Possible trade and roster fixes for the Wings, Part III

[InjuredChoker]

Man, some of you guys are worse than Kenny himself. Trading for Jagr? Yikes.

What's the matter? Peter Stastny wasn't available? He could mentor Tatar and Jurco...

Peter Stastny is possibly available, but i wouldn't personally go after him as he's 57 yrs old and hasn't played in almost 20 years.

seems like normal kenny pick-up, though.

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

Peter Stastny is possibly available, but i wouldn't personally go after him as he's 57 yrs old and hasn't played in almost 20 years.

seems like normal kenny pick-up, though.

He must have meant Paul Stastny.

 

[JmanWingsFan]

Man, some of you guys are worse than Kenny himself. Trading for Jagr? Yikes.

What's the matter? Peter Stastny wasn't available? He could mentor Tatar and Jurco...

Let's play a game, shall we?

Player A has 19 goals, 30 assists for a total of 49 points and is a +1 on the season.

Player B has 17 goals, 32 assists for a total of 49 points and is a +21 on the season

As far as hockey advanced statistics go, they heavily favor Player B, who ranks in the top 15 for forwards in some of my personal favorite statistics. But the gist of it is, Player B is far and away better than Player A in many relevant advanced statistics.

You're the GM, which player do you sign?

 

[SoupNazi]

He must have meant Paul Stastny.

No, I'm pretty sure he meant Peter to make the remark that Jagr is old.

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

No, I'm pretty sure he meant Peter to make the remark that Jagr is old.

Yeah you're probaby right there Soup.

 

[Michael Brand Eggs]

Let's play a game, shall we?

Player A has 19 goals, 30 assists for a total of 49 points and is a +1 on the season.

Player B has 17 goals, 32 assists for a total of 49 points and is a +21 on the season

As far as hockey advanced statistics go, they heavily favor Player B, who ranks in the top 15 for forwards in some of my personal favorite statistics. But the gist of it is, Player B is far and away better than Player A in many relevant advanced statistics.

You're the GM, which player do you sign?

Which player might retire next year and leave the team holding the bag? It's a poor investment for a team so close to missing the playoffs entirely.

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

Let's play a game, shall we?

Player A has 19 goals, 30 assists for a total of 49 points and is a +1 on the season.

Player B has 17 goals, 32 assists for a total of 49 points and is a +21 on the season

As far as hockey advanced statistics go, they heavily favor Player B, who ranks in the top 15 for forwards in some of my personal favorite statistics. But the gist of it is, Player B is far and away better than Player A in many relevant advanced statistics.

You're the GM, which player do you sign?

I'll take a stab and say Player A

 

[JmanWingsFan]

Which player might retire next year and leave the team holding the bag? It's a poor investment for a team so close to missing the playoffs entirely.

This isn't about age. This is about talent and making the team better. You're out to add talent and make the team better. Who do you choose?

I'll take a stab and say Player A

Why would you choose the worse of the two? Not only that, but Player A will cost you more than Player B. That's not being a good GM.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

I think we're in the mode of winning hockey games. Moves made still have to weigh the present and future good for the club, but I don't think picking up a rental upgrade is necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. Especially with the questionable health of Datsyuk, Zetterberg, and Franzen for the rest of the season.

I know one reaction to their injuries is that we should just tank the season, but even with them missing chunks of the remained of the season I still don't see us free falling in the standings. If we can grab some cheap help that pushes us into the playoffs, I think that experience will be more beneficial for guys like Nyquist, Tatar, Jurco, Sheahan, etc. than moderately improving our draft position.

wouldnt it be better to go out and get a younger guy that could not only help us win now(for the zetts, datsyuks and alffies sake) but also help us win long term and be part of our next wave(for the sake of tatar, nyquist, jurco, mantha, sproul, ouelett, smith, howard, helm etc's sake)?

if we're giving up future assets to me it makes more sense to do so only for more REPEATED long term return then a quick one off benefit

we really arent a team that is a 42 year old legend away from winning the cup, a team full of young superstars in desperate need of a calming influence and wisdom in the locker room needs that player. We have that in spades what we need are more horses to pull the cart not just this year but also during the 2017-2018 season and thats why i am so against adding the typical playoff rental.

 

[Michael Brand Eggs]

This isn't about age. This is about talent and making the team better. You're out to add talent and make the team better. Who do you choose?

I'm out to do those things while maximizing asset value. I can't afford to throw away what it would take to land Jagr.

 

[jaster]

Let's play a game, shall we?

