kipwinger

Tons of first round picks have been traded. Collectively Ottawa, NYR, and NJ picked 8 times in the first round of this years draft. San Jose got a 1st for Barclay Goodrow. I'm not sure how anyone can believe that 1st round picks weren't available.

Why would I trust that? Hockey executives back bad decisions, and lose their jobs because of it, all the time. This draft is a carbon copy of the last one. One decent player and a bunch of depth guys. The Senators drafted 3 times in the first round this year. Six times in the first two rounds. The Devils drafted 3 times in the first round. The Rangers drafted twice in the first. All three of those teams are rebuilding, and in our conference. If you're happy with drafting once in the first, and then crossing your fingers a hoping depth picks pan out then that's on you. But clearly there's another way to approach it. Give yourself more 1st and early 2nd round picks (and don't waste them on stay at home defensemen).

If the guy you wanted will still be there five picks later, and other guys won't, then maybe you want the wrong player? Also, statistically the probability of success drops off significantly the later in the draft you go. So trading back, as a strategy, is not supported mathematically. Point is a center so I'm not sure how that comparison works. Raymond isn't. Marner is a reasonable comparison, though I don't think he's any better than Hall or Tarasenko. But sure, Marner it is. So we got a Mitch Marner type and a bunch of guys that lack offense. Cool. That'll definitely help a team that can't score and only has positional strength on the wing.

Which is why you trade up and/or make your picks earlier in the rounds so you have as many options as possible. Trading back, both within the round as well as overall, takes away your choices and creates a situation were you both NEED a kid to pan out, and don't necessarily get the kids you want. Yzerman himself talked about the need for 2nd and 3rd rounders to turn "into player". And then he went ahead and drafted at the ends of each of those rounds. Thus reducing the probability of success.

Raymond is basically a Taylor Hall or a Tarasenko type. I mean, that's good and everything, but I don't think it's a franchise changer. Wallinder has questionable offense. Niederbach is a depth center. We need high end skill, and got one high end skill guy at a position of strength for us. I'm pretty disappointed in this draft. Also, continuously trading back completely negates the returns you got on your initial trades. If Yzerman had traded AA for two 3rds and two 4th everyone would be pissed. But trading back does essentially that. When you've got a bunch of picks, make them or trade up, not back.

Are we excited about the earlier ones? Raymond is fine, I guess, but who else blew your doors off?

Cool another defensive defenseman.

Why bother drafting in the 2nd round at all. Apparently the true value of guys like AA and Nyquist is that you can eventually turn them into 3rd, 4th, and 5th rounders. Awesome.

So if I'm following this correctly, with their highest (and most) draft picks in 30 years the Red Wings have chosen to draft wingers and stay at home defensemen? Sweet.

They got a later round pick. The type of later round pick they could have used on a kid like Cross Hanas.

This draft is pretty underwhelming.

The Red Wings explicitly said that Veleno and McIsaac don't. So I'm assuming they are the only ones.

So far as I know, Zadina, Brome, Seider and Rasmussen have the out clause. McIsaac and Veleno don't.

The AHL is most likely not having a season this year. So no, they couldn't have. Have you guys not been paying attention to all the news about that lately? The AHL season is HIGHLY in doubt. Which is why the Red Wings loaned guys like Veleno and McIsaac (who have no chance of making the NHL roster) to European league for the entire season, while the loaned buys like Seider and Zadina to Euro clubs with an "out" clause so they could play in the NHL.

It's really not that hard to figure out. Having a couple million, and a roster spot, laying around might be the difference between a few more Marc Staal moves or not. Plus moving out trash, and moving more in, isn't blocking some kid either. At worst it's a lateral move. P And then there's the signal that it sends to guys like Larkin, Mantha, Bert, Hronek, etc. This is your team now boys.

I have lots of friend in Muskegon and visit often. I'm sure I'll be seeing him, drunk and obnoxious, around town before too long. Being a West Michigan f*ckboi is what he's been working his whole life to accomplish. He's got the wife for it already.

Small and nontraditional market success is lame and is for pinko commie losers. Who wants to see Tampa win the Cup after years of near misses and heartbreak? And don't even get me started on Washington. Much better if the Blackhawks just win every other year. It's the way it should be.

Hard breakup for Abby and the Wings. They've been through a lot together. Always hard to face up to the fact that you're no longer wanted. Though, I'm sure if he tries really hard he'll can console himself by resting his head on the pile of money he made the last few years while being absolutely f*cking horrible at his job.

In that scenario I'd just take Nugant Hopkins from Edmonton and let them pursue Stamkos. In any event Detroit is situated to benefit if good players/big contracts are gonna get moved.

The problem with "clearing space" is that there's nobody willing to take on contracts. Detroit's in the driver's seat because we aren't close to the cap limit AND we don't have an internal cap. Most other teams are either right up against the cap or are on an ownership imposed budget.

Yeah, that's probably my starting ask. I'm sure there are other teams who could offer more, but the sticking point is the flat cap. Edmonton (for example) has about 10 million in cap space with only 34/50 contracts signed and lots of quality free agents to sign over the next two years. Could they move out a big contract, maybe? But other than Detroit and a few others there aren't any teams willing to take on bad/big contracts with the cap stuck at 80 mil this year (and probably next year too). Normally I don't think a team like Detroit, with an offer like mine, would be in the running but this isn't a normal year and we may just be able to capitalize on that.

Yeah, totally agree. They don't NEED to dump him and he's still got TONS of value. Again, any trade for Stamkos would be a cap dump. They don't want to take a big contract back I'm sure. They'd want futures/prospects. I'd definitely do it if the ask was futures. First, he's a genuine difference maker who would help us win games. Second, in doing so he makes us more desirable for UFAs. Third, if nothing changes you trade him to a contender 3 years from now for a haul because he'll still be able to score at 33 years old. For Veleno/Rasmussen and two 2nds I'd do it.

I'm probably the only one here who thinks that Sergachev, while good, is probably overrated huh? He's not an especially offensively talent player. He has a worse career points per game average than Filip Hronek, despite being on a vastly more offensively talented team. He's also solid defensively, but not a rock or anything. For the right price I'd definitely trade for the guy, but I'm not sure he's going to be top line defender or anything.

What do you mean by hockey deal? Because traditionally that means giving something of equal value in a 1 for 1 trade. But the whole point of trading Stamkos would be to clear cap space, so they can't really take on anything of equal value. It would have to be futures.

That's the thing, because of the flat cap there aren't too many teams can afford to take on that contract. If they really want him traded this offseason we're one of the only teams that could accommodate the cap hit.