kipwinger

I read an article saying that Nashville will likely leave both Duschene and Johansen exposed and may even sweeten the pot (picks, salary retained) if Seattle will pick one of them. If Nashville were to retain enough money to get him down below Larkin's salary, would any of you trade for Ryan Johansen? Edit: Say Nashville eats 2.5 million, making him cost 5.5 for the next four years (when he'll be 33).

Agreed. I see a team that's playing good teams really tough (and beating them a lot too). The COVID thing hurt. Losing Bertuzzi hurt. But we've still hung around and been very competitive most nights. And that's with a roster with some glaring holes, even at full strength. Full credit to Blashill here too. This is still a very patchwork roster that is regularly beating the top end teams in the conference (Tampa, Carolina, and Florida) despite having a piss poor defense, abysmal powerplay, and no 2nd line center. Start addressing those issues, see continued growth from guys like Rasmussen (who's going to be a monster next year) and Zadina, and you've got a .500 team.

Because I don't think having an "elite" goalie really matters all that much. I probably wouldn't even draft a goalie in the top part of 1st round if there was some way of knowing FOR SURE that he'd be the next Price. Maybe with a late first rounder, but NEVER with a top pick. Goalies simply don't matter that much. Bernier is currently playing as well, or better, than every top goalie in the league and we got him for peanuts. Our goalie tandem, both free agents, are better than most goalie tandems in the league. There just doesn't seem to be any evidence that elite goaltending matters in this era. Maybe when Hasek was carrying s***ty Buffalo teams to the playoffs, but not now when the worst defensive team (Ottawa) and the best defensive team (Vegas) are separated by about 1.5 goals per game. What that tells me is that even non-elite goalies (and defenses) aren't THAT much worse than elite ones. Pick the center or defenseman.

If you consider Lundquist and Price two of the top goalies of the modern era (which they pretty clearly are) then they're prime evidence that you shouldn't draft a guy like that in the top five. Neither of those guys have ever won anything. It's not like the old days were a great goalie can drag a mediocre team to success. You NEED to have a good team, and then you can win with a good(ish) but not great goalie. I'd rather be the Blackhawks with Corey Crawford than the Rangers with Lundquist every single time. Edit: Look at the last 10 Cup Champions and only Vasilevsky is a really elite goalie. Maaaaybe Quick too. But nobody else really.

Aside from my normal arguments against drafting the "best player available", I don't mind drafting for "need" this year in particular because there doesn't seem to be any agreement on which player is "best". It's not obvious that Owen Power (for example) is going to be any better a defenseman than William Eklund will be a center. And I don't really think it's because the players aren't talented or top of the lineup caliber players. I think scouting has just been so much harder this year so there's a little more uncertainty.

I think you basically have to do it now, because if all goes according to plan the team should start improving every year from here on out. This might be the very last time we pick in the top five for a while. And it's going to become MUCH harder to find a top end center picking in the 6-10 range. I'd probably go center with both my first rounders this year, offensive left-shot d-man next year, and power winger the year after. Kent Johnson still intrigues me, but I'm starting to sell myself on Lucius too. A shoot-first center isn't ideal, but considering Raymond is more of a playmaker you could have a Matthews-Marner type dynamic.

While there doesn't seem to be any agreement on the top of the draft this year, there are some interesting options at center. Kent Johnson is probably the most purely skilled playmaker, but he's slight and needs a lot of physical development. William Eklund is having an insane year as a draft eligible in the SHL, but I've seen mixed reviews about whether he's got dynamic offensive upside. Chaz Lucius scores is a natural center, is competitive and good in the faceoff dot, but he's a shoot first type center (a la Seguin or Zibanejad) and may end up getting moved to the wing. Sillinger is supposed to be very good offensively, but his skating needs a lot of work. And finally Beniers is basically Larkin 2.0 with a lower ceiling and a higher floor. He's also probably the surest thing. There doesn't seem to be any consensus on which of these guys will be the best in 3-5 years though.

