• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

HoweFan

2017 Draft

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I do think Rasmussen was the wrong pick with Vilardi still on the board, but who knows how they'll turn out. Regardless, he's a Red Wing now and has instantly become one of our top prospects. Hopefully he ends up better than Vilardi and develops into a true number one center.

I'm hoping Holland still has something up his sleeve in this draft. He should trade a couple 3rd round picks for another 2nd, and draft two of Timmons, Hague, Samberg or Brook.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Real question here, as I see Kenny getting lots of s*** about this pick. I'm truthfully not familiar with how an organization comes to decide on a pick and my guess is most here don't either, but for anyone that does: Is it actually Holland responsible for deciding on the pick? I'm sure he can veto it of course, but I would imagine that the scouts are the ones responsible more so than Holland. 
Not trolling, looking to be educated.


From what I understand, scouts watch the players take their notes, videos hand it over to the higher ups and then the discussion starts but the final voice goes to the GM. Although it should be the head of scouting because nobody knows them better.

I wanted Vilardi heck would have picked him over Hirschier but I didn't expect anything so yeah whatever. Next year is going to be the start of a real rebuild and hopefully a top 3 pick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When that pick came up I thought, Vilardi or Tippett? I wonder who Holland will take? And then he traded back and took Cholowski. No, wait? Listen, I don't know how this Rasmussen kid will pan out, hope for the best; but one thing is for sure, his career will be compared (at least around here) to Vilardi and Tippett from here on out, fair or not - no, totally fair. The same with Cholowski and Chychrun. And I don't know about you, but a future with Vilardi/Tippett and Chychrun is more tantalizing than the one with Rasmussen and Cholowski. But hey, I'll be more than happy to have my reservations and doubts proven unwarranted (I just don't think they will be). Sorry I can't be more optimistic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Your promising a 2nd meltdown? Youre right i LOVE tippet, hes the gift that keeps on giving

No meltdown, just 10-15 years of "I told you so" and more fodder to throw at Holland. Tippett will be winning trophies and Rasputen will be struggling to find his game in the AHL for 5 years. This is Sheahan 2.0, with less talent.

43 minutes ago, frankgrimes said:

 


From what I understand, scouts watch the players take their notes, videos hand it over to the higher ups and then the discussion starts but the final voice goes to the GM. Although it should be the head of scouting because nobody knows them better.

I wanted Vilardi heck would have picked him over Hirschier but I didn't expect anything so yeah whatever. Next year is going to be the start of a real rebuild and hopefully a top 3 pick

 

If this top 10 pick proved anything, it's Holland cant handle the heat. I don't trust him with a top 3, hopefully after this season I won't have to. #fireholland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, kliq said:

You're comparing D to a forward, apples and oranges. It's pretty well known that D drafted high flop quite often. Rasmussen was not JUST drafted because of his size, his 32 goals in 50 games had something to do with it as well. 

 

I don't think his goal totals are all that impressive for playing in the WHL. He doesn't have a single primary assist, and has the worst 5v5 scoring in the draft. Pretty alarming for a #1C in the WHL. Hopefully he improves, and I wish him the best of luck. I think the game has passed this organization by with their disregard for analytics. It's kinda like being a climate denier. 

Moving on, I would not mind a trade to get another early second. Isaac Ratcliffe is still available who compares to a better skating Lucic. Draft him along with Hague and we will have all the size that leftwinger and richdg can handle. But instead we will take a goalie according to Ansar Khan...

Edited by BringBack19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we discarded Tippett with our pick. And I thought he would not be available at #9. This big bird we got better start pumping in goals quick. My gut feeling tell me he's gonna be a chump, ending up on our 3rd line once he settles in.

If we start bad I am all for tanking next season as the second coming of Lidström is coming up in the draft. He would have gone #1 easily this year despite being underage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LeftWinger said:

Here's the thing...we need pure scoring, not just pp scoring. There was one guy that all the analysts were calling a pure scorer, sniper, best goal scorer in the draft...and he was staring right at Holland when he picked...and Holland passed instead of shot. Oh, what couldve been with Tippett. He'll get the Calder in his rookie season, and challenge for the goal scoring lead, watch.

