What do you think of Yzerman these days?

[norrisnick]

You would have me believe there were no other ways we could have freed up cap? Possibly moves that didn’t cost us a 2nd - Like another Fabbri and a 4th type move?

You can say it wasn’t an impulse move, but his actions sure as hell seemed more along the lines of “I gotta get rid of this guy now, screw the cost”

Is there really a material difference between a 2nd and 4th? It's Albert Johansson or Mastrosimone vs Anton Johansson or Amadeus Lombardi. Moving Holl would have cost more (that and we need RD) and Maatta is IMO a better D to keep around. So, with regards to shedding $7M it was basically down to Fabbri and Walman.

 

[Frk It]

Is there really a material difference between a 2nd and 4th? It's Albert Johansson or Mastrosimone vs Anton Johansson or Amadeus Lombardi. Moving Holl would have cost more (that and we need RD) and Maatta is IMO a better D to keep around. So, with regards to shedding $7M it was basically down to Fabbri and Walman.

Maatta is exactly the guy you move.

Yeah I think there’s a pretty decent difference between trading someone a 4th to take a player and trading them a 2nd to take a player.

Some of these teams we are chasing have gotten their best players from round 2.

 

[norrisnick]

Maatta is exactly the guy you move.

Yeah I think there’s a pretty decent difference between trading someone a 4th to take a player and trading them a 2nd to take a player.

Some of these teams we are chasing have gotten their best players from round 2.

Maatta is simply a better defenseman than Walman. Just straight up.

 

[Frk It]

Maatta is simply a better defenseman than Walman. Just straight up.

Right so you could get rid of him without having to tack as much on.

And as I sit here and look at the defense, I don’t even pencil him into my top 6.

So you clear cap and open a roster spot up.

 

[Retire91]

I don’t expect Yzerman to be infallible. Smart people do dumb things sometimes. As I’ve said in this thread, I think Yzerman is overall doing a good job and I wouldn’t replace him if I had the choice.

I just think y’all are doing some wild shit to make excuses for that Walman trade, like nothing Yzerman does could possibly be wrong.

I mean the dude has lit a 2nd round pick on fire before when he drafted Clelveland, so not like it’d be the first time.

I do like Yzerman but I don't consider him infalable. I am trying to think of that D guy from Vancouver that had like 1 good season and Yzerman signed him to Tampa in a albatross contract. He misses. But he does have a pretty darned good trade reputation. Heck honestly there are so many unknowns on trades so no one is speaking with facts here. But given his rep on trades I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

 

[norrisnick]

Right so you could get rid of him without having to tack as much on.

And as I sit here and look at the defense, I don’t even pencil him into my top 6.

So you clear cap and open a roster spot up.

Why keep a more expensive defenseman that you don't want to use? The "you" being the Red Wings staff.

Maatta is honestly my preferred top pairing LD given our options. The rest of our D isn't good enough to stack up Mo with Ed. We've seen time and time again that Chiarot isn't a top pairing D. Gustafsson is allegedly going to be tried on the right side. Olli unlocked Hronek. No reason he can't be a steady partner for Mo.

Olli - Mo
Ed - Gus
Chia - AlJo/Petry

Maatta would get you something at the deadline if he is indeed not going to be in our top 6. Steady vet with Cup wins under his belt. Only turns 30 later this month.

Just looked it up because it felt like starting from his pneumonia in Dec of '22 and basically an entire year was trash. But before and after he was solid.

12/7/22 - 12/10/23 : 74GP 4G 13A 17P -19
Before and after : 76GP 6G 18A 24P +24 (25 games from '22-'23 and 51 games from '23-'24)

 

[Pavels Dog]

Because we're tired of filler signings.

Sign good players and the team will get better. Keep signing filler players and it's going to stay the same or get worse.

But the team has been improving every year.

 

[raymond23]

Maatta is exactly the guy you move.

Yeah I think there’s a pretty decent difference between trading someone a 4th to take a player and trading them a 2nd to take a player.

Some of these teams we are chasing have gotten their best players from round 2.

Yep, Maatta was clearly the player to move. Having to watch that guy try and skate for another season is going to kill me

The narrative that Walman was bad for us I don't get. He played on the top pairing against historically tough matchups, performed well at first and then struggled/got injured, then just never really got another chance after that. He's a very capable defenseman and also good for 10+ goals per season. Not to mention he had a great first year with us.

Guy was worth a 2nd round pick, not the other way around. Forever dumbfounded by that move.

We also better hope Gibson doesn't turn into anything too good. He's gotten great reports out of Nashville and is instantly one of their top prospects...