Yeah, this kid's legit. I think it was Craig Button who was all-in on Viro, and had him ranked as a 1st (or early 2nd) round talent. Pretty much everyone else had him in the 3rd round where we took him. He's definitely been a stud though.

Larkin's offense is abysmal for a "top line center". It's comical that anyone thinks this team is going anywhere with him as a 1C.

#12 in ice time, #1 in our hearts.

For sure. I'm definitely excited to have him as part of the package. He's by no means a throwaway player IMO. I think Washington is just going to be that cap strapped in the offseason.

I think a lot depends on what we land this year in the draft. Total wildcard. This is probably going to be the most under-scouted draft in the modern era. Everyone keeps saying there's no consensus top guy this year, and I think that's largely built on the fact that most of these guys haven't been seen regularly in a season and a half. That increases the chances that you draft a guy that's not as good as you think, or maybe that you draft a guy who is better than you thought. In addition the pandemic has a lot of these draft eligible players playing up an age or in leagues they otherwise wouldn't. It's really hard to know how good guys like Power, Beniers, Johnson really are because there's almost no chance that any of these guys would be playing NCAA hockey in their draft years in a normal season. With 5 picks in the top two rounds I think we're primed to find some really quality players.

Man I wish we had a 2nd line center. Panik-Namestnikov-Fabbri would be a killer 3rd line.

I definitely think so, but I'm biased because I've always liked the versatility of his game. He's a strong possession player and he's super fiesty, with enough offense to chip in and compliment skill guys. His only real issue is that he's not going to play on the powerplay or penalty kill so his value is limited in that way. Personally I'd use him as a 3rd line puck retrieval guy opposite someone skilled. Maybe do Panik-Rasmussen-Fabbri. The last few games we've had Filppula on Rasmussen's line, he's easily a better option than that.

Both are supposed to play tomorrow according to Yzerman's presser on Monday.

Lol, what else is he gonna say? The deal is done. 10 times out of 10 Krsmith does NOT pull the trigger on this exact trade.

What gets lost in all the kerfuffle, and what I think is really the most important part of all this, is that somewhere a disheveled @krsmith17 is lying next to a Mantha shaped body pillow repeatedly saying "the wave of the future" a la Howard Hughes in The Aviator.

All of which is true, but has no bearing on whether we "won" the trade or not. Or whether it was a big overpayment. All Vrana has to do is produce more than Mantha would have for the Red Wings in the same roles. And then add in the picks and you've got a pretty clear win. There's no denying that both Mantha AND Vrana would produce more in Washington rather and Detroit all things being equal. But that's not really relevant. One of them has to play for Detroit, and I think we'll get similar or better production out of Vrana once you factor in better linemates and more icetime than he's had previously. And when you add the picks, and Panik (who I actually really like), I think it's a MASSIVE return for a guy who's not too much better (or better at all) than Vrana alone. Edit: It would be like we traded Tomas Tatar for Gustav Nyquist, 1st, 2nd, and Darren Helm. Huge. Overpayment.

Sure, the picks could obviously bust. Totally agree. My bigger point is that Vrana and Mantha basically produce at about the same rates at the same points in their respective careers. If the trade was one for one I'd have been happy with it because A) Mantha is a p*ssy, and B) Vrana still an RFA. But when you throw in the picks AND a useful depth player I really DO think it's a massive win. As far as the bolded, I don't agree. Washington's 3rd line isn't loaded with super talented guys. Dylan Larkin and Tyler Bertuzzi (and to a lesser degree Fabbri and Zadina) are MUCH better than anybody Vrana's regularly played with. The team overall is worse, but his linemates are about to improve dramatically from guys like Brett Connolly, Lars Eller, Devonte Smith-Pely, and Carl Hagelin. Hard to say what Blash does with Vrana, but if you literally plugged Vrana into all Mantha's existing roles I genuinely believe he out produces Mantha on the Red Wings. Which is not to say Mantha is going to bust in Washington. He's going to score a ton. But we basically replaced (or improved upon) his production and got premium assets too. Plus we got rid of a big, lazy, b*tch on top of it.

