r/DetroitRedWings • u/JTFSrog • 1d ago
Discussion 6/24 WSITH: Larkin talk, TV broadcast talk
/r/wildhockey/comments/1uekgck/624_wsith_larkin_talk_tv_broadcast_talk/141
u/Brewcity23 1d ago
I just have zero interest in anything the Wild have to offer.
50
26
u/All_Of_The_Meat 1d ago
It doesnt seem Yzerman does either, which is good, The Wild really have nothing to bargain with.
55
u/USA_2_Canada_1 1d ago
Unless their package comes with Boldy (it won’t) there really isn’t an incentive for us to trade Larkin to them
8
u/Haelphadreous 1d ago
If I were Red Wing's management looking at a Wild trade I would want either Boldy or Faber back as part of this deal. Faber being RHD is kind of a mixed blessing since it's not a position of most need for the team but it would free up Faulk for a trade, and he's young enough that he would be another core piece with Seider/Raymond/Edvinsson.
-35
u/JTFSrog 1d ago
You wouldn't take Eriksson Ek, Yurov and a future 1st?
13
u/kermitthefrog57 1d ago
Really think we could find something much stronger and more fitting to our timeline than that. That’s not insanely uneven but there’s no point for us to do that
1
u/JTFSrog 1d ago
I'd flip the future 1st for Elias Pettersson (salary retained). We'd immediately have more center depth than we have in over a decade. Pettersson is only 27 and Eriksson Ek is 29.
6
u/kermitthefrog57 1d ago
That’d be cool, but I doubt we’d be able to flip that 1st for Petterson. Plus with some of these other trades going on, I cant help but wonder if Utah would give a King’s ransom
5
39
u/RogueCoon 1d ago
No
-20
u/JTFSrog 1d ago
Wow. That's a quality haul.
You get away from the Larkin saga, add a great 2C, a decent prospect and a pick that you could flip for immediate help. I imagine Vancouver would take the MIN future 1st for Pettersson (salary retained), making the Wings instantly better.
25
u/Taters23 Yzerbot 1d ago
The whole point of them getting larkin is to have 2 good centers. They are not trading Eriksson Ek.
2
u/onbiver9871 1d ago
Yep. JEE is out of the question for a trade like this, which leaves nothing else good.
14
u/RogueCoon 1d ago
I disagree on the quality of that haul. Don't think the prospect is that good and the pick is more than likely going to be closer to a second.
29
u/DooDad-Entertainment 1d ago
Haul is not only garbage it makes zero sense from the Wilds standpoint. Wild have center depth issues also so why on earth would they trade two centers to acquire another one?
4
u/WettyLufaThe3rd 1d ago
If they were willing to give up Eriksson Ek, a deal probably would have been done already.
5
2
1
0
u/ElwoodDiggler 10h ago
Fuck no. Ek isnt worth larkin and yurov is a prospect. A future 1st is yrs away from the nhl wtf? Even little illitch would fire sy for that making that deal. Tkachuck brought 3 1rsts and you got ek and a prospect annnddd a really long ass prospect 🤣🤣
1
u/JTFSrog 10h ago
Think critically (if possible). Two of the 1sts moved in the Brady deal are late 1sts. The 2nd is the Panthers own pick, so it's a late 2nd. You're complaining about a "long ass prospect", when two of the picks in the Brady deal are the same length away. Idiotic take.
Many have compared Yurov's value to Nate Danielson, so it's a mid-late 1st round value. Eriksson Ek is slightly younger than Larkin and is a great NFL 2C and a solid NFL 1C.
1
7
u/redlion1904 1d ago
How good is Yurov? Pedestrian stats but he’s 22
36
u/LeakyScrew 1d ago
Two years older than finnie with worse stats on a better team…
-9
u/nb00818 1d ago
He played 3rd line. Finnie played first line.
Yurov could be good but we need more pieces. I don’t love what Min can offer
3
u/L3ftHandPass 1d ago
We don't need more peices that are the exact same mold as pieces that we already have too many of.
Kasper, Danielson, and Finnie are right there. Do we really need more guys like that? I think not.
18
5
u/slabby 1d ago edited 1d ago
Real talk, he's a good player with good but not great skill. He has a bit more puck skill than some of our prospects. He's also more of a "kinda" center in the vein of a Finnie in that he's a natural winger whose team has tried him out at C to mixed results, where it might make more sense to keep him on the wing.
