• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

HoweFan

2017 Draft

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I'm torn over this pick, as I agree that on paper, at least, Vilardi was the better choice.  Still, with the obvious choice to emphasize size this year, Rasmussen fits that well.  I am glad someone else mentioned the old Herb Brooks quote, since that is what popped in my mind after the pick.  I haven't followed the draft as much this year due to gigs, so I think a wait and see to pass judgement mindset is in order.  Hopefully Kenny pulls something off in free agency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Said it before, say it again: Both Lindstrom and Setkov, who plays in SuperElit for Malmo, are likely Hakan Anderssons picks, and that makes me very confident they'll be good and that the early pick for Lindstrom will be justified in the future.

https://futureconsiderations.ca/player/Michael-Rasmussen/

https://futureconsiderations.ca/player/Gustav-Lindstrom/

https://futureconsiderations.ca/player/Keith-Petruzzelli/

Just read these reports (for our other picks there were none) and have to think, Ras sounds better there than I've heard so far, and Lindstrom..sounds like in best case, we can just cut the "n". :yahoo:

Petruzzelli sounds like a steal and Setkov apparently wasn't even ranked at all. From a danish article, per Google translate (:rolleyes:):

Quote

Malte Setkov was drafted yesterday as number 100 at the United Center in Chicago. The big back from Rødovre (198 centimeters and barely 90 kilos) was a surprise to most, but the Detroit Red Wings scouts have seen a great star in Setkov - and not least the progress he has made during the last season .

"Getting around him (on the ice) is almost like sailing around the globe. There has not been much talk about him during the season, but he is a solid and physical big and strong back. He has a massive range", says Håkan Andersson, Director of European Scouting at Detroit.

Setkov is compared to Detroit's second round choice Gustav Lindström from Almtuna, who is also a back who has delivered massive progress during the season.

- He (Malte Setkov) started the season at Malmö Junior 18 team and the Junior 20 coach told me that he almost laughed at Setkov at the start of the season. He was big and "wobbly". In January and February he played (Malte Setkov) powerplay on the Junior 20 team. He is almost two meters tall and is still growing, explains Håkan Andersson to Red Wings' website.

Scout's analysis: The dane has just got used to how fast his body grew during the last year's time.

Still growing..maybe we've drafted the next Chara? :lol:

Edited by The Datsyukian Deke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Glubki said:

I'm not confident Rasmussen stays on the board if they had dropped back and he was their top man regardless of what the local keyboard experts are opining. I am very confident that Lindstrom would have been available to them in the 3rd round unless they caught wind of something through the rumor mill or the pedigree grapevine/linkage. That was the only pick that has me smh and it's just about the timing and value standpoint not the player. I'm really intrigued by the 3rd round picks and the big Danish kid who is supposed to be a really good outlet passer.

Not a great draft but not an epic fail like Puck Daddy, Wheeler and a few other pundits are calling it either. B- overall.

I find it funny that some keep using this to describe the people that think it was a botched pick. How are we any different than the ones saying it was a good pick? Neither side (for the most part) are saying definitively that Rasmussen IS going to suck or IS going to be great, just what they believe he will develop into at the NHL level.

As for whether or not Rasmussen would have been available if they moved back, we'll never know, but I believe he would have been if they moved back 2-3 spots, and would have been worth the risk. They've been willing to risk it several times in the past (Mantha, Cholowski), it just sucks they weren't willing to this time.

Why are you so confident that Lindstrom would have been available later? But it's not okay for some of us to believe Rasmussen would have been available at around 12? According to Wright, several teams approached him after the pick, praising them on such a great selection, and they were hoping he would be available shortly after he was selected 38th overall. I think either one of Lindstrom or Kotkansalo have a great chance of being one of those 2nd / 3rd round defense gems.

I was pleased with the picks after the first. The only complaint I would make is that we should have traded up to get another 2nd to grab one of Timmins, Hague, or Samberg. The Rasmussen pick doesn't sit well with me though, so I give the two days a C+ overall...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Richdg said:

Just think about the guys that should be the core of our team for the next 12-15 years. Mantha-a sniper, pure goal scorer. Svechnikov-sniper and play maker. Larkin-very good speed, good shooter and passer. AA-very good speed, good shooter average play maker, G Smith-big physical puck retriever with some offensive skill. These are the guys that will become our top 6. They will also fill out of top 2 PP units. What is missing? Front of net. No one else in the entire system can play that role. Adding Tippett doesn't solve that. He is another sniper, which is fine. But then we have to do something dumb like this year when we had to use Mantha and Vanek as the front of net guy, roles that they are not suited for. After Vanek it got worse and we had to use Sheahan! We also used helm and Nyquist in that role. This is why Rasmussen fits our team and the team needs so well. On paper anyway.

