Jump to content

kipwinger's Photo


Member Since 31 May 2011
Offline Last Active Today, 02:36 PM

#2530985 Red Wings Target Mike Green

Posted by kipwinger on 10 July 2014 - 09:28 AM

What should Tatar or jurco be traded for? Stamkos? Trading Tatar for a guy like green makes sense and is a fair trade, like it or not.


A top 4 D isn't peanuts. Fans have a highly inflated value of the Wings' prospects and young players. Tatar is a good young scoring winger, more like Kozlov than Datsyuk. Mantha hasn't played a game of pro hockey but people are acting like he's Brendan Shanahan part 2.


A top four defenseman under contract?  Sure.  I'd trade almost any of our young guns in a package for Yandle.  He's that good AND under contract.  But losing a guy as good as Jurco or Tatar for a rental is dumb.  How much developmental time and resources go into each prospect?  A lot.  And the absolute best you can hope for is that they turn into top six forwards or top four defenseman.  In Tatar, Nyquist, and Jurco, your best case scenario has come true...and it's DEFINITELY not good value to throw that away for a guy who (if recent history is any indication) isn't going to help you compete for a Cup and probably isn't going to re-sign with your team at the end of the year.

#2530945 Next Seasons Needs/Team Future

Posted by kipwinger on 09 July 2014 - 10:52 PM

I was amazed how gritty he was for an average sized high scoring European winger. He had a level of intensity that you couldn't help but notice all the time. Haven't seen much of him as of late but doesn't sound like it's working.


Not so far, but he did finish a little stronger at the end of last season.  Then again, he was completely buried in the depth chart too so it's not like he's had a chance to play much. 

#2530943 Next Seasons Needs/Team Future

Posted by kipwinger on 09 July 2014 - 10:41 PM

Everything I saw of Frk after the draft was impressive. Stellar international play mostly. I personally think he has what it takes to regain form. But it's not looking great for him at the moment.


Like I said, it really seems to be a matter of fundamentals.  A lot of guys on good teams get away with bad habits in juniors.  And even when they come up to the AHL their skating makes up for their lack of positioning.  His just doesn't, so he gets exposed.  But I agree, he's not done.  He's just got to learn the right way to play hockey now. 

#2530941 Next Seasons Needs/Team Future

Posted by kipwinger on 09 July 2014 - 10:33 PM

To be honest, I'm not sure if Frk's ever going to get his positioning together, but I do think he can fit into a niche if he puts in the proper off-season work. I agree that he benefited from his teammates, and his skating and lackluster two-way play hurt him. I still think he's going to have a better season than last - although, I do believe that he's going to have to impress Blashill right off the bat to get minutes.

If I'm Frk, I bust my hide in the gym and turn into a puck hound. He's still got that wicked shot, but I think he's the kind of guy who'd be smart to become a "piano puller" on a line - dig for pucks in the corner, get in front of the net, etc. He's never going to be the catalyst on a line, but I think he could be a good complimentary piece/PP guy.


I agree.  I always thought that in the best case scenario he'd model his game off of Vanek.  He's not the greatest skater in the world either, but he's got a good shot, is sturdy down around the crease, and is a physically strong guy who's not afraid of contact. 


I don't know if it's too late for Frk to be a poor man's Vanek, but that's probably the guy I see in him the most. 

#2530939 Red Wings Target Mike Green

Posted by kipwinger on 09 July 2014 - 10:20 PM

I think it's kind of funny that we have one thread blasting Holland for his lack of moves and "we like our team" mentality, and here we have everyone making a commotion about how they couldn't bear to see us lose ANY of our up and coming young players in an actual move.


I don't think anybody is saying that all the young guys are untouchable.  But rather that they shouldn't be traded for peanuts.  Which should be obvious, except that it isn't to some folks. 

#2530866 Kane & Toews Sign Identical 8-year, $10.5M AAV Extensions

Posted by kipwinger on 09 July 2014 - 03:19 PM

Kane's gonna get soooooooooooooo wasted tonight!  PARTY!!!! WOOOO!

#2530864 Red Wings Target Mike Green

Posted by kipwinger on 09 July 2014 - 03:17 PM

I definitely don't think that Garrison is as good as Green, and Garrison is under contract, but the two scenarios would be similar in that they're both cap dumps of offensive defensemen in the 30-40 pts. range.  So starting with something similar is not a bad idea.  If Garrison was worth a second then Detroit should probably start with a 2nd plus a little more and go from there.  All this talk about starting with Tatar or Jurco is nuts. 

#2530858 Red Wings Target Mike Green

Posted by kipwinger on 09 July 2014 - 02:57 PM

What did Garrison go for?  I'd start with a package that was just a little better than that and work my way up. 

#2530782 Next Seasons Needs/Team Future

Posted by kipwinger on 09 July 2014 - 11:30 AM

Lol I'm sure you must hate how well Pulkkinen is doing... :lol:


I'm still hoping Frk can turn things around this season. I think he will have another slow start but finally find his game half way through this season. I predict he finishes this season with around 50 points with the Griffs...


Not really, I'd prefer the team be good than me be right. 

#2530779 Red Wings Target Mike Green

Posted by kipwinger on 09 July 2014 - 11:21 AM


I want another Cup with Z and D. Jurco's, what, 21? It'll probably be a couple years before he breaks out, and that's if he breaks out at all. We'd all like to see him become the next Hossa or Lucic, but that's probably not happening any time soon if at all. Not that I'd necessarily move him for Green. But, Nyquist is arguably a 30-goal scorer right now, and Tatar is arguably right there with him. Jurco's less of a "sure thing." It's certainty we're after. Green is a known. He's proven. We need someone like him, this season.