 

[Henkka]

Off

Maatta is simply a better defenseman than Walman. Just straight up.

Yeah, and we should keep the better players.

***

And some move was needed to open the cap.

"trade was not needed"
"guy should be worth a 2nd"

What a heck are these false narratives?

Trading Walman opened cap space, AND a spot for Edvinsson, and people still whine about it?

C'mon. Time to wake up.

 

[HisNoodliness]

I don’t expect Yzerman to be infallible. Smart people do dumb things sometimes. As I’ve said in this thread, I think Yzerman is overall doing a good job and I wouldn’t replace him if I had the choice.

I just think y’all are doing some wild shit to make excuses for that Walman trade, like nothing Yzerman does could possibly be wrong.

I mean the dude has lit a 2nd round pick on fire before when he drafted Clelveland, so not like it’d be the first time.

agree that it's annoying how some posters, in their desire to defend Yzerman, went from "Walman is our second best defenseman, here's my lineup with him at the top" to "Walman is terrible, always has been and I'm glad that he's gone" overnight. It's just so obviously silly and disingenuous that the assumption must be that most of us have the memory of a goldfish.

I think it was a bad trade. Whatever happened behind the scenes with Walman being a locker room problem, being too lazy trying to come back from injury or whatever, may make the trade more reasonable from Yzerman's perspective. From mine, it was dumb. By my count, Walman would be our 7th or 8th best player next year and 2nd or 3rd best defenseman. That's a big piece to lose, especially considering that his contract was cheap and we had to pay to do it. That's a big red F at the top of the page if I'm grading it.

 

[HisNoodliness]

Yeah, and we should keep the better players.

This is why it's a bad trade. We kept the bad players.

 

[Frk It]

agree that it's annoying how some posters, in their desire to defend Yzerman, went from "Walman is our second best defenseman, here's my lineup with him at the top" to "Walman is terrible, always has been and I'm glad that he's gone" overnight. It's just so obviously silly and disingenuous that the assumption must be that most of us have the memory of a goldfish.

I think it was a bad trade. Whatever happened behind the scenes with Walman being a locker room problem, being too lazy trying to come back from injury or whatever, may make the trade more reasonable from Yzerman's perspective. From mine, it was dumb. By my count, Walman would be our 7th or 8th best player next year and 2nd or 3rd best defenseman. That's a big piece to lose, especially considering that his contract was cheap and we had to pay to do it. That's a big red F at the top of the page if I'm grading it.

Yeah and again, I don’t expect a GM to make 0 bad moves. Or sign 0 bad contracts.

So it is what it is. I think it’s a bad trade and it just comes down to how do you want to choose to feel about it.

The move doesn’t that bother me that much, people going out of their way to justify it does.

 

[SirloinUB]

You would have me believe there were no other ways we could have freed up cap? Possibly moves that didn’t cost us a 2nd - Like another Fabbri and a 4th type move?

You can say it wasn’t an impulse move, but his actions sure as hell seemed more along the lines of “I gotta get rid of this guy now, screw the cost”

Like I said, part of the cost was getting ahead of the market.

As far as other options to shed upwards of 3 Mil. Im not sure there were any. You suggest Maatta was a better choice. Maybe, but again, you're failing to acknowledge that Yzerman clearly valued Walman less. This is evident by the fact Walman was scratched down the stretch and Maatta was not. So yes, there was an element of "I gotta get rid of this guy, now" it was not, however, a situation where Yzerman called the first GM in his contact list and accepted the first deal that was offered to him.

Look, when the trade broke, I found it quite jarring. Flatly I was stunned and annoyed at the cost of this move for a week but when you step back and look at this objectively, Walman clearly did not have value to the red wings or other GMs. It sucks, but it is what it is.

Is there really a material difference between a 2nd and 4th? It's Albert Johansson or Mastrosimone vs Anton Johansson or Amadeus Lombardi. Moving Holl would have cost more (that and we need RD) and Maatta is IMO a better D to keep around. So, with regards to shedding $7M it was basically down to Fabbri and Walman.

I had typed out "2nd round picks are overrated on this forum but that is a conversation for another day" but deleted it. I would say there is a material difference but 2nd round picks are very overrated around here.

 

[SirloinUB]

Guy was worth a 2nd round pick, not the other way around. Forever dumbfounded by that move.

You can't just say that like it is a fact when the evidence suggests the contrary. This move isn't the end of the world either way but people bothered by this trade are simply rejecting the reality that Walman did not have the value they believed he had.

