kipwinger

I heard he's only got a 21% corsi and that he's blocking Andrew Gibson's spot in the lineup.

Wings were coasting on that one, they need to buckle down and stay disciplined.

I'm confused, didn't Zadina dump the Red Wings to "bet on himself"?

Thank god. I just learned today that he was blocking Antti Tuomisto from making the big club.

Seider just blocked an absolute bomb. Clearly stung him. What a beast.

And another goal for the 2nd line. Gost again. Yeesh.

What a snipe by Joey V lol

Veleno is feeling himself tonight clearly.

That's insane. Since January we're the 2nd best team in the league by points percentage. Behind only Florida, and ahead of Edmonton (who won 16 in a row).

He's driving that line right now. He creates something on every shift. And just like that, Raymond scores!!!!

2nd line buzzing again. They'll get one before the night's out.

Gost needed that one. What a shot!

Everybody knows I love Rasmussen, so take this with a grain of salt, but I don't think that pick was a reach. If you look back at the first round Rasmussen is roughly the 8-12 best player and we took him with the 9th pick. Hischier, Heiskanen, Makar, Pettersson, Necas, Suzuki, and Robert Thomas are all definitely better Oettinger, Mittelstadt, Tippet, Vilardi are all roughly as good, so it's a pick your poison type situation when Detroit gets to the podium. Obviously in real life Necas was still available, but there were questions about Necas on draft day or he wouldn't have fallen to 12th OA. In a redraft he probably goes fifth. But I don't think Ras is a "miss". He's probably the 8th to 12th best player and we got him with the 9th pick. People are obviously welcome to prefer different players, but he was selected basically where he should have been.

You're misunderstanding the rules. The premise is that we either get lottery luck in the two years we had the best lottery odds (and take the concensus 1OA pick in both years) OR we never win the lottery but essentially have better scouting in any two different years during the rebuild. So you can't have Stutzle. You either get Raymond or Lafreniere in 2020, and either Seider or Jack Hughes 2019. Those were the only two drafts where we had realistic odds of winning the lottery, and in both cases there was never a single doubt that Hughes or Lafreniere would go first overall. So if we HAD won the lottery we would almost certainly have ended up with those players.

Right. Another way of thinking about it is this: You have two options. You trade Tyler Bertuzzi for a 1st. Then you use that 1st, plus Kubalik and a throwaway prospect for 4 years of Debrincat. After 4 years you trade 29 year old Debrincat for a 1st (plus whatever else you get), and either make that pick or trade it in a package for another Debrincat type guy, and so on. OR...You trade Filip Hronek for a 1st. There are no Debrincat type trades to be made, so you make the pick (plus your own 1st) and get Danielson plus ASP to replace Hronek (or someone else) down the line.

Exactly. And if you have a David Savard you should ALWAYS trade him for a 1st.

I misspoke. You can if you keep Seider/Raymond you can "upgrade" any TWO other picks. So you can take Hughes/Dobson over Zadina AND upgrade another pick.

Stan Bowman kinda did something close to this in Chicago but I don't think it was an explicit strategy. He moved on from guys like Campbell, Versteeg, Byfuglien, Ladd, Leddy, Teravainen, Saad, Panarin, throughout their dynasty. Some of them were trades but not all. But he didn't hold on to his 1sts. But he could afford to move those guys because he always had solid replacements coming along right behind them because of his drafting.

So which do you choose? Swap Seider/Raymond with Hughes/Lafreniere but keep Zadina, Cholo, Svech, Ras, Edvinsson, Kasper, Danielson, ASP, etc.? OR...keep Seider/Raymond but swap any other player we chose for a different player provided the new player was still on the board at the time we picked?

I think you're on to something. Like me, Yzerman is dumb too and doesn't have the brain power to figure out that he'd need to dump contracts if he brings people in. He's probably just going to keep adding and adding and adding players until he's got 25 defensemen on the roster. I know that's what all of us fans are suggesting that he do.

And what about Shai Buium and Andrew Gibson?!?!!?! Those guys are only DAYS AWAY from being NHL ready and people wanna block them with losers like Noah Hanifin and Chris Tanev?!?!? eVeRYonE iZ so STupUD nD iM sOoooo mAD!!!

Here's a fun one. In terms of the Red Wings rebuild, do you think we'd be better off if we'd won the draft lottery in our two worst rebuilding seasons and taken the consensus 1OA pick, or would we be better off if we'd never won the lottery but taken the (hindsight) best pick available in two other drafts. So basically, would we be better off if we'd done everything exactly the same but we had Jack Hughes and Alexis Lafreniere instead of Seider and Raymond. Or would we be better off if we did everything the same and had Quinn Hughes and Martin Necas instead of Zadina and Rasmussen?

For sure. You'd either have to be Dave Poile OR be in a situation like SY where you've got tons of goodwill coming in and you'd have to make sure your owner was on board with the plan from the jump.

Your post got me thinking about an idea I've been kicking around for a while. What if you just never traded a first round pick? Like, as an organizational philosophy? BUT you always traded away talented (but not core) pieces after their primes? Over time would you be better off for it? So for example, you draft Filip Hronek and he turns into a top four defenseman. You keep signing him throughout his RFA period (usually ends around 27-28 years old, same as their primes). If you're out of playoff contention you trade him at the deadline for a haul, if you're in the playoffs you trade his rights in the offseason for something meager or let him walk for nothing. But you NEVER trade a 1st. That means you've got roughly 10 years worth of 1st round picks to find his replacement. Plus whatever additional picks you've gathered from similar trades previously. In the event of injuries you either sign a UFA (Chiarot or Maatta) or trade prospects and/or 2nd-3rd round picks to replace who you lost with a Walman level player. The advantages are this: 1. Over the hill players can still fetch big returns at the deadline. There are a million examples of teams getting 1st round picks in return for over the hill 30-35 year old players. So very often you'd have extra first and 2nd round picks to use however you wanted. 2. Trading a 1st round pick for a deadline rental almost never benefits your team. Lots of teams do it at the deadline and it only ever pays off for one of them. Even dynasty teams only win 2-3 times during their windows, so AT BEST you get a few trade wins and even more trade losses. 3. Your roster will always be full of studs to replace the guys you trade away at the end of their usefulness. You can confidently trade a Hronek at the end of his usefulness without any dropoff because you've got Seider and Edvinsson and Sandin Pellika coming right behind him. Obviously your drafting would have to be league average or better. You'd probably also only want to draft centers and defensemen with your 1st round picks. So in essence you ALWAYS trade your Manthas, Bertuzzis, and Hroneks, but never trade your Seiders or your 1sts. Am I crazy or is this a WAY better idea than trading a 1st for Elias Lindholm (for instance) and A) hoping that helps you win the Cup, and/or B) hoping the pick you traded away doesn't become Andrei Vasilevsky? Because Option A is unlikely and Option B is devastating.

You're probably in the ballpark, but it's hard to say how a trade packages will actually shake out these days because salary retention/cap casualties have value as well. Look at the Chychrun deal last year, or the Mantha trade a year before.