krsmith17

Has what we've been doing in the past been working? 4 Stanley Cups in the past quarter century, so I would say so, yes. You can say that we won't ever have a team like the '97 team, or the '98 team, or the '02 team, but we absolutely could have a team as good as the '08 team. We're in the middle of a rebuild, and have hit rock bottom. Of course things haven't been working for the past 10+ years. It's the natural cycle of sports. We did have a good, not great Jimmy Howard that we selected in the 2nd round. He never won s*** in the playoffs, but that's because he didn't have the teams in front of him, not because he wasn't a capable goaltender. If Corey Crawford could win multiple Stanley Cups, Jimmy Howard could have as well. I'm sure we could get another Jimmy Howard caliber goaltender via the draft, trade or even free agency, once we've built up enough talent in front of the net. Again with the no real top end talent at the top of the draft besides Wallstedt. It's bulls***. There will be top end talent outside of the goalie available at 6th overall. Yes, I do think there will be talent available in the latter half of the 1st round and 2nd round, but not more so than will be available at 6th overall... You did though... ...

So you think the only way to change that, is by drafting a goaltender in the top 10? LOL What? You don't know if there will be elite skaters available in the 1-15 range, but there might be elite talent available in the latter half of the 1st or 2nd round??? Kent Johnson likely isn't elite, but Logan Stankoven might be elite? I think it has much more to do with the fact that most general managers value skater positions more than goalie positions (for good reason), and also know how difficult it is to project the goaltender position. Wallstedt is going to be elite. All of the skaters are going to be bottom 6 guys. Makes sense...

Because the Red Wings have been bad at drafting and / or developing goaltenders for the past 25 years... It's not because they haven't been available. They just haven't been good at identifying goalie talent in these 18/19 year olds. Again, I don't buy this being an AWFUL draft with NO elite talent. It's just such an unknown because of lack of games played and in-person viewings. There will be elite talent that comes out of this draft. Yzerman and co. just have to identify who that elite talent is. Maybe it's Eklund / Johnson. Maybe it's Edvinsson / Hughes. Maybe it's Wahlstedt... I have no idea. Hopefully Yzerman does... C'mon man. Skaters ARE much easier to predict. That's a fact. There's a reason most of the top skaters are taken in the first couple rounds, with a few busts mixed in, and a few slipping to the mid to late rounds, while the top goalies are taken all throughout the draft. Sure, the elite of the elite are often taken at the top, but that's no different with skaters. I'm aware how "exceptional" Wallstedt is "projected", and how "mediocre" a lot of the skaters are "projected", which is why I wouldn't hate the pick. All I'm saying is that IF Yzerman believes Wallstedt could be a true number one goaltender, and McTavish / Clarke (or whoever) could be a true number one center / defenseman, then I hope he leans skater, and worry about the goaltender later. Absolutely. But that same logic applies to a goaltender. Could Wallstedt become a 1G? Sure, but there could also be one available at 38, 48, 52, or 70... Yes, time will tell, just like any draft / future projection on kids...

I don't think you need a goaltender that can steal games every night though, if you have elite skaters. That's the point. Tampa is the best team in the league, and Vasilevskiy is considered one of the best goaltenders in the world right now. Is Tampa great because of Vasi, or is Vasi great because of Tampa. I'm sure it's a bit of both. But Point, Stamkos, Kucherov, Palat, Killorn, Coleman, Hedman, Sergachev, McDonagh, etc. may play a pretty big role in the team's success as well... Vasilevskiy was definitely on again last night, and maybe Tampa lose that game if he wasn't. But he's also been off some games, lost games that they should have otherwise won. It happens. It happened to Hasek, Brodeur, Roy (as we know all too well), and it will happen to every goalie ever. It goes the other way too. Average goalies like Bernier or Osgood can singlehandedly win you games, and go on heaters and even win you Cup(s), IF you have the skaters in front of him to allow it to happen...

