Dabura

Did he say Ryback? Casey Ryback is on this tank?!

Yep, this is pretty much how I see it playing out (assuming no trades). $6-6.5 x 6 for Larkin, $4-4.5 x 2 for Mantha. The others are easier to figure. I don't think they go for full term with Larkin because the cold truth is the jury's still out on what he's going to be at the NHL level. Personally, I'm bullish on him, but I've been wrong about young players before.... Same idea with Mantha: he has all the potential in the world, but a 48-point season and inconsistent performance probably shouldn't get you a monster long-term deal in this day and age, even if your ceiling is really high. So max term is 8 years, right? I have this weird thing where it's set in my mind that it's 7, even though I "know" it's 8. At any rate, I'm somewhat surprised by these two predictions, as I'd thought the $$$ would be bigger. I'd be interested to know if Matt Cane sees them signing these contracts with the Isles and Caps. If so, I guess it's less surprising to me. If not, and those are the offers that win bidding wars...wouldn't you expect the $$$ to be a little bigger? Maybe it's just me. *shrug*

It absolutely is an underdog story. Everyone looked over their roster before the season began and concluded they'd be lucky to make the playoffs this season.

Kinda wishing I'd put money on my preseason prediction that Vegas would make the SCF. What. a. story.

That's assuming he continues to suck. Maybe he does, maybe he doesn't -- but, personally, I'm willing to bet his current trade value is pretty negligible anyway. We'd be selling low. Like I said, he might have some value as a deal-clinching sweetener. But I reckon that's about the extent of his trade value right now.

To be fair, Bouchard isn't a sure thing. But I know what you mean. Larkin and Mantha have shown enough at the NHL level that we can at least tentatively identify them as core players. We don't have a Larkin or a Mantha on the back end, and while Cholowski and Hronek are both very promising, the operating assumption should be that neither of them is going to become That Guy. Hughes/Boqvist/Bouchard/Dobson would be the best defense prospect we've had in a very long time. For an organization that desperately needs an infusion of that kind of talent into the defense pipeline...well, picking one of those defensemen seems like a no-brainer. I guess the main counterargument, from where I stand, is that defensemen are kind of a crapshoot. If the Wings have some doubts about their ability to turn Hughes or Boqvist or Bouchard or Dobson into a top-pairing NHL defenseman and they're more confident in their ability to turn Wahlstrom or Tkachuk into a player who's as good as or better than Mantha, I'd say that's a respectable rationale for picking one of those wingers over any of those defensemen. I don't know if it'd be the right call, but I could appreciate the logic behind it. In theory, a Mantha-Larkin-Wahlstrom line could be an absolute juggernaut, even with a s***-tier defense group behind it.

Didn't mean to imply that you did. Was just saying. I mean, it's largely a matter of personal interpretation. I guess there's also an element of semantics. That being said, I haven't noticed a big difference between the way people are projecting Wahlstrom and the way people are projecting Bouchard. For defensemen, people have Dahlin in a class of his own and then Hughes, Boqvist, Bouchard, Dobson making up the second tier. For wingers, it's pretty much Svechnikov & Zadina at the top and Tkachuk & Wahlstrom in a tier ever-so-slightly below them. (Personally, I might actually put Wahlstrom right alongside Svechnikov and Zadina.) Some quick-read takes: http://www.mynhldraft.com/2018/NHL-Draft-Profiles/Evan-Bouchard http://www.mynhldraft.com/2018/NHL-Draft-Profiles/Oliver-Wahlstrom I think it also comes down to wing vs. defense. Is a scoring winger scoring at an elite rate? If so, then you can comfortably call him an elite scoring winger (relative to his peers). It's not as easy to evaluate a defenseman. If we're talking point production, Bouchard's elite (relative to his peers). If we're talking hockey IQ and playmaking ability, Bouchard's elite (relative to his peers). Do these things plus a perfectly competent defensive game give him true elite upside (at the NHL level)? Hard to say. It's not like it is with scoring wingers, where you just care about their ability to put the puck in the net and you can boil it down to basic stats.

Caught some WJC action, which helped me check off a bunch of names on the "to-see list." Have some friends all across Canada and once every few years I go on a big trip to visit all of them where they're living and we'll typically catch some local CHL action. This year was one of those years. Sometimes they'll send me "scouting reports" and/or crappy cell phone footage via the interwebz, because we're hopeless hockey nerds. Also have some friends in Scandinavia Land and it's the same basic dealy.

