2017 NHLTrade Deadline Discussion

[krsmith17 7,191]

3 hours ago, amato said:

 

Buff is listed as a defenseman on the jets roster and IIRC, he's play pretty much all defense for them.. at least in recent memory anyway. I would think they'd have to list him as defense, but who knows.

 

Let's hope they have to protect him as defense anyway and hope that they'll want to trade Trouba to say an eastern conference team on the brink of a (hopefully) quick rebuild  

 

i also don't think the ducks will want to trade Fowler with how good he's been for them this year.. It's too bad Theodore and Montour aren't a year older. 

That's what I meant... Can they just play him on the wing for a few games and have him listed as a forward? Probably not, and I agree, hopefully that isn't an option and they have to move Trouba. Holland should still be calling Cheveldayoff every other day...

I would also love to see Holland go hard after Montour. That's if, none of the big names are available...

[LeftWinger 4,961]

More than likely, he does only have one more season left, so years at, what, 65% buyout? Not bad.

[kliq 3,755]

2 hours ago, TimeBinder said:

We will get minimal return on anyone traded  - unless someone gets desperate(injury) - we are stuck in a rut.  Everyone knows this; prepare for the long hall and new GM.  Rocky times ahead - don't think chris is as interested as his dad(always was his mom's team). 

Why do you feel Vanek will get a "minimal return"? I'm sorry, but this sounds like "woe is me" type of thinking. Last year Roman Polak and Nick Spalling got 2 second round picks. There is no reason to think that Vanek will not net us a good return.

[frankgrimes 1,836]

8 minutes ago, kliq said:

Why do you feel Vanek will get a "minimal return"? I'm sorry, but this sounds like "woe is me" type of thinking. Last year Roman Polak and Nick Spalling got 2 second round picks. There is no reason to think that Vanek will not net us a good return.

Vanek will give the Wings a solid return, something in the ballpark of a second rounder and a solid prospect which is still MUCH better than losing the guy for nothing in the summer. GMs aren't stupid they've seen him playing in contract and non contract years I'm sure most know what they are getting which is basically a guy with a good net front presence but let's be honest he is a third liner on a cup contender.

 

[kliq 3,755]

1 hour ago, frankgrimes said:

Vanek will give the Wings a solid return, something in the ballpark of a second rounder and a solid prospect which is still MUCH better than losing the guy for nothing in the summer. GMs aren't stupid they've seen him playing in contract and non contract years I'm sure most know what they are getting which is basically a guy with a good net front presence but let's be honest he is a third liner on a cup contender.

Exactly, which is what brings his value up. The guy wants to cash in this offseason, what better way then to kill it in the playoffs. Look what a good playoff run did for Bickell as just one example.

Can't say I agree with the 3rd liner comment. Right now Chicago has Richard Panik, Nick Schmaltz, and Artem Anisimov in their top 6. Vanek makes that top 6 if he's on Chicago and you dont get much better then Chicago.

[amato 3,210]

13 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

That's what I meant... Can they just play him on the wing for a few games and have him listed as a forward? Probably not, and I agree, hopefully that isn't an option and they have to move Trouba. Holland should still be calling Cheveldayoff every other day...

I would also love to see Holland go hard after Montour. That's if, none of the big names are available...

Yeah the only problem is that Montour is exempt from the expansion draft.. no way they move him. The ducks have a REAL bright future on their blue line if they keep Fowler, Lindholm, Vetanen, Montour, and Theodore together. 

 

Maybe in a couple years when a few of them are due for raises we can snag one. 

[krsmith17 7,191]

1 hour ago, amato said:

Yeah the only problem is that Montour is exempt from the expansion draft.. no way they move him. The ducks have a REAL bright future on their blue line if they keep Fowler, Lindholm, Vetanen, Montour, and Theodore together. 

 

Maybe in a couple years when a few of them are due for raises we can snag one. 

Yeah, we'd definitely have to give up a fair bit if we wanted any of those guys. They are looking for help up front, and I think they'd probably want one of the big three (Larkin, Athanasiou, or Mantha), but maybe something along the lines of Tatar / Nyquist and Saarijarvi / Hronek could get us Montour...