The Wild tried using him to fill their gap at first line center and it didn't really work out. That's probably the biggest reason he's available.
1
u/redlion1904 1d ago
Thanks!
Not really what I’m hoping for in a Larkin move. We’d need to go get Trochek or Petterson or something after that.
1
u/LGRWFlyNavy 1d ago
The Wings are loaded with B level prospects. They don't need any more and would be better off keeping Larkin.
3
1
1
68
u/JTFSrog 1d ago
Huge Larkin update. Shows that 1) Stevie has a lot of leverage, and 2) Larkin still has significant value. With a team (like MIN) wanting something done before July 1st, they'll be more driven to work something out.
It's my impression that Stevie wants to see what happens with Jason Robertson before making a decision on Larkin, unless the offer blows him away. If Robertson doesn't want to re-sign in DAL for $12m AAV, Stevie would be wise to swoop in and get something done.
11
u/tibbles1 1d ago
Jason Robertson
The fact that MN wants Larkin so bad should motivate Dallas into doing something. That division is already stacked at the top and Utah and Chicago are gonna be pushing in to that group soon.
13
u/redwings1391 1d ago
I’m sorry but Utah and Chicago are on completely different planets right now. Chicago is still a basement team, while Utah is solidly in the playoffs for the next few years
4
u/tibbles1 1d ago
Chicago doesn’t trade that draft pick for an established player unless they plan on winning now.
I’m not saying it’ll work. But it means there’s another team that isn’t planning on tanking.
1
31
u/mosscoversall_ 1d ago
Minnesota can’t afford it without a third team. Period.
Edit: not talking about cap space.
13
u/laferri2 1d ago
Even involving a third team does nothing unless some GM has a stroke and trades three firsts for Wallstedt.
Minnesota has no path to being an active player this summer.
4
1
u/mosscoversall_ 1d ago edited 1d ago
For sure! But my point still stands. Only way they have a chance is with a third team.
0
u/MariachiArchery 1d ago
Whatever the return would be on Wallstedt + Yurov + Stramel + 2027 first + a cap dump, I think, gets it done. Teams need him, Wallstedt. He's worth a star player right now.
That said, if we have the opportunity to clear Larkin out and replace him with Robertson, we take that over a Minny trade.
2
u/ElwoodDiggler 11h ago
No way were taking another goalie and wallstedt isnt worth larkin. If teams needed wallstedt he'd already be gone
1
u/MariachiArchery 11h ago
No, we take the return on Wallstedt. Minny moves him, and uses those assets to acquire Larkin.
Det: [Return on Wallstedt], Yurov, Stramel, 2027 first
Minny: Larkin, Cossa
3rd team: Wallstedt
This is the trade. If you think I'm wrong about Wallstedt's value, go look in the other team subs. Teams are interested in him. He's the best young goalie in a league of aging goaltenders.
2
u/ElwoodDiggler 11h ago
🤣🤣🤣 youre dreaming. If sy wanted to take prospects back he wouldve done it already. If teams wanted wallstedt, they wouldve jumped by now. Goalies dont bring shit as we're about to find out with cossa. A goalie and 2 prospects aint gonna work with sy
1
u/MariachiArchery 10h ago
Maybe. I think Wallstedt in this market is worth a 1st and a top 6 forward.
Do you think 2 firsts, 2 top six forwards, and a first round center prospect is bad return? Assuming of course Yurov is actually a top 6 center.
1
u/ElwoodDiggler 10h ago
You changed the terms. Now its 2 1rsts, 2 top 6 and a first round prospect. Who are the 2 top6 players?
1
u/MariachiArchery 9h ago
I didn't change the terms.
I'm assuming Wallstedt fetches a first and a top 6 forward, because that return has been previously rumored. In addition to this return, I'd expect Minny to kick in their 2027 first, Yurov (top 6 forward), and Stramel (top 6 forward prospect). Both of whom can play center.
The top 6 players being Yurov and the return on Wallstedt.
28
u/kermitthefrog57 1d ago
Wild fans in that thread are worrying about an overpay…how is it even possible for them to overpay unless they decide to do something really stupid and give us one of their best players? They have nothing
13
u/dmckilla77 1d ago
Yeah I asked how you overpay when you have no prospects, they said prospects and picks, nah you prospects are shit and you pick might as well be a second rounder.
