kipwinger

Draisaitl IS better than McDavid. It takes about 10 seconds of critical thinking to figure that out. He's a point per game center who's one of the top defensive centers in the league, one of the top faceoff centers in the league (and WAY better than McDavid), and doesn't get sheltered minutes (unlike McDavid). McDavid starts in the offensive zone 63% of the time (Draisaitl 53%), that's Jakub Kindl levels of sheltering. McDavid scores marginally more, Draisaitl does EVERYTHING else better and still has elite offense. I'm glad you focused in on this though because it's a perfect example of everything I'm saying. You're already so convinced that McDavid is better that you don't even bother to figure out whether or not it's true.

Lemme guess, you have faith in Laine because he was "highly touted"? Something tells me that if Laine had the EXACT same career, but was drafted 35th overall you wouldn't have so much faith in him.

They say this EVERY year. Rasmus Dahlin was supposedly the "Connor McDavid of Defensemen". Jack Hughes was "generational". So was Alexis Lafreniere. "Highly touted" doesn't mean anything at all. It's just a marketing strategy used to get dummies to watch the draft. Literally EVERY SINGLE YEAR we find out that a guy who was "highly touted" isn't as good as a guy taken 4 or 5 picks later. How "highly touted" was Elias Petersson? Or David Pastrnak? Or Nikita Kucherov? Hell, Connor McDavid was the most "highly touted" prospect since Crosby and he's not even the best center on his own team.

Some of those guys will be traded, but some won't. Either way, you're falling into the same logic trap as the other guy, which is that Yzerman's only way to make the team competitive is to keep cycling through guys year after year looking for upgrades via the draft. I don't see that as the case. At a certain point we'll have enough picks and good prospects to make impact trades. Similarly as we continue to improve our chances of landing free agents improves as well. My guess is that Yzerman didn't give Larkin the "C" just to trade him. I just don't see it. I think he plans to build around Larkin, Seider, Raymond and probably whomever else he takes this year. I doubt he's looking to the draft 2 or 3 seasons from now as building blocks considering by the time those players hit the NHL guys like Seider will be as much older to them as Larkin is to him. The rest of the guys on your list will be trade bait or depth. If we land a top talent later in the first round (a la Kopitar or Necas or Pasternak or Kuznetsov etc. etc. etc.) great, if one becomes available for trade (a la Seguin or PLD) we'll go that route. Either way I just don't see him pursuing a strategy of losing as much as possible each year with his fingers crossed hoping to land the next Auston Mathews.

Getting a Kopitar at 11 happens just as often as getting a McDavid at 1. Your logic makes no sense. But I've been talking about this for years now. You (and others like you) get soooo caught up in the hype of the draft that you're completely blind to the fact that those consensus #1 picks are RARELY that much better (or better at all) than guys you could get later in the draft. When all is said and done Alexis Lafreniere isn't going to be any better than Tim Stutzle. Jack Hughes won't be any better than Trevor Zegras. Rasmus Dahlin won't be any better than Quinn Hughes. You've bought into this idea that we need to tank to get these guys that are SOOOO much more "elite" and the reality is that they aren't really better at all.

I don't disagree that we need impact players, I just disagree that we have to bottom out over and over again to get them. And I'd add that doing so would have long term negative effects for the franchise, even IF we get a top pick. It's just as likely that you get a Kopitar at 11th and trade for a Carter as it is that you tank year after year and get a Malkin and Crosby.

I'm not eager to move Hronek or anything. But with Seider coming Hronek is essentially a second pair RHD, which I consider good value for an offensively capable 2C. If Calgary wanted to structure something around Vrana or Zadina I'd be all about that too.

You realize that we could literally lose for the next 10-15 years and never get a chance to draft someone as good as Crosby or Malkin or Kane or Ovechkin or McDavid or Matthews or whomever else you think we're going to get right? If your plan for winning is to hold out for one (or two) all time great players then you're going to fail FAR more often than you're going to win. The Pens didn't win because they tanked. They won because their high draft picks just so happened to coincide with the greatest player of his generation. Same with Ovie, Kane, McDavid, Matthews. These guys don't grow on trees. You're just as likely (or more likely) to be terrible for a prolonged stretch and end up with Jack Hughes and Nico Hischier than you are with Malkin/Crosby, Kane/Toews, McDavid/Draisaitl.

Do they? I dunno. Don't really know much about their defense. I was just trying to find someone with equivalent value that's expendable.

He's a career .75 ppg center, Larkin's a .67 ppg center. Larkin's much better defensively, but IMO Monahan's quite a lot better offensively. As I've stated elsewhere I think we need a 2C who is offensive. For me the question isn't whether or not I'd take Monahan (I would) but what the price would be? To Det: Monahan, 3rd To Cal: Hronek, Washington's 1st

1. The winning culture in Detroit was built on Yzerman's back after the Red Wings were mismanaged into oblivion in the 80s and early 90s. If you think that guy is okay with tanking year after year waiting for a top pick you're nuts. 2. Patrick is hurt often and sucks. Why would anybody pay more for him via a "flip"? 3. Prior to the Pens drafting Malkin (and then Crosby the next draft) they missed the playoffs for three straight seasons. They went to the playoffs for 11 straight seasons before that. They tore down and rebuilt VERY quickly. That absolutely DID NOT pursue a strategy of prolonged losing. Of the teams we've discussed Chi, Edm, and Buffalo all had prolonged losing periods followed by high picks, and it only worked out well for Chicago. It's not like being terrible forever waiting for an Auston Matthews is some recipe for success. It fails just as often (or more often) than it's successful.

That too. But mostly because we're good on the wing.

