• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Dabura

Rumors Thread

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, LeftWinger said:

Schmaltz? 

He was placed on waivers by St. Louis, any interest?

I have a feeling Ottawa will grab him anyways, but I wouldnt be opposed to it. If it doesnt work, we waive him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/6/2019 at 1:14 PM, Dabura said:

I've mostly lost interest in Hamilton, but if we could get him at a decent price and then maybe sign Tyler Myers to a reasonable deal in July...maybe our D corps starts to look not entirely terrible on paper.

25, rh shot, 40-50 point to pair dman. Ya I think we've all lost interest. Rather have Ericsson tbh 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Euro_Twins said:

25, rh shot, 40-50 point to pair dman. Ya I think we've all lost interest. Rather have Ericsson tbh 

6 goals and 14 points in 41 games this season. -14 rating. He's bounced around teams over the past few years and I'm starting to wonder if there isn't something to the whispers about him being kinda weird/difficult off the ice.

Like I said, if the ask isn't ridiculous, I'm interested. But even if it isn't ridiculous, I'm not confident that getting him wouldn't be a wash at best. I'd be more into if I felt like it was the first step in a calculated, aggressive plan to really try to improve our D corps before next season. If it's just Hamilton and he's being counted on to spearhead a major turnaround on our blue line? Meh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dabura said:

6 goals and 14 points in 41 games this season. -14 rating. He's bounced around teams over the past few years and I'm starting to wonder if there isn't something to the whispers about him being kinda weird/difficult off the ice.

Like I said, if the ask isn't ridiculous, I'm interested. But even if it isn't ridiculous, I'm not confident that getting him wouldn't be a wash at best. I'd be more into if I felt like it was the first step in a calculated, aggressive plan to really try to improve our D corps before next season. If it's just Hamilton and he's being counted on to spearhead a major turnaround on our blue line? Meh.

One down year isn't a big deal. Hes proven over the past several years what hes capable of. Maybe Carolina just isn't a good fit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Euro_Twins said:

One down year isn't a big deal. Hes proven over the past several years what hes capable of. Maybe Carolina just isn't a good fit. 

What if it's not just one down year? If it's a matter of fit, What if Detroit isn't a good fit?

Comes down to what we'd be giving up. I suppose the timing also matters. Like, if we're talking post-lottery and we know we're picking in the top two or three? I'd probably be more willing to move one of our better young forwards -- which is probably what it would take to land Hamilton.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Dabura said:

What if it's not just one down year? If it's a matter of fit, What if Detroit isn't a good fit?

Comes down to what we'd be giving up. I suppose the timing also matters. Like, if we're talking post-lottery and we know we're picking in the top two or three? I'd probably be more willing to move one of our better young forwards -- which is probably what it would take to land Hamilton.

I just think you don't pass up on a guy like Hamilton because of one bad season. If anything it lowers his value and makes it the best time to go for him  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Dabura said:

What if it's not just one down year? If it's a matter of fit, What if Detroit isn't a good fit?

Comes down to what we'd be giving up. I suppose the timing also matters. Like, if we're talking post-lottery and we know we're picking in the top two or three? I'd probably be more willing to move one of our better young forwards -- which is probably what it would take to land Hamilton.

 

7 minutes ago, Euro_Twins said:

I just think you don't pass up on a guy like Hamilton because of one bad season. If anything it lowers his value and makes it the best time to go for him  

Both good arguments. I'm on the fence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Both good arguments. I'm on the fence.

Same. I've always been a fan of Hamilton, but it is a bit of a concern that he's already been bounced around three different teams at the age of 25. I'd still kick the tires on him if he is available. If he can be had for relatively cheap, sure I'd take him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I've just been conditioned to accept that if you want to acquire a good young defenseman in a trade, you'd better be prepared to offer up a pound of flesh. In our case, I'm guessing that would mean Mantha or Athanasiou, as they're the best non-Larkin trade chips on our roster and everyone knows the 'canes are (always) looking for top-six scoring forwards.

