kipwinger

I didn't say anything was a "guarantee". I implied that it was likely Detroit picks a forward given our depth at right defense.

There's a good chance Ottawa wants Drysdale considering they have no decent right shot defensemen on their team or in their system. But I'm not sure they'll take him at three considering it's pretty obvious that Detroit is going to take a forward. We're already all set on right side defensemen. I suspect Ottawa nabs Stutzle at 3 and Drysdale at 5.

Exactly. I've been saying for years that good centers (and to a slightly lesser extent d-men) impact the game in so many more ways than good wingers that given this choice I'll take a slightly less offensive center over a high scoring winger. Need proof? Ryan O'Reilly. If you asked every fan on LGW to name the top 5 players in the league NONE of them would have picked Ryan O'Reilly. Mostly because he's not an elite scorer. But check out how he's currently DOMINATING the Vancouver Canucks right now.

Nobody suggested it would be off the board. It would, however, be a mistake. You're just making sh*t up and then arguing against it.

Nope, I get picks wrong all the time. I just think it's dumb to argue for BPA when nobody has any good means of determining who that is AND the best players on draft day frequently are NOT the best players 5 or 10 years later. I'm not really saying anything revolutionary either. If you just wanted BPA you'd simply look at a guys stats, draft the "best" one and call it a day. There's a reason GMs spend so much time looking at things like work ethic, growth potential, quality of competition, roles, etc. Also, a HUGE part of who turns out "better" has to do with your player development system and is completely independent of the player anyway. BPA is just a dumb mantra that dumb fans repeat without really thinking about it. Don't be that guy and there's nothing to worry about. We practically are already. Next thing you know Marty Lapointe will be the goaltending coach and Boyd Devereaux will be heading our analytics department.

The BPA argument always seems so dumb to me. For one, there's typically no obvious difference in the quality the 4th, 5th, or 6th (or for that matter the 29th, 30th, and 31st) players drafted. Second, teams are chronically unable to DETERMINE who's the best player on draft day. Hence why guys like Petterson or Heiskanen or Makar, or Hughes fall in favor of guys who aren't "better". It's a flawed way of drafting because there aren't obvious differences in quality between these guys on draft day AND if there were, GMs haven't been largely unable to discern those differences. Again, the "nepotism" comment was me being silly. However, because it bothers you I'm going to bring it up all the time from now on. We're basically the Kevin Lowe/Craig McTavish Oilers now. Nepotism run amock.

If you took him because you know him, and not because he's the best fit for your team, then wouldn't it be nepotism though? Edit: Also, the "nepotism" comment was basically a tongue-in-cheek dig at the fact that our team is now being run by Yzerman, Verbeek, Draper, Howe, Maltby, Fischer, Cleary. Who knew that the most qualified guy for almost every position available in the Red Wings organization just happened to be a guy who formerly played for the team? That's a serious coincidence.

Woof. Aren't Stepan, Gagner, Filppula, and Neilsen all basically the same guy at different stages of decline? Screw that, I'm all set on signing anyone from the "guys that were sorta good 8 years ago" crowd.

Same here. I think anybody who gets him is getting a playmaking winger. Not something I'd be targeting if I'm the at the Red Wings stage of the rebuild. But apparently he's family friends with Kris Draper, and apparently the Wings are all about nepotism these days, so I'm sure he'll be our guy.