Uh no we definitely need PP scoring. One of the worst in the league 2 years in a row. Do you not like PP goals or something? PP goals win you playoffs, cups. It's as important as ever in today's game and likely the major reason we missed the playoffs. 

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rasmussen just isn't the type of guy you take at 9.  Vilardi and Tippett are both likely to be better, he's probably going to end up being a winger (as a top center you need more assists than he had, big red flag for me), they could have traded back (unless they tried and nobody wanted to move up to 9) and got him or a similar caliber player, or even if they were going to reach they could have taken a D like Valimaki or Foote Fungus Jr.

This reminds me of the Sheahan pick, only 12 picks higher and with the team having a bigger need for a player with a higher ceiling.  He's probably going to be in the NHL, but as a 3rd or maybe 2nd line player.  Getting that type at 21 isn't bad.  Getting that type at 9 is a bust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, kickazz said:

Uh no we definitely need PP scoring. One of the worst in the league 2 years in a row. Do you not like PP goals or something? 

Do you not like even strength goals? They all count the same, and there is a better argument to be made that if someone can score 5v5 they can score 5v4. Our issue is with coaching on the pp, and not having a good #2 quarterback behind Green. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm trying to get behind this pick, and I've read several scouting reports and it still sounds like it may turn out to be somewhat of a botched pick. Not because he's terrible, but because he's not great, and I feel there were still some great players available at 9.

It seems like his biggest assets are his size, strength and ability to protect the puck. All things that should be a given for a 6'6", 215 lb. kid playing mostly against kids half his size. What happens when he turns pro and is playing against men? Is he going to be able to continue to push players around, and drive the net for those dirty goals? Maybe, but there's no guarantee.

To me, Rasmussen lacks the overall raw skill that you should be looking for in the top 10. All of his goals are scored on rebounds within a couple feet of the crease, and while that is something this team could use, I hope he's capable of more than that.

I'm not furious about the pick, disappointed yes, because I feel there were several better options available. I would have been ecstatic if we picked a player like Rasmussen in the later rounds, but it just doesn't seem to me to be a top 10 talent level pick. I hope I'm wrong. I hope he pans out, but I honestly don't expect him to be anything more than a reliable, two-way, middle 6 center.

4 minutes ago, sputman said:

So who do we want that could realistically fall to us at #38?

I want one of Timmins or Hague personally. Hopefully both if Holland is able to trade a couple 3rd round picks for another 2nd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, BringBack19 said:

Do you not like even strength goals? They all count the same, and there is a better argument to be made that if someone can score 5v5 they can score 5v4. Our issue is with coaching on the pp, and not having a good #2 quarterback behind Green. 

"PP is our enforcer"...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, BringBack19 said:

Do you not like even strength goals? They all count the same, and there is a better argument to be made that if someone can score 5v5 they can score 5v4. Our issue is with coaching on the pp, and not having a good #2 quarterback behind Green. 

That's stupid. Our PP issue is with coaching? We've had two DIFFERENT PP coaches the last two seasons and both seasons the PP has been abysmal. If you don't think that's a player issue (at the very least partially) then whatever. Secondly not everyone in the league is a PP specialist. We just drafted one, be happy. What? Do you think just because this draft prospect is labelled as someone who scores PP goals, he is going to be incapable of scoring even strength goals or something? Nyquist had a near 30 goal season where he scored mostly on the PP btw. We get a top 10 prospect but the cherry on top is we get a specialist. THAT'S A GOOD THING. 

Read below and educate yourself. 

http://www.freep.com/story/sports/nhl/red-wings/2016/12/29/detroit-red-wings-scotty-bowman/95942334/

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, kickazz said:

Dude NO ONE is high end talent this draft lol. 

