krsmith17

Source? I'd prefer it to be a 2019 2nd, but I'd do it... The Vegas pick is 30, not 31.

... You seem like a boring pick.

No.

I think we'll take at least a few with our 11 picks...

Yeah, I just seen it on Twitter. No reliable source though. Hunter would be a fantastic add for this organization. Whether as a coach, scout or some sort of managerial role. Guy is a phenomenal talent evaluator.

Anyone else hear any rumor on Dan Bylsma as a potential candidate for one of the assistant coaching vacancies? I've never been a huge fan of Bylsma, but he could be a decent candidate to replace Torchetti on the offense / power-play side. Thoughts?

Why would the only potential defensemen drafted over the next two seasons that will be ready by 2020 be the number 6 overall this year? Sure, that could be the case, but there's no reason to think whoever we take with any of those picks mentioned (2018 - 30, 33, 36 (we could also move up) / 2019 potential top 10 pick), could be ready by then. Hronek was drafted 53rd overall in 2016, and he is expected to compete for a spot in training camp. I don't expect him to make it out of camp, but wouldn't be at all surprised if he is up at some point this season. We will likely be picking a defenseman 20 picks higher in what is projected to be a much deeper draft. I think it's a very strong possibility that whoever we draft there could be ready in two years time. Of course I'm not suggesting a lateral move. I'd only replace Ericsson if we can find a quality replacement. Here's where I think we disagree... I think finding an upgrade over a 36 year old Ericsson will be very easy. There's also no guarantee that E would even want to continue to play beyond this contract. I'd say there's a high probability that he'd retire at 36. He will have made over $38M over his career with the Wings. Liv will be 7 years old, so he might want to spend more time with his wife and daughter, rather than playing another season (or however many you think he might play) as a 6th / 7th defenseman. If we must keep a player or two around for "veteran leadership", my personal choice would be the two younger guys. I think a 30 year old DeKeyser and 29 year old Jensen would provide the same leadership qualities Ericsson would, while providing better play on the ice. I don't think Jensen would receive a significant raise, nor do I think Ericsson would take a significant pay-cut. Let's just say for argument's sake, we meet in the middle and we could sign either for $2.5M. I'd personally prefer a 29 year old Jensen over a 36 year old Ericsson at that cap hit, and like I said, I don't think Jensen would command that much, nor do I think Ericsson would sign for that little. I really hope our biggest problem with the defense in two years time is who should be our 6th / 7th defenseman...

McKee is no longer under contract with the Wings. Throw in McIlrath and Smith and I think it's a fair deal...

What about 7th overall?

Nielsen does have a NMC / NTC in which he'd have to submit a 10 team no trade list. The same would apply for the expansion draft though... If Holland really wants to trade him, he'd be able to. I "wouldn't mind" trading Abdelkader either, but like I said, I just don't see Holland trading an alternate captain.

If teams (GM's) learned anything from this past expansion draft, it should have been "Don't make any f***ing side deals!" Let them take their player and move on. Besides, I just don't think it's worth losing a pick to get rid of any of those players. Helm will only have a year or two left on his contract, and is a very solid bottom six forward. There's no way Holland is going to trade an alternate captain. And I believe Nielsen has enough value that you'd be able to trade him in a year or two for a decent return, nevermind giving up any assets to get rid of him.

For sure. I just don't see DeKeyser going anywhere. I can see him possibly given an "A" in the next couple years, or maybe even as early as next year, when Kronwall retires. He's under contract for the next 4 seasons, and he's a guy I can see being extended beyond that. Yeah, I don't think a player needs to be a "vet" to be a leader. Larkin will likely be the captain in a couple years and he'll be relied upon to provide leadership on and off the ice. Mantha as well. I doubt Athanasiou will even be here in a couple years. I don't see Abdelkader going anywhere, but I agree that we should be looking to trade Nielsen in the next year or two. I agree, but I don't see any reason that can't be DeKeyser or a youngish (26-30 year old) UFA. I don't think a "leader" needs to be 30+, and certainly not 35+.

