marcaractac

My only question with Nielsen is whether he gets bought out, waived, or if there is a taxi squad next season to burry him on. Maybe he'll do us all a favor and just retire. If he can no longer crack this roster...

Dekeyser can easily be replaced with another Stecher-level signing next summer. Time to move on from Holland-era mediocrity. Not to mention Johansson might be ready to make the jump by then. Hell, even Cholowski passed Dekeyser in usefulness at this point. I'm actually shocked at how quietly responsible he was in most recent stint.

I think Staal did a good job of showing that Dekeyser is just not good.

2/3 requirements have been fulfilled already. Currently locked in at picking 7-9. If Vancouver has any competence what so ever, they'll get 5 out of a possible 14 points with 3 ROWs or simply 6/14 points. That gives us our beloved 6-8 without a lottery win.

This is a tough one really. Back surgery is a concern as far as long-term goes. But he has shown enough that when healthy he is a beast. My hope is to target a 3-year deal. That way when it's up, the team should be good enough for him to want to stay and win a cup with this team. I think a one-year deal is lose lose. If he comes out flying and you can't lock him in by the deadline, you have to trade him before risking losing him for nothing. As a rental, you'd also extremely hamper his trade value. I think you have to take a risk here and go 3-4 years. If his back is an issue, there is LTIR at least. But at least then you have the option of having him for the rebuild or setting the team up for another Mantha-type trade. I think the back surgery might get you a tiny bit of a discount on a longer deal also.

The weak draft title definitely comes from a lack of scouting compared to normal. I also think that term is used simply when there is no consensus high-end talent. Does not mean the talent is not there, just means there isn't that kid who seems ready to jump into the league at 18 years old. The top 10 guys all likely need anywhere from 1-3 years of development before making any sort of NHL impact. Which is fine, as that fits our timeline. This draft definitely feels like 2017, which was considered "weak" but lots of talent came out of it. Even AFTER pick number 10. I feel the guys we get with top picks going forward are not gonna be the ones who get the Wings back into the playoffs, but rather contribute to turning us into a threat once we get there. I feel we have everything needed in the system to simply return to the post-season in 2-3 seasons. Last year we were on pace for something like 18-19 wins based on 82 games. This season we're on pace for about 29 wins. With some health luck, it's not far-fetched to see this roster put up 35 next year and become a .500 team. Though I think it'll be 2022/23 season when we see this roster start to break out offensively like the Sens have this year. Edit: If there is one thing this season has shown, is that the CHL rules for drafted players are garbage. These rules actively hamper the development of some players. We'd have likely never seen guys like Drysdale or Byfield make NHL debuts this year under normal circumstances.

It's a weak draft in a minimally scouted year. It's a crapshoot throughout. The separation between 1-3 and 6-10 is minimal at best. There is little consensus. The issue is comparing this draft to others. I'm not trying to convince myself of anything. All this information is readily available for anyone to take in. Ask Q.Hughes, Necas, or countless other star players drafted outside of the top three years if I'm reaching.

Yeah, based on lottery odds. Not because of teams being unable to get one point in five games or five points in eight games. Based on lottery odds alone, the worst likely outcome is 8th. 11th is near mathematically impossible.

I don't disagree. I'm just saying there is always better, younger options in UFA.

Yup, forgot Seattle. You're still doomin' and gloomin' over nothing.

11th is not possible. Can only drop two spots. Calgary and Vancouver will pass us. SJ needs one point to not fall behind us. 5-7 is statistically the most likely. Don't know where you get this 6th seed max thing from. Calgary needs 1 point in 5 games. Vancouver needs 5 points in 8 games with just one regulation win. SJ needs 1 point. That happens, we are 5th last. Which means picking 7th at worst. 11th isn't possible, 9-10 is extremely unlikely. We'd have a better chance of winning the lottery than picking lower than 8th. We are right in that Eklund/Johnson range. Nothing to worry about. Edit: forgot Seattle. So 6-8 most likely. 11th still laughably unlikely.

We'll pick like 5-7. Not a big deal.

When his contract ends, it's good bye. Don't care of he is willing to play for league minimum. He can be easily replaced with someone better.

Gotta imagine the league gets involved if it's something that blatant.

I like these ideas. Only change is make is Cossa with the caps pick, but that's nitpicking. I'd also prob swap Ras and veleno.

Scratched for the tank

Hey, Rags did it two straight years.

They'll just gift LA instead

That was shear luck though hahaha. Ottawa was a young, upcoming playoff team. The wheels ******* fell off and Colorado lucked into a #3 pick. It's not something you can gamble on. Colorado also had better, younger players ready for his spot. We do not. If we can swing a deal to get a center younger than Larkin with potential (along with the first rounder), I'd be all for it.

Having said that, if it were some 3-way trade where a contender wanted Kuznetsov at 50% of his cap hit and it led to us shipping Larkin to Washington and us getting their 1st and a promising young center from said contender, then sure. I'd be all for that. But I doubt a guy like Yzerman wants a guy like Kuznetsov anywhere near this roster.

The Mantha trade made sense because the main player coming back was younger with similar production. The picks in this case are a bonus. Larkin for Kuznetsov, far too much stock being put into that first round pick. Especially when the player coming back is problematic. Also, Yzerman didn't name Larkin captain just to move him. Comparing Larkin to Mantha just doesn't make any sense. Mantha has a history of taking games off.

I agree that Larkin is nowhere near Kuznetsov. But due to the age thing, I see no scenario where this doesn't delay the rebuild. The fact that the Caps are also seem so urgent to get rid of him is also concerning. I guess I'm just not convinced the risk is worth the reward. Now if it were clear Ovie wanted out or some s*** as well, maybe. But for now I still see that team as being too good next year to make that 1st high enough to be worth gambling on Larkin.

Yes. But let's be a powerhouse when he is 27 and not just starting to make the playoffs. A '22 1st from the caps is likely a later first round pick. You can't trade Larkin (for a guy causing problems in Washington) in hopes they fall off the face of the earth next season. Terrible asset management. The odds of getting a player with that pick anywhere close to what Larkin is, is slim to none. A likely late first rounder is likely no more than a third line player. Not worth the risk. Larkin is not the problem here. The lack of another top 6 center is. We'll get that in one of the next couple of drafts.

He'll be an important part of the team, but he lacks the puck skills to be a 1C, maybe even as a 2C. Long term I think he fits best on the wing as a power forward and a killer net-front presence on the pp. Until we get that offensive top 6 center, I definitely see Veleno and Ras assuming the middle 6 center roles. I just think Veleno is a more effective 3C than Ras would be, as I feel Ras has more impact on the wing. Having said that, I'd happily eat the crow if Ras grows into a legit top 6 center.

I'd rather not delay the rebuild and waste years of Seider.