[amato 3,210]

 

this should make the trade deadline even more exciting  

[kliq 3,755]

16 minutes ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

Tatar, Nyquist, Sheahan, Howard package.  For Anyone.

OR you bring in a new coach who actually utilizes his players properly, and then trade them when that have some value. I don't believe that all of our players broke at the same time.

[LeftWinger 4,961]

Quote

 

I agree with both of you. We have so many needs. My only concern is, lets say we keep a top 6 pick, draft a center at that spot, do you think he will see 2017-18 NHL action? This is Holland...there has to be a spot for him in order to make the team. Even when Larkin made it, it was only because Datsyuk was hurt. He played well enough to stay, but if Pav were healthy, Larkin would've started in GR and would be seeing spotty time in the NHL... Trouba would be in the NHL from day one.

I'm going to copy and paste this response over to the deadline thread, so we don't derail this Draft thread.

 

 

...and here it is.

The subject is the idea of trading our 1st round and Tatar(or Nyquist, or another player) to Winnipeg (who right now has a higher pick than us. They have #4, we #6) for Trouba and a 2nd round pick (#35 ATM.) Giving them 2 picks in the top 6 or better, and us Trouba and 2 picks in the top 6 of the 2nd round. 

so estenitally:

to WPG : 1st round, Gus Nyquist (or another player (giving them TWO top 6 picks and player.))

to DET : Jacob Trouba, 2nd round pick.

 I think the prospect of having 2 top 6 picks plus an established NHL player would be well worth Trouba (who has said he wasn't happy with his playing situation in WPG and would prefer to be moved, not to mention the expansion draft where they will have to expose a good young D with too many NMC's to have to protect) and a high 2nd rounder. Neither team is making the playoffs, outside of a miracle, so making this deal at the deadline wouldn't hurt either team's eventual position when it coms to the draft. Winnipeg has a better chance of getting #1 overall ATM, it could be quite the possibility that they get #1 and we get #2, they'd have two awesome picks and we'd have our young, established, legit #1 D man PLUS two high 2nd rounders that can help in our youth movement down the road. This is a hockey trade like Holland always talks about, and considering the fact that WPG would have two picks in the top 6 or better (again, outside of a late miracle by either team) that should be enough to where AA, Larkin or Mantha is not even a starting point.

so to sum it up,

WPG gets: Nyquist, 2 top 6 picks. Possibly #1 and #2 if the lottery falls right. ATM it's #4 and #6.

DET gets: Trouba and 2 top 6 picks in the 2nd round. Possibly #32 and #33. ATM the moment it's #35 and #37.

This is the only phone call I make as the GM. I'll be fielding calls for Vanek, Green, Smith, etc... but I am on the phone today with WPG trying to get this done at the deadline.

Edited February 15, 2017 by LeftWinger

[BadgerBob 297]

2 hours ago, LeftWinger said:

 

...and here it is.

The subject is the idea of trading our 1st round and Tatar(or Nyquist, or another player) to Winnipeg (who right now has a higher pick than us. They have #4, we #6) for Trouba and a 2nd round pick (#35 ATM.) Giving them 2 picks in the top 6 or better, and us Trouba and 2 picks in the top 6 of the 2nd round. 

so estenitally:

to WPG : 1st round, Gus Nyquist (or another player (giving them TWO top 6 picks and player.))

to DET : Jacob Trouba, 2nd round pick.

 I think the prospect of having 2 top 6 picks plus an established NHL player would be well worth Trouba (who has said he wasn't happy with his playing situation in WPG and would prefer to be moved, not to mention the expansion draft where they will have to expose a good young D with too many NMC's to have to protect) and a high 2nd rounder. Neither team is making the playoffs, outside of a miracle, so making this deal at the deadline wouldn't hurt either team's eventual position when it coms to the draft. Winnipeg has a better chance of getting #1 overall ATM, it could be quite the possibility that they get #1 and we get #2, they'd have two awesome picks and we'd have our young, established, legit #1 D man PLUS two high 2nd rounders that can help in our youth movement down the road. This is a hockey trade like Holland always talks about, and considering the fact that WPG would have two picks in the top 6 or better (again, outside of a late miracle by either team) that should be enough to where AA, Larkin or Mantha is not even a starting point.

so to sum it up,

WPG gets: Nyquist, 2 top 6 picks. Possibly #1 and #2 if the lottery falls right. ATM it's #4 and #6.