I've seen all of Hughes, Boqvist, Bouchard, Dobson in person. I've also seen Wahlstrom, Tkachuk, Zadina, Svechnikov, Dahlin in person. I've also seen Smith, Wilde, Veleno, Farabee, Noel, in person. Et al. Not that that confers any degree of expertise on me. But, point is: I SEEN SOME S***. The highlight packages you can find for all of these players on YouTube are, by their very nature, kind of misleading. If you only knew Boqvist through one of these videos, you'd think he's the next Doughty, or at least the next Gostisbehere. If you only knew Bouchard through the highlights, you'd think his shot is the only thing he has going for him. "Truth" is, Boqvist, when he's not making pretty plays in the o-zone, spends a decent amount of his time not really getting much accomplished, sometimes getting worked over in the d-zone because he's small and slight (though, to be fair, he's only a month away from being eligible for the 2019 draft, so he's quite young). There are definitely times where he seems more Kindl than wunderkind. With Bouchard's highlights, all you see is him scoring goals with well-placed shots, and that actually sells his overall game quite short -- while, admittedly, also neglecting the fact that he often tried to do way too much by himself this season and it often bit him right in the ass. Every one of these four defensemen (and Wahlstrom, and Zadina, and Svechnikov, and even Dahlin) has his strengths and his shortcomings. Of the four defensemen, the safest pick is probably Dobson, as he appears to have the highest floor of the four while also having very real NHL top-pairing potential. But I slightly favor Bouchard over any of the others. Why? Because I feel his best qualities match up almost perfectly with our most pressing needs on the back end, needs that have fundamentally and fatally handicapped our team in the absence of Rafalski and Lidstrom. The post-Lidstrom Wings struggle mightily on the breakout; Bouchard's first pass is "elite, elite." The post-Lidstrom Wings struggle mightily to string passes together; Bouchard's passing is "elite, elite." The post-Lidstrom Wings struggle mightily just to hold the offensive blue line, especially on the power play; the o-zone is Bouchard's kitchen, his office, his house The post-Lidstrom Wings struggle mightily to run a precise, consistently effective power play; Bouchard is a masterful PP QB. Maybe more than anything else, the post-Lidstrom Wings have desperately needed a true go-to guy on the blue line, a cornerstone player, someone who plays a ton of minutes and plays in all situations. A non-ancient leader. An engine. Someone who isn't just a skilled specialist. Someone who can help lift a team out of mediocrity instead of just being along for the ride. To me, Bouchard checks these boxes, and that's a really big deal. He was the London Knights' offense this season. He was counted on to lead a team that had just lost top talent to the NHL draft and he responded by owning the captaincy, playing big minutes, playing in all situations, being (mostly) accountable on the defensive side of the puck, and putting up 87 points in 67 games in the OHL. tl;dr we're getting tkachuk

For the record: Bouchard is not slow. Like, this isn't an actual thing. In comparison to Hughes or Boqvist? Sure, he's "slow." And maybe Dobson has better technique. Maybe. But this "Bouchard's skating is a real point of concern" is overblown nuttiness, IMHO.

You haven't seen a single assessment that suggests Bouchard has the potential to be an elite defenseman at the NHL level? I've been on the Bouchard bandwagon for a while now. While I don't think he's a lock to be a top-pairing defenseman at the NHL level, I do feel he's about as promising a prospect as you're going to find outside of the true marquee prospects like Ekblad, Dahlin, et al. Same with Wahlstrom: he's by no means a lock to become an elite winger at the NHL level, he's not in that Ultra Top-Tier class of prospects, but he's about as good a winger as you could hope to get with the 6th overall pick. Between the two, Bouchard is probably the riskier pick, if only because defensemen are generally more of a crapshoot. But, yeah, I wouldn't say there's a big difference between the two in terms of their projectability. Either one would be a great pick, neither one is a sure thing.

TBH, I'm just kinda busting your balls because I'm bored. lol As much as I hate our defense situation, I think I'd be ok with us taking Wahlstrom 6th overall. I admit that I've had the "What if he's the Kane to Larkin's Toews?" thought. It's probably a stupid thought, but oh well. Hope springs eternal!

Skill comes in many forms. Lidstrom wasn't flashy like Doughty is, but he controlled the ice. Keith was never flashy like Subban is, but (in his prime) he controlled the ice. Bouchard thinks the game and sees the ice as well as, if not better than, any of his Dman peers. His first pass is exceptional. His shot is exceptional. (Hughes barely has a shot. Boqvist needs to work on his accuracy.) He logs huge minutes. He's the best natural PP QB in this draft class. I don't see a real problem with his skating, beyond the fact that he doesn't skate ludicrously well like Hughes does. He can't stickhandle in a phone booth, but he's a defenseman. Not hardcore disagreeing with you, just saying. I'm cool with us taking any of Hughes, Boqvist, Bouchard, Dobson. I just don't think it's quite accurate to say Bouchard is less skilled than the others. I want *effective* players.

