Dabura

Fair enough. I doubt that's the choice we'd be looking at, though. I think you guys are overthinking this. Offer me Kakko and an established young stud and I'll listen. 3rd and 10th? Meh. That's some team attempting to swindle you. In this case, that team is the Avs, who can f*** right off with their get-rich-quick schemes.

EDIT: Oops, wrong thread.

Nah. Kane's put up 100 points this season on a weak team and he isn't even in his prime. He's been a driving force behind three championship runs. Players of his caliber are nearly impossible to find. I suppose your question isn't quite as clear as it could be. When you say, "...could be a Kane/Eichel/Rielly," are you saying they'll be as good as those players? Or are you merely saying their playing styles will be similar? They see me Kanin'. They hatin'.

Notes: Hirose and his family ready for Hirose's debut at MSG [DetroitRedWings.com] He was totes listening to some LGW.com HYPE! jams. Don't even try to deny it.

I take Kane. WHAT NOW, NERDS

Happy birthday, Vladdy!

if u love zegras so much why don't u marry him

It just occurred to me that I might've been reading you wrong and you're actually saying Holland *ISN'T* "sitting back and letting the team tumble in the standings." If that's your position...well, I guess we still disagree. Because I think that is, in fact, what Holland is doing.

Sure. But I feel like you're just disagreeing with me for the sake of disagreeing. Team is bad. Holland is "sitting back and letting the team tumble in the standings," i.e. he's allowing the team to suck, i.e. he's "embracing" the suck, i.e. he's "tanking." I get it. Losing is bad and unacceptable. But you're beating that drum while also acknowledging that Holland isn't exactly doing everything in his power to make sure the team is finishing as far away from 31st overall as possible. Why didn't he buy at the trade deadline? Why is he allowing rookies to take on expanded roles? Why aren't we all in on trying to climb the standings?

Ah, the '90s. What a decade.

No. It's aliens.

SHOTS FIRED

I think you're too hung up on the word "embracing." I'm not saying they're jumping up and down and celebrating that the team sucks. I'm saying they're owning it. They're allowing things to unfold naturally, for the time being.

Y'all need Jesus. smh. 3rd + 10th for Jack Hughes doesn't even get the conversation started for me. I hang up the phone. If I'm gonna have regrets related to Jack Hughes, I wanna regret that I took the projected superstar, not that I passed up the opportunity to take that player. That goes for any other similarly top-tier prospect, e.g. Auston Matthews in his draft year.

Prospect Ramblings [DobberProspects]

Oh, don't get me wrong, I think it's entirely possible that 3rd + 10th gets you two franchise players. But I think it's equally likely -- if not more likely -- that it gets you Pierre-Luc Dubois and Tyson Jost (3rd and 10th overall, respectively, in the 2016 draft). Hughes is about as close to being a sure-thing superstar as it gets and I just don't believe any organization should pass up the opportunity to get a player like that for free, unless they get an absolutely incredible offer. I'm talking, like, Kakko + Draisaitl.

Two questions: Why are we acting like Holland has a bad working relationship with the youth? Isn't Yzerman the guy who played hardball with Jonathan Drouin and ultimately traded his ass out of town?

That, and he's played on Jack Hughes's wing. I dunno that the Hughes factor should count against him, but I suppose it's something you have to consider. The DeBrincat comparison is a really easy one to make...and I buy it. Similar players. Nah. Hughes is more or less the best prospect an organization could ever hope to get. I'm not trading that for 3rd overall and 10th overall. I'm certainly not doing it for the f***ing Avalanche.

Losing is never acceptable (except when it is). You are a terrible person.

I don't believe anyone in the organization thinks losing is a good thing. However, "sitting back and letting the team tumble in the standings" is, to me, "embracing the suck." It's accepting the notion that losing a ton of games is ok. And why is it ok? Because of the deep hole the organization is in and the potential benefits of selling assets, stockpiling picks, and picking relatively early in every round. Like kickazz said, that's pretty much what tanking is.

As for the claim that the Wings aren't all that bad (and that moving Nyquist was, therefore, a miscalculation)...I agree and I disagree. We've lost a ton of one-goal games. Encouraging? Maybe. Fool's gold? Probably. We lose lots of games by only one goal, but it tends to be the opposition's superior top talent and superior depth that ultimately decides the outcome. When it's do-or-die time in the 3rd period of a close game and "next goal wins it," you want to be able to match your opponent's talent. If you can't, you're going to lose the majority of those games. We don't have the talent. Maybe soon, but not right now. We're "so close, yet so far." Nyquist? I don't think Nyquist really moves the needle in either direction. Mostly I just didn't want him on a $5M x 5 contract.