DET gets: Trouba and 2 top 6 picks in the 2nd round. Possibly #32 and #33. ATM the moment it's #35 and #37.

This is the only phone call I make as the GM. I'll be fielding calls for Vanek, Green, Smith, etc... but I am on the phone today with WPG trying to get this done at the deadline.

I donno. Highest pick this team has had in decades, when this team can't score at all, and they trade it? As much as defense is needed I just don't think trading that pick would be a good idea. 

[mackel 681]

10 hours ago, F.Michael said:

While I don't quite despise Holland - I've grown weary of his tenure as GM.

He needs to replace Jimmy D, and get some fresh blood to run things (preferably someone with no ties to Detroit).

I absolutely agree with this...  I hope they go outside for a new GM and coach, we don't want to turn into the 90's/00's Oilers with a rotation of glory day retreads in those positions.

[krsmith17 7,191]

I disagree. Our biggest need is defense. I like where LeftWinger's head is at, but I just don't think his trade proposal is very fair from the other teams perspective, although maybe not that far off... This is a weak draft, so if we're able to get a legit top pair defenseman for our first round pick, plus, I do it without hesitation.

I'd like to see us aggressively shop our rentals at the deadline for picks / prospects, hopefully get a few high picks, (possibly 4 in the first two rounds), and then try to flip a couple of those picks / prospects / roster players to upgrade this team with young (under 26) talent. This is looking like it could be a long(ish) rebuild, but I don't think it necessarily has to be...

[LeftWinger 4,961]

Sure we need scoring, but Holland will just use that pick for another under sized European defenseman, like Liljegren. The kid can't even stay in the SEL he is in their 2nd level now, and Holland will waste the highest pick since Primeau on him. Trade it for a legit nhl defender who can move the puck. Thats what creates offense. 

I'm keeping Vanek, shopping our 1st, green, Smith, or anyone else not named AA, Mantha or Larkin and I'll keep Z and Nielsen as well.

[MotorCityMadness 388]

13 hours ago, amato said:

 

this should make the trade deadline even more exciting  

So humongous big

[DickieDunn 2,571]

It's going to be a huge deadline. Huuuuuuuge. Biggest ever. I guarantee that it'll be so big that you won't believe it. Now excuse me, I need 3 more layers of spray tan.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk

[chaps80 1,591]

On February 14, 2017 at 6:33 PM, kliq said:

Why do you feel Vanek will get a "minimal return"? I'm sorry, but this sounds like "woe is me" type of thinking. Last year Roman Polak and Nick Spalling got 2 second round picks. There is no reason to think that Vanek will not net us a good return.

Hopefully if Vanek is traded, he re-signs in Detroit July 1. One season isn't enough. Really like to see what he can do with Mantha and AA in the coming years.

[DickieDunn 2,571]

I only want Vanek on one year deals. 1) he's getting old and 2) I don't think he'd continue to play as hard on a multi year deal

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk

[krsmith17 7,191]

7 hours ago, LeftWinger said:

I'm keeping Vanek, shopping our 1st, green, Smith, or anyone else not named AA, Mantha or Larkin and I'll keep Z and Nielsen as well.

I really don't get why you're so adamant about keeping Vanek. He's by far our best trade chip, and for a team that needs to rebuild / retool, it's an absolute must to move him at the deadline. If Holland doesn't trade him to the highest bidder, he should lose his job... If Vanek is such a key piece to this team going forward (I don't believe he is), we could always re-sign him in the offseason, after we get assets for him at the deadline...

6 hours ago, DickieDunn said:

I only want Vanek on one year deals. 1) he's getting old and 2) I don't think he'd continue to play as hard on a multi year deal

I agree with this. If we're re-signing Vanek, I'd prefer another one-year deal. I'd do another two-year deal max. Anything more than that, and I think we'll see him disappearing for long stretches. I really don't think it's that he's "such a great fit with the Red Wings" as much as I think, he's in a contract year, and wants to get paid...

[krsmith17 7,191]

1 hour ago, F.Michael said:

I think we need a coach who harps on D.

