kipwinger

I'm less concerned that they're all offensive. I mean, you could always just start them in the o-zone. But AA is tricky because he's best in transition, and when blowing the zone, so that he can get up to speed and beat defenders. So you can't really start him in the offensive zone. Honestly, if Zadina and Vanek are on the line I'd rather they play with Neilsen. Assuming Larkin, Neilsen, AA, and Glendening are our centers I'd go for something like this: Bert-Larkin-Mantha Vanek-Neilsen-Zadina Ras-AA-Nyq Helm-Glen-Abby This is just for next year. In the long run I've got much different ideas about how I'd set my lines.

Yeah, I mean if you can get a player of Tavares' caliber you should, but it doesn't mean it'll work out. If Matthews can become a dominant 200 ft. player then it's no issue, but I don't see it working if they're both trying to be a big minute, all offense, type of center. It'd be like if you had Tyler Seguin and Conner McDavid on the same team. One of them is going to fall off a bit.

Another big thing with Toronto is going to be how Babs utilizes Tavares/Matthews. I'm predicting that one or the other of them will have a down year this season. Tavares pretty much needs ALL of the minutes to be at the top of his game, but that would take away top minutes from Matthews (who projects to be better in the long term). And it's not like a Crosby/Malkin, Kuznetsov/Backstrom, or Kopitar/Carter situation where both guys are really good at everything so their usage doesn't matter. Tavares can't really be a defensive, matchup, center. He's all offense, and in order to get that offense he needs lots of minutes. Minutes that probably should be going to Matthews.

Toronto is in a really strong position going forward. They're STACKED at forward and have good goaltending. Their defense is good, but not great, and they've drafted TONS of defensemen the last two years. They're legit Cup contenders. The only thing stopping them will be how good other teams in the East get over the next few years. They'll be a top team for sure, but it's entirely possible they'll be one of those top teams that's always overshadowed by another team that's just a bit better.

It'll be a good indication of how willing AA is to embrace an opportunity and capitalize on it. He's (potentially) being given a chance to anchor his own line, with decent enough linemates, and some real minutes this year. There's no reason he can't use this as an opportunity to bring his game up a notch if he's willing to be coached. If he doesn't, then it'll be pretty clear what kind of player we've got in AA.

Yeah, it's a lazy argument. You're only in "cap hell" if you're a team like Chicago who wants to win one or two more with your current core before rebuilding. Cap constraints don't really matter for a team like Detroit because all the bad contracts will be off the books by the time we're ready to compete again. For a lot of lazy pundits, having bad contracts has become synonymous with "cap problems" when they aren't really the same thing. Sure we've got bad contracts, but they're not really stopping of from doing anything we should be doing (re-signing our FAs, adding quality depth, integrating entry level contracts), so who cares?

We're positioned to have a really big draft again next season and we're already pretty stacked prospect-wise. If I'm Holland I'm content to be mediocre this season, have a huge draft, and slowly replace older guys with up and comers via attrition. Next offseason we lose Frk, Vanek, Nyquist, Kronwall, Jensen, and Witko. Year after its Green, Ericsson, Daly. And that's without trades. All Kenny needs to do is draft well, stay the course, and be a lottery team this coming year and we're back in the thick of things. And finally, FINALLY, the glory days Red Wings will be behind us and we can get on to being a modern hockey team.

I mean, with Zetterberg done it's basically a throw away season as it is so I don't see a problem in trying anyone who factors into your future plans at center. I genuinely couldn't be happier about this. It gives a couple of kids some much needed minutes, and still ensures we'll essentially be a lottery team. One more year of solid drafting and I'll feel very good about our future (I actually do already).

I like it. Give AA the reps and see what he's got. Maybe it'll force him to commit to playing a full game. If not, you can always move him back to the wing.

I don't really see any argument for Fedorov. He wasn't more skilled than Yzerman in any meaningful way, he scored less over the course of his career, and was less of a factor in all 3 Cup runs. He was definitely more athletic though, I'll give him that.

My bad, I was genuinely confused and so I misread your position on this. All this time you were saying that A) there's nothing wrong with Mantha's deployment on the powerplay, B) he's successful at it, C) his talent isn't wasted, and D) you're fine with that? Ok then, I agree. Edit: Also, I think you're getting former and latter mixed up in the post above.

There are currently 17 first overall draft picks still playing in the NHL. Of those, 4 have won Stanley Cups (Ovechkin, Crosby, Fleury, Kane). So while drafting someone like Hughes or Dahlin is exciting, and there's no reason not to take them if you get the chance, it's not really that big of a deal if you don't. It's almost more fun to think about who you'd take other than the obvious top guys IMO. Other than Pittsburgh, who had essentially 3 first overall (I'm counting Malkin because he clearly goes first in any draft that doesn't also have Ovechkin), the core groups of all the recent Cup winners have only sparse representation from the top spot. Ovechkin, Kuznetsov, Backstrom, Carlsson. Toew, Kane, Keith, Hossa. Doughty, Kopitar, Carter, Quick. Bergeron, Kreci, Chara, Thomas/Lucic(?). I'd much rather we get down to the business of finding those other guys and hope that Larkin turns out to be as good as Toews or Bergeron or Kopitar than waste too much time thinking about Jack Hughes given how unlikely it is that we'll ever draft him.