Look at potential PP units down the road:

Unit 1, using a 1-3-1:

net front: rasmussen

slot: Mantha

RH wing: Larkin

LH wing: Sproul/Russo

Point: DD

Unit 2, using a 1-3-1:

net front: Smith

Slot: Svechnikov

RH wing: AA

LH wing: Jensen/Cholowski

Point: Lindstrom

Those are not bad units based on potential. Now if Tippett was our choice we lack a net from guy and we take one of the wings out of the lineup. With him being a RHed shot it would be one of the Sproul/Russo or Jensen/Cholowski pairs.

This is what I don't get. People keep saying how much this guy would improve our power-play. Do you know why our power-play has struggled even more so than a lack of a net-front presence? A lack of right-shooting snipers. Literally anyone can play net-front and bang in rebounds with enough practice, but not everyone can shoot the puck like Stamkos, Kessel. As you pointed out, Smith could be a net-front on one unit, and we can use any one of Holmstrom, Bertuzzi, Zablocki, etc, etc (who cares) on the other unit. The importance of a great net-front is vastly overstated around here. Maybe it's because we had two of the best ever in Ciccarelli and Holmstrom. The lack of right-shooting forwards is much more of a concern going forward in my opinion and we could have decreased that concern by picking one of Vilardi or Tippett.

Side note: I would think (hope) we have better options than DeKeyser, Russo and Jensen by then. Also, Cholowski is a left-handed defenseman. I liked the Lindstrom pick too, and I hope he can quarterback a power-play some day, but is he going to jump past players like Hronek and Saarijarvi?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When we look back at past drafts and say, man if we only knew...well this is going to be one of those drafts, but the difference is, we all knew Tippett or Vilardi wouldve been the correct choice. The no brainer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for the strategy of "take the best player available", and sure you can say Holland failed on that (again), but since we got the kids we got, I just say let's take a positive look at them, especially Ras, because kid cannot do anything about Holland selecting him too early.

Edited by The Datsyukian Deke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, The Datsyukian Deke said:

I'm all for the strategy of "take the best player available", and sure you can say Holland failed on that (again), but since we got the kids we got, I just say let's take a positive look at them, especially Ras, because kid cannot do anything about Holland selecting him too early.

Absolutely! Hopefully it's one of those drafts that 8 other teams look back on and say, damn, shouldve take Rasmussen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, The Datsyukian Deke said:

I'm all for the strategy of "take the best player available", and sure you can say Holland failed on that (again), but since we got the kids we got, I just say let's take a positive look at them, especially Ras, because kid cannot do anything about Holland selecting him too early.

Because Holland just decided to take him on his own with no input...

Is this real life?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

I find it funny that some keep using this to describe the people that think it was a botched pick. How are we any different than the ones saying it was a good pick? Neither side (for the most part) are saying definitively that Rasmussen IS going to suck or IS going to be great, just what they believe he will develop into at the NHL level.

As for whether or not Rasmussen would have been available if they moved back, we'll never know, but I believe he would have been if they moved back 2-3 spots, and would have been worth the risk. They've been willing to risk it several times in the past (Mantha, Cholowski), it just sucks they weren't willing to this time.

Why are you so confident that Lindstrom would have been available later? But it's not okay for some of us to believe Rasmussen would have been available at around 12? According to Wright, several teams approached him after the pick, praising them on such a great selection, and they were hoping he would be available shortly after he was selected 38th overall. I think either one of Lindstrom or Kotkansalo have a great chance of being one of those 2nd / 3rd round defense gems.

I was pleased with the picks after the first. The only complaint I would make is that we should have traded up to get another 2nd to grab one of Timmins, Hague, or Samberg. The Rasmussen pick doesn't sit well with me though, so I give the two days a C+ overall...

I thought most were using it tongue in cheek because of a specific post the other day about Toews. It is a ridiculous and hypercritical term. 

Share this post


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

We'll, one thing is sure, they went for big kids. Still sour at the #9, but cant say I know too much about the rest, so we'll just hope we get 3 or 4 winners. I won't hold my breath on him making any deals this summer to better the team. If he does, he'll overpay.

Youre always sour at #9

Share this post


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

Lol! Calder Trophy in his rookie year. Rocket Richard for most goals. Don't think those guys you listed will be winning rookie of the Year. Come back to reality.

Lol if you think he's going to win Rocket Richard of Patrick Laine you've got to pass us whatever you're on right now cause we're stuck here in reality.

Share this post


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

Because Holland just decided to take him on his own with no input...