You're a lot more likely to find a number one goaltender at pick 38, 48, or 52, than you are to find a 1C or 1D. I also don't think Wallstedt is any more of a sure thing than a few of the skaters that could be available at 6th overall. And that's kind of the point from the anti-goaltender in the top 10 (or 1st round) perspective. My drafting philosophy has always been, never take a goaltender in the 1st round, because "goalies are voodoo", and skaters are much easier to project. That, and like I've mentioned, I'd just prefer to build at team of elite skaters, and have good, not great goaltending. However, this year, I'm not completely against taking Wallstedt, because... But, maybe there is a skater that Yzerman is very excited about in this draft. And if that's the case, I'd much rather take the skater. Regardless what anyone thinks of this draft, there will likely be a 1C and / or a 1D available at 6th overall. It's just a matter of if Yzerman will take that player. I don't believe this is a "weak draft", like so many are saying. I just think it's a under-scouted draft, because of the pandemic...

I doubt it. I don't get this at all. Blashill has had some of the worst NHL lineups in the modern NHL. He's a good coach with an awful roster. Why would Yzerman can him as soon as he builds up a respectable roster, and the team starts turning the corner? I mean, sure, it's possible that happens, but I just don't think Yzerman sees Blashill as a lame duck.

I don't know if Blashill will be around beyond the rebuild, but I can see it... He's a good coach, well respected around the league, and Yzerman must like what he sees from him.

Yeah, you probably could be wrong on something you have no idea about... I'm not saying I do. I have no idea what Tanguay will bring as a coach. I guess that's why I found it odd to see such a comment, as if he's a terrible coach or something... Either way, I like the hire. It'll be nice to see a fresh look on the power-play. Maybe we will see less of the neutral zone drop pass, less perimeter play, quicker puck movement, more player movement, more down low action, more use of the bumper, less use of the net front, etc...

There may not be a franchise altering skater available at 6, but there likely will be at least one 1C and / or 1D available at 6. Who that is, I have no idea. I would hope Yzerman and his staff do know, or at least have a better idea than any of us here. Maybe it's Johnson. Maybe it's McTavish. Maybe it's Edvinsson. Maybe it's Hughes. But if any of those guys are available, and Yzerman believes they will develop into legit top line guys, I say take one of them over the goalie. But again, if he takes Wallstedt, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. For me, I just think top goalies are less important to the makeup of a team than any skater position, and are also easier to fill via trade or free agency. Or maybe we luck out and one of the guys currently in the system pans out (unlikely). I'd rather build up forward and defense, and worry about goaltending later. Just because it has been, and still is somewhat of a crapshoot....

I don't think a single person is saying that "elite goalies are easy to get"... What some people are saying is that you don't need "elite" goalies to win. Which is absolutely true. Again, if Yzerman believes Wallstedt is the best player available, this is the one year I'd be somewhat okay with taking the goaltender. If that is the route he wants to go, I hope he attempts a trade back, and swings for the fences with his other 1st, and 2nd round picks...

Kind of an odd comment. Do you have any idea what Tanguay is as a coach? His coaching strategies / philosophies? What his systems look like? What assistant coach could Yzerman have brought in that would have signified to hookers that the tank / rebuild is over, or nearing the end? Based on what exactly?

Nice! I assume he's taking over for Bylsma, handling the offense / power-play? Tanguay was a hell of a player, and seemed to have had some success with Iowa in the AHL the past couple seasons. Hopefully we have a whole new look on the power-play next season... Tanguay is good buddies with my cousin. I've met him a few times, at my family cabin a couple times in the (off-season) summer when he was still with Colorado / Calgary, and at my cousins wedding like 15 years ago... Good dude.

I wouldn't say Alnefelt is a "surefire #1 starter", but I don't think (m)any 18-20 year old goaltenders are, and that includes Askarov and Wallstedt. Sure, they look great now, but we've seen goalies this good flame out in the past. It could happen with these guys as well. Again, if Yzerman takes Wallstedt 6th overall, I'll trust the pick, and hope it works out, but it wouldn't be my first choice. I'd much rather acquire a goaltender via trade or free agency. I've mentioned Alnefelt in the past, and it makes a ton of sense. "Why take the risk and keep doing the same thing we've been doing for 25 years without success"? Umm you are aware that we've won 4 Stanley Cups in that span, right?... If anything, that proves that maybe we shouldn't "waste" a top 10 pick on a goaltender. All of those Cup teams were built around elite skaters.

In my opinion, Cholowski has earned it over Lindstrom. But it's not just about what they've done so far in their early careers. It's also about how you project them. If everything goes right for Lindstrom, he's a solid 3rd pair, stay-at-home defenseman that can kill penalties. That sort of defenseman can be acquired any year via free agency or low cost trade. If everything goes right for Cholowski, he could be a 2nd pair, puck-moving defenseman that can quarterback a power-play. These players are a little harder to find, and cost a little more in free agency / trade.

