Toggle sidebar

Larsson for the 3rd overall pick... Yes or no.

  • Thread starter Thread starter DEVILS ALL THE WAY*
  • Start date Start date

DEVILS ALL THE WAY*

Guest
I've been posting the idea of moving Larsson for the 3rd overall pick in this years draft, wich would be one of MacKinnon or Drouin and wanted to get the vibe of our entire board instead of having a single post in a thread of that carries about 35 pages.

Here's why I'd consider such a move...

I know no one wants to move Larsson but we can really change the face of this team going forward if we were to make a trade with Tampa for that 3rd overall pick.

Lets not be foolish here, the cost would be extremely high, as it should be. With that said, Tampa would probably ask for Larsson and I'd be in favour of flipping Drouin for Larsson, leaving us with Probably the 2nd or 3rd best d-man in the draft at #9 with Ristolainen, Nurse or Zadorov or we can trade down and land Pulock or Morrissey while landing a extra pick.

I love Larsson but Drouin, or MacKinnon for that matter, will be game changers and with what we have in the pipeline... I think we'd be a much more competitive team with Drouin/MacKinnon + Ristolainen/Nurse/Zadorov instead of Larsson + Shinkaruk/Domi.

Just my opinion.
 
I'm with you on this one. We don't need larsson we need mackinnon or drouin. In fact I'll go on to say if we don;t trade him, he might be our biggest mistake at the draft ever considering who was available.
 
I would do our pick+Henrique to move up

We have a really promising young guy in Larsson and yes Henrique is clutch but I'm not totally sold on him...Slot drouin in immediately where Henrique was and bam him + Kovy+Loktionov
 
In the next 3 years most of our current NHL defensive corps is gone, I also believe Larsson is on the verge of a breakout season. There's no indication yet he can't be a top pairing dman. Think long-term, our needs tomorrow could be totally different from today's, I don't want Lou to trade Larsson.
 
In a perfect world I'd trade Larsson, Henrique, picks, prospects and others (D'ags, Tallinder) for the #2 AND #3 pick. Instant chemistry with Drouin and Mackinnon.
 
I think it's a crazy idea. Larsson is the foundation of our future defensive corps. He is not being traded for a pick. Not even a top 5 pick.

All it does is lose a guy we have developed for two years, and replace him with a guy whose development clock is at zero. Lou refused to give up the 29th pick because he didn't want to do that, what makes you think he will do it in this situation?
 
Saugus said:
I think it's a crazy idea. Larsson is the foundation of our future defensive corps. He is not being traded for a pick. Not even a top 5 pick.

All it does is lose a guy we have developed for two years, and replace him with a guy whose development clock is at zero. Lou refused to give up the 29th pick because he didn't want to do that, what makes you think he will do it in this situation?
Click to expand...

My opinion as well
 
If MacKinnon is sitting there at 3 I'd have to think VERY hard bout this. The guy does it all and will be a star in this league. I was in awe watching him last night..

It'd be a tough decision because I agree with yashin in that Larsson is going to break out soon. I really love the Greene/ Larsson pairing..
 
Absolutely not. we could keep Larsson and have a defensive jewel, and draft a young Shinkaruk/Domi with potential to be an offensive star
 
Larsson has the tools.

Trading him to acquire a player with a little more seems kind of counterproductive. Trade someone else to acquire him? Sure but when you could pair this guy up with Larsson, why not?
 
Larsson was a fourth overall pick not long ago. What happens if this #3 overall player doesn't perform well either? Do we instantly entertain the thought of moving him for a future #2 overall player?

And on and on until we get a #1 overall player? Talk about silly.
 
Saugus said:
I think it's a crazy idea. Larsson is the foundation of our future defensive corps. He is not being traded for a pick. Not even a top 5 pick.

All it does is lose a guy we have developed for two years, and replace him with a guy whose development clock is at zero. Lou refused to give up the 29th pick because he didn't want to do that, what makes you think he will do it in this situation?
Click to expand...

Exactly. It will just be a ridiculous cycle. In 2 years when MacKinnon isn't a 30 goal scorer and we lack a true #1 defenseman, we'll have the same thread about whether we should trade him for the next trending top 3 pick. Just stop and be patient with your prospects. 2 years ago this whole board was salivating over Larsson and most people would have taken him even if we had the first overall pick. Now at 20 years old with over 100 games played, we want to trade him? The logic has gone out the window.
 
