For some reason, national media members continue to miss the mark on the Detroit Red Wings. Whether it's due to a lack of context, a limited perspective or for narrative's sake, it seems as if many have an idea of what they think the Red Wings are and run with that.
This time around (to no one's surprise), it's about Dylan Larkin.
Pierre LeBrun of The Athletic released an article about rumblings he's heard in the NHL -- in one part of the story, he talks about Larkin's suspension (and trade request).
"Larkin showed up for work and played his butt off in the opening month of the season," the piece reads, "all while getting stripped of the captaincy and booed by Red Wings fans — both understandable, given he requested a trade."
"Played his butt off"?
Did we watch the same games?
Save for a great two point return against the Ottawa Senators, Larkin has looked all but checked out. His game winning goal against the Edmonton Oilers was the first sign of life we'd seen from him in weeks. Larkin looked beyond absent on the ice, often botching seam-to-seam passes from Lucas Raymond or lifting his stick at the most inopportune times.
Despite not playing in three games this season, he leads the team in giveaways with 20 in 10 games while having just four takeaways. That means he was giving up the puck five times as much as he was taking it from other teams.
But conjecture from LeBrun isn't the only time the media's come to Larkin's defense. Shayna Goldman of The Athletic, who typically has very good takes, posited the idea that stripping the "C" from Larkin would "only further vilify him".
He asked for a trade. He didn't want to be with the Red Wings anymore. Why in the world would the team keep him as their captain? How does that make any sense?
Media fixated on infantilizing Larkin
Just a few days back, Daily Faceoff posited a question to their panel: are fans being too hard on Dylan Larkin for asking out of Detroit?
Are we being too hard on Dylan Larkin for asking out of Detroit?
Episode➡️https://t.co/WOaS9z8xqA
Presented by: bet365 (@bet365ca)
https://t.co/Fx0nkxWvrn - #bet365
@tyleryaremchuk | @JeffMarek | @thesheethockey https://t.co/OfiRqsaGZM
The answer, of course, is no.
Larkin has a right to request a trade. He's allowed to give as many or as few teams as he wants. But he's also under contract for another five seasons. He has to work with the Red Wings just as much as they have to work with him. If the Wings can't find a trade partner that will give them what they want, then Larkin will have to keep sitting around until they do.
Fans are allowed to criticize a player that refuses to play
This isn't rocket science. Signing a contract implies that you're going to honor the terms of said contract. It doesn't mean you're immune to criticism because some fans are upset at you.
Dylan Larkin, since the end of the season, has done the following:
- Said he wants to remain a Red Wing for life.
- Requested a trade while only providing the organization three teams to trade with
- Refused to communicate with fans or the media throughout the entire offseason
- Lost his captaincy due to his lack of commitment to the team
- Refused to give any answers on why he requested a trade
- Said he's committed to playing for the team and winning games
- Expanded his trade list to the top 10 US teams
- Claims he's "waited long enough" and refuses to honor the terms of his contract
What part about this makes Larkin seem like the victim?
Yes, he's absolutely well within his right to request a trade. But requesting a trade doesn't magically erase the consequences of his actions.
The infantilization of a 30-year-old multimillionaire athlete needs to stop.
Add us as a preferred source on Google