Meh, I just don't see Ericsson with the Wings beyond next season. I really do think Holland's mentality has changed, and he'll be much more focused on getting younger going forward. It's the way of the new NHL and he's going to have to change his ways to keep up. You're also forgetting that we have those three picks, 30, 33 and 36 that we'll likely see at least one defenseman taken. Let's just say we take Samuelsson or Miller with one of those picks. All of sudden they're in the mix 2-3 years from now as well. We also have a 1st and two 2nds next year, and we'll likely have more than that after this year's trade deadline. I think it's very possible that we could have as many as 9 or 10 picks in the first two round of the next two drafts. That's a lot of picks. You'd have to think (hope) at least a couple turn out to be top 6 NHL defensemen. Then you also have the possibility of trades or UFA signings from outside the organization. I think we'll see a massive turnover over the next two seasons. I don't see any of Kronwall, Ericsson, Daley, Green, Ouellet or Jensen with this team beyond next season. If any are still here, I'd say maybe Green is in the final year of a 3 year extension, or Jensen is playing on the bottom pair for peanuts.

How about... Bean - Bouchard / Dobson Cholowski - Hronek DeKeyser - Jensen ?

Gotcha. I'm against trading up from 6, because I don't see a big enough drop off from 3 to 6, to offset the loss of what would likely be 2 high 2nd round picks. Maybe if we were getting a Zadina calibre center or defenseman at 3, I'd consider it, but not for another (right-handed) winger...

I agree. I'd prefer to hold onto a couple of those 2nd rounders, because there are a bunch of players I like in that range. However, if we can trade one or two, plus, to move up into the top 10, or even 15, I'd do it. I'm a big believer in quality over quantity. I'd like to trade picks in next year's draft, and then replenish them at next year's trade deadline. We need to start restocking that cupboard.

Are you saying we should or shouldn't try to move up? I could be wrong, but it almost seems like you're saying we shouldn't, but based on that list, and 2nd round picks in general, I think you'd be crazy not to. That is a pretty lackluster group of players. A lot of busts and sub-par NHLers. If we can move up into the top 10, I'd pay the price (within reason) to get up there.

For sure. If the trade is with Vancouver, I'd personally hope Bouchard is still available, and take Bouchard / Wahlstrom at 6 / 7. If the trade is with Edmonton, I'd take Wahlstrom at 6, and hope Dobson is still available at 10. Either scenario would be a huge shot in the arm for this organization. I agree. I don't think the 4 picks would get that deal done. However, it is Chiarelli we're talking about here... Back when MacTavish was running the Oilers draft, in 2013 he traded 37th overall for 83, 88, 94, 96, and 113 in two trades. The 10th overall, especially in such a deep draft, is much different than the 37th overall in a relatively weak draft though. What do you think of my proposed trade? Still not enough? What would you change / add to make it work for both sides? I know it's never going to happen, but it's still fun to discuss.

Tyler Dellow of The Athletic wrote an interesting article based on Eric Tulsky's model on the cost of trading up in the draft. https://theathletic.com/382776/2018/06/08/dellow-on-the-value-of-draft-picks-and-a-look-at-reasonable-trades-the-canadian-teams-could-make/ He only looked at the 5 Canadian teams; Montreal - 3rd, Ottawa - 4th, Vancouver - 7th, Edmonton - 10th, Toronto - 25th, (Calgary and Winnipeg don't have a 1st round pick in this year's draft). Detroit were mentioned as a trade partner for all five picks. According to the model and what Dellow sees as fair value, we'd have to give up the following to move up for each pick... 3rd overall - 6 and one or (more likely) two of 30, 33, 36 4th overall - looks like a typo in the article, but I would assume similar to the 3rd overall... 7th overall - 30, 33, 36 and 67 10th overall - 30, 33 and 36 25th overall - 30 and 67 I've already said that I'm against trading up from our 6th overall, but trading up to add another top 10 pick (7-10) really intrigues me. This model is based on draft picks only, but what would it cost if we added a player / prospect / pick(s) in future drafts? Based on the two trades involving the 7th and 10th overall picks, would Athanasiou, Vegas' 1st round pick or Ottawa's 2nd round pick, plus the Islanders 2019 2nd round pick be enough? Fair value for both sides? Too much? Not enough? I'd personally love for Holland to pull off this sort of trade to get both Bouchard and Wahlstrom. I think (hope) Holland will be aggressive, but I doubt he pulls this off...