You're making my point for me. Mantha's production is heavily dependent on his TOI, Vrana's hasn't been. The minute Mantha's TOI drops his production dips. His TOI in all situations will go down in Washington where he's not "the guy". Meanwhile Vrana's TOI in all situations is about to go up, and he's already produced at Mantha levels (or better) without the ice time. And I don't agree that Vrana was "sheltered". Pretty hard to displace Backstrom as the primary playmaker on the Caps powerplay. He'll fill that role in Detroit. Similarly, it's not been an easy task cracking Washington's top six the last few years. I don't know that he's been "sheltered" as much as he's been the young guy on a veteran team. Washington did the EXACT same thing with Burakovsky. Then they traded him to Colorado and he blew up. I'm expecting the same from Vrana

FWIW Yzerman drafted him and was supposedly inquiring about him after he was waived early this season. Then Marc Staal said in an interview that a bunch of Red Wings were asking him about DeAngelo. So I don't think it's impossible that he's a Red Wing by next season. Don't know how I feel about that, but it seems like it could happen.

I love this trade. Having watched a TON of Capitals hockey over the last 5 years I'll give you my take. Basically... I don't agree with your assessment of Vrana. In the last two years he's scored 36 goals in 108 games. Good for 3rd on the Capitals behind Ovechkin and Oshie. 35 of those goals came at even strength. He also did this despite significantly lower even strength ice time than most of Washington's regular forwards. During those same two years he had 15 powerplay assists despite being on Washington's 2nd powerplay unit. If you watch the Capitals you'll realize that they rarely give time to their 2nd unit, and if they do it's not much. The reality is that Mantha relies more heavily on the powerplay for his production than Vrana does. Vrana is a much better even strength goal scorer and he's about to see a sizeable increase in ice time with a top center (his best center previously was Lars Eller). Plus now that he's on a top powerplay unit he's likely to see a significant increase in PP ice time, which is good for Detroit (and Vrana's stat line) because he's a great powerplay passer and the first legit playmaker we've had off the half wall since Datsyuk and Zetterberg. Vrana's warts are these: He's not super defensively responsible, and he's not super physical. It's legitimate to wonder how he'll handle better competition that comes with increased icetime, but with that said he's not Andreas Athanasiou either. He's more competitive and responsible than THAT. FWIW he's also been one of Washington's better possession forwards over the last two years. I think we actually got the better player here, he just needed to not be buried down lineup. Especially when you consider Mantha is likely to take a hit in icetime. This will hurt especially bad on the powerplay because his usual spot is occupied by a playmaker in Washington's system (typically Backstrom or Kuznetsov). He'll be the shooter on the second powerplay, and as I've already mentioned that unit doesn't get the same icetime that Mantha was getting in Detroit. Edit: Final thought. I'm pumped about the 1st too. I think Washington is getting bounced early. Nobody on that team gives a sh*t anymore and it's evident. They won their Cup and now they're content to go as far as their talent takes them without doing the hard work. They're primed to get beat by some hardworking up and coming team. I don't see them making past the 2nd round and maybe they get bounced in the first depending on their matchup.

2002

I'm not sure I agree. While he hasn't scored a lot this year, off the top of my head I can think of at least two of his assists (in one game) were on plays were he forecheck hard, stripped the puck from the opposition, and made plays to find open teammates for goals. Tatar probably will have the better career, or at least the odds suggest he will, but that belies just how good Tatar is. He's consistently underrated. The guy's a 20/50 guy every year like clockwork, plays in all three zones, and is a possession monster. He's a better winger that probably 85% of the NHL.

Hell, if Larkin and AA can score 30 I don't see why he couldn't. Especially if he's with a playmaker as you said. Imagine him with a Trevor Zegras level passer for the next few years. That's why I like Kent Johnson in this year's draft. He's the only center with that kind of offensive creativity. I suspect if we draft a center though it will be Beniers or Eklund. Kris Draper said he "knows what a Red Wing looks like" and these days that looks a lot more like Zetterberg than it does Yzerman, or Fedorov, or Datsyuk apparently.