Confirmed with Link: Walman and a 2nd Round Pick traded to SJ

[Atoadaso]

Have to imagine his injuries played a large in this decision, we don’t know obviously but what if they know there’s a significant chance he won’t be ready to compete come next season.

 

[DTR]

I’m just reading up on this, this is pretty relevant.

Main difference here though is we made a trade with the team with the team potentially claiming off waivers the day before. The optics on that look much worse, IMO.

NY and SJ didn’t do a trade prior to that waiver claim, did they?

Valid point but unless there is something in writing there isn’t anything anyone can do to penalize the teams.

Make no mistake, it’s a scummy practice to get around NTCs but the only way to close this loop is to alter the CBA and that won’t happen.

 

[Hen Kolland]

Because it’s (very clearly) disregarding why NTC’s exist and how waivers are supposed to be used.

But there is nothing wrong if the Wings are shot down trying to move him. They decide that he isn't an NHL caliber player independent of that result, place him on waivers and the Sharks claim him. Is he protected because his no trade list had the Sharks listed? Absolutely not.

We don't even know if Holl's name was brought up in the conversation. For all we know, Yzerman never even asked Holl for a no trade list. What if the "future considerations" were simply, "we are going to waive a bottom of the lineup player to free cap space, you claim him" and that player is Holl without ever consulting him.

Like that's what makes the gray area so difficult to actually analyze, you can probably craft a loophole several different ways. Not to mention this is still a fantasy land of an idea and is probably not close to begin with.

 

[DTR]

Have to imagine his injuries played a large in this decision, we don’t know obviously but what if they know there’s a significant chance he won’t be ready to compete come next season.

True but he could just be LTIR’d when the season starts. We can exceed the cap by 10% this offseason so it feels like it’s more than just an injury.

 

[sepster]

You would think that all of you that are this upset/invested in Jake Walman would be invested enough to pay attention to rumblings surrounding the Wings.

Why am I not upset or surprised by this move? Aside from the fact that my own eyes told me during the middle of the season that Walman was playing like shit, but also I've known since the end of the season that more that likely Walman was on his way out. How did I know this? Because reliable posters let us know that on these very boards at that time, which I was then able to confirm on my own. This move was predicted months ago for you all to read.

Having said that, I wasn't expecting to have to PAY to get rid of him, but I guess Yzerman felt the cost was acceptable for what he has planned. Which brings me to another point, we are at the very beginning of offseason moves. This complaining about minor, individual moves among the process of building is beyond absurd.

Have you ever worked on a project and then had someone come up behind you and start critiquing your process? "What are you doing? Why are you doing that way? That's not the way I would do it. I don't understand what you're doing." Yeah, lots of that going on.

 

[Hen Kolland]

Have to imagine his injuries played a large in this decision, we don’t know obviously but what if they know there’s a significant chance he won’t be ready to compete come next season.

LTIR is still a thing and would free up the cap space without having to trade him if we were talking about an injury and question marks if he would play again.

 

[Run the Jewels]

The assumption is that San Jose isn’t in Holl’s list of teams in his no trade clause. So they would be doing this with waivers to skirt around that with a hand shake deal with San Jose.

Which for a last place team, would check out.

Would Yzerman really do this rather than just eat $1.133 million by buying him out? With Walman out the door we have what, $36 million in cap space?

 

[DTR]

But there is nothing wrong if the Wings are shot down trying to move him. They decide that he isn't an NHL caliber player independent of that result, place him on waivers and the Sharks claim him. Is he protected because his no trade list had the Sharks listed? Absolutely not.

We don't even know if Holl's name was brought up in the conversation. For all we know, Yzerman never even asked Holl for a no trade list. What if the "future considerations" were simply, "we are going to waive a bottom of the lineup player to free cap space, you claim him" and that player is Holl without ever consulting him.

Like that's what makes the gray area so difficult to actually analyze, you can probably craft a loophole several different ways. Not to mention this is still a fantasy land of an idea and is probably not close to begin with.

Yzerman shouldn’t have offered the NTC in the first place. If we are doing all this to unload Holl through less than scrupulous ways it makes the Holl signing even worse, which is hard to imagine being possible.

 

[Frk It]

But there is nothing wrong if the Wings are shot down trying to move him. They decide that he isn't an NHL caliber player independent of that result, place him on waivers and the Sharks claim him. Is he protected because his no trade list had the Sharks listed? Absolutely not.