Not at all how any of that went down... You've called Zadina a "bust", and said both Zadina and Cholowski "suck". That's not simply saying that you don't believe they will develop like where they were picked... I've never said Rasmussen sucks. Just that there were better players to choose from where he was picked. I said it on draft day, and I maintain that stance today. If you were banging on the table for DeBrincat in 2016, and Hughes in 2018, I'd understand you saying we should have taken those guys instead of Cholowski and Zadina. You weren't though. Anyway, I'm done. Stecher should be protected over Lindstrom.

Yes. Both can very much be true. Not sure why that's so difficult to understand. I also like Cholowski, but I wouldn't have been happy if Holland picked him in the top 10 with Sergachev, Bean and Chychrun still on the board... Cholowski was picked right around where Rasmussen should have been picked, is producing at a similar clip, despite being a defenseman, but Cholowski "sucks", and Ras is destined for greatness... Makes sense...

I wouldn't take on both of those contracts. Both have been productive in Tampa, but neither would put up near those point totals in Detroit. Tampa would make that deal in a heartbeat though. They'll be desperate to move one or both of those players.

Based on this, I'm going to assume no matter how many times I say that I'm not down on Rasmussen, I'm down on where he was picked, it's not going to sink in... I'm done with this convo, but I'll just say one more time, I really do hope you and @The 91 of Ryans are right, and Big Ras becomes a monster for us in a couple years.

I'm all for "helping" Tampa out to take Alnefelt off their hands. Palat (1 year at $5.3M), Johnson (3 years at $5M), or Killorn (2 years at $4.45M)...

Sure, let's do that. Based on what? McKenzie's list? His rankings are based on information from NHL scouts... He was probably ranked at 9 because he caught wind that the Red Wings were really high on him. A few other outlets had him in that range as well, but there were also quite a few that had him in the late teens, early twenty's, where I personally think he should have gone. But myself and a few others thought right... at least so far... Maybe Rasmussen pops off and becomes a stud shut-down 2C that puts up 50-60 points. I just don't see it. I hope I'm wrong...

Sure, and they're all fair excuses reasons to give Rasmussen more time. He is young. He will improve. I don't think he'll ever be better than a handful of other players I would have taken in that spot though. And that's the point here. I'm not saying Rasmussen is a bust. I'm not saying to trade his ass. I'm simply saying we could have made better use of that pick.

LOL If this was basically all you have been saying, you wouldn't have received much (if any) debate at all. The problem is, that's not at all what you were saying. You called Zadina a bust before he ever played a single game for the Red Wings... Also, Zadina was not a reach. Not even close. Most Wings fans went into the 2018 draft, hoping that Zadina would fall to 6. Understanding that it was a long shot. He fell, Holland picked him, and Red Wings fans everywhere (except mackel) rejoiced... The year prior, going into the 2017 draft, myself, and a few others were hoping we would take pretty much any player, other than Rasmussen. Big Ras was a reach. Zadina was not. For sure. That Palat - Point - Kucherov line really seems to struggle (gets caved innnnnn), especially in the playoffs... Regardless, you want to add more size and grit to that top six? Not hard. Draft a player in the 2nd or 3rd round that can bring a physical element. Trade one of the many small, skilled wingers, for a big boi winger. Sign one of the many grit guys in free agency every year. Just don't waste a top 10 pick on one...

This is basically all any of us have been saying... No one thinks Rasmussen is a bad player, just that he was a reach at 9th overall, when there were clearly better options on the board. This team and this rebuild would look dramatically different (much better) if we had Necas instead of Rasmussen... Raymond - Larkin - Bertuzzi Vrana - Necas - Zadina Fabbri - Veleno - Berggren Smith - Pearson - Erne ToO SoFt ThOuGh...

Not sure I follow the logic of just including 1st rounders, but sure. Even if we're just including 1st rounders (not sure why), there are still easily 20 players as good or better than Rasmussen in my opinion.

I think every one of those players are at least debatably, some indisputably better than Ras. The point was where Rasmussen would go in a re-draft. So 2nd round players (and later) can go ahead of 1st round players (even top 10 picks) ya dink...