Proposal: Winnipeg and Detroit
- Thread starter Phasenet
- Start date
BStinson
Registered User
- Nov 11, 2013
- 2,365
- 558
Vatican Roulette
Baile de Los Locos
BStinson
Registered User
- Nov 11, 2013
- 2,365
- 558
I guess it depends on your definition of small but I could see Trouba + 1st for Lindholm (value wise).
I think something like this is in the ballpark. But not sure how much the Ducks would be interested in Petan. A 1st seems awfully rich even lottery protected.
A 2nd or equivalent prospect (Armia, Copp, De Leo, Lipon) etc). IMO Petan is pushing it.
I wouldn't do a 1st at all.
Last edited:
Don't think I'd move Comrie right now. He's out best G prospect (not including Hellebuyck) and we only have a couple G prospects as is.
Master Scheif
dirt nasty
I would add a lot to Trouba if it meant getting Lindholm. Doubt Ducks would consider unless the plus was more than we can reasonably give up.
Yup, the Ducks have no reason to trade Lindholm, he's a rare talent. Especially not for a lesser Dman (no offense to Trouba, Lindholm is just better now).
Number1RedWingsFan52
Registered User
Number1RedWingsFan52
Registered User
This is still a downgrade for Anaheim, Can't see BM trading Lindholm for Trouba and Dano Trouba could still want as much or more as Lindholm and he isn't half of the D man that Lindholm is.
I agree that Lindholm is better than Trouba, but the difference isn't close to double. I still think that the perspective on Trouba's value has been dampened excessively based on linemates and usage. He's very good in all facets of the game and has a lot of space to emerge as a top-line D in the right situation.
CaptainChef
Registered User
I wouldn't add a thing. Don't think there is much to chose between these two players & that includes Trouba being sacked with a huge anchor for the last three years. Unless Trouba genuinely wants out, I keep him. Keep in mind to, if Ana wants to trade Lindholm, something smells rotten there too.
Agree with this as well. I would be extremely surprised if Trouba was shipped regardless of contract talk. He holds a lot more weight in the proposal than what is being traded back to WPG
Which Anaheim wouldn't trade Lindholm for another defenseman in Trouba. What's the incentive here to swap defenseman? Makes no sense for both sides.
Both players are extremely talented btw it would just be a nonsense trade for **** and giggles
Maukkis
EZ4ENCE
- Mar 16, 2016
- 10,721
- 7,597
It was explained pretty well on our boards by KingBogo. Basically, Trouba might be better off going for a bridge deal, whereas Lindholm, as the better and more proven one, wants long term security. We have the cap space to give Trouba a long term deal, but because of Buff/Myers/Stuart and the problems that come from them, giving the long term deal to Lindholm would be better. Anaheim, on the other hand, is pretty handcuffed by their internal budget, so two cheap years of Trouba, who would take Lindholm's place as their #1 defenseman would help a lot. Winnipeg obviously adds a decent piece. Forward prospects/young NHL forwards should make sense, as Anaheim lacks them currently.
Fowler - Trouba
Despres - Vatanen
Theodore - Manson
Trouba can play big minutes with Fowler, and on a team with Vatanen and Theodore, he can offer a quality defensive play and be in the first PK unit (and probably flourish, being on his natural side and not having an anvil next to him). In two years, when both Fowler and Trouba's contracts are up, the next wave of Montour and Larsson are ready to replace the inevitable loss of one of the two.
Lindholm - Byfuglien
Enstrom - Myers
Morrissey - Chiarot
Lindholm is pretty much slotted right where Trouba would be: next to Byfuglien, but this time on his natural side. His role would probably be very similar to Trouba's: chances of him making it to the power play units are slim. He doesn't necessarily fix anything, but he replaces Trouba, and even upgrades him slightly.
And what would the add be from us? I was thinking Brendan Lemieux, since LW is a position of need for the Ducks (?). Also, we could give you someone like Lowry for immediate help. The options are there.
CaptainChef
Registered User
The other reason I don`t add anything to trade for Lindholm is that RHD are in much shorter supply than LHD.
First of all, I think some Jets fans here overvalue Trouba: he is not in the same tier as Lindholm or Jones. He is in the tier of Larsson and Hall was horrible (but understandable) overpayment for Larsson.
That being said, he is a young RHD and that costs a lot. I said it before and still say that the best offer Detroit can make is DDK+Helm+1st lottery protected for Trouba+small cap dump. I wanted Detroit to snatch Byfuglien because I believe DDK-Buff would be one of the better top pairs in the league (and still would do it but the price for Buff would be unacceptable) and Helm is a hometown boy but I see how this deal may seem underwhelming. I can see Helm swapped for a prospect not named Larkin with some value and cap adjustments.
That being said, he is a young RHD and that costs a lot. I said it before and still say that the best offer Detroit can make is DDK+Helm+1st lottery protected for Trouba+small cap dump. I wanted Detroit to snatch Byfuglien because I believe DDK-Buff would be one of the better top pairs in the league (and still would do it but the price for Buff would be unacceptable) and Helm is a hometown boy but I see how this deal may seem underwhelming. I can see Helm swapped for a prospect not named Larkin with some value and cap adjustments.
Maukkis
EZ4ENCE
- Mar 16, 2016
- 10,721
- 7,597
Helm essentially holds negative value to us, as we don't have any need for him and his contract. DDK makes almost as much as Trouba will make = no point in swapping them two around. That first has very little appeal to it, as it's protected and we need to start contending soon. Sorry, but it's Larkin or nothing.
- Nov 24, 2006
- 8,476
- 15,784