We don't even know if Holl's name was brought up in the conversation. For all we know, Yzerman never even asked Holl for a no trade list. What if the "future considerations" were simply, "we are going to waive a bottom of the lineup player to free cap space, you claim him" and that player is Holl without ever consulting him.

Like that's what makes the gray area so difficult to actually analyze, you can probably craft a loophole several different ways. Not to mention this is still a fantasy land of an idea and is probably not close to begin with.

It’s the optics of trading with the team the day prior and the player not being included that I think throws a wrench in what you’re saying, personally.

But I get some of what you are saying, some of this is hard to prove or open for interpretation.

I just think in this case the optics would be especially bad.

 

[norrisnick]

You would think that all of you that are this upset/invested in Jake Walman would be invested enough to pay attention to rumblings surrounding the Wings.

Why am I not upset or surprised by this move? Aside from the fact that my own eyes told me during the middle of the season that Walman was playing like shit, but also I've known since the end of the season that more that likely Walman was on his way out. How did I know this? Because reliable posters let us know that on these very boards at that time, which I was then able to confirm on my own. This move was predicted months ago for you all to read.

Having said that, I wasn't expecting to have to PAY to get rid of him, but I guess Yzerman felt the cost was acceptable for what he has planned. Which brings me to another point, we are at the very beginning of offseason moves. This complaining about minor, individual moves among the process of building is beyond absurd.

Have you ever worked on a project and then had someone come up behind you and start critiquing your process? "What are you doing? Why are you doing that way? That's not the way I would do it. I don't understand what you're doing." Yeah, lots of that going on.

Moving on from Walman is a non-issue. It's that he somehow has significant negative value is somewhat baffling. As you alluded to in paragraph 3.

Getting a 4th vs a 3rd in return? Yeah, that's nit-picking value of a trade.

Having to add a 2nd to move a seemingly serviceable player? That's hand typing pages of code that can be copy pasted levels of weird.

 

[better Red than Dead]

Maybe the future considerations is Barclay Goodrow?

 

[Atoadaso]

LTIR is still a thing and would free up the cap space without having to trade him if we were talking about an injury and question marks if he would play again.

Yeah but he still has to compete for a spot that he lost to Edvinsson and then you add Johansson, gonna be a tough spot for him if he misses a good chunk to start the season. Thats why I think it was mentioned this was also an opportunity for him.

 

[SirloinUB]

I think there are way too many conspirancy theories based on how unexpected it was - we need to accept the reality:

- Yzerman wanted to get rid of at least one maybe more defensemen, at decided on Walman, based on ??? (like his play last year or off-ice reasons for him being benched or whatever)
- Walman's value was ridiculously low
- Yzerman still decided that having Walman and his cap around is more detriment than waiting for his value to rebound and try to move somebody else
- There is no backroom agreements between Grier and Yzerman - if they wanted they could have included Holl or swap 14th and 15th picks in this trade.
- Everybody need just to take off from main board if they cannot handle stupidity of Sens' fans

Basically we can agree or disagree with Yzerman, but the market's gives him some kind of confirmation in his wish to get rid of him - Walman just does not seems like a hot commodity.

I'm with you. I think we are all looking for ways to rationalize this but I ultimately believe future considerations will truly be nothing in this instance.

Occam's Razer applies here. The simplest answer is Yzerman wanted to clear cap and roster space and deemed this the most efficient way to obtain that. The value for Yzerman was no money and no roster piece coming back. Just a purge of piece he didn't want.

I'm just really surprised that Walman was viewed so poorly across the league. I thought some team would have some interest in taking a flier on the Dman with the 23rd most goals over the last two seasons.

 

[DTR]

Maybe the future considerations is Barclay Goodrow?

SJ has no retention spots so if we are trading for him it’s at full cost for almost no value to next years roster.

 

[DatsDeking]

I’m huffing the copium hard trying to make this makes sense but I think we’re stuck waiting to see how this plays out. I dont see how Goodrow can be claimed off waivers and PLD can be traded one for one but Walman has negative value of a second round pick.

We’ll see what happens.

 

[Frobbo]

You are really bad at math.

I don't get your confusion. They traded last year's 2nd draft choice. I know the Wings don't draft well out of the first round but after only one year doesn't he still have the value of a second round draft pick? Or are you saying realized draft picks have no value? Thus, the player plus a future 2nd equals two seconds, duh.

 

[Mr Nimbus]

I've slept on this. And it's still terrible. I'd be less upset if this came after we somehow got rid of holl/petry/copp.