Would I move Mantha or Athanasiou for Hamilton in a 1-for-1 swap? Maybe, maybe not. Tough call. If, by some miracle, the 'canes decide they're ok with selling low on Hamilton and the ask is, like, Hronek/Rasmussen + 2nd? I probably take that action. But do they pivot so soon from "Hanifin for Hamilton is a good trade" to "Mistakes were made. Hamilton can be yours for a couple futures"? I mean, Tom Dundon appears to be one of those "unconventional" GMs, so maybe that's exactly what's going on. Wouldn't count on it, though.

Also worth considering: Hamilton has two seasons left on his contract (next season and the season after that), and I believe he'll be UFA-eligible in the final year (2021). Barring lottery luck and/or a series of aggressive "outside-the-box" moves, I have a hard time seeing the team becoming super-competitive within the next two years and I don't know that Hamilton would be with us beyond that time frame. That's why I said I would feel a lot better about trading for Hamilton if I felt like it was part of an ambitious plan to accelerate the rebuild timeline. If we're trading for Hamilton with the expectation that he's singlehandedly going to be a major agent of change for this organization over the next two seasons, i.e. the dreaded "My name is Ken Holland and I finally made a hockey trade, now get off my lawn and leave me alone" scenario, maybe we're better off not trading for Hamilton -- or anyone comparable -- at this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd probably not trade anyone for an established defenseman at this point.  It would cost a fortune and we're not even sure we need one.  We'll run the "our defensive depth is bad" bell so automatically, and for so long, that we've probably not taken enough time to determine whether it's still relevant or not.  Cholowski and Hronek are both playing like top four defensemen.  McIsaac is as good a defensive prospect as almost anyone has.  Good depth in Sulak, Saarijarvi, and Lindstrom as well.  Not going to count on anything from Setkov, Barton, Regula, but there's third pair upside there as well.  I'd honestly sit tight, draft another defenseman this year, and look to augment that group via trade or free agency in a couple years when we're looking to be competitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dabura said:

I guess I've just been conditioned to accept that if you want to acquire a good young defenseman in a trade, you'd better be prepared to offer up a pound of flesh. In our case, I'm guessing that would mean Mantha or Athanasiou, as they're the best non-Larkin trade chips on our roster and everyone knows the 'canes are (always) looking for top-six scoring forwards.

Would I move Mantha or Athanasiou for Hamilton in a 1-for-1 swap? Maybe, maybe not. Tough call. If, by some miracle, the 'canes decide they're ok with selling low on Hamilton and the ask is, like, Hronek/Rasmussen + 2nd? I probably take that action. But do they pivot so soon from "Hanifin for Hamilton is a good trade" to "Mistakes were made. Hamilton can be yours for a couple futures"? I mean, Tom Dundon appears to be one of those "unconventional" GMs, so maybe that's exactly what's going on. Wouldn't count on it, though.

Also worth considering: Hamilton has two seasons left on his contract (next season and the season after that), and I believe he'll be UFA-eligible in the final year (2021). Barring lottery luck and/or a series of aggressive "outside-the-box" moves, I have a hard time seeing the team becoming super-competitive within the next two years and I don't know that Hamilton would be with us beyond that time frame. That's why I said I would feel a lot better about trading for Hamilton if I felt like it was part of an ambitious plan to accelerate the rebuild timeline. If we're trading for Hamilton with the expectation that he's singlehandedly going to be a major agent of change for this organization over the next two seasons, i.e. the dreaded "My name is Ken Holland and I finally made a hockey trade, now get off my lawn and leave me alone" scenario, maybe we're better off not trading for Hamilton -- or anyone comparable -- at this time.

I say if the cost is AA, Mantha, or Nyquidt then you absolutely pull the trigger on the deal. If its Larkin or Zadina, then no. Top pair dmen are hard to fund in the trade or draft. Add the rh shot in, coupled with the age, and aa or mantha for him is a steal. Just look at what Edmonton got for Hall, a perennial ppg top line winger, who was just 24 years old. I don't care about his "attitude problems". Subban had those too, and look how good hes been in Nashville. 