I'm not even talking about superstar talent. I'm talking, like, "very good 2C, serviceable 1C on a bad team" (e.g. Matt Duchene, Jordan Staal, younger Martin Hanzal).

I've been pretty clear on this point for the past couple of months: Michael Rasmussen is the one player I did not want us to WANTED us to NOT TAKE with the ninth overall pick. If you dig into his stats and read more than just one or two of the credible scouting reports, you find major red flags. Or, if you're short on time, you can just read that report I linked. Excerpt:

Just how bad are Michael Rasmussen's numbers, you ask?

In 50 games at 5v5:

  • 14.98 min/GP (about 750 minutes of ice time)
  • 12 goals (37.5% of his total goals scored)
  • 3 first assists (yes, you read that right. Three first assists in 50 GAMES. Three first assists in 750 minutes of ice time at 5v5. That was also 25% of his total first assists for the season)
  • 4 second assists (40% of his secondary assists)
  • .96 G/60 (19th out of 87 forwards)
  • .24 A1/60 (9th worst of any first-time eligible forward in the WHL that played 50 games or more)
  • -8.44 GF%Rel (16th worst)

From where I stand, Michael Rasmussen has "middle-six NHL winger" written all over him. I'm not saying he's guaranteed to be a bust. I'm saying there were better options, safer bets. And I'm saying all of this as someone who's seen most of the consensus North-American first-rounders -- and some of the Euros -- in person.

"So I take it you hated the Mantha pick. Yes?"

Mantha is a big body, but it was clear that we was a high-end talent, a natural scorer blessed with God-given gifts -- a low-risk, high-reward selection. I don't see that with Rasmussen. I see a power play specialist. And even then...

  1. He's much bigger than 99% of his peers, which won't be the case at the pro level
  2. I don't feel the net-front position ranks among our power play's biggest problems

I sincerely hope Michael Rasmussen is the real deal. If he becomes a bona fide 60-point centerman at the NHL level, I'll gladly eat crow. (Though, again, my complaint is not "There's absolutely no way he'll ever become a really good NHLer." My complaint is that Rasmussen was not the best player available at #9, that taking Rasmussen inside of the top ten was a misguided reach.)

I'm going to hope for Martin Hanzal/Nick Foligno but set my expectations at Nick Bjugstad/Jimmy Hayes. I'm also going to remind myself that we're in the beginning stages of a rebuilding effort that will probably take the better part of the next ten years to complete. Rasmussen is but one piece of a puzzle.

I did my HYSTERICS! bit, got it out of my system, settled down. Now I'm trying to keep things in perspective and convince myself to trust in #TeamHolland.

Let's see how the rest of this draft shakes out for us.

Edited by Dabura

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Dabura said:

 

I'm going to hope for Martin Hanzal/Nick Foligno but set my expectations at Nick Bjugstad/Jimmy Hayes. I'm also going to remind myself that we're in the beginning stages of a rebuilding effort that will probably take the better part of the next ten years to complete. Rasmussen is but one piece of a puzzle

Read your entire post and I get your point. Highlighting your last paragraph because that's my point. Rasmussen is one part of the puzzle of a rebuild. We have plenty of players that should be scoring on even strength on paper but maybe not as good on the PP. We simply filled "a" need. Just one of many needs.

It seems like the franchise is obviously trying to get bigger, get better on the PP, and keep stocking centers. Tactically they met their goal in their pick. 

I think people are assuming what THEY think we need is what the organization is actually looking for. That's not the case, the org has their own agenda, and they feel this guy meets it. 

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, kickazz said:

That's stupid. Our issue is with coaching? We've had two DIFFERENT PP coaches the last two seasons and both seasons the PP has been abysmal. Secondly not everyone in the league is a PP specialist. We just drafted one, be happy.