Every game we look horrible in our own end, and turn the puck over dozens of times throughout the game.

Granted - we need better players, but a more experienced coach too.

I think if anything Blashill relies too heavily on the defensive side of the game for the players he has on his roster. This team, as poorly built as some may think, is built for speed and offense, but yet Blash seems to rely on the slower defensive guys. He tries to win games 1-0 / 2-1, and our defense just isn't good enough, instead of trying to win games 5-4 / 4-3 to make up for the defensive lapses. When you have a defense compiled of the likes of Green, Smith, a broken down Kronwall and 2-3 rookies, you shouldn't be trying to play low scoring games, or you're more often than not going to find yourself on the losing end... That's why I still say our defense should be the first priority to upgrade. If we could get a true top pairing guy this offseason, I think we instantly become a much better offensive and defensive team. This team has some nice pieces, just no elite or potential elite level guys on the back end...

[kylee 727]

We need to either dump players or dump coaches. Please don't just stand pat Holland, this dive has been in the making for several years 

Edited February 16, 2017 by kylee

[Fedorovfan 25]

A guy who I think would be a good choice for coach is Brad Shaw. Defense coach of the Blue Jackets. The Jackets defense was bad but since he's been there their defense is very solid. 

[DickieDunn 2,571]

I think if anything Blashill relies too heavily on the defensive side of the game for the players he has on his roster. This team, as poorly built as some may think, is built for speed and offense, but yet Blash seems to rely on the slower defensive guys. He tries to win games 1-0 / 2-1, and our defense just isn't good enough, instead of trying to win games 5-4 / 4-3 to make up for the defensive lapses. When you have a defense compiled of the likes of Green, Smith, a broken down Kronwall and 2-3 rookies, you shouldn't be trying to play low scoring games, or you're more often than not going to find yourself on the losing end... That's why I still say our defense should be the first priority to upgrade. If we could get a true top pairing guy this offseason, I think we instantly become a much better offensive and defensive team. This team has some nice pieces, just no elite or potential elite level guys on the back end...

This. He wants to defend defend defend. Good teams don't spend much time defending. They have the guys like AA and Mantha doing their thing putting pressure on the other team. Blashill would rather have Sheahan and Glendening spending 75% of their time in the D zone because they're "good defensively" than AA playing in the O zone because he might make a defensive mistake. Well, if you're scoring a bunch and giving up goals vs. another guy who never scores but defends well, the offensive guy gives you a net gain even with lapses defensively.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

I like good defensive players and I don't mind defensive minded coaches, in fact I prefer them. But to KR's point, I agree, the way this team is built I think they should be playing a risky, up-tempo style offense. Our forward group is where the depth on this team is. A Lindy Ruff type coach I think could squeeze a lot more out of them. Sure we'd also probably give up more goals than we are now, but my thought is perhaps we'd score more than we'd give up.

If this team had better D we could probably play how Blashill wants to, but it doesn't, and unfortunately I think he's trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

Edited February 16, 2017 by ChristopherReevesLegs

[chaps80 1,591]

9 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

I really don't get why you're so adamant about keeping Vanek. He's by far our best trade chip, and for a team that needs to rebuild / retool, it's an absolute must to move him at the deadline. If Holland doesn't trade him to the highest bidder, he should lose his job... If Vanek is such a key piece to this team going forward (I don't believe he is), we could always re-sign him in the offseason, after we get assets for him at the deadline...

I agree with this. If we're re-signing Vanek, I'd prefer another one-year deal. I'd do another two-year deal max. Anything more than that, and I think we'll see him disappearing for long stretches. I really don't think it's that he's "such a great fit with the Red Wings" as much as I think, he's in a contract year, and wants to get paid...

Funny thing is, he's already on a long term deal worth fairly big money (by NHL standards) from Minny that was bought out. So with his $2.6 million contract with Detroit, he's making nearly $8 million this season. He IS getting paid like a top player in the league right now.

 I agree on the short term deals too. One season at a time at a max of $5 million, and that's generous. He's had some injuries and played for a few teams. A player with his skills should have no problem finding a solid long term home. I remember when Buffalo signed him to a $10 million a year deal. They didn't get their moneys worth. Neither did other teams.