I'd say Cholowski and Hronek are locks to make it, but I'd give Saarijarvi and Lindstrom a 50/50 chance, at best. I think your point was more so that we will likely have a very young defense corp in the next few years though, and that I agree with. I still think we should and probably will acquire at least one of those young defensemen via trade. And like you said, at least one through the next two drafts. Yeah, we'll definitely need a veteran defenseman or two around to guide / mentor the kids, but I highly doubt that guy will be Ericsson. DeKeyser will still be under contract by that time, so unless he's traded before then, which I highly doubt will happen, I'd expect him to be that guy. I've been one of the few that hasn't ragged on Ericsson or his contract over the years. Sure, he's overpaid, but it's (he's) not near as bad as some fans make it out to be. However, I think it would be a huge mistake to extend a 36 year old Ericsson. Most defensemen start to really slow down in their mid 30's. I really can't imagine Ericsson playing quality minutes beyond 36. I'd prefer neither. A "veteran" doesn't need to be ancient (to NHL standards) to provide leadership, he just needs to have been around for a few (5-7ish) years. There's no reason to re-sign a way-past-his-prime player like Daley or Ericsson, when DeKeyser or any 28-30 year old UFA defenseman can fill that role. Daley's contract is 3/4 Ericsson's, but there's no reason we couldn't retain half in the final year, or even at this year's deadline, making both players attractive to other teams as depth defensemen. I think teams would be interested in Daley and / or Ericsson at just over $2M. If not at this year's trade deadline, definitely next year. Neither are going to garner a big return, but Daley could fetch us a 3rd or 4th round pick (2nd if we're lucky), and Ericsson could probably fetch us a 5th or 6th round pick. Both players have a NTC, which make them more difficult to move, but if the team wants to trade them, Ericsson would have to provide a 19 team no-trade list this season, and Daley, a 15 team no-trade list, 10 days prior to this season's trade deadline. I'd be shocked if any of Kronwall, Ericsson, Daley or Green are here beyond the next two seasons. And that includes the potential of Green being extended this summer. If he is re-signed, I don't see it being for anything more than two years.

Not gonna happen. I honestly believe the organization philosophy has shifted. Ericsson may not even last 2 years in Detroit...

Trip to the D to see a Wings game.

Cholowski > Sambrook

Hey man, everybody knows you don't actually have to pay up on internet bets... Otherwise you'd owe me a trip to Detroit...

Yeah, I've never had much of a problem with the ripening process for the most part in Detroit. I think most kids need it, especially being later picks than most teams have seen over the past couple decades. It's also very easy to push a kid back to Grand Rapids when you're trying to compete for a Cup every season. After all, "the NHL isn't a developmental league". Now that we're at the lower end of the cycle, and we're actually starting to rebuild, get higher draft picks and get younger, we're already starting to see some younger players make the roster much younger than we have in what seems like forever. Mantha probably would have made the roster the year after being drafted, if he hadn't fractured his tibia. Larkin made the roster a year after being drafted. Rasmussen will likely make the roster this season, a year after being drafted. I fully expect whoever we pick at 6 in this year's draft to challenge for a spot this coming season, at worst will make the team next season. Defensemen are a little slower developing but it's expected that both Cholowski and Hronek will challenge for a spot this season, two years after being drafted. In saying all that, we really need to start taking advantage of these players on ELC's, and the only way to do that is to make room on the roster. Holland needs to get rid of some bad contracts over the next couple seasons. Some will expire over that time anyway, so it's really only a couple players he needs to try to ship out.