kipwinger

I like the Gallant pick. Don't know much about the other bunch though.

Well they've already said that Larkin will play center this year. I think they were sacrificing long term development for short term goal scoring because they were trying to make the playoffs. Now that the streak is over hopefully that will be less of an issue.

I mean, that's definitely what they're doing. I just think it's short sighted. In the long run you want your more dynamic offensive players at center. Let Mantha, Svech, Tatar, Nyquist, Bertuzzi, etc. play on the wing. They play without the puck and can finish. But Larkin and AA are magic when they've got the puck on their stick. Just stick them on the second and 3rd lines and shelter them in the d-zone until they get better defensively.

Agreed. I actually think we should use AA as a center though, like he was drafted to be. I'm not sure why the Wings don't see it. Your most talented skater, scorer, and one of your better puckhandlers should probably carry the puck more IMO. They probably have questions about his faceoff percentage or some dumb s***.

Neither of those guys are decidedly better than AA. Why do you think he needs another year? He scores more goals than both of them in fewer minutes. There are knocks on his work ethic, but those exist for Mantha too. And there are knocks on his defense, but those exist for Larkin too. Larkin was demoted all the way down to the 4th line at one point last season because he was bad defensively. I'm not against trading AA (or any of them) theoretically, provided the price is right. But I do think it's strange how people act like Larkin and Mantha are decidedly better than he is. To me they're all in the same boat. Hell, give AA 2 more minutes of ice time a night, powerplay time, and Zetterberg as his center and he probably leads the team in goals.

Yall ready for the Wings to trade back and take Klim Kostin? Exciting stuff on draft day.

We get like one of these guys a year. There's literally no way to criticize Holland for not landing undrafted guys. He does it all the time. Dekeyser, Nosek, Russo, Coreau, Reneuf, Hicketts. If people ***** about Holland missing on this kid then I don't really know what to say.

I didn't pay for Custance's anodyne b.s. when it was for ESPN Insider and I probably won't pay for it now. His articles are almost all "human interest" pieces that neither ask difficult questions nor provide complex answers. It's pretty much all "The Stanley Cup Finals will come down to who wants it more" type crap. Besides why pay for boring hockey content when the majority of the really interesting stuff is coming out of blogs these days for free?

Only thing I would have done differently is protect Sheahan over Abby. Interesting looking at other teams' lists though. Lots of good defensemen are unprotected. Holland may have missed the boat a bit. I'd have given long looks at Calvin De Haan and Matt Dumba.

It doesn't work that way though. Jurco was a better AHLer than Athanasiou and he was an NHL flop, so by your rationale AA should never have gotten a call up because he wasn't even Jurco good. Pulkinnen had better AHL career than most NHL players did btw. So what? All that means is that Pulkkinen wasn't any good. It doesn't say much at all about everyone else. Frk shoots as well as Pulkkinen did, but he's bigger, stronger, faster, and more aggressive. He's worth a look. If he doesn't pan out, oh well. In my scenario he's essentially taking Miller's roster spot, so it's a wash anyway.

This was exactly what I meant. If we're going to have one "defensive/shutdown" line, I'd rather that line be made up of Helm/Sheahan, Abby, and Nosek, than Glendening, Ott, Miller, or whomever. They'd be just as good defensively, and probably a little better offensively and in terms of possession. And if a 3rd line of Neilsen, Frk, and Svechnikov could give you the same production or better then it's a relative gain. I definitely didn't mean to sound pessimistic, I think it would give us a better 3rd and 4th line.

You're talking about two different things here, so I'll try to address them both. Frk's "skill", and his scoring rate so far in the AHL. The two aren't really the same thing. His scoring rate is decent enough for the AHL, but his skill is what makes me think he'd perform better on an NHL third line than the guys you mentioned. A little like AA, who didn't really have that great of a scoring rate in the AHL when he was a top guy, but whose skillset makes him dangerous in the NHL as a complimentary piece. I think that with his shot, size, and hands it wouldn't be unrealistic for Frk to get 12-15 goals on the 3rd line I mentioned (Neilsen and Svech). You may have more faith in Abby, Sheahan, or Helm than I do, but I don't see them scoring that much at this point. I don't think Frk is some star player in the making or anything, but I think he's got better finishing skills than those guys.

Necas is interesting because he's got a late birthday and so is consistently one of the youngest players in any league/tourney he plays in. As a result, his numbers don't look all that impressive. But when you look just at the games he plays against his peers, his stats start looking pretty good.