What a goof I am for assuming you "thought" his talent was being wasted when in reality you "think it feels" like his talent is being wasted. It was a real stretch on my part.

At least two of you think that...because you said so explicitly. Like here. And here.

I don't really understand this line of thinking. Tons of skilled player, most more skilled than Mantha, see regular or exclusive net front time on the PP. Off the top of my head, Benn, Perry, Pacioretty, Wheeler, Backes, Kreider, JVR, and Simmonds are all highly skilled players who also play in front of the net. So maybe there's something to it and it's not that Blashill is "wasting" a skill player. Maybe it's actually preferable to have a skilled guy there.

Here's an article in which all the goals scored in the 2016 NHL season were mapped by their location on the ice as well as by the type of shot. https://www.omha.net/news_article/show/667329-the-science-of-scoring

You stated you'd be happy if it worked AFTER you said that you wanted it Blashill to stop doing it once Rasmussen was on the team. Which is it? If Mantha is successful doing it (as you've said) and you're happy he's successful doing it (as you've said) then why would you want Blashill to stop doing it? It's not easier to score around the net than it is to score from the perimeter. That's why there's so few Holmstroms and so many Hudlers, Tatars, and Nyquists.

Oh Christ, this is going to turn into another Jurco/Smith situation isn't it. If a guy doesn't perform exactly as we imagined he would then he's been "ruined" by the coach. Mantha was top 50 among all forwards in powerplay goals and that's considered a bad thing? 9 of his 24 goals came on the powerplay. His 15 even strength goals (where he's not a "net front" presence) would have tied him for the top 100. Hell, his even strength goal scoring isn't even the best on the team (Nyquist and AA). If anything, moving him to net front on the pp made him a more productive goal scorer, not the other way around. Mantha can't play like he did in juniors because it wouldn't work. He dominated a bunch of kids because he was more physically developed. He won't be able to blow by NHL level defensemen and beat NHL goalies clean off the rush. He also probably won't score much as a shooter on the PP either because his lateral quickness isn't great. So Blashill makes a tweak to his game to give him more success (which works) and people *****. He had a 900% improvement on his PP goalscoring over the year before and Blashill is misusing him? Jesus.

You said that 15 years ago you'd have said "possibly" if someone had said Keith was going to be elite. Which is bull. Pretty much nobody saw that coming. I doubt you'd have been any different. That was my point. And that's really my larger point overall. Defensive prospects are hard to gauge at 18 years old. Some of the best modern defensemen looked unimpressive on draft day. Chara, Keith, Subban, Weber, Byfuglien, Letang, Yandle, Klingberg, Josi were all drafted outside of the first round. Karlsson, Carlson, and Burns all went in the first, but not as high as their talent has born out. Only some of the best defensemen actually projected to be that on draft day (Suter, Doughty, Pietrangelo, Hedman, Ekblad). Compare that to forwards. Almost all your top forwards were valued highly on draft day. Suggesting that pretty much nobody knows what's going to make a defenseman turn out to be any good, while pretty much everybody can spot a winner at forward.

I feel like you'd have said "I don't see him as anything more than a 3rd pairing guy" based on his lack of draft pedigree and unimpressive NCAA and Junior stats.

Are those things mutually exclusive? Couldn't this all be a charade AND a guy's played through a tough injury and is now hanging em' up to go golfing and hang out with his supermodel wife?

Wait, where did I say he's average at anything? I've already said, he's like Franzen. Good wheels (for a big guy), good shot, good size, good net front. He's good at all of it. If he were excellent at all of it he'd be Blake Wheeler. He isn't. His best attribute, and one that you consistently fail to mention because it doesn't support your "Mantha is a shooter" narrative, is that he's really good at protecting the puck and making good passes for scoring chances in the offensive zone. If anything I'd say he's under rated as a PLAYMAKER. Which is probably the only thing that will set his career apart from Franzen. He'll score 28-35 goals a season, but his ceiling will depend on how many assists he has.

Nobody thought Duncan Keith had "Duncan Keith" upside either when he was drafted, which is why he went 54th overall. They've actually had very similar careers so far. Both BCHL, both dispappointed in NCAA, both went to junior hockey later and tore it up. Both skate well, both defend well, have similar physical attributes.

Since we're making projections about defensemen, I'll do you one better. Dennis Cholowski follows in the footsteps of another former BCHLer, Duncan Keith, and becomes a top pairing mainstay and all around badass. He goes on to win a few Cups, a few gold medals, and a Conn Smythe. "Generational" superstar Dahlin scores a bunch of points and wins nothing, just like Erik Karlsson before him.

I think that's his floor. Which isn't a bad position to be in. But I think his ceiling is probably a bit higher. Especially when he's feasting on all those tasty Zetterberg minutes. Larkin has room for growth on the PP, he's going to get top end wingers now, AND the team in general is going to start producing more as their defense starts to improve. That should be good for another 15 pts. The real question is, is Larkin REALLY the player we saw last season, a 65 pts. guy? Or is he a 55 pts. guy? Because if you add another 15 pts. onto that and you've got his ceiling. He might end up topping out as a 65-70 pts. center, like Ryan Johansen or Toews. Or he might end up an 80 pts. center, though there's really not anybody in that point range who I think has a comparable skillset to him. Also: Kadri is really good defensively and Larkin kinda blows defensively at this point in his career.