The Detroit Red Wings came into 2026 with growing expectations as a team ready to move out of its rebuild and seriously compete for a playoff spot. However, several trade decisions during the season have drawn criticism, with many fans and analysts pointing to two moves in particular as mistakes. These are the trade involving Elmer Söderblom and the acquisition of Justin Faulk. Together, they highlight what some believe was a misreading of the team’s needs and timing.
The decision to trade Söderblom to the Pittsburgh Penguins for a third-round pick has been widely questioned. Söderblom is not just another depth player; he is a uniquely built forward with rare size at 6’8” and flashes of offensive skill that make him intriguing. Players like him often take longer to fully develop, especially when adjusting to the pace and physical demands of the NHL. Detroit, still in a phase where patience with young talent is crucial, chose to move on from him relatively early.
This move becomes even more questionable when viewed in the context of where the Red Wings are as a team. They are not a fully established contender with surplus young talent to spare. Instead, they are a team trying to build a sustainable core. Letting go of a developing player like Söderblom suggests either impatience or a miscalculation of his future value. If he finds his game in Pittsburgh, this trade could age poorly and become a clear example of selling too early.
The second move drawing heavy criticism is the trade for Justin Faulk from the St. Louis Blues. Faulk is a respected veteran defenseman who brings experience, leadership, and a steady presence on the blue line. In isolation, acquiring a player like him is not a bad idea for a team trying to compete. The problem lies in what Detroit gave up to get him. The package reportedly included a first-round pick, a third-round pick, a promising prospect in Dmitri Buchelnikov, and defenseman Justin Holl. That is a significant price, especially for a player in his 30s who may not be part of the team’s long-term future.
This trade has been criticized not because Faulk is a poor player, but because of the mismatch between cost and need. Detroit’s biggest issue has been offense, not defense. While improving the blue line can help overall team performance, it does not directly address a lack of scoring depth.
By committing major assets to a defensive upgrade, the Red Wings may have missed an opportunity to pursue a high-impact forward who could change the dynamics of their offense. The inclusion of a first-round pick is particularly important, as those picks are often used to secure young, cost-controlled talent that can shape a team’s future. Giving that up for a veteran suggests a push to win now, but the rest of the roster may not be strong enough to justify that approach.
The contrast between these two moves is striking. On one hand, Detroit traded away a young, high-upside player for a modest return. On the other, they spent heavily to acquire an older player whose impact may be limited in scope and duration. Together, these decisions create the impression of a team caught between rebuilding and contending, unsure of which direction to fully commit to.
Compounding the issue is what the Red Wings failed to do. The team was linked to high-end offensive talents like Elias Pettersson and Robert Thomas, both of whom could have significantly improved their scoring ability. However, no deal materialized, and Detroit finished the trade period without adding a major offensive piece. This lack of action in addressing their most pressing weakness has made the other moves look even worse in comparison. It is not just about the trades they made, but also about the opportunities they missed.
As the season has unfolded, these decisions have had visible consequences. The team has struggled with offensive consistency, relying heavily on a few key players to generate goals. When injuries hit, particularly to important figures like Dylan Larkin, the lack of depth becomes even more apparent. Defensive improvements alone have not been enough to compensate, and the team’s overall performance has suffered as a result. Their playoff hopes have become uncertain, and scrutiny of management’s decisions has intensified.
In the end, the criticism of Detroit’s 2026 trade strategy centers on timing, asset management, and prioritization. Trading Söderblom is seen as giving up on potential too soon for too little return, while acquiring Faulk is viewed as overpaying for help in an area that was not the team’s biggest need. These moves suggest a lack of clear direction, with the team neither fully committing to the future nor effectively maximizing its chances in the present.
There is still time for the narrative to change. If Faulk plays at a high level and contributes significantly, or if Söderblom fails to develop in Pittsburgh, the trades may look more reasonable in hindsight. But based on current results and expectations, many observers believe the Red Wings made two key mistakes in 2026. For a team trying to reestablish itself as a contender, those kinds of missteps can have lasting effects.