Unknown Caller said:
Exactly. It will just be a ridiculous cycle. In 2 years when MacKinnon isn't a 30 goal scorer and we lack a true #1 defenseman, we'll have the same thread about whether we should trade him for the next trending top 3 pick. Just stop and be patient with your prospects. 2 years ago this whole board was salivating over Larsson and most people would have taken him even if we had the first overall pick. Now at 20 years old with over 100 games played, we want to trade him?
Click to expand...

Two years ago Elias wasn't 2 years closer to retirement and we had Parise. We have lots of D prospects and in my mind it would be tough passing up on the chance of having a top line guy AND a potential top 6 forward.
 
Nick0930 said:
Two years ago Elias wasn't 2 years closer to retirement and we had Parise.
Click to expand...

So fill your needs through free agency or trades. What happens in two years when our defense sucks? Do we trade MacKinnon for a top 3 defensive pick again?
 
HF, where we trade young talent for younger talent because it's younger.

I think we should trade Larsson for the 3rd overall pick, personally. We need a stud forward. Then in 2015, we trade Drouin for the 2nd overall pick because we need a stud D-man. Then in 2017, we trade that player for the #1 overall pick because we need a stud forward. Then in 2019, we move to Quebec for being so stupid.
 
Lol, I'll never get why people have to try to get little jabs in at the question or thread starter.

I can see why you would want to get Mac or Drouin but I'm about just as excited to see Larsson next year. Year 3 and 4 of a young Ds development is where you will really start to see large strides in development. I think he's already a top 4 D and the future of our D no matter who else is in the pipeline. Merril, Gelinas and the others might not make it at all, so I don't count on them.

I think both forwards will be very good but I also think Larsson will be and I wouldn't trade away the two hard years of development this team has worked on with him.
 
Nick0930 said:
Two years ago Elias wasn't 2 years closer to retirement and we had Parise. We have lots of D prospects and in my mind it would be tough passing up on the chance of having a top line guy AND a potential top 6 forward.
Click to expand...

None of our defensive prospects project to be on Larsson's level. Do we have some nice pieces? Sure. But none of them have elite potential like Larsson does. Trading him just because our offensive pipeline needs to be replenished would be a huge mistake. What defensive prospect are you counting on to turn into a number one defenseman if we traded Larsson?
 
Swapping Larsson for #3 is risky, because you don't know what your options at #9 are going to pan out as due to the higher draft order before that pick. This isn't a regular trade where you are looking to acquire NHL assets for NHL assets.

We know the potential with Larsson is there and that he's absolutely capable of playing at a respectable level in the NHL with the potential for a really high ceiling and he's still ONLY 20 going on 21.

You're playing a risky game of draft roulette in looking to acquire two young but high ceiling talents. And who knows what we do at #9 based on all the above. If we deal Larsson do we automatically feel obligated to go D at #9 to replace him? What if we like another forward? Do we take them instead?

Either way I don't see it happening. I think all options are on the table and it wouldn't surprise me to see Lou active at the draft, but dealing Larsson is the last thing I expect to have happen. Trading up, trading back, wouldn't stun me. Making a separate deal or two wouldn't either.
 
Unknown Caller said:
So fill your needs through free agency or trades. What happens in two years when our defense sucks? Do we trade MacKinnon for a top 3 defensive pick again?
Click to expand...

What were Lou's biggest free agent splashes since the lockout?

Volchenkov (yuck)
Rolston (double yuck)
Tallinder (meh)
Zubrus (only signing universally considered to be good)
Sykora (literally no risk)
Hedberg (whatever)

Then we get into Asham/Vishnevski/Holik territory.

Lou doesn't get into bidding wars, and NJ isn't a terribly attractive place for UFA's to sign. As long as he keeps up the bargain bin mentality, don't expect us to fill any holes via trade or UFA.

Lou uses UFA to supplement a core he builds through the draft. Loktionov was a one time fleecing, we can't expect to continue getting new talent that way.
 
Rolston was not considered yuck at the time. literally half the league wanted him.

its not like he paid a random guy a bunch of money for no reason.
 
Zajacs Bowl Cut said:
Rolston was not considered yuck at the time. literally half the league wanted him.

its not like he paid a random guy a bunch of money for no reason.
Click to expand...

Rolston the player, yeah, but signing a +35 guy to a four year deal was a major red flag that a lot of us chose to selectively ignore.

Even then, Rolston only chose to come back to NJ because of his relationship with Lou. He turned down better offers to come here because he had history. If he hadn't played here previously, he never would have come back to NJ.
 
Didn't Rolston start off pretty hot and then saw his career practically end after a knee injury?

Some contracts you can tell are awful from day 1: Richards, Bryzgalov, etc.

Some contracts look like garbage as their careers go on: Buowmeester, Heatley, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom