kipwinger

The counter-argument would be that even if you're not a contender if your team isn't full of terrible contracts you can take on (short term) dead weight from contending teams for things that will help you later a la the Canes with Patrick Marleau. The Canes got a 1st for that BTW. Certainly something a rebuilding team shouldn't be turning their noses up at because their new GM "dgaf". But what do I know?

From an Athletic article detailing how effectively each team has used its cap space. Detroit was dead last. Last, and certainly least, it’s Detroit. How could it be any other team? With four contracts in the D-range on the books, the Red Wings are in a four-way tie for the most bad deals in the league. Where Detroit differs is that the other teams have a few more above average deals to offset the pain. Not Detroit who have as many toxic deals as above-average ones. Those belong to Dylan Larkin, Anthony Mantha, Tyler Bertuzzi and Andreas Athanasiou – four forwards that provide the bulk of the team’s on-ice value. Without them, this team would be cooked. The biggest issue for Detroit is how much the team is spending for a marginal win over the remainder of their contracts. It’s not just the alarming number of poor deals, or the certainty in how bad those deals are, but the fact that those deals are mostly for players that bring huge negative value. The team is spending $14.5 million per win, the league’s second-highest mark. That contributes to the team’s 35 percent average for positive value probability which is the league’s lowest mark, stemming from seven deals sitting at an under 20 percent success rate. The team signed a replacement level forward to a two-year deal worth $3 million per, and it’s somehow not even close to being the worst deal on the books. That honour could go to Trevor Daley or Danny DeKeyser or Jonathan Ericsson or Darren Helm or Frans Nielsen or Justin Abdelkader and the fact the team has this many options is why they’re ranked so low. (Abdelkader made the honourable mentions list on last week’s worst contracts, but through my own personal error should’ve actually been … second. I wrote down that he only had three years left, but he actually has four somehow. My sincerest apologies). None of them are that expensive, but those deals add up into death by a thousand cuts. Those seven deals are collectively worth $69 million in financial commitment over the next several seasons, $29 million of which is tied up in next year’s cap. The Red Wings stand to lose just over five wins of value combined from those players over the entirety of their contract, with 40 percent of that coming in 2019-20. That’s as bad as it gets. Well, actually, it gets worse. The next five deals are worth $17 million and are worth negative 0.1 wins on top of that. I just can’t fathom that a professional hockey team is spending over $80 million on players that are actively hurting the team’s chances of winning. New GM Steve Yzerman has his work cut out for him.

Well you're not going to go to jail for thinking so, but it's basically fan logic. Unless you're replacing someone with someone else who's better then it's usually a bad idea. I wouldn't be upset if Yzerman replaced Wright with Al Murray, because Murray has been awesome at the draft. But replacing him with someone who's never even scouted, let alone ran a full, global, scouting program or draft should probably be viewed as a negative.

I don't know what to think about you. Every year after the draft you gush about how good we did, but now you're not really sure if the guy doing the drafting is a big loss. He drafted Larkin, Svech, Cholo, Hronek, Rasmussen, Zadina, Berggren, Veleno, McIsaac, Lindstrom, and Seider. They seem a bit better than "a lot of Christopher Ehns" to me. Maybe some of them don't turn out, but conservatively we probably have a top line 1C (franchise cornerstone and future Captain), two or three top six forwards, and two or three top four defensemen in 5 drafts. No too shabby.

Mkay

1. Given that he was the "Director of Amateur Scouting" my guess is that other than the GM he was the one "directly responsible" for ALL the selections since 2014. IMO they haven't been too bad, and in some cases they were superb. 2. I don't want Draper to replace Tyler Wright as Director of Amateur Scouting because Kris Draper has never been a full time scout at any level. When Wright was hired he came with a track record, he had a long history of working with prospects in Columbus. And considering the Jackets drafted and developed well during that time, you could reasonably infer that he knows what he's doing when it comes to prospects. None of that is possible with Draper because, as previously mentioned, he's never been involved with prospects at all. He was the Assistant to the GM. I'd be less worried if they'd promoted Jiri Fischer (for example) to Wright's old position because he's been working with prospects for years.

Bummed to see Tyler Wright leave, thought he did a pretty good job with our drafting over the years. REALLY bummed to see Kris Draper taking over for Wright.

England has a "pro league". The ECHL is a pro league. Doesn't mean it's a good pro league. My only point is that there's not enough of a history of producing quality hockey players that I think it's worth reaching to take a guy from there unless he's obviously dominating, which Seider wasn't. Also, saying he "could" be our Hedman is no different than saying he "could" be another Dekeyser. This was a deep enough draft that we didn't have to take those types of risks with the 6th pick. I'm not sure whether Seider will be any good in the NHL or not. There's always a risk that a guy will bust. I'm just saying I feel a LOT more confident that Dylan Cozens or Trevor Zegras will hit their ceilings than Mortiz Seider will hit his given the information that I have available to me, the average fan.

All valid points. Well done. You've convinced me that Seider was the right choice.

I was being sarcastic. Germany is a country of 80 million people and produces almost no NHLers. For comparison's sake, Finland is a country of 5 million people and produces a ton of NHLers. I conclude, therefore, that the quality of hockey in German is not very high and the quality of hockey in Finland (again, for argument's sake) is quite high. I've explained in a post above why developing in a country where the hockey isn't very good could be detrimental to long term success, but it goes something like this: PK Subban played against (and with) Steven Stamkos since he was a kid, Trevor Zegras has been shooting on Spencer Knight every day at practice for years, Mortiz Seider has played against puds his entire life (including the four of five AHL washouts and NHL journeymen you mentioned above). Why does this all matter? Because when you combine this information with a few other things it suggests that this pick has a lower probability of success for the organization than other picks that were still available. And this is a pivotal draft for the organization, so lower probability of success isn't good. What other things? First, Seider doesn't seem to have a ton of offensive upside based on his history of production in a 2nd tier league. Second, Steve Yzerman has NEVER drafted and developed a defenseman who was any good. Third, while Steve Yzerman knows more about hockey than I do, so does every other talent evaluator in the hockey industry and most of them weren't as high on Seider as Steve was. Fourth, guys who play defense well but don't score a ton are NOT that hard to come by. If you REALLY need a guy with Danny Dekeyser's floor and Ryan McDonagh's ceiling you can get one pretty easily. How do I know? Because we got Dekeyser for nothing and McDonagh was traded to Tampa. Don't get me wrong, I REALLY hope Moritz Seider turns out to be a John Carlson. I really really really do. But for all the reasons above I just think the odds of that aren't as good as Zegras turning into a Claude Giroux, or a Cozens turning into a Seguin. And that either of those options would have helped us more than having a Ryan McDonagh or a Colton Paryako or a Brent Seabrook.

No s***, I'm giving my opinion on the draft. One that differs considerably from Steve Yzerman's. That's the whole point of the post. Also, I didn't say the German league CAN'T produce elite talent. I'm saying it never has. And when you're considering reaching for a player, while other high end prospects are still on the table, you might want to consider where that player came from. Why does it matter? Because even if you have all the physical tools, if you've been playing with or against a bunch of puds you haven't been developing your skill in the same way that guys in Canadian leagues are. Essentially, it's easier to score on bad goalies so your shot doesn't have to be as good. It's easier to defend bad fowards so your positioning doesn't have to be as good. And so when you finally get to the AHL it might be the first time you've had to do things right, and you're trying to do it against better players than you've ever seen in your life. So the margin of error for Seider to gain the kind of skills he may not have developed in Germany (because of the aforementioned puds) is going to be narrower than for a UNDTP kid like Zegras who's been playing with other NHL caliber talent for years.

Yeah, that's a logical fallacy though. Reductio ad absurdum. Nobody is saying you should scout American high school hockey more than German men's leagues. I'm saying that when there are still VERY talented hockey players on the board, and you're trying to decide who's going to be better than who, one thing to look at is whether or not this player comes from a place that actually develops good hockey players. Particularly if you're planning on reaching as much as Yzerman seemed to reach here. I genuinely don't mind Seider as a player. As best I can tell he's a decent enough prospect. But there are enough question marks about him to make me question whether reaching on him was a smart choice when Cozens and Zegras were still available. And one of those question marks is that he played his entire hockey career in a country that produces less NHL players than Slovenia.

If that's the case then Yzerman should be fired on the spot. You don't say "We're good at center because this kid we already have MIGHT be a solid 2C" That would be absolutely terrible strategy. The whole reason you take the Filip Hroneks of the world is because you can't bank on the guy you liked better (Cholowski) being as good. I'm actually good with Seider AND Tuomisto, and I don't think it necessarily HAD to be one or the other. I'm annoyed that neither seem to have the kind of game changing upside that other players had at 6 and 35. There's always risk involved on draft day, and Yzerman and Co. seem more comfortable with the risk that the guys they took will only turn into good (but not great) players over the risk that they guys they like would still be there later in the draft. Essentially, "we want Mortiz Seider, regardless of what his upside is, and we don't think he'll be available at 35". My preferred strategy would have been, "which player at 6th has the best chance of being a star player". Maybe that's one in the same for Yzerman vis-a-vis Seider, but if so then it should be easy to explain why you think he'll be that good because nobody else seemed to think so. I'd venture to guess that WAY more NHLers developed through the BCHL than through the various minor German leagues. Saying the BCHL is a "lesser league" is true only in the sense that it's not a men's league. But in terms of each league's track record of developing high level NHL players it's not even close.

I don't think enough is being made about the fact that his kid is from a German league. There is NOT a big track record of success, particularly at the higher end of the draft, coming out of Germany. People legitimately questioned Alex Newhook because he played in the BCHL last season, but it appears everyone is basically fine with using a top ten pick on a guy from a league that has NEVER produced a top ten talent. I mean, somebody's gotta be the first, but I haven't seen enough of Seider to make me feel confident that he's the one. Also, I think the team (led by Yzerman) has done a TERRIBLE job selling this kid to the fans. "Ummm...we liked his athleticism...ummm...he should be a good Top 4 two-way defender...ummm...we were going to take him at 35th if we didn't take him here." is not the kinda stuff you really want to hear about a top pick in a pivotal draft. If he's really THIS good, it should be easy to explain why in a way that fans will understand.