Is this real life?

What about the input? The input comes from people that Holland either hired himself or continues to pay, for giving that input. If the result isn't good, the person in charge should get the blame. That's real life, oh yes.

Plus, Holland never did anything to deserve any benefit of the doubt by anybody. But this has been discussed here all over, again and again. For years, for trillions of posts...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What about the input? The input comes from people that Holland either hired himself or continues to pay, for giving that input. If the result isn't good, the person in charge should get the blame. That's real life, oh yes.
Plus, Holland never did anything to deserve any benefit of the doubt by anybody. But this has been discussed here all over, again and again. For years, for trillions of posts...


Your reaching with your argument but go ahead. You are an anti-Holland guy anyways it's expected.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DickieDunn said:


No, but it's his job to make the final say

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk
 

Agreed, but if Holland is the one who gets the criticism when a pick is bad, with that logic should he not get the praise when the pick is good? Not that you have said this Dickie, but this is a consistent narrative on this board.

Share this post


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

Honestly, what was Holland thinking?

Do we need a centerman? Nope

Do we need a 6'6" player? Nope

Should we be taking guys mostly ranked at #10 early at #9? Nope

completely outrageous, and boy im really miffed

Im with you.  He was the right choice based on what was there.  I am just pissed we didnt trade up to get Patrick.  We should have done that at all costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

Im with you.  He was the right choice based on what was there.  I am just pissed we didnt trade up to get Patrick.  We should have done that at all costs.

Is he a good or bad pick? Personally, im going to do the same thing with Ras that i do with most players. Wait until there's a general consensus on which he is, then argue the oppsite. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agreed, but if Holland is the one who gets the criticism when a pick is bad, with that logic should he not get the praise when the pick is good? Not that you have said this Dickie, but this is a consistent narrative on this board.

He should get credit for the good picks and other moves. And yes, people who just dislike him will blame him for the bad and give everyone else credit for success (Holland had nothing to do with the Wings winning any Cups, all the bad decisions were his, and Yzerman gets the credit for building the Lightning even though he started with some pretty nice cornerstones). And people who think he's fantastic do the opposite.

I just feel this is a very underwhelming pick and there were better choices available. Rasmussen looks a lot like a bigger version of Clarkson. Vilardi is more of a center and still big. Tippett looks like a more talented winger. Or he could have gone with a D, which is a bigger need.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk

Share this post


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


No, but it's his job to make the final say

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk
 

Not pointing this at you but others who will say the following - 

Good pick - It was Bowman, Devallano, Hakkan, Yzerman, Nill.

Bad pick - Holland makes the final say.

This is as pathetic as it gets. Can't get any worse. Except maybe strapping up Holland in front of the new arena and throwing stones at him with 40 lashes and forcing him to repent for all his decisions. WHY OH WHY DID YOU PICK RASMUSSEN YOU SINNER!

59 minutes ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

Im with you.  He was the right choice based on what was there.  I am just pissed we didnt trade up to get Patrick.  We should have done that at all costs.

Wait, you actually are okay with this pick?  

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, I love this about the internet. Other people telling me what my general thinking is. :lol:

Of course he needs to get credit for the positives! Picking AA, for example. Picked at #110, other teams for sure want to change their picks before him in retrospect, no doubt. Holland deserves the credit, even if other people made that choice, because he leads and picks those people.

So much for "is this real life?" - ofc it is. If you are a companys CEO, you get the credit for success and the blame for failure, no matter where in your organisation it was actually created.

So for Holland - what was the state of this franchise when he took over, what is it now? Did roster quality stay the same, improve or decrease during his tenure? Did we have rosters who were good enough to win, and how many titles did we actually win?.

It's just like making a "pro" and a "con" list on a sheet of paper and checking which one is longer.

And for Holland, it's "con". That's all I'm saying. I'm not following any agenda, looking in a different direction when he does something good (for example, I credited him for the Smith trade, just because he won it) or hoping for his failure - as long, as he is in charge, I want him to succeed because I want this team to succeed!!

That said, because I want this team to succeed I would prefer a change at GM, because he is simply not good enough.

Edited by The Datsyukian Deke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I already stated that I am skeptical about our first pick. Despite his size he will need serious polishing in the minors then in GR. My point being that we can't figure him out in quite some time, I'm guessing he'll be on the wings maybe 2, most likely 3 years from now.

Since I'm not getting any younger maybe some young buck wouldn't mind reminding me who this big dude is once he's on the roster and what my initial thoughts were, which is a solid 3rd line center, after some tryouts on the top 6 which failed, albeit not miserably but clearly.

 

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