ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022 Report post Posted March 14, 2017 8 minutes ago, kipwinger said: I agree for the most part. My understanding is that a whole series of scouts evaluate each player, score them, and then pool their scores to determine the final draft ranking. This likely mitigates the affect that any one scout has on the final determination. But like I said, this wouldn't be affective if too many of your scouts valued the same types of traits, or tended to undervalue or not recognize, others. I do think that quite a lot of teams promote "yes men" however. Not that people think to themselves "I'm going to hire a guy just because he thinks like I do". I imagine they know these people for years, have lots of conversations about hockey in which they seem to have "similar ideas" (i.e. say the kinds of things each other like to hear) and so naturally think the person "fits right in" to the organizational culture. Again, look at Lowe and McTavish. Great players, but idiot managers who just keep turning to each other for insights that neither of them had to begin with. All because they were buddies and presumably liked how the other thought about hockey. Sometimes its important for organizations to hire people who don't "fit in". I don't have a problem with the Wings promoting guys like Malts or Draper. But if I needed to hire any new scouts I'd be damn sure whoever I got hadn't spent years as a penalty killing, depth forward, with limited offensive ability. In any organization, if you're picked people well to begin with, you don't need to find more people to reinforce what you're (presumably) doing well to begin with. You should look for people to complement, innovate, and add to what you're already doing well. Of course, politics happens in all business. I don't know a lot about Lowe and MacTavish to be perfectly honest. Edmonton? I like to think the Red Wings are a bit smarter than some of the backwards teams. Since the 90s we've done a very good job drafting. I would attribute any detriment to our recent scouting to Yzerman, Nill, and Babs taking scouts with them, not Maltby or Draper. Part of that being I have no idea what actual role/power they have in the organization, and I have no reason to think it's bad. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kipwinger 8,524 Report post Posted March 14, 2017 1 minute ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said: Of course, politics happens in all business. I don't know a lot about Lowe and MacTavish to be perfectly honest. Edmonton? I like to think the Red Wings are a bit smarter than some of the backwards teams. Since the 90s we've done a very good job drafting. I would attribute any detriment to our recent scouting to Yzerman, Nill, and Babs taking scouts with them, not Maltby or Draper. Part of that being I have no idea what actual role/power they have in the organization, and I have no reason to think it's bad. I don't know either. And I don't even think we draft badly. As I said elsewhere, I think we've drafted really well lately to be honest. I really like Tyler Wright as the director of scouting. As far as I know, Yzerman didn't really have much of a "scouting" roll. I think that was primarily the purview of Nill, MacDonnell, and Fischer in North America, and Andersson and Vakurov in Europe while Yzerman was around. But your point is valid. I think you're right though that we've had a lot of turnover in our scouting ranks the last few years. Thankfully there hasn't been much fall off to speak of. And as I said elsewhere, I think there's a misperception that getting late round draft steals was easier than it actually is because we had a lot of success with that for a while with guys like Dats, Z, Franzen, Filppula, etc. But the truth is, guys like that almost never turn out to be that good. We weren't better at drafting back then, we just got really, really, really lucky. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022 Report post Posted March 14, 2017 19 minutes ago, kipwinger said: I don't know either. And I don't even think we draft badly. As I said elsewhere, I think we've drafted really well lately to be honest. I really like Tyler Wright as the director of scouting. As far as I know, Yzerman didn't really have much of a "scouting" roll. I think that was primarily the purview of Nill, MacDonnell, and Fischer in North America, and Andersson and Vakurov in Europe while Yzerman was around. But your point is valid. I think you're right though that we've had a lot of turnover in our scouting ranks the last few years. Thankfully there hasn't been much fall off to speak of. And as I said elsewhere, I think there's a misperception that getting late round draft steals was easier than it actually is because we had a lot of success with that for a while with guys like Dats, Z, Franzen, Filppula, etc. But the truth is, guys like that almost never turn out to be that good. We weren't better at drafting back then, we just got really, really, really lucky. I do agree we have drafted well recently. Which is strange considering my theory that it should be worse with scouting losses. You can call it luck, but I think the Wings benefited a lot by just being willing to take a chance on untapped markets for NHL players. Especially in the 90s. They took a risk - where as a different team might have played it safe and drafted another big bodied Canadian boy - and it paid off. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kickazz 5,459 Report post Posted March 14, 2017 4 hours ago, krsmith17 said: I prefer nachos and beer, to actually watch the draft, rather than how people react to the draft on a forum. That's just me though... I'm an all rounder, I like to watch the draft and watch computer GM's implode. 1 ChristopherReevesLegs reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LeftWinger 4,963 Report post Posted March 14, 2017 4 hours ago, Jacksoni said: Dunno I think that redhead dude would be good for us. Adds colors, you know? He's absolutely my first choice after Patrick. Maybe even before Patrick. I would not be mad if he took either of them over the other. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LeftWinger 4,963 Report post Posted March 14, 2017 1 hour ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said: I do agree we have drafted well recently. Which is strange considering my theory that it should be worse with scouting losses. You can call it luck, but I think the Wings benefited a lot by just being willing to take a chance on untapped markets for NHL players. Especially in the 90s. They took a risk - where as a different team might have played it safe and drafted another big bodied Canadian boy - and it paid off. They pretty much failed in drafting in the 90's, especially in untapped markets. They got Holmstrom in 94 (not Holland,) then Datsyuk in 98 and Z in 99. But the rest...no luck. No hidden gems in late rounds, and really a lot of hot garbage in the early rounds. Even before Holland there was a lot crap picks too, so not just putting it on him. They need to draft the best player in the position they need. This year, being a lottery pick, in my opinion it'd Patrick, Tippett or vilardi. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LeftWinger 4,963 Report post Posted March 15, 2017 Holland has done right then last few years in the 1st round. I just hope he doesn't blow the cat this time with a top 5. It'll be like him to draft Liljegren in the top 5 if he's still there instead of Tippett or Vilardi if they're still there. I just believe Tippett or Vilardi would have the greatest impact on this team. But we need so much, it's hard to fill all our needs in one draft. We need a #1 center, a #1 right wing scorer, a #1 defenseman and they way it looks maybe a #2 defenseman as well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022 Report post Posted March 15, 2017 35 minutes ago, LeftWinger said: They pretty much failed in drafting in the 90's, especially in untapped markets. They got Holmstrom in 94 (not Holland,) then Datsyuk in 98 and Z in 99. But the rest...no luck. No hidden gems in late rounds, and really a lot of hot garbage in the early rounds. Even before Holland there was a lot crap picks too, so not just putting it on him. They need to draft the best player in the position they need. This year, being a lottery pick, in my opinion it'd Patrick, Tippett or vilardi. Kozlov, Eriksson, Holmstrom, Datsyuk, Zetterberg I always forget Fedorov, Lidstrom, and Konstaninov are 89. 2000 through 2002 were also some big drafts for us. When I said 90s this is essentially what I meant. Also not arguing that it wasn't luck. They gambled and it paid off. Gambling is essentially luck. However, the only other team I remember that was willing to make gambles like this was NJD. Maybe Vancouver? I don't remember good 1 LeftWinger reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DickieDunn 2,571 Report post Posted March 15, 2017 Larkin, AA, Mantha, Svechnikov are a good base for a future forward unit. Add in Smith and a free agent and they're good to go. Defense is far and away a bigger need, unfortunately I don't think there's any D worth a top 5 pick. If they can get a top end D under 25 years old for their #1 this year I think they need to seriously consider it.Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Buppy 1,720 Report post Posted March 15, 2017 While all the Draper/Maltby/organizational-philosophy-on-scouting-and-promoting-former-players talk is no doubt interesting in a way, I feel I should point out that the specifics have no actual foundation in reality. Draper is an assistant to Holland, not a scout. Maltby is a pro scout, providing input on potential trade and FA targets, and scouting upcoming opponents. Very different role than an amateur scout, who provides input on potential draft selections. Beyond that, the simple fact that the majority of scouts around the league were never anything at the NHL level is indisputable proof that what kind of NHL player someone was is completely irrelevant. This is how false narratives start. Random musings, lacking any substantial analysis and more often than not lacking simple fact-checking...then some fan eager for something or someone to blame picks it up and runs with it. 5 Jonas Mahonas, amato, BinMucker94 and 2 others reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022 Report post Posted March 15, 2017 Based on need, I really want to draft a top D-man... however, if we're going to draft best available, that HAS to be a center. The top end of this draft is pretty much all Cs and two Ds. I say draft a solid C now and go for high end D-men next season. Next season is the complete opposite of this year, and is LOADED with high quality D-men: Dahlin, Boqvist, Bouchard, Addison, Hughes, McIsaac, Merkley, Bicheler... This is why I think Holland should pass on Liljegren 1 Dominator2005 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
