Mr.TaterSalad Posted June 19 Posted June 19 I thought I read somewhere that Florida wasn't open to moving Lundell period. If they are and would package #9 overall with it, I'd take that trade. it allows us to get a high-er draft pick and still presents the opportunity to tank with Larkin out of the picture. Truthfully, I'd try and flip Lundell for more picks or prospects, but I know that won't be Yzerman's plan. Quote
Jason_R Posted June 19 Posted June 19 1 hour ago, Shinzaki said: If Florida sends their 1st rd pick with Lundell and Samoskevich...I would do that A fan base can dream. 😊 Quote
NorthWoods Posted June 19 Posted June 19 Just now, Jason_R said: A fan base can dream. 😊 Yeah turning Larkin into 2 young NHL players with upside plus a 2nd seems like a win to me. Quote
Shinzaki Posted June 19 Author Posted June 19 32 minutes ago, Jason_R said: A fan base can dream. 😊 Dream? Larkin is THE premium asset in play in an era when premium assets don't move very often. I want more than two middle six guys and a 2nd rd pick. I'm mystified why some of you put such little value on him Quote
Jason_R Posted June 19 Posted June 19 21 minutes ago, Shinzaki said: Dream? Larkin is THE premium asset in play in an era when premium assets don't move very often. I want more than two middle six guys and a 2nd rd pick. I'm mystified why some of you put such little value on him I think an established young center with 1C potential, a high end prospect and or top draft pick, and a third asset is the ballpark. But Raddysh’s contract underscores what a great deal Larkin is signed to, and I would be thrilled to see a bidding war occur. Quote
buddha Posted June 19 Posted June 19 i mean, we could deal larkin for mcdavid, but he's older now and i'm not sure that would make us better, so no. Quote
buddha Posted June 19 Posted June 19 larkin for misa, #2 overall, will smith, and a 2027 unprotected first. Quote
slothfacekilla Posted June 19 Posted June 19 Time to call in those future considerations from the Walman deal 1 Quote
slothfacekilla Posted June 19 Posted June 19 Ooof that's tough, maybe Walman since he has 7 years left but he also could decide he cares. I have a feeling him and Babcock aren't going to vibe but maybe I'm wrong. Quote
Shinzaki Posted June 19 Author Posted June 19 1 hour ago, buddha said: i mean, we could deal larkin for mcdavid, but he's older now and i'm not sure that would make us better, so no. You would trade him for Joe Veleno and a 20% off coupon for poutine Quote
buddha Posted June 19 Posted June 19 1 minute ago, Shinzaki said: You would trade him for Joe Veleno and a 20% off coupon for poutine i would trade him for a great center prospect, a first round pick, a third round pick, and maybe a throw in young bottom six player. cause that's his value. Quote
Shinzaki Posted June 19 Author Posted June 19 Right...Misa and the #2 pick is an absolute bargain for San Jose 1 Quote
buddha Posted June 19 Posted June 19 25 minutes ago, Shinzaki said: Right...Misa and the #2 pick is an absolute bargain for San Jose i doubt san jose would trade misa straight up for larkin. Quote
buddha Posted June 19 Posted June 19 (edited) maybe if you included edvinsson too. then you can start talking about #2 or including other forward assets. Edited June 19 by buddha Quote
buddha Posted June 22 Posted June 22 prashanth throwing more shade on the larkin trade return. says he's more in line with what youre hearing from nhl execs: 30 years old, never been a point per game player, not going to be a #1 center on your squad. says he would take larkin for denoyers straight up. Quote
Mr.TaterSalad Posted June 22 Posted June 22 On 6/19/2026 at 6:01 PM, buddha said: i doubt san jose would trade misa straight up for larkin. I do think they would trade #2 overall for Larkin though. With Larkin they could have him anchor the second line while Misa develops. They can also move a guy like Alexander Wennberg over to wing to be a linemate for Larkin. Quote
Jason_R Posted June 22 Posted June 22 44 minutes ago, buddha said: prashanth throwing more shade on the larkin trade return. says he's more in line with what youre hearing from nhl execs: 30 years old, never been a point per game player, not going to be a #1 center on your squad. says he would take larkin for denoyers straight up. This seems overly pessimistic. There is a “sky is falling” mentality among Wings fans, which I get, but which is overblown. There is no way that a consistent 30 goal scorer who is still one of the fastest skaters in the NHL and who continues to produce while consistently drawing the toughest defensive assignments is going to get traded straight up for a player who has never seen an NHL game. 1 Quote
buddha Posted June 22 Posted June 22 1 hour ago, Jason_R said: This seems overly pessimistic. There is a “sky is falling” mentality among Wings fans, which I get, but which is overblown. There is no way that a consistent 30 goal scorer who is still one of the fastest skaters in the NHL and who continues to produce while consistently drawing the toughest defensive assignments is going to get traded straight up for a player who has never seen an NHL game. denoyers, a first, a third, and filler should get it done. Quote
Shinzaki Posted June 22 Author Posted June 22 (edited) Desnoyers, Simashev and a 1st for Larkin and AlJo Edited June 22 by Shinzaki Quote
buddha Posted June 22 Posted June 22 3 minutes ago, Shinzaki said: Desnoyers, Simashev and a 1st for Larkin and AlJo utah says no to that. Quote
gehringer_2 Posted June 22 Posted June 22 3 hours ago, Jason_R said: This seems overly pessimistic. There is a “sky is falling” mentality among Wings fans, which I get, but which is overblown. There is no way that a consistent 30 goal scorer who is still one of the fastest skaters in the NHL and who continues to produce while consistently drawing the toughest defensive assignments is going to get traded straight up for a player who has never seen an NHL game. LOL. I wonder if Yzerman is finding out it's hard to demand more for a player that you've gone out of your way to criticize. It may have felt good to be mad at the time, but going after him in pubic was probably best left undone given that he could have anticipated the eventual need to move him at just about that point. Quote
buddha Posted June 22 Posted June 22 17 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: LOL. I wonder if Yzerman is finding out it's hard to demand more for a player that you've gone out of your way to criticize. It may have felt good to be mad at the time, but going after him in pubic was probably best left undone given that he could have anticipated the eventual need to move him at just about that point. this has nothing to do with anything steve yzerman has said about larkin. other gms already know his strengths and weaknesses. Quote
Jason_R Posted June 22 Posted June 22 35 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: LOL. I wonder if Yzerman is finding out it's hard to demand more for a player that you've gone out of your way to criticize. It may have felt good to be mad at the time, but going after him in pubic was probably best left undone given that he could have anticipated the eventual need to move him at just about that point. I don’t remember Yzerman saying anything critical other than an indication of disappointment that Larkin did not keep something in house that he should have kept in house. Anyway, I think this deal provides a floor for the Larkin deal. It is also the first domino to fall. There are only a few options out there for teams that want to make a major upgrade and now Brady is off the list. I’ll be surprised (and alarmed) if this gets dragged out beyond the draft. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.