Player A has 19 goals, 30 assists for a total of 49 points and is a +1 on the season.

Player B has 17 goals, 32 assists for a total of 49 points and is a +21 on the season

As far as hockey advanced statistics go, they heavily favor Player B, who ranks in the top 15 for forwards in some of my personal favorite statistics. But the gist of it is, Player B is far and away better than Player A in many relevant advanced statistics.

You're the GM, which player do you sign?

Not nearly enough context. Without appropriate context, those numbers mean nothing.

 

[JmanWingsFan]

I'm out to do those things while maximizing asset value. I can't afford to throw away what it would take to land Jagr.

Maximize what value? You're trying to win the Stanley Cup. You spare no expense to try and attain that when it's in your reach. If by some remote chance Jagr becomes available, he becomes a rental. Rentals don't cost much in the way of assets for the very reasons you're bemoaning the potential acquisition. Screw the playoffs. Alexander Semin had 44 SOG and a shooting percentage of 0% because Jaroslav Halak. That series with the Canadiens in 2010 is all the proof you need that the playoffs are a crapshoot and anything can happen in small sample sizes.

 

[DatsyukToZetterberg]

Maximize what value? You're trying to win the Stanley Cup. You spare no expense to try and attain that when it's in your reach. If by some remote chance Jagr becomes available, he becomes a rental. Rentals don't cost much in the way of assets for the very reasons you're bemoaning the potential acquisition. Screw the playoffs. Alexander Semin had 44 SOG and a shooting percentage of 0% because Jaroslav Halak. That series with the Canadiens in 2010 is all the proof you need that the playoffs are a crapshoot and anything can happen in small sample sizes.

Except going for the Stanley Cup every isn't how it works. Each team has a window and ours has shut for the time being. When you're in the window you can try & buy each deadline but not very often has the team that "won" the TD gone on and played in the finals. As a matter of fact I'd go far as to say the 2 times it has happened the team, the Bruins in both cases, would have been better off today had they not traded for their rentals & kept their picks.

The true contenders, Hawks, Pens, etc., don't even go for it every year. The Pens aren't likely to make a deadline move after selling off a bunch of the farm last year and they're as close to being a Cup favorite as a team can be.

Lastly the rental you're talking about will cost us a 1st+. He's playing better than he did last year, he's on a team making a playoff push that doesn't sell of players so there's no way he's getting less than he did last year. Jagr doesn't normally re-sign with teams and with our cheap youth on the way up he blocks our ability to upgrade our defence.

He got a conditional 1st+2 c prospects last year. If he's traded this year I will guarantee you that he is getting a 1st+B/B- prospect in return. That's not a price the Wings should be paying for a soon to be 42 year old player regardless if his ability as we aren't contending this season.

 

[JmanWingsFan]

Except going for the Stanley Cup every isn't how it works.

You're right. Every team that is deemed unable to compete should just stop playing hockey and fold shop until next year. Clearly they can't win so they should just stop wasting time and effort. They aren't going to win the cup.

Each team has a window and ours has shut for the time being.

Oh please. It's hardly shut. The young players we've been clamoring for are finally here. We're still a talented club.

When you're in the window you can try & buy each deadline but not very often has the team that "won" the TD gone on and played in the finals.

No one is advocating 'winning' the trade deadline. I don't see the relevancy of this point. Now if you want to talk about making deadline moves, well...

-The Wings brought in Brad Stuart in '08
-The Snow Chickens brought in Bill Guerin in '09
-The Blackhawks didn't acquire anyone because they were already loaded
-The Bruins acquired several depth players in '11
-The Kings got Jeff Carter in '12
-Blackhawks brought in Michal Handzus, and the Bruins brought in Jagr in '13

Yeah, making moves helps.

The true contenders, Hawks, Pens, etc., don't even go for it every year. The Pens aren't likely to make a deadline move after selling off a bunch of the farm last year and they're as close to being a Cup favorite as a team can be.

How quick is everyone willing to throw away the old talking points under the bus for the sake of an argument. We've been complaining and beating the horse deader than dead on Ken Holland because Holland doesn't ever do anything at the deadline anymore, and now you're talking about how the Red Wings need to conserve assets?

You can't have your cake and eat it too. Pick one.

Lastly the rental you're talking about will cost us a 1st+. He's playing better than he did last year, he's on a team making a playoff push that doesn't sell of players so there's no way he's getting less than he did last year. Jagr doesn't normally re-sign with teams and with our cheap youth on the way up he blocks our ability to upgrade our defence.