frankgrimes 1,836 Report post Posted March 15, 2017 How about waiting till the Wings find out which top 5 player they'll get? If it's #1 Patrick is a no brainer for sure at 4 or possibly 6 things will get much harder. 1 kliq reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krsmith17 7,191 Report post Posted March 15, 2017 I'd draft the best forward available (Patrick / Vilardi / Tippett), try to trade up to get another 1st and draft the best defenseman available (Hague / Foote) there. Or just draft as many defensemen in the 2nd and 3rd rounds and hope to strike gold on one of them. I still say we should be aggressively shopping this summer for that top pairing defenseman though. We need to offload a bad contract or two as well. Holland has his work cut out for him. I think this summer should be a good indicator whether or not Holland is capable of pulling this team through a rebuild... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LeftWinger 4,963 Report post Posted March 15, 2017 Lol, thats what was said about Holland last year...so last summer was supposed to be a good indicator and now this summer is. Next summer? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krsmith17 7,191 Report post Posted March 21, 2017 Craig Button has us taking defenseman Cale Makar at number 4... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mackel 681 Report post Posted March 21, 2017 (edited) http://www.tsn.ca/craig-s-list-lots-of-talent-after-patrick-hischier-1.702428 Interesting stuff... Edited March 21, 2017 by mackel Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022 Report post Posted March 21, 2017 11 minutes ago, krsmith17 said: Craig Button has us taking defenseman Cale Makar at number 4... A D-man under 6 ft? My word Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mackel 681 Report post Posted March 21, 2017 10 minutes ago, krsmith17 said: Craig Button has us taking defenseman Cale Makar at number 4... It would be nice to have a high end Canadian talent on the team, it's been a long time. 5 minutes ago, mackel said: http://www.tsn.ca/craig-s-list-lots-of-talent-after-patrick-hischier-1.702428 Interesting stuff... Tippett has dropped bigly to #20. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022 Report post Posted March 21, 2017 3 minutes ago, mackel said: It would be nice to have a high end Canadian talent on the team, it's been a long time. Why? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mackel 681 Report post Posted March 21, 2017 1 minute ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said: Why? it's a dynamic we don't have. I think we have our quota of marginal and/or overpaid players that are from Michigan. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022 Report post Posted March 21, 2017 1 minute ago, mackel said: it's a dynamic we don't have. I think we have our quota of marginal and/or overpaid players that are from Michigan. Oh we have marginal Canadians as well. We don't have any high-end Finns on the team. Is this a dynamic we need to add? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mackel 681 Report post Posted March 21, 2017 (edited) 11 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said: Oh we have marginal Canadians as well. We don't have any high-end Finns on the team. Is this a dynamic we need to add? Sure if you can't get a canadian. If I had a choice of comparable players I'd take the canadian every time... I gather you disagree, which is fine. But that's my opinion, which is fine. Edited March 21, 2017 by mackel Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022 Report post Posted March 21, 2017 2 minutes ago, mackel said: Sure if you can't get a canadian. If I had a choice of comparable players I'd take the canadian every time... I gather you disagree, which is fine. But that's my opinion, which is fine. Which country are you from again? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mackel 681 Report post Posted March 21, 2017 (edited) 25 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said: Which country are you from again? This isn't a relevant question. If the talent level is equivalent, you take the canadian... that's my opinion. You take the canadian for the intangibles, growing up in an immersive hockey culture, being in an elite competitive environment from a young age, and though it's corney to say that old school canadian heart and will to win is a real factor. Again you seem to disagree, which is fine... that's you're opinion and I respect that... Edited March 21, 2017 by mackel Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935 Report post Posted March 21, 2017 (edited) Cale Maker is a new name to me. What jumps out to me is that he's playing in the AJHL which is the Tier II league that is below the WHL in Alberta. He's 6th in scoring there as a Dman, so makes you take notice, but I don't how much you should take the league into account. Seems many great NHL players played in that league (Messier, a lot of Sutters, Hartnell, Vernon, Heatley, and more), though a bunch of those only played there a year or 2 before they graduated to higher junior leagues. Apparently, the WHL's Medicine Hat Tigers did draft him, but he chose not go because: “I was a pretty small guy at the time,” Makar said. “For my development’s sake I thought a longer career path was the way to go. I thought that the college-AJHL route was the best for me.” http://globalnews.ca/news/3196026/brooks-bandits-cale-makar-has-chance-to-make-history/ Edited March 21, 2017 by PavelValerievichDatsyuk Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
