What does keeping Vanek do?  Prevent the team from getting an asset that potentially helps long term and gives them a little better chance of sneaking into the playoffs to get thumped in the first round next year, assuming he doesn't disappear once he gets a multi year contract.

Yeah not much a 5th overall pick who still scores at pretty much a ppg pace can do for us. Hopefully we can draft another Nyquist or Tatar and watch them stink 5 years from now with the pick we get for him.

[DickieDunn 2,571]

 

4 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

He's better than pretty much every young guy we've drafted and trained in the last 5+ years. But sure, unload him for that 2nd so we can draft another Martin Frk.

Yeah not much a 5th overall pick who still scores at pretty much a ppg pace can do for us. Hopefully we can draft another Nyquist or Tatar and watch them stink 5 years from now with the pick we get for him.

So Vanek is the key to winning the Cup?  No?  Then trade him.

[frankgrimes 1,836]

Yeah not much a 5th overall pick who still scores at pretty much a ppg pace can do for us. Hopefully we can draft another Nyquist or Tatar and watch them stink 5 years from now with the pick we get for him.

sure while the Wings are at it trade for Marleau too.

Vanek is not part of the rebuild so might as well get an asset for him

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 minute ago, DickieDunn said:

 

So Vanek is the key to winning the Cup?  No?  Then trade him.

Fixed: So _________ is the key to winning the Cup?  No?  Then trade him.

lol yall love sucking so much you wanna trade the only guy helping this team

1 minute ago, frankgrimes said:

 

sure while the Wings are at it trade for Marleau too.

Vanek is not part of the rebuild so might as well get an asset for him

 

Who said we're rebuilding? Holland? You?

Vanek probably has 5 good years in front of him yet. I have a novel idea... Why don't we trade a guy who doesn't help the team (Nyquist, Tatar, etc.) instead of one of the few decent players we actually have.

[Detroit # 1 Fan 2,204]

How Kenny is even thinking of re-signing Vanek now, instead of trading him for assets is crazy. If Vanek does want to be here, then trade him at the deadline for a package (1st or 2nd + prospect) that helps us get better, then re-sign him in the summer. We can turn this ship around in a hurry, but it's gonna take this down year. To keep our vets/rentals to make a run at the playoffs where the best cast scenario is going out in 4/5 games is complete and utter lunacy.

[wings4thecup06 504]

What if we could only get a 2nd rounder (and a late one at that) plus a mediocre D prospect from a contender for Vanek? 

What's better then? Trading for that or re-signing him? Even though I'd like to think they could get a first for him, what if it's not a sellers market, and the returns are crap? 

Vanek has been excellent, and in this scenario I don't see re-signing him as the worst option, as long as some other excess fat is trimmed from the roster. 

I still think he should be traded to take advantage of us having a high priced valuable asset for a change, combined with our diminutive post-season prospects, but keeping him probably wouldn't be the worst thing ever as long as the new contract is reasonable....

Edited January 18, 2017 by wings4thecup06

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

2 minutes ago, Detroit # 1 Fan said:

How Kenny is even thinking of re-signing Vanek now, instead of trading him for assets is crazy. If Vanek does want to be here, then trade him at the deadline for a package (1st or 2nd + prospect) that helps us get better, then re-sign him in the summer. We can turn this ship around in a hurry, but it's gonna take this down year. To keep our vets/rentals to make a run at the playoffs where the best cast scenario is going out in 4/5 games is complete and utter lunacy.

Red Wings fans 2009-2015: "This team needs a top end sniper. Preferably RH. Kenny is an idiot"

2016: Ken gets one

2017: "Trade him for a 2nd." 

[DickieDunn 2,571]

Who said we're rebuilding? Holland? You?
Vanek probably has 5 good years in front of him yet. I have a novel idea... Why don't we trade a guy who doesn't help the team (Nyquist, Tatar, etc.) instead of one of the few decent players we actually have.

Help the team do what, finish 24th in the league instead of last? Sucking is sucking.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

4 minutes ago, DickieDunn said:

Help the team do what, finish 24th in the league instead of last? Sucking is sucking.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk
 

Yeah and trading your good players over your bad ones is moronic. But we're gonna be great again once trashill is gone, amirite dick?

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

3 hours ago, DickieDunn said:

why can't I get rid of the quote box?

I found the solution to this problem. Once you delete the text, you click the blank space beside "SoAndSo said:" and it makes a blue outline of the quoted box - then you just press delete and it goes away. It was driving me crazy for a while, but this always works.

As for the subject, Green has 1 more year on his contract so he's not just a rental. He could command more than a pick. If it was for a quality D prospect/young player+pick, then maybe I'd be on board, but I'd rather keep him than get a pick for him (it would be a low pick from any contending team). I do think he's young enough to be part of a good WIngs team in a few years. If he's not part of the future, then we could keep him for the trade deadline next year when the draft is projected to be better.

Edited January 19, 2017 by PavelValerievichDatsyuk