I've never seen the kid play, but the Hockey News profiled him recently and said his skating was good. They said he hit a major grown spurt (grew two inches and gained 35 lbs) since 2012 so maybe he just needed the added strength to find his stride. I don't know. Anyway, here's the article for anyone who's interested. http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/article/teams-lining-up-to-sign-erie-defenseman-darren-raddysh

It's not even that I like Frk so much as I like skill players playing in positions that require skill. I think a 3rd line with Frk and Svech on the wings scores more than a 3rd line with Abby and Sheahan/Helm on the wings. And I think a 4th line with Nosek, Abby, and Helm/Sheahan scores more than a 4th line with Glendening, Miller and Ott (or whomever). For me it's about relative gains. I just happen to be talking about Frk and Svech because they're the two most skilled guys we have who aren't playing in Detroit yet.

Preds have solidly outplayed the Pens in at least two, potentially all three, games. They just got s*** goaltending the first two games. Anybody who watched those first two games and came away thinking the Pens were running away with this wasn't paying attention.

With no changes aside from Sheahan or Helm being taken in the expansion draft, I'd go with Nyquist-Z-Mantha Tatar-Larkin-AA. Frk-Neilsen-Svech Helm/Sheahan-Nosek-Abby Annnnd another point for Frk.

Frk with a goal and an assist so far tonight. He, Svech, and Nosek should all be up next year. 3rd line for the Red Wings: Frk-Neilsen-Svech 4th line: Helm-Nosek-Abby

No thanks. Getting a washed up Datsyuk back isn't going to bring back the glory days, no matter how much folks want it to.

You're right, I stand corrected. We couldn't sign him next year, we'd have to wait until his bridge deal is done. Either way, my feeling is still the same. If we really wants to play for Detroit as badly as people suggest he does, then just wait until he's a UFA to sign him (regardless of when that is). Not like we're going to be competitive for a few years anyway, so what's the rush?

I told you to look at Orlov (as an example) because his HERO chart, which you were showing for Shattenkirk and Trouba is "across the board" better than theirs. And I only bring him up because he's an example of your "moneypuck" idea, but doesn't get a 10th the fanfare (or the insane LGW trade proposals). I don't "like" him anymore than I "like" Trouba. I'm just fully aware that he's an example of a guy that's quite a lot better than Trouba in a number of meaningful ways, yet nobody seems to be suggesting that we trade our organizations' top prospects for him. Wonder why people are willing to throw away organizational depth for a guy who's (at best) in the same ballpark as guys like Shattenkirk, and who we could easily sign a few years from now (if he's as high on Detroit as his fans seem to suggest) without losing a single asset? Clearly not because he's super good, you yourself just said he's neither better nor worse than Washington's 3rd best defenseman.

To tell you the truth, I don't give a s*** about "liking" individual players. I'm not asking them to come over and babysit my daughter, so I don't need to like them at all. You could literally replace every single player on our team with a different player and I'd be happy as long as the Red Wings were better afterward. I'm a fan of the team.

Out of curiousity, how do you define "defending" in the NHL? Like, what exactly isn't Shattenkirk good at?

Firstly, your Trouba>>>Orlov & Shattenkirk statement is not supported by anything other than your fetish for a young player. Which is asinine. But I don't know why I'd expect anything less from a guy who once said Brendan Smith was untouchable because he was a "dynamic offensive defenseman". Or that Jurco was a "top six winger". lol. You're absolutely one of the worst around here for trying to justify personnel moves based on whether or not you "like" a guy. Secondly, Trouba ISN'T AVAILABLE EITHER. There has been no credible source saying Trouba wants out of Winnipeg, or that Winnipeg wants to trade Trouba, since he signed his new contract. Add to that the fact that Tim Cheveldayoff is the league's least frequent "trader" and the fact that Winnipeg AREN'T rebuilding. There is no indication that this is likely. You just REALLY WANT it to happen, so as usual, you're selectively using bits of information to justify it. Just more evidence of exactly the thing I'm talking about. People willing to part with good assets, for marginal returns, because they irrationally like players who aren't as good as fans would like them to be.

Tons of defensemen are better than what we have right now, doesn't mean I'd trade good prospects for them. And I've elsewhere made trade proposals involving Nyquist/Tatar for a defenseman, so stop acting like I'm against trading ANYONE for a defensive upgrade. I'd be happy to move someone who's a little older to a team looking to win now for a defensive upgrade. I'm not, however, interested in throwing away guys who we'll need a few years from now for a guy who's biggest asset is "he's better than what we have". Also, your Cabrera analogy is bull. Cabrera was already a superstar player when we traded for him. Trouba isn't even a top pair defenseman on his own team. That's the sticking point. You're acting like, and making trade proposals like, he's a better player than he is. Would I trade Svech (and others) for Erik Karlsson? That's a more apt comparison to Cabrera, which you well know.