Man, this guy was all over it on how Jagr would not be available because he was playing on a playoff bubble team before you were...

New Jersey isn't out of the playoff hunt, they'll want a good deal for those players.

 

[drw02]

Except going for the Stanley Cup every isn't how it works. Each team has a window and ours has shut for the time being. When you're in the window you can try & buy each deadline but not very often has the team that "won" the TD gone on and played in the finals. As a matter of fact I'd go far as to say the 2 times it has happened the team, the Bruins in both cases, would have been better off today had they not traded for their rentals & kept their picks.

The true contenders, Hawks, Pens, etc., don't even go for it every year. The Pens aren't likely to make a deadline move after selling off a bunch of the farm last year and they're as close to being a Cup favorite as a team can be.

Lastly the rental you're talking about will cost us a 1st+. He's playing better than he did last year, he's on a team making a playoff push that doesn't sell of players so there's no way he's getting less than he did last year. Jagr doesn't normally re-sign with teams and with our cheap youth on the way up he blocks our ability to upgrade our defence.

He got a conditional 1st+2 c prospects last year. If he's traded this year I will guarantee you that he is getting a 1st+B/B- prospect in return. That's not a price the Wings should be paying for a soon to be 42 year old player regardless if his ability as we aren't contending this season.

How can people say this team isn't a contender? Of course they have to get healthy first but if they do they are absolutely contenders. What would have happened if Detroit had won that game 7 over Chicago? It's not a stretch to say we could have won it all. This years team is more talented and experienced than last years. This team just oozes playoff experience, they know what it takes to get it done.

 

[BinCookin]

It should be said that Franzen has missed significant time only one other time in his career (twice if you count his second year in the league where he played 69 gmaes). He seems to miss 5-10 games a year, which sucks to have him out, but it's not like he's missing 20-30 games every other year with massive, debilitating injuries. Concussions are certainly an injury we should be more leery of, but there's a lot of guess work involved in saying the guy's going to crap out health wise in the near future. It's possible, obviously, but I think it's just as likely he keeps playing his 75 or so games a year for the next three or four years and just keeps being Franzen.

I know Franzen has not missed ALOT of time, But how many times has he been injured with a "concussion" or "head injury". I really think these concussions are scary territory. I like Franzen a lot, I am just wondering how many concussions he has had. Even if they only keep him out 5 games, he is headed for the Lindross brother's retirement as opposed to Knee or back injuries.

Also many are worried about his long term deal. Its really not a problem. When he gets to age ~37 he goes on LTIR for whatever. Then we replace him. He gets paid, we get the cap relief, etc etc. Long Term Injury "retirement" will be suggested, and he will say "I am trying to get healthy" but they just won't send a doctor to see when he is healthy. Catch my drift.

 

[DatsyukToZetterberg]

You're right. Every team that is deemed unable to compete should just stop playing hockey and fold shop until next year. Clearly they can't win so they should just stop wasting time and effort. They aren't going to win the cup. Oh please. It's hardly shut. The young players we've been clamoring for are finally here. We're still a talented club. No one is advocating 'winning' the trade deadline. I don't see the relevancy of this point. Now if you want to talk about making deadline moves, well...

It doesn't make sense for us to go out and make a trade for a player that can only help us for one year. What is so hard to understand about that? We aren't in a position to trade a 1st that could be anywhere from 7 or 8 - 20 or 22, the odds are our pick will be closer to the 7 & 8 range than the 20-22.

If you can say with a straight face that adding Jagr increases our chances to win to the point where we can beat the Bruins or Pens in a 7 game series than it makes sense. Personally I don't think he has that kind of effect & he has gone ice cold in the playoffs for 2 straight years, not someone I'd want to bet a 1st on producing in the playoffs.

-The Wings brought in Brad Stuart in '08
-The Snow Chickens brought in Bill Guerin in '09
-The Blackhawks didn't acquire anyone because they were already loaded
-The Bruins acquired several depth players in '11
-The Kings got Jeff Carter in '12
-Blackhawks brought in Michal Handzus, and the Bruins brought in Jagr in '13

None of them gave up a 1st+ for those players and the LA deal is a whole other can of worms. LA decided to shake up their core & made a move to reflect it, that deal is nothing like a Jagr to Detroit deal would be unless you think Jagr will be a long term member of the Wings.

Yeah, making moves helps.

Making smart moves help. Adding a forward isn't anywhere as big of a need as adding a good defenceman, especially if we want to go on a deep playoff run.