I guess it's that time of year again, when I have to take time out of my day to remind everyone that the "League is trying to screw the Red Wings" narrative is SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO stupid. Here's a couple big reasons why: The Red Wings are one of the most popular teams in the NHL, a key source of league marketing, and one of the teams that helps keep hockey alive and thriving in non-traditional markets. Ever notice how there are more Wings fans that Coyotes fans in attendance when we play in Phoenix? Me too. So does the league, and they REALLY like that. Notice how two highly successful documentaries came out (using league copyrighted footage) in the last few years which focus heavily on the Wings? Me too. That's not an accident. Ever notice how the Red Wings feature into every promotional package the NHL puts together or how they're involved in about 10,000 "Wednesday Night Rivalry" games despite being horrible? Me too. It's because they're one of the strongest markets in the U.S.. The NHL absolutely DOES NOT want them to be bad. Let's just say I was a complete dumbsh*t and I actually believed that there was a conspiracy to screw the Red Wings, I still shouldn't worry about it. Why? Because the Wings are the most successful team of the last 30 years, and one of the most successful teams in the history of the league. If there's a conspiracy, it's the LEAST successful conspiracy in history. It would be such an utter failure, conducted by the least capable conspirators, that it would be nothing to worry about. At all. It would be suuuuuuuuch a massive failure that the cabal of people organizing this fiasco would have fired Gary Bettman (or whomever) and found newer, more successful, conspirators. And yet, they haven't. Why? Because conspiracies are stupid, and so is anyone who believes in them. Finally, "the league" that everyone refers to is just the NHL owners, the commissioner, and the general managers. They make and agree upon all the rules. Are we to believe that people like the Ilitches, Holland, Yzerman, Nill, Rutherford, etc. etc. etc. are all conspiring to screw themselves or a team they have deep ties to? Obviously not. I realize for some of you this "conspiracy" is just a fun thing to play at. I genuinely hope that's true for every one of you. But there are at least a few idiots who genuinely think we're getting "screwed" by the league. And you people are dumb as f*ck.

He didn't start on the 3rd line. Ended there because, as I mentioned, he wasn't good when surrounded by better players. But for what it's worth, Ryan Nugent Hopkins is their 3rd line center, so even that line isn't lacking of talent.

How many people do you know who are done growing at 18 years old? But even if he doesn't grow another millimeter, you know who else was 5'9 when he was drafted?

You’re trying pretty hard to make the case that Rossi has more limited offensive upside than it appears, while making the opposite case for Lundell when the reality is that based on everything we know up to this point the opposite is true. Whether Rossi becomes a Star remains to be seen, but comparing him to O’Reilly is absurd. OReilly scores 60ish points in 60ish games his draft year. Rossi dropped 120 pts in 56 games. Rossi is routinely praised for his offensive game, especially his passing, stickhandling, and power play effectiveness. O’Reilly has never been a top point producer at any level. These guys are worlds apart offensively. Also, I don’t recall anyone holding Lafrenieres age against him. Nor do I recall you, specifically, questioning Jack Hughes offense because he played on a good team. You think playing with Turcotte, Zegras, Boldy, York, Knight (all 1st rounders a year ago) might have padded his stats a bit? Yet you seem inclined to do so with Rossi now for some reason. Perhaps the 67s are really good because they have one of the top 2 or 3 best players in the CHL on their team? You don’t have to prefer the guy, but it seems odd to me that you’re so intent on shoehorning him into this “limited offense but stud two-way” narrative when that doesn’t seem to be the case here, and you’ve shied away from similarly applicable comparisons in the past.

Wow, you took my posts waaaaay personally. It’s okay, just breathe. You’re allowed to prefer any player you like big guy.

edit: duplicate post.

If I were going to take a winger, and that's a huge IF, it would be Holtz and not Raymond anyway. He's much more physically developed and has the high end goal scoring you want out of the wing position. A righty with a cannon of a shot would look good on our powerplay half wall a la Ovechkin or Stamkos or Laine. Raymond is showy, which is cool on youtube and all but I kinda don't care about dekes and s***.

AA was already demoted to Edmonton's 3rd line before the break. He had one goal in 10 games with all the firepower around him that a guy could ever want. But again, he's abysmal in every other aspect of the game so coaches don't trust him out there in top six roles against better competition. Especially defensive minded coaches like Tippett. AA scored 30 in Detroit because we suck and so he was gifted a bunch of minutes we wouldn't get on a deeper team. He may or may not hit 30 again but that's kinda irrelevant. A sub 50% possession player with no heart isn't going to be a difference maker even if he scores 40 goals because he'll always be giving up more than that. In short, he blows.