We absolutely, positively, needed a top six center a year ago too.  We got one, for a cost that wasn't worth it, and the move did nothing to help the team.  We need to be wary about how far we're willing to go to fill a need.


I think Mike Green could help.  But I'd be wary about giving too much for him.  Because there's a thin line between need and want.  The Wings have managed quite well without a right shooting PP quarterback in the past, and if the cost is too high they need to be willing to do so again.  Missing out on FA has begun to turn the quest for a right defenseman into something messianic, and that worries me more than spending another down year letting the kids develop.  Hell we've got people clambering for Jurco and/or Tatar to get traded for an expiring contract because we need it so bad.  As if we don't need forwards with size, tenacity, and goal scoring potential, given that our current ones are getting old and injury prone. 

#2530765 Red Wings Target Mike Green

Posted by kipwinger on 09 July 2014 - 10:26 AM

It's almost like they're negotiating.  Like, one side asks for something incredibly high.  And then the other side counters with something incredibly low.  And then they eventually work their way toward something palpable for each side.  Hmmm....

#2530745 Red Wings Target Mike Green

Posted by kipwinger on 09 July 2014 - 09:28 AM

Everybody realizes that just because a team asks for something in a trade doesn't mean they'll get it right?  And also, even if they don't get it, that doesn't mean the trade won't happen?


Dallas just gave up a worse player than our young guys (Chaisson) for a better player than Green (Spezza) on an expiring contract.  Why does anyone think that we'd give one of our young guns for a worse player than Spezza (Green) on a worse contract?  Ken Holland has shown an unwillingness to be proactive in player acquisition.  He has not shown symptoms of early onset Alzheimer's Disease.


They can ask all they want, they'll likely not get one of those guys in return.  And that will likely not stop them from trading Green anyway.  If they want to trade him to another team, one who IS willing to give top young talent for injury prone 2nd pair defensemen on expiring contracts, then more power to them.  But I suspect finding GMs that stupid will prove more difficult than they think. 

#2530685 Red Wings Target Mike Green

Posted by kipwinger on 08 July 2014 - 06:26 PM

I obviously don't know for sure who is going to be better between the two small, skilled wingers but I without a doubt believe Pulkkinen will be the better player and the bigger need in a few years. Like, I've made clear many times, I really like Tatar and I would love to keep him, but if we are making a trade, to me, he is the most expendable forward. Yes, he just had a great rookie year, which should increase his value even more in a trade.


Pulkkinen has a better shot than any prospect we've had in a long time, probably ever, and we probably haven't had a weapon of a shot on our team since Brett Hull. I hate comparing prospects to retired greats, but you cannot deny the similarities in the two. They're both identical in size, 5'10, 195-200lbs. they both shoot right and have a cannon, hell, Pulk even goes down on one knee, when one-timing from the hash marks, the same way Hull did.


So isn't it obvious now that Pulkkinen will put up nearly 1400 points in the NHL the same way Hull did... :P

Seriously though, I really like this kids potential. :)


I like his potential too.  I like Tatar's goals even better.  Until Pulkkinen scores some NHL goals I'm not assuming anything on potential. 

#2530678 Red Wings Target Mike Green

Posted by kipwinger on 08 July 2014 - 05:54 PM

To answer both of you...


1.  The Legwand trade should have shown everyone the danger of trading good talent for expiring contracts.  And free agency just showed us that lots of NHL players would rather not sign here.  So it would be stupid to trade a more valuable asset (Tatar) for a more questionable player (Green).  There's a real good chance you lose a real good roster player for nothing. 


2.  Until Teemu Pulkkinen scores a single NHL point, there's absolutely no reason to assume that he's got more value to the team, or a higher ceiling, than the guy who just scored 19 goals and 39 pts. in his rookie year.  There's also no reason to assume that Pulkkinen can replace his production.  Assuming so would be dangerous, regardless of what your gut feelings are, or your eyeball tests, or anything else.


If you're going to trade Tatar, get good value for him, or keep him.  He was one of the few bright spots that our team had a year ago and he's only going to improve off his rookie year.  Trade him as part of a package for a top four defenseman under contract, or a top six forward under contract, or don't trade him. 

#2530652 Red Wings Target Mike Green

Posted by kipwinger on 08 July 2014 - 04:13 PM

Hell, sweeten the pot and give them Glendening or Andersson for the trouble and you might bring the price down a little more. 


Fact is, they'd be helping us out by trading us Green.  But we'll be helping them too.  He's expensive, his cost/benefit ratio is probably not better than their other top four defensemen, and they need forwards that they don't have money for.  If they can get a decent prospect or two and a pick OR a low end (cheap) roster player and a decent prospect, they'll be making out.  If they expect to get an up and coming roster player (Nyquist, Tatar, Jurco) or a top end prospect (Mantha, Sproul, Ouellet) they'ref****** nuts. 


Those would be fair. I could also see Pulkkinen + Jensen + 2nd/3rd.


I just wouldn't be that surprised to see Tatar traded either.


I wouldn't be surprised to see him traded either.  But if he was traded for Mike Green on an expiring contract then Ken Holland should be drawn, quartered, burned, buried, exhumed, drawn, quartered, and burned again for being af****** toolbox.