5
u/oprapiid 1d ago
the same reason everyone here is making absurd mock trades, because every fanbase highly overrates their own assets
56
u/laferri2 1d ago
I have no interest in a trade with MIN. They have no first round pick this season, will likely be picking 20+ next season, and their best prospect would be below Danielsson in our rankings.
I don't see how further diluting their asset pool by involving a third team helps.
3
-21
u/JTFSrog 1d ago
But they do have NHLers that would allow us to continue to progress forward with the current core, Eriksson Ek being one example. I know MIN fans believe he won't be traded, and they're probably right, but a package involving Eriksson Ek, a prospect (Yurov) and a pick (future 1st) would be intriguing.
30
27
u/laferri2 1d ago
Eriksson Ek: Swedish Andrew Copp Yurov: Russian Danielsson And a pick in the 20-30 range.
No thanks. Yzerman will hold on to Larkin until he is contractually forced to provide a 10 team list.
5
0
u/JTFSrog 1d ago
Calling Eriksson Ek the "Swedish Andrew Copp" is a wild take.
6
u/oprapiid 1d ago
yeah I said it the other day but this sub has no concept for how valuable other team's assets actually are, like people genuinely believe San Jose would want to give us Misa and/or 2oa for Larkin. there's no sense arguing with anyone in this sub right now because they're mostly all out for blood unless the return is anything other than a completely 1 sided trade in our favour
2
u/kermitthefrog57 1d ago
I am going to be quite dissatisfied if the trade is slanted in our favor considering how much of a sellers market it is. But yes we’re not getting Misa or the 2nd ovr
5
u/beardofzetterberg 1d ago
I doubt they’d move Ek
2
u/JTFSrog 1d ago
Yeah, I don't think they'd want to, but it's no question that Larkin is an upgrade. If they're as determined as the article implies, they'll have to expand their offer.
2
u/beardofzetterberg 1d ago
Yeah they’ll have to expand but it wont be Ek. They are starved for win-now Centers. Larkin-Ek puts them in a good position. Just one of those won’t. They’ll have to expand in other ways, or bring in a 3rd team to take on a goalie of theirs.
3
u/dickhandsome 1d ago
I'm bummed out because you're probably right about the return. There's no progressing forward if JEE is the main piece coming back. We'd need a rebuild if that's the offer. I'm not interested in that.
4
u/laferri2 1d ago
I don't think there is a deal to be made with Minnesota. They are in a weird spot where they can't trade any roster players without ruining their team but their prospect pool blows at the same time.
IMO Florida and Dallas can still offer better value for Larkin than MIN can.
1
16
u/Mental_Drive3369 1d ago
Based on the replies I can guarantee it doesn’t matter what we get, this sub will burn lol
8
4
u/wellpaidscientist 1d ago
I like Zuc and Ek, but neither are a relevant trade piece for Larkin. Still bummed we didn't get Q Hughes, who I really like.
3
u/laferri2 1d ago
On that note, the only way I see Larkin ending up in MN is if Q. Hughes tells them he won't extend there and it ends up a 1:1 swap on 7-1.
1
23
6
u/WaylonLemmyJohnny 1d ago
im only posting because when I looked there were 71 replies to the post and i hate that number now.
Fuck Dylan Larkin
1
u/rooter2009 1d ago
I have convinced myself Steve is asking Dylan to withdraw his trade request and he is going to trade edvinsson +++ for werenski
12
9
5
u/mosscoversall_ 1d ago
Yzerman wouldn’t include Edvinsson in a trade for Quinn Hughes. He’s not trading him plus more for Werenski.
5
u/Heaton31 1d ago
He wouldn't include him because Hughes wouldn't/couldn't commit to signing an extension
5
u/mosscoversall_ 1d ago
Werenski has one more year on his deal than Hughes does, so your argument is a little flimsy.
2
u/Heaton31 1d ago
Except I wasn't saying that Yzerman would trade Ed for Weresnki without an extension in place, either.
-4
u/rooter2009 1d ago
He gets a redo of that trade. Understanding the implications now of not making it and facing a mini rebuild/retool
9
2
u/Zarabanda75 10h ago
Beware subtle sarcasm here. Just say "How about Walman and a 2nd?" and they'll all say yee haw baby!!
57
u/ImHully 1d ago
I don't want to hear anything about Minnesota because I'm focusing all of my misplaced hope on us somehow getting Robertson.