I think your logic is spot on. I've argued elsewhere that we have a good crop for forwards. But there are two things wrong with that strategy. First, in this year's draft with a reasonably high pick we passed on guys with "elite" offensive upside (which is never a great plan) to provide more depth. We don't have any game breaking talent, and that's a problem. Depth is great, but a team full of Tyler Bertuzzi's get's crushed by a team full of Tyler Bertuzzi's and one Sidney Crosby or Artemi Panarin or Nikita Kucherov or whomever. Second, while our "fowards" as a group look good, our center depth doesn't. This draft puts HUGE pressure on Veleno to be a high-end top six center. Something that's still very much up in the air. Adding a Cozens, Zegras, or even a Krebs or Newhook takes a ton of pressure off Veleno, and Larkin, going forward. This is, of course, assuming that neither Rasmussen or AA are in the long terms plans at center (and I'd argue they shouldn't be).

There was never an Yzerman love fest from me, if that's who you're directing your comment toward. I was vocally in the minority that I preferred Holland to Yzerman all day every day. Though, from the looks of it our top pick this year wouldn't have been much different with Holland at the helm.

So, I was gone all weekend and am only now getting to review our draft. In short, it sucks. There are some decent players here, but we did nothing to address our biggest organizational weakness: our center depth. Prior to the draft our depth chart was Larkin, Veleno, and (maybe) AA. And it's exactly the same after the draft. The single most important position on any hockey team was completely ignored in a really important draft. We didn't have a really high end defensive prospect before the draft, we don't now. We consistently passed on skill players for guys with intangibles like "hockey sense" and "compete level". It wasn't a complete disaster. Seider will be a good defenseman, but not an elite one. Even if he turns into a Paryako, which is probably his ceiling, a guy like that doesn't significantly change the complexion of our defense or team. He's a good piece but probably not a great one at 6th. Very much the Michael Rasmussen of defensemen (and I'm a Rasmussen fan). Grewe has Tyler Bertuzzi upside, which is a good complimentary piece on a team full of good complimentary pieces. Maybe Tuomisto adds a little offense from the back end, but probably not any more than Cholo or Hronek or McIsaac. But we were a team without any real game changers prior to the draft, and we still are despite a really high pick in a draft with lots of guys with (supposedly) elite upside.

I don't really like this pick but whatever. It's done. Sure hope he starts in the AHL next season though. If one of the key attributes for drafting this guy is how much more NHL ready he is that everyone else then let's get him up and get him playing in the organization as fast as possible.

Don't know how I missed that. Thanks for the heads up.

I'm not nuts about today's pick, but will feel a whole lot better if we nab Philip Tomasino tomorrow.

I'd be surprised if he going before 20th. I just don't see teams taking goalies in the top part of the 1st round. Particularly one who played in an all-star team and was never really challenged all season. Maybe the last 1/3 of the first round. But sooner would really surprise me.

You can count the number of guys on this list who made an offensive impact in the NHL on one hand lol. Apparently Sweden sucks at producing defensemen. But I get your point. Thanks for providing these numbers BTW. Where did they come from?

If you're planning on using them on the 3rd pair then they're not really all that important to trade for are they? And obviously I don't mean "any". If some team is giving guys like that away then sure, take them. But if they're similar stylistically to what you have, and they're not any better, and they're going to cost more than a little, and they're going to play on the 3rd pair, then you probably should think twice about trading for them. Particularly when you guys are talking about trading higher end roster players to get one. The truth is we've got a REALLY good crop of young defensemen already in our system. None of them are a Doughty or a Keith or a Burns, but neither are Fabbro or Bean or anybody else you're likely to trade for. The closest thing to a guy like that was Trouba (maybe) and that seems significantly less likely now. The better course would be to keep your assets, watch how they develop, and look to develop a solid defensive group. Then target a defender with your 1st rounder next year when we'll presumably still have a high(ish) pick.

Any cost is too high considering they're nearly identical stylisically to Hronek and Cholowski and neither are demonstrably better. And you can't really have a top four of identical guys who all have essentially the same pros and cons.

I would hope not. Neither have proven that they're any better than a Hronek or a Cholowski. People get so hung up around here on certain players that they "like" or "want" or whatever that they never stop to ask if they're any good, or if acquiring them would be worth the cost given what we already have. Trading top end assets for a smallish, offensive, defenseman when we've got two smallish, offensive, defensemen who are arguably better is pretty dumb considering a top-four of those guys would get absolutely DOMINATED by most decent teams. As hard as it might be to grasp for the "WE NEED TO ADDRESS OUR DEFENSE IMMEDIATELY!!!!" crowd, it is entirely possible that our stable of young defensemen (Hronek, Cholo, McIsaac, Lindstrom) plus the depth guys (Regula, Barton, Sarijaarvi, and Kaski) might very well be better than any combination we'd have by acquiring someone like Bean or Fabbro...and we wouldn't have to toss away high quality assets to get it.