How quick is everyone willing to throw away the old talking points under the bus for the sake of an argument. We've been complaining and beating the horse deader than dead on Ken Holland because Holland doesn't ever do anything at the deadline anymore, and now you're talking about how the Red Wings need to conserve assets?

I've never said I'm upset that Holland hasn't been active on the trade deadline. I may not like that he doesn't make moves & brings back familiar faces but I'm rather happy he hasn't gone about wasting our long term assets for a misguided attempt at success. We may have different views on how a person would ideally manage a team but I'm of the view that long term success where you can compete every year > short term success at the cost of long term sustainability.

Man, this guy was all over it on how Jagr would not be available because he was playing on a playoff bubble team before you were...

Than why even bring it up? Are you really wanting Jagr that badly that you're willing to give up the overpayment that the Devils will want for a 42 year old forward? The little value Jagr would provide to us would likely be dwarfed by the value the prospect+1st round player would bring to us.

 

[DatsyukToZetterberg]

How can people say this team isn't a contender? Of course they have to get healthy first but if they do they are absolutely contenders. What would have happened if Detroit had won that game 7 over Chicago? It's not a stretch to say we could have won it all. This years team is more talented and experienced than last years. This team just oozes playoff experience, they know what it takes to get it done.

A contender imo is a top 5 team in the NHL. The Pens, Bruins, Hawks, Kings, Sharks & Blues. Those are the favorites to win the cup. If you aren't in that bracket you aren't a true contender. That doesn't mean you can't win the cup it just means you shouldn't be going all in all the time like those teams can.

Pretty much if you aren't a contender you have to pick your spots on when to go all in.

As for your question we could be a team that makes it to the finals or conference finals but we could also be a team that ***** the bed & picks top 10. That isn't a contender it is a middle of the pack team. Most teams can say if we play up to our potential or get healthy we could make a run but we also have to look at the situation and realize that we're much closer to being an average team than being a contender.

 

[BinCookin]

Let's play a game, shall we?

Player A has 19 goals, 30 assists for a total of 49 points and is a +1 on the season.

Player B has 17 goals, 32 assists for a total of 49 points and is a +21 on the season

As far as hockey advanced statistics go, they heavily favor Player B, who ranks in the top 15 for forwards in some of my personal favorite statistics. But the gist of it is, Player B is far and away better than Player A in many relevant advanced statistics.

You're the GM, which player do you sign?

Addition stats to the question

Player A plays on a Team that is GF/GA -36 (3times worse as a team)
Player B plays on a Team that is GF/GA -11

Not to mention +/- is not a fully awesome stats in itself

Player A is 30 Yrs Old
Player B is 41 Yrs Old

Player A has a Cap hit of ~7.15 M
Player B has a Cap hit of ~4M.

Now who do you choose???

 

[BinCookin]

I think Bottom Line This team does CAN NOT afford to trade away 1st round picks or young players for the likes of Edler / Jagr .

We just don't have the assets.

 

[jaster]

How can people say this team isn't a contender?

Because it's a sports message board, where that stuff is extremely common. Pessimistic, panicky, sky-is-falling, whatever you want to call it.

Now, of course we aren't in the top tier of contenders, but what many still fail to realize in the salary cap era is that any team that makes the playoffs is a contender. Any team can win. We may be a long-shot, to the point that we want to be very careful about what we give up in a potential deadline move, but writing this team off completely is not rational, it's just emotional/dramatic/whatever.

 

[drw02]

A contender imo is a top 5 team in the NHL. The Pens, Bruins, Hawks, Kings, Sharks & Blues. Those are the favorites to win the cup. If you aren't in that bracket you aren't a true contender. That doesn't mean you can't win the cup it just means you shouldn't be going all in all the time like those teams can.

Pretty much if you aren't a contender you have to pick your spots on when to go all in.

As for your question we could be a team that makes it to the finals or conference finals but we could also be a team that ***** the bed & picks top 10. That isn't a contender it is a middle of the pack team. Most teams can say if we play up to our potential or get healthy we could make a run but we also have to look at the situation and realize that we're much closer to being an average team than being a contender.

I consider a contender any team that has a reasonable chance at winning the cup, probably about 10 or so teams. I think the Wings fall into that category. We've seen many times before that seedings do not matter much once the playoffs start. You really don't think if Detroit didn't lose handfuls of there best players for large chunks of the season they would be among the top 5-7 teams in the NHL? I agree we shouldn't go all in at the trade deadline due to the concerns we may not get healthy enough but standing pat is sometimes the best move anyway. I firmly believe we are among the top 3 teams in the east if healthy.