 

[Tatar Shots]

I know this will be pretty controversial, but I do wonder if we preferred to keep Holl over Walman? Walman was dreadful for a while and neither player could crack the lineup the last month of the season. We needed space for all the LHD, especially the young guys coming up, and perhaps we simply opted to keep the RHD in Holl?

 

[SimonEdvinssonAtSix]

It’s 2. We traded Gibson to get that 2nd then traded it again. It’s essentially 2 2nds and Walman for a 3rd round prospect.

Or, check this out, we traded Gibson for a prospect plus a 2nd then we traded Walman + 2nd for FC.

So we traded Walman for free. The 2nd round pick was an illusion. There is no spoon.

 

[izlez]

I don't get your confusion. They traded last year's 2nd draft choice. I know the Wings don't draft well out of the first round but after only one year doesn't he still have the value of a second round draft pick? Or are you saying realized draft picks have no value? Thus, the player plus a future 2nd equals two seconds, duh.

You trade away a 2nd and receive a 2nd in return. Then you trade away a 2nd.

Your net is giving away one 2nd, not two

I know this will be pretty controversial, but I do wonder if we preferred to keep Holl over Walman? Walman was dreadful for a while and neither player could crack the lineup the last month of the season. We needed space for all the LHD, especially the young guys coming up, and perhaps we simply opted to keep the RHD in Holl?

This crossed my mind that perhaps Holl gets more hate than he deserves. He's a big body vet that was a +8 last year.

But that doesn't explain why the team played Walman on the 1st pair all year and had Holl in the press box. If they believed in Holl, they would have just played him over Walman

EDIT: Guess I skimmed too much and ignored the LHD vs RHD thing. Which my god, I will never understand why everyone in the hockey world acts like that is so important

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

Yzerman shouldn’t have offered the NTC in the first place. If we are doing all this to unload Holl through less than scrupulous ways it makes the Holl signing even worse, which is hard to imagine being possible.

I'd be curious to know what percentage of UFA's get some form of NTC in their contract, because anecdotally it feels like it's almost all of them. Which makes sense in a capped league. It's one of the few other tools GM's have.

 

[RedHawkDown]

Yzerman has like a week to redeem himself. I swear to god if he re-signs Ghost for like 4 years at 5-6M I'm going to become a Leafs fan. At least the failure there is expected.

 

[Holden Caufield]

I don’t even get it from a cap clearing perspective. There wasn’t any need to rush clearing cap space without Mo/Ray contracts in place. If we are signing free agents or making a trade that brings on money, you could do that without having to move out cap now. Then when Mo/Ray deals are ready, if you’re desperate you do something like this.

I see what you are saying here. But you don’t want to leave yourself vulnerable to offer sheets.

Better to clear now, then be put on the clock and have to clear space to save a young franchise player.

Doesn’t mean I like this move. But I don’t think you can use Seider/Ray being unsigned as ‘wiggle room’ short term. That earmarked money must concretely remained earmarked against the cap IMO.

 

[Hen Kolland]

It’s the optics of trading with the team the day prior and the player not being included that I think throws a wrench in what you’re saying, personally.

But I get some of what you are saying, some of this is hard to prove or open for interpretation.

I just think in this case the optics would be especially bad.

It's a weird dynamic and probably would say a lot about where Holl's head is at. It's my belief that his career is over as soon as he is not under his current contract. If we offered him a chance to be an NHL regular for San Jose and he said "no, I'd rather be bought out and try my chances" then I think he is just prepared to have his career be over and doesn't really care about playing.

Optically it might look bad for us, but we can't really care about optics. Maybe it calls into question the organization's moral compass and it would reflect poorly to prospective free agents. I don't know, hard to care too much about someone who is going to be a net 0 impact on our team for the rest of his career and collect millions for it.

 

[jaster]

I don't get your confusion. They traded last year's 2nd draft choice. I know the Wings don't draft well out of the first round but after only one year doesn't he still have the value of a second round draft pick? Or are you saying realized draft picks have no value? Thus, the player plus a future 2nd equals two seconds, duh.

I am not confused. Even the guy who made that original post admitted the error of his ways. Even rewarded himself with a Snickers bar, which I approve.

We did not give up two 2nd round picks to dump Walman. This was explained by several posters later in the thread.

If you're saying we traded a 2nd to acquire Walman in the first place, that is also incorrect. The original trade for Walman included giving up Nick Leddy and Luke Witkowski, and receving in return Walman, Sundqvist, and a 2nd.