What is this "lack of skill" you speak of?

He's only the all-time greatest Buffalo Sabre. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taro_Tsujimoto

I like Other Dude, but he's no Taro Tsujimoto.

I wouldn't go that far. But certainly he'd be far and away the best D prospect we've had in ages.

Goalies are so hard to accurately assess and project that I just don't even think about them anymore. I'm hoping we have a future stud in Larsson and/or Petruzzelli, but I'm not counting on it...

Going sixth to Red Wings would be fine by Evan Bouchard [Kulfan, Detroit News] Craig Button, TSN’s chief draft analyst, feels Bouchard would be a good fit with the Red Wings. In fact, Button compares Bouchard to a popular former Wings’ defenseman in terms of their styles. “Larry Murphy,” Button said, when asked a player who reminds him of Bouchard. “Doesn’t play with a whole lot of fanfare, he won’t be in the highlights every night, but he’ll be on the ice at all the important moments and contribute in significant ways in all areas of the game. “Evan’s an excellent passer in every area of the game, he always has his eyes up, and in the offensive zone he has the ability to generate offense and produce points and goals inside the blue line. “There’s a really good chance he could be there at six (for the Wings). He’s a calm, excellent player.”

This is sort of where I was coming from with the Carlson talk. Knowing Holland, and knowing he wants a relatively quick rebuild, I've gotta think he's looking to sign or trade for a defenseman who would "tie the room together" and give us something we can tentatively identify as a future top four. Hughes/Boqvist/Bouchard/Dobson + Hronek + Cholowski is a promising group of defense prospects. Add one more high-end defenseman to the group and we could cautiously consider the defense problem addressed and resolved, at least for the time being. I dunno that I firmly believe Jake Bean is That Guy. It could be worth paying more to acquire a more proven player. But, yeah -- my point is that I think Holland is going to go fishing, starting next month at the draft. C - Larkin, Rasmussen W - Mantha, [some guy] D - [CAR guy], Hughes/Boqvist/Bouchard/Dobson, Hronek, Cholowski G - whocares Doesn't exactly scream "Back in business!" but it would at least gve us something workable, something to build around.

Svechnikov has never been quite as talented or quite as tantalizing as Mantha, but where he is right now does kind of remind me of where Mantha was when the infamous "very disappointing" comment was made. Svechnikov had a great rookie campaign in the AHL, then he was injured in preseason and went on to have a "very disappointing" sophomore season. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt and assuming that injury basically sank his season straight out of the gate. I'm not expecting greatness, but I do think he has the potential to be a respectable scoring-line winger in the NHL. I figure his trade value is pretty negligible right now, so I wouldn't be in a rush to move him -- unless, perhaps, adding him as a sweetener to a package is what allows us to get a worthwhile high-end defenseman.

THIS ISN'T EVEN MY FINAL FORM! Srsly tho, I kinda miss Outspoken General Manager Brian Burke. GMs these days are boring. Not enough heels, and the faces are all vanilla and uninteresting. Not enough personality, not enough drama, not enough controversy, not enough shots fired. Need moar truculence.

"No." - Hurricanes

21 years old...6'3"...drafted 5th overall...great skater...very high ceiling...put up 10 goals and 32 points last season in a role he probably wasn't quite ready for, on a scoring-challenged team........ If I'm Carolina, I only move him if I get an offer I can't refuse. I'm guessing there's a small group of players that they're going to actively shop. Guys like Skinner (who I like), Faulk (who I like), maybe Lindholm (who I like), maybe Rask (who I like), et al. I think they're going to try to shake up their core by changing out some of the more veteran players. Younger guys like Hanifin probably won't be shopped, but they'll at least listen to offers. Having said that, I do wonder what it'd cost the Wings to land Hanifin. I wouldn't offer the #6 pick, because there's a good chance that the player taken with that pick will be as good as Hanifin -- and my hope would be that Hughes/Boqvist/Bouchard/Dobson + Hanifin would give us a future top pairing. I've heard talk that the new owner wants the 'canes to become more physically imposing, "tougher to play against." How much would Rasmussen interest them? How much would Bertuzzi interest them? How much would Svechnikov interest them? How much would Vegas's 1st interest them? Maybe some combination of some of those pieces could get it done? Just spitballing.

Should've drafted Hossa instead of Franzen. Holland really screwed the pooch on that one, I tells ya.