 

1 hour ago, Dabura said:

I dunno, maybe I'm overthinking this.

Yes you are 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kipwinger said:

I'd probably not trade anyone for an established defenseman at this point.  It would cost a fortune and we're not even sure we need one.  We'll run the "our defensive depth is bad" bell so automatically, and for so long, that we've probably not taken enough time to determine whether it's still relevant or not.  Cholowski and Hronek are both playing like top four defensemen.  McIsaac is as good a defensive prospect as almost anyone has.  Good depth in Sulak, Saarijarvi, and Lindstrom as well.  Not going to count on anything from Setkov, Barton, Regula, but there's third pair upside there as well.  I'd honestly sit tight, draft another defenseman this year, and look to augment that group via trade or free agency in a couple years when we're looking to be competitive.

A lot of us have been on the "sign Karlsson" wagon, but I do agree with your thoughts on continuing to develop our D instead. How about we throw top $$$$ at Bobvrosky this summer? We NEED a goalie that is a game changer. Howard is not it, Bernier is crap, especially at $3M. We do not have any goalie in the pipeline that seems to be a game changer. Throw a ton of cash at Sergei and let our D develop around him and our young D. If we're lucky enough to get a top 5 (#1 hopefully) we'll no doubt draft a kid with huge NHL potential, then add to that a game changing G, we'd be sitting pretty good going forward. Last night's game is an all too familiar reminder of how Howard is not a game changer. All three goals were soft ones. Bad D or not, we need a game changing G.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

I'd probably not trade anyone for an established defenseman at this point.  It would cost a fortune and we're not even sure we need one.  We'll run the "our defensive depth is bad" bell so automatically, and for so long, that we've probably not taken enough time to determine whether it's still relevant or not.  Cholowski and Hronek are both playing like top four defensemen.  McIsaac is as good a defensive prospect as almost anyone has.  Good depth in Sulak, Saarijarvi, and Lindstrom as well.  Not going to count on anything from Setkov, Barton, Regula, but there's third pair upside there as well.  I'd honestly sit tight, draft another defenseman this year, and look to augment that group via trade or free agency in a couple years when we're looking to be competitive.

I've heard this same rhetoric for years now, just swap the names for smith, or marchenko, ouellet, sproul, etc... we always have these "great" prospects but the fact remains none have planned out since Kronwall. Yes cholowski looks very poised, I'd put him at 2nd pairing, hronek the same. But don't forget we've had plenty of guys come in and look very good just to s*** the bed the next year and from there on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do not trade AA. Period.

 

I'd trade Mantha and Rasmussen for that top D for sure. If we were acquiring one via trade.  Like I said above, I'd rather continue to let our NHL quality D grow and supply them with an elite goalie to bail them out here and there. Howard is not it,he should be dealt at the TDL and NOT re-signed as our starter. If he is not dealt, still NO to re-signing him as our starter.  If we somehow dumped Bernier and then wanted Howard as our backup, that's fine. Howard is NOT a quality starter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Euro_Twins said:

I've heard this same rhetoric for years now, just swap the names for smith, or marchenko, ouellet, sproul, etc... we always have these "great" prospects but the fact remains none have planned out since Kronwall. Yes cholowski looks very poised, I'd put him at 2nd pairing, hronek the same. But don't forget we've had plenty of guys come in and look very good just to s*** the bed the next year and from there on. 

Good point.  You should totally abandon drafting and developing because Brendan Smith, Jakub Kindl, and Ryan Sproul all suck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Good point.  You should totally abandon drafting and developing because Brendan Smith, Jakub Kindl, and Ryan Sproul all suck.

 

Yes saying we should trade for a legit top pairing dman is saying we should abandon drafting and developing. Pointing out that we haven't had any success for 15 years with dmen and we should acquire a top pair guy is exactly like saying you should stop trying to develop and draft guys. They are clearly one and the same. Hell by your standard we shouldn't try to sign a better goalie either. Just keep hoping and praying one pans out. Let's get mrazek back maybe... I can put words in your mouth too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Euro_Twins said:

I've heard this same rhetoric for years now, just swap the names for smith, or marchenko, ouellet, sproul, etc... we always have these "great" prospects but the fact remains none have planned out since Kronwall. Yes cholowski looks very poised, I'd put him at 2nd pairing, hronek the same. But don't forget we've had plenty of guys come in and look very good just to s*** the bed the next year and from there on. 