Lots of speculation that the Flames are looking to trade one of Gaudreau or Monahan. I don't have any interest in Gaudreau but Monahan is interesting. Probably would need to trade a roster player, prospect, and pick. Thoughts?

Big "no thanks" on Murray from me. He's a skilled player but he's got a chronic back condition that will be with him the rest of his career. It was reported on last season by The Athletic's CBJ beat writer. He'll never play anything close to a full season for the rest of his NHL career.

I'd generally agree with the above. Though I'd add a couple things. Vrana basically had all of Detroit's best offensive chances last night. He hit one post himself, set up Filppula for another that also hit a post, and finally he set up the goal Filppula scored by drawing in the defender and getting the pass through.

My point is that JVR will be left unprotected, not Nolan Patrick. Count on it. But either way, Nolan Patrick sucks. He wasn't really all that good when he was drafted, and he's injured constantly now. There's nothing he could do for us that Joe Veleno or Michael Rasmussen couldn't do as well or better. Secondly, people have to get past this "if we get better we're not going to get a top pick" mentality. If we keep bottoming out every year we're going either A) waste the careers of good young players, or B) begin to lose good players to trade requests/free agency. Sucking every year just to get top prospects is a terrible idea and doesn't seem to have helped Buffalo or Edmonton either. And the reason why is because they have a culture of losing and apathy that can't be changed just by drafting an Eichel or McDavid. I'd MUCH rather draft in the 10-15 range for the next couple years and hope to land a Martin Necas instead of losing year after year in hopes of landing a Jack Hughes.

Van Riemsdyk will be left unprotected. He's on the wrong side of 30, makes a zillion dollars, and doesn't have trade protection. Of the two I'd rather have Dunn than Dumba considering Dumba is a righty and we've got Seider and Hronek on the right side and they're both better than Dumba. As I've said in other threads, I MIGHT take a look at Ryan Johansen via trade. If you could get Nashville to eat some salary AND if Johansen's struggles this year have a good explanation, we might finally have a 2C who's not f*cking horrible.

Totally agree, I see Beniers as another Larkin. He might have marginally more offense in him, but he's basically the exact same player stylistically. The centers with the highest offensive upside are Johnson, Lucius, and Sillinger. Beniers is another Larkin, and Eklund is somewhere in between (I've seen him compared to Barzal stylistically). I've been all over the place on this, but so far I'm leaning toward Lucius. While he's definitely shoot-first, and not as much of a playmaker, there are a few things that I really like as far as his development potential at center. He's really young and underdeveloped but has a big frame so he should be above average in size once he grows into himself. His skating isn't the best, but will also come along with added strength. He obviously shoots the lights out and will kill on the PP. But (most importantly) he's 60% in the faceoff dot. While I generally like playmaking centers, and have advocated for such around here for a long time, I can definitely see a scenario where Lucius stays at center because of his faceoff ability, and he and Raymond create a TON of offense together (especially on the powerplay). That would leave a Larkin-Zadina matchup/even strength scoring line as your 2nd, which I really like the thoughts of.

I do like that the Yzerman/Draper brain trust seems to be much more inclined toward offense than Holland's team was. You look at the guys we've signed/traded for/drafted and offensive skill is definitely a big part of the package. But as much as I think Blashill has done a very good job getting what he could with the hand he's been dealt, I'm just not sure he really knows how to get much out of a team offensively. At this point I'm basically all in on Gerard Gallant. We've got the makings of a fast, tenacious, skilled team and that's basically the hallmark of his systems. I'll f*cking puke if they hire Lane Lambert (Barry Trotz's assistant) and we're back to defense first hockey again.

Here's a microcosm of the Wings' woes: Our shooters in the shootout were Larkin, Gagner, Erne, Svech, and Hronek. Those are apparently the most talented offensive players we had available lol. No wonder our scoring is in the toilet. Also, it's maybe time for us to have the uncomfortable conversation that Dylan Larkin is just not all that offensively talented. He needs to be taken off the half wall on the PP, he can't make plays AT ALL. Starting today Vrana would be in that spot for me.

I definitely don't think he'll ever live up to that pick, at least not offensively. And when you consider some of the guys drafted after him it will always sting a little bit. But with that said, if he ends up scoring 15-20 goals and 40ish points while being a beast defensively (a la Martin Hanzal) he'll be a guy who can really help this team win, which is all I give a damn about.

I think his skating looks great this year. A week or so ago he jumped up into a 2 on 1 and I was super impressed. I think he needed more leg strength TBH. I suspect his skating will only improve as he gets a stronger lower body.

I think Ras is going to be a monster next year. He still hasn't had a full offseason to train, get stronger, gain muscle, etc. He's been hurt and/or playing in Europe. A full summer at Barwis Methods with Larkin and Glendening and he's going to be a beast. The Michael Rasmussen that's squatting 500-600 lbs is going to be a motherf*cker to deal with. You look at him without his pads and he's still kinda skinny for a guy his size.

Yeah, I'm trying to figure out what's going on with him this year. I'd definitely want my scouts to figure that out first. Because he's still on the right side of 30 and has a history of production. I'd be curious to know what's going on with him.

That's why I think we should take the center with the highest offensive upside this year, even if that means taking someone like Johnson or Lucius with a little bit longer developmental curve. Then go out and try to start making the team better in the short term. Being in lottery hell for any more years is going to start weighing on guys like Larkin, Bert, and Hronek. It probably already is TBH. You really don't want to start losing good players because you suck all the time (ahem...Buffalo). In another thread I floated relieving Nashville of Ryan Johansen. He's not going to be a game changer for us, but he'd give us an offensively capable center for a few years who can hold down a second line.