AA was already demoted to Edmonton's 3rd line before the break. He had one goal in 10 games with all the firepower around him that a guy could ever want. But again, he's abysmal in every other aspect of the game so coaches don't trust him out there in top six roles against better competition. Especially defensive minded coaches like Tippett. AA scored 30 in Detroit because we suck and so he was gifted a bunch of minutes we wouldn't get on a deeper team. He may or may not hit 30 again but that's kinda irrelevant. A sub 50% possession player with no heart isn't going to be a difference maker even if he scores 40 goals because he'll always be giving up more than that. In short, he blows.

Honestly, the thing I like about Rossi the most though is how dedicated he seems to be. Everybody who profiles him talks about how he's constantly working on aspects of his game. Those are always the kinds of guys who push through and find new levels to their game. That's what Datsyuk did. That's what Zetterberg did. Those weren't guys with amazing physical attributes. They were guys that played the game correctly and never quit looking for an improvement or an edge or a way to impact the game. I'm trying to find the quote now, but in an interview earlier this year Rossi's coach said something to the effect of "If you told Marco that eating raisins every day for a year would improve his game he'd go out and do it". That's awesome as hell.

Well there's really only one center expected to be available at 4th overall that has that kind of upside (Rossi). Maybe two others if you include Perfetti (who doesn't even play center consistently in the CHL) and Lapierre (who's had about a zillion injuries). Here's the thing with Rossi though. People say he's "two way" as some kind of slight when in reality he's elite in both areas of the game. He led the CHL in points, more points than Lafreniere, more points than Byfield, more points than Perfetti. He's a dominant offensive player. AND his defense is just as good. So are his face offs. So is his special teams play. If he were literally two inches taller he'd be in the running for first overall. He has MUCH greater offensive upside than any center on our team AND he's excellent defensively. Which is why he gets compared to Backstrom a lot. 80+ point playmaker with world class defense is not an unrealistic ceiling for him.

There's a lot here so I'll streamline. 1. Dobberprospects is not "credible". It's just some guy on the internet. 2. Lundell doesn't have dynamic offense, at any level, which is why I don't want him. Sure he'll can "get pucks on the right sticks". So could Filppula, back in the day, but if I want someone to provide timely offense I'm probably not looking at Flip either. 3. I'm not down on Larkin. I'm just pointing out that he's not the kind of guy who's going to eat teams alive off the half wall on the PP. AND he's not an especially creative passer. I'm really looking for a Backstrom, Giroux, type of guy here. That ain't Larkin. 4. Again, if the scouts don't think Rossi, or Perfetti, or anyone else is going to be an offensive dynamo at center, then pass on them. "Loading up on Larkins" isn't a good strategy because you have to be able to score in different ways. Even strength vs. powerplay, transition vs. cycle, skill vs. crashing the net. All create offense, but all require different skill sets.

It's a good thing you don't care, but I DEFINITELY don't believe you.

We need a center with offense. If Yzerman and the scouts don't think any of those guys are going to be centers, then take the defenseman or goalie and draft your 2C next year. However I really haven't seen any credible sources say that Rossi A) isn't going to be a center, and B) isn't going to be a 70+ point guy (or better). We definitely don't need a guy like Lundell, as that's basically what we have in Veleno. You've got to have guys that can generate offense in different ways. Specifically we need guys who can run the powerplay off the half wall like Dats and Z used to do. We've got shooters in Mantha and Zadina but nobody on the other side who is really good at getting pucks through to them. Larkin is a good 5 on 5 scorer, and especially good in transition, but his playmaking from the blueline in isn't that good.

You should have probably linked this article if you're going to suggest literally every single thing they advocate in it. Otherwise it looks like you're trying to pass off their ideas as your own. Clearly you'd never do that. https://thehockeywriters.com/red-wings-boeser-trade-target/

Also, I really like Jeremie Poirier with the 32nd overall pick. He's the best offensive defenseman in the draft by a pretty wide margin, but he's a liability defensively. Seems like that will drop him into the 2nd round. But he's a late birthday so he's got a little more immaturity in his game that you'd expect to round out as he matures. Rossi and Poirier and I'm a happy guy on draft day.