Read below and educate yourself. 

http://www.freep.com/story/sports/nhl/red-wings/2016/12/29/detroit-red-wings-scotty-bowman/95942334/

No you're right we only went from 23.8% in 14/15, to 18%, to 15% respectively and it is all on the players not coaching.... Since Blashill has taken over he has had two pp coaches, and both years it has been a failure. There is one common denominator and it is Blashill. Whether he has hired two bums or he is dictating the philosophy it has resulted in the worst slide of pp scoring in the NHL over two years. Nyquist and Green are PP specialists and it has worked out real well over the last two years. Your article doesn't prove your position on why to take Rasmussen just states the obvious. PP and Goaltending, which is a derivative from defensive play, leads to a successful season. Well no sh*t captain obvious. Maybe dive into the facts, and statistics to find root causes instead of cherry picking an article and educate yourself son... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seeing the wings obsession with coreau  and his stupid size we shouldn't be surprised by this pick, although he's the one guy I was hoping they wouldn't pick especially with our glaring need at d

 

and right after foote,brannstrom,liljegren(f***en leafs) and valimaki all crossed off the board, the way this teams being ran, I'm not to optimistic about today , maybe we strike gold with some unknown European cause right now I see a 6'6 future 3rd liner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BringBack19 said:

No you're right we only went from 23.8% in 14/15, to 18%, to 15% respectively and it is all on the players not coaching.... Since Blashill has taken over he has had two pp coaches, and both years it has been a failure. There is one common denominator and it is Blashill. Whether he has hired two bums or he is dictating the philosophy it has resulted in the worst slide of pp scoring in the NHL over two years. Nyquist and Green are PP specialists and it has worked out real well over the last two years. Your article doesn't prove your position on why to take Rasmussen just states the obvious. PP and Goaltending, which is a derivative from defensive play, leads to a successful season. Well no sh*t captain obvious. Maybe dive into the facts, and statistics to find root causes instead of cherry picking an article and educate yourself son... 

Lol wait a minute so two different PP coaches, yet Blashill (who doesn't run the PP) is at fault. Rock solid logic. 

Statistically speaking Rasmussen is a PP specialist, and we're terrible on the PP. Holland picked a need. It's as simple as that, but if you're too bitter about "omg omg omg we passed on Vilardi" (who btw got passed by 5 other teams) to realize the logic behind the pick then that's your ignorance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kickazz said:

Uh no we definitely need PP scoring. One of the worst in the league 2 years in a row. Do you not like PP goals or something? PP goals win you playoffs, cups. It's as important as ever in today's game and likely the major reason we missed the playoffs. 

Yes, but Tippett scores in all situations, not just pp. It doesn't matter now, Holland made a huge mistake, I honestly don't know how he still has a job. Picks 1-11 we made the worst choice. 10 teams got better, and we got a player that may or may not make it. Tippett and Vilardi will be nhl regulars within 2 seasons. We won't see Rasputen until 2025 and maybe he'll be a #2C, maybe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, kickazz said:

Read your entire post and I get your point. Highlighting your last paragraph because that's my point. Rasmussen is one part of the puzzle of a rebuild. We have plenty of players that should be scoring on even strength on paper but maybe not as good on the PP. We simply filled "a" need. Just one of many needs.

It seems like the franchise is obviously trying to get bigger, get better on the PP, and keep stocking centers. Tactically they met their goal in their pick. 

I think people are assuming what THEY think we need is what the organization is actually looking for. That's not the case, the org has their own agenda, and they feel this guy meets it. 

That's fine, and I don't think a single person is saying that Rasmussen is a bad player, just that he was a bad pick at 9 with the players that were left on the board. If you want a big guy that can bang in rebounds, pick him in the later rounds. Hell, I would have been okay if we picked Rasmussen after trading back to the mid round, without Vilardi and others on the board, and picking up another 2nd. With a top 10 pick (the first one in a quarter century) we should have taken the most skilled player available. Rasmussen was not close to that in my opinion.

Edited by krsmith17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also I look at Martha's size and how good he is at keeping pucks in the o-zone along the boards and down low, if Rasmussen is half as good at it as Mantha he'd still be better than anyone not named Mantha. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now