 

[detredWINgs]

There is no rhyme or reason to saying no to Jagr.

He'll cost a 1st rounder? There's no guarantee he'll re-sign? He's one dimensional? Isn't guaranteed top line minutes here? We need to improve our defense more than our forwards? Well have roughly 29 forwards if we get healthy?

Gee, that was hard.

He's a really good offensive player? He could help us win the cup? He could offer his wealth of experience to the young players? Rentals never cost a whole lot? You can never have too many good forwards? I'm just trying to point out that passing up on Jagr is stupid regardless of the excuse, even if it's unlikely?

Yeah, makes every sense in the world to acquire Jagr if he was available. No excuses. You don't pass up on top six talents.

You said there was no rhyme or reason to saying no to Jagr, so I gave you some reasons not to. Plenty in fact. Did you really need the rhyme as well?

We don't need Jaromir Jagr.
He looks like a homeless jogger.
If he gives up a first round pick,
Holland will look like a huge ****
And we'll all need to drink lots of lager.

 

[Winger98]

Tallinder sounds just like them.

Myers seems more like the guy Holland has been after lately. Or Ehrhoff. Maybe Tallinder if we're looking for a pure rental, but the D Holland has reportedly been after through trades have been Bouwmeester, Edler, Bogosian, etc. Young, high upside guys.

wouldnt it be better to go out and get a younger guy that could not only help us win now(for the zetts, datsyuks and alffies sake) but also help us win long term and be part of our next wave(for the sake of tatar, nyquist, jurco, mantha, sproul, ouelett, smith, howard, helm etc's sake)?

if we're giving up future assets to me it makes more sense to do so only for more REPEATED long term return then a quick one off benefit

we really arent a team that is a 42 year old legend away from winning the cup, a team full of young superstars in desperate need of a calming influence and wisdom in the locker room needs that player. We have that in spades what we need are more horses to pull the cart not just this year but also during the 2017-2018 season and thats why i am so against adding the typical playoff rental.

You won't find me arguing against going after a long term piece, and I think the Holland trade rumors point to him focusing on such a piece for awhile now. Given the choice, I would definitely lean hard towards the long term asset.

That might not be out there, though - especially with our cap situation right now. Since I don't think we'll fall too far in the standings regardless, I'm not against a move for a rental if the price is right. Our prospect pipe line is pretty full, so losing a mid round pick or two isn't a killer. And I think making the playoffs as a 7/8 seed is still a better option than missing the playoffs as the 9/10 team.

edit: I have to say, though, that Tallinder isn't an upgrade to me.

I know Franzen has not missed ALOT of time, But how many times has he been injured with a "concussion" or "head injury". I really think these concussions are scary territory. I like Franzen a lot, I am just wondering how many concussions he has had. Even if they only keep him out 5 games, he is headed for the Lindross brother's retirement as opposed to Knee or back injuries.

Also many are worried about his long term deal. Its really not a problem. When he gets to age ~37 he goes on LTIR for whatever. Then we replace him. He gets paid, we get the cap relief, etc etc. Long Term Injury "retirement" will be suggested, and he will say "I am trying to get healthy" but they just won't send a doctor to see when he is healthy. Catch my drift.

Looking through here, I see three other instances that are either labeled concussion or head injury. the last concussion was '08, the "head injury" was in 2010, though the head injury could have been a stick to the face or something. I don't remember that far back well enough to say. I see a lot of leg injuries in recent history.

And I figure he'll go out the same way if he's hurt. Just abuse the hell out of LTIR.

 

[JmanWingsFan]

Addition stats to the question

Player A plays on a Team that is GF/GA -36 (3times worse as a team)
Player B plays on a Team that is GF/GA -11

Player A plays with two actual top line talents and is done in by the fact that the team's management is completely inept and decided to depend on a goaltender way past his expiration date.

Player B, however, plays in a system that completely suppresses offense for both sides.

Not to mention +/- is not a fully awesome stats in itself

Have to speak the language of the commoners, otherwise they won't be interested in what you have to say.

Player A is 30 Yrs Old
Player B is 41 Yrs Old

Irrelevant. They're both play really well.

Player A has a Cap hit of ~7.15 M
Player B has a Cap hit of ~4M.

Both players probably depart after the year, but Player A requires more assets to get. Player B, not so much.

Now who do you choose???

You pick the cheaper player who's playing just as well as the more expensive player. Why? Because he can help your team win.