The facts are:
- Walman was a healthy scratch over other options.
- He had two years of term
- Nobody wanted to give up value for him
- The Red Wings needed cap space.

If there is anything to be bothered by, it should be the fact that Yzerman put himself in a spot where this kind of move was necessary (regardless of who it was) but the trade itself is not a big deal or worth holding over Yzerman's head.

 

[Frk It]

Like I said, part of the cost was getting ahead of the market.

As far as other options to shed upwards of 3 Mil. Im not sure there were any. You suggest Maatta was a better choice. Maybe, but again, you're failing to acknowledge that Yzerman clearly valued Walman less. This is evident by the fact Walman was scratched down the stretch and Maatta was not. So yes, there was an element of "I gotta get rid of this guy, now" it was not, however, a situation where Yzerman called the first GM in his contact list and accepted the first deal that was offered to him.

Look, when the trade broke, I found it quite jarring. Flatly I was stunned and annoyed at the cost of this move for a week but when you step back and look at this objectively, Walman clearly did not have value to the red wings or other GMs. It sucks, but it is what it is.

For what it's worth I see where you're coming from, I just don't see it the same way.

 

[brett89]

wings are linked to laine any truth behind that?

 

[saska sault]

wings are linked to laine any truth behind that?

If "linked" and in the media...not likely. Yzerman and Co don't let out much information, if any at all.

 

[Henkka]

wings are linked to laine any truth behind that?

Husso + Määttä/Holl in the deal at it would work with cap.

 

[Winger98]

Husso + Määttä/Holl in the deal at it would work with cap.

Their GM would also be taping a sign to his back saying "Fire Me" if he pulled that deal for Laine.

 

[RabidBadger]

You can't just say that like it is a fact when the evidence suggests the contrary. This move isn't the end of the world either way but people bothered by this trade are simply rejecting the reality that Walman did not have the value they believed he had.

The facts are:
- Walman was a healthy scratch over other options.
- He had two years of term
- Nobody wanted to give up value for him
- The Red Wings needed cap space.

If there is anything to be bothered by, it should be the fact that Yzerman put himself in a spot where this kind of move was necessary (regardless of who it was) but the trade itself is not a big deal or worth holding over Yzerman's head.

That's a very good summation of the situation. I think people are people are focusing more on how Walman was a diamond in the rough for more so than how he ended up as a healthy scratch. It feels like we're talking Vrana 2.0 (with the St. Louis connection even!)

 

[lilidk]

That's a very good summation of the situation. I think people are people are focusing more on how Walman was a diamond in the rough for more so than how he ended up as a healthy scratch. It feels like we're talking Vrana 2.0

Walman is not Vrana2.0 , maybe Laine is. He will be fine next season with Sharks

 

[RabidBadger]

Walman is not Vrana2.0 , maybe Laine is. He will be fine next season with Sharks

My comparison is that we took a loss on both of them, even though they had perceived value by the fans. Unless Dylan Larkin writes a tell-all book when he retires, we will never know why either of them went out the way they did.

 

[Henkka]

Their GM would also be taping a sign to his back saying "Fire Me" if he pulled that deal for Laine.

All speculation I have learned, is that Columbus has to retent salary or take bad contracts back to create the same effect.

Määttä is ok defenceman, they are even in a need for LHD. And Husso could be that dead weight which CBJ has to take as a dump for Laine.

Of course there could be some other particles like picks and prospects, but I'm thinkin only how the cap would work in such a trade.

No trade will happen if the cap won't work for both sides. It's always the first starting point for any trade idea.

 

[Winger98]

All speculation I have learned, is that Columbus has to retent salary or take bad contracts back to create the same effect.

Määttä is ok defenceman, they are even in a need for LHD. And Husso could be that dead weight which CBJ has to take as a dump for Laine.

Of course there could be some other particles like picks and prospects, but I'm thinkin only how the cap would work in such a trade.

No trade will happen if the cap won't work for both sides. It's always the first starting point for any trade idea.

Which is why you're not seeing him dealt right now. Getting guys like Husso and Maata doesn't do much of anything for them and they aren't in any desperate situation to find cap space. Unless there is something going on behind the scenes motivating them to move Laine off the team before the season starts, there's no real reason to make such a move.

Columbus is going to hope Laine can show up to camp in shape, be ready to go this season, eat a lot of first line/1st pp time and rebuild his value. Then they can decide to move him later in the season when the cap hit is less of an issue, or next summer.

 

[Henkka]

Currently the highest bid is rumoured to be from Montreal. Jordan Harris and Joel Armia.

So 5'11 midget mediocre defenceman and overpaid 4th line RW.

We can easily match that.