kickazz

I hate to say it but players who are usually at a disadvantage (aren't the biggest guys, aren't the fastest) are usually the smartest and most adaptable. Yzerman, Patrick Kane, Datsyuk, Zetterberg are a few that come to mind that were either small players who used their wits to make it far.

Agreed. Larkin’s speed drives his style of game. He’s not your Datsyuk type finesse player that tricks the opponent. He’s not your Zetterberg type player that outsmarts opponents with limited abilities. He’s a fast player that uses it to his advantage. What happens when his speed runs out? Can he finesse his way through? Is he as smart as Zet and adaptable as Zet or someone like Thornton? I don’t think so.

Hence he should also be a penalty killer. Of course you agree with that

Center, sometimes Wing.

Rasmussen is ____ and he ____. Fill in the blanks @Dabura

That’s the curse of being contrarian.

It was a comeback. A retort to my comment. A way to satisfy you in the crux of this little discussion.

Beyond the destruction of JoMa in this post, on a serious note, AA is one streaky player. Which could mean Larkin could end up breaking 30 before him.

That’s just a lame comeback

We turn our “L”s into “Lick my s*** Babcock, we’re getting that cup first!”

No obviously he wasn't trying to kill him, it was a hyperbole.

Yeah I mean if it was a superstar player then you keep him for sure; no questions asked. But a guy like Nyquist that ultimately wasn't really a difference maker (a good player but not the type that would change the momentum of a game) isn't worth throwing money at for 5 years or something. Put it this way, if it was 37 year old Datsyuk instead of 29 year old Nyquist on the trade deadline, this year, I would have kept older Datsyuk. That guy could convert a 1 goal game into a tie or a tie into a last minute lead easily and almost with a guarantee. If we wen't back to becoming super try-hards that kept getting 20th picks and kept getting early playoff round eliminations I would go crazy. That 2012-2017 limbo period was very frustrating. Zet and Dats just didn't have the help. We need to build correctly and Holland has more of less echoed this. 1-2 years of good high end draft picks and we might be there. I'm honestly excited for this years draft more than any draft since I've been alive just because we might end up getting #1.

He harai goshi'd him holy s***.. Judo has no place in hockey. That s*** is meant to be done on a rubber mat or in a ring that's pliable and bouncy (like MMA or WWE). Not on ICE. Wouldn't be surprised if he got a lifetime ban. Could have paralyzed or killed the guy instantly.. Helmet basically saved him. Do people not learn from the Todd Bertuzzi situation? Hockey fights are fun and great but damn try not to kill the guy..

Jack Hughes all the way man. He's guaranteed talent for the long haul it looks like. Plus the guy is named Jack. Who names their kid Jack anymore? It's not like its 1950 or something. What a throwback.

Ahh I see. Does height matter as much as it did in the 90s and 00s anymore though? I feel like speed and smarts can make up for it now.

Has Jack Hughes scored 50 in juniors yet. Also why isn't Caufield projected to be higher in the draft?

Gratz on the name calling.

Yzerman was a 4th pick not 20th. Check how many in the top 10 in 83 draft made HoF. Then check the from pick 10-20. Do the math and look up the word "probability".

First round pick. Jack Hughes. Even the post dead wings era; when we drafted Yzerman with the 4th pick; its been said that it was an instant seller and caught the attention of many. Yzerman singlehandedly sold tickets and brought life to Red Wing hockey. Superstars sell tickets. They make everyone around them better and they win championships.

Well yeah, we're not tanking as in purposely losing games. But the bolded parts is basically the way of getting a high draft pick. Which is what people equate to modern day tank. Neo was of the opinion that we don't get rid of Nyquist for draft picks. That we keep the secondary guys around, and if we finish in the 20th place it would be more respectable than finishing last and build through that. I'm saying that's stupid. Pardon my bluntness.

I know, I already argued this point previously that his first "Season" was spent playing 9 minutes on average and the year following was a little more. Last year was his first full actual year in a somewhat higher role. This would be the second in that continuing role and he's done well. Larkin is the better player overall. But goal scoring wise this question is legitimate for this year.

Yes the franchise is a joke now, the team confidence is so low that Larkin and AA can't even put up 20 goals. Player development is so terrible that we haven't managed to put together a franchise center yet. This guy Zadina we picked up is lazy and he sucks. Can't even shoot, could barely play in the NHL with the lackadaisical attitude in the locker room. You’re excused and so is your argument that would get the Red Wings nowhere aside from making you feel better.

Typical answer of a hater. Yes we are all Red Winge fans and the players’ fans. I’m guessing you must not be? FYI my favorite player currently is Larkin. I just happened to recognize another’s abilities and potential for growth rather than dismiss it 3 years into their career. I'm allowed to ask this question and make this thread.

Not a single name call towards you on there. But nice try, I understand it’s 2019 and everyone sensitive needs to have an attempt. (Also hypocritical given how much you criticize certain people of a party for being sensitive specifically when you bring up politics in the forums. Bravo). I insulted and dismissed your argument. Because it’s silly and purely rides pride. That's the kind of mentality that f***s up teams for years and years and one of my biggest pet peeves (see above with the colossal failure that Pistons had with your strategy; me being a Pistons fan obviously). Wanting a team to miss the playoffs and finish 20th place for ego satisfaction (since it’s not last place) rather than getting a high draft pick is dumb and counterproductive in a parity era. Plain and simple. And it's also not much different than the "rebuild on the fly" that Holland attempted no matter how much you think they're different. The end game is that same, we end up having mediocre picks; rather than top 5 picks. Arguing any further on this point would be like arguing with Jonas on one of his trolling arguments.

Well there’s 7 people who voted AA, not sure why it would be considered blasphemous to ask the question.