I normally share your caution with regards to prospect hype. But no recent defensive prospect has looked as good for this long as Chowlowski has. 

Also, the Wings are due for a little draft/development luck on the back end. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Euro_Twins said:

I say if the cost is AA, Mantha, or Nyquidt then you absolutely pull the trigger on the deal. If its Larkin or Zadina, then no. Top pair dmen are hard to fund in the trade or draft. Add the rh shot in, coupled with the age, and aa or mantha for him is a steal.

Fair enough. Like I said, I'd consider it. But I'm not sure it's the slam-dunk steal that you think it is. Could turn out that way, but could easily not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LeftWinger said:

A lot of us have been on the "sign Karlsson" wagon, but I do agree with your thoughts on continuing to develop our D instead. How about we throw top $$$$ at Bobvrosky this summer? We NEED a goalie that is a game changer. Howard is not it, Bernier is crap, especially at $3M. We do not have any goalie in the pipeline that seems to be a game changer. Throw a ton of cash at Sergei and let our D develop around him and our young D. If we're lucky enough to get a top 5 (#1 hopefully) we'll no doubt draft a kid with huge NHL potential, then add to that a game changing G, we'd be sitting pretty good going forward. Last night's game is an all too familiar reminder of how Howard is not a game changer. All three goals were soft ones. Bad D or not, we need a game changing G.

 

Howard has a higher save percentage and lower GAA than Bobrovski so far this year and is playing on a worse team. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Euro_Twins said:

 

Yes saying we should trade for a legit top pairing dman is saying we should abandon drafting and developing. Pointing out that we haven't had any success for 15 years with dmen and we should acquire a top pair guy is exactly like saying you should stop trying to develop and draft guys. They are clearly one and the same. Hell by your standard we shouldn't try to sign a better goalie either. Just keep hoping and praying one pans out. Let's get mrazek back maybe... I can put words in your mouth too. 

We shouldn't try to sign a better goalie.  So you're not putting words in my mouth. 

"Acquiring" a top pair guy isn't easy.  There currently aren't any available for trade.  Karlsson "might" be available as a UFA, but even he doesn't really fit in with the competitive cycle of our team.  He'll be on the downswing of his career before we'll be good enough to compete.  So I guess we're going to have to go with what we've got, and draft and develop better than what we have in the past.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LeftWinger said:

You do not trade AA. Period.

 

I'd trade Mantha and Rasmussen for that top D for sure. If we were acquiring one via trade.  Like I said above, I'd rather continue to let our NHL quality D grow and supply them with an elite goalie to bail them out here and there. Howard is not it,he should be dealt at the TDL and NOT re-signed as our starter. If he is not dealt, still NO to re-signing him as our starter.  If we somehow dumped Bernier and then wanted Howard as our backup, that's fine. Howard is NOT a quality starter.

Howard is not a quality starter? The exception being the All Star game of course.

1 hour ago, amato said:

 

Howard has a higher save percentage and lower GAA than Bobrovski so far this year and is playing on a worse team. 

Stop bringing data into the argument.

6 hours ago, Dabura said:

Pick a side! We're at war, damn it!

I am feeling Swiss today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/9/2019 at 7:54 AM, Euro_Twins said:

I've heard this same rhetoric for years now, just swap the names for smith, or marchenko, ouellet, sproul, etc... we always have these "great" prospects but the fact remains none have planned out since Kronwall. Yes cholowski looks very poised, I'd put him at 2nd pairing, hronek the same. But don't forget we've had plenty of guys come in and look very good just to s*** the bed the next year and from there on. 

Kuznetsov, Kindl, Smith, Bykov, Marchenko, Quincey, Lashoff, Russo, Ouellet, Sproul, Sambrook.  

 

Lots of busts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now