Official 2018 NHL Amateur Entry Draft Discussion Thread

[krsmith17 7,191]

6 hours ago, Buppy said:

If you look over almost anything it will of course have a more well-balanced group than the current "almost nothing". 2008 could hardly be called well-balanced, even relative to the current Wings, and proves rather conclusively that you can in fact succeed with unbalanced handedness. Just like Buffalo proves the opposite.

The only reason you don't see it more often is simply because it's just weird to see a roster so unbalanced. Like Dabura jokes, it's almost something you'd have to try to do. With the current numbers, you'd expect 35-40% of your roster to shoot right. 10-ish players, counting reserves/call-ups, which would likely mean at least a couple decent ones. In short, it's not something that makes a team successful; it's just something that almost every team, good and bad, has.

Of course handedness isn't the be-all end-all, but it definitely does factor into a team's success (especially on the power-play). No one is saying we should trade left-handed players for worse right-handed players, or draft right-handed players over better left-handed players. All else being equal though, we should be looking to acquire more right-handed players for balance. It's not really much different than us being deep up front, and shallow on the back end, and looking to acquire defensemen via trade or through the draft. It's common sense.

It's no coincidence that the top power-play units have triggermen on both sides of the ice.

Here are the top power-play units in the league last season...

Pens - Kessel (R) / Malkin (L) and Crosby (L)

Leafs - Marner (R) and Nylander (R) / Matthews (L) and Kadri (L)

Lightning - Stamkos (R) / Kucherov (L)

Bruins - Pastrnak (R) and Bergeron (R) / Marchand (L)

Jets - Laine (R) and Scheifele (R) / Ehlers (L) and Connor (L)

Islanders - Barzal (R) / Tavares (L) and Lee (L)

Caps - Ovechkin (R) and Oshie (R) / Kuznetsov (L) and Backstrom (L)

Aves - MacKinnon (R) / Rantanen (L) and Landeskog (L)

Canucks - Boeser (R) / Horvat (L) and Baertschi (L)

All of these teams have a balance of right-handed / left-handed shooters on the power-play.

Here are the worst power-play units in the league last season...

Oilers - McDavid (L), Draisaitl (L) and Nugent-Hopkins (L)

Blues - Tarasenko (L), Schenn (L), Schwartz (L) and Steen (L)

Flames - Monahan (L), Tkatchuk (L) and Ferland (L)

Hawks - Kane (L), Anisimov (L) and DeBrincat (R)

Sens - Duchene (L), Hoffman (L), Brassard (L) and Dzingel (L)

Coyotes - Keller (L), Perlini (L) and Fischer (R)

Jackets - Panarin (R), Bjorkstrand (R) and Dubois (L)

Wings - Mantha (L), Tatar (L), Nyquist (L) and Frk (R)

Most of these teams only have left-handed shooters on the power-play, with the exception of Columbus, DeBrincat with the Hawks and Fischer with the Coyotes, who are both rookies, and Frk with the Wings, who is a bottom 6 forward, and might not even be back next season...

We need some elite level right-handed shooters. If you think it's not an issue whatsoever, and we should continue to employ a team completely left-handed shooters (top six), I don't know what else to say...

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

13 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Says the guy with the Pee Wee Herman avatar 

Only for Lefty's endless amusement 

[nyqvististhefuture 1,002]

3 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

I'd love to take any of Wilde, Samuelsson or McIsaac with our 2nd pick, but I don't see any of them being available at 30. I think we'd have to trade up anywhere from 5-15 picks for any of them. I really think we should try to trade up to get another top 10-15 pick. I'm not sure what it would take, but maybe Athanasiou, the Vegas pick and a 2019 2nd round pick could get us up there.

id trade maybe AA and the 30th ro move up 200 spots throwing in another early second is too much for me , AA is still young and if he has a coach that doesnt screw around with him he can be a 30 goal guy ...  with his and mcdavids speed together they would cause teams headaches 

 

maybe even better use him to land jake bean as you suggested ... can maybe trade the vegas pick and 36th for devils 17th and land dellandrea or bokk , think that 17th pick is for the taking since devils pick again at 110

 

and someone mentioned the flames having no picks till round 4 we can maybe send a pick if they really like someone for kylington or andersson  

Edited June 5, 2018 by nyqvististhefuture

[krsmith17 7,191]

42 minutes ago, nyqvististhefuture said:

id trade maybe AA and the 30th ro move up 200 spots throwing in another early second is too much for me , AA is still young and if he has a coach that doesnt screw around with him he can be a 30 goal guy ...  with his and mcdavids speed together they would cause teams headaches 

maybe even better use him to land jake bean as you suggested ... can maybe trade the vegas pick and 36th for devils 17th and land dellandrea or bokk , think that 17th pick is for the taking since devils pick again at 110

and someone mentioned the flames having no picks till round 4 we can maybe send a pick if they really like someone for kylington or andersson  

I'm not sure if Athanasiou and the Vegas pick would be enough to move up to 10, but it is Chiarelli we're talking about, so you never know. If that package could get us Wahlstrom (if he falls), I'd be ecstatic. Unfortunately, I think Wahlstrom will be gone before then though. Maybe take Wahlstrom at 6, and hope one of Bouchard or Dobson is available at 10 would be the better option.

Getting another top 10 pick is a pipe dream though. I think Holland will be busy at the draft, but I highly doubt he can pull that off.

I'd use Svechnikov in a package for Bean to reunite the brothers in Carolina. I'd like to trade up for any of the defensemen I mentioned, or Bokk, Kaut or Dellandrea, depending on who we take before that.

I was hoping we'd draft one of Kylington or Andersson back in 2015, but I wouldn't have much interest in trading a high pick for either of them in this draft.

[The 91 of Ryans 3,014]

My order of preference at 6

1. Dobson

2. Hughes

3. Whalstrom

4. Kotkaniemi

5. Bouchard

 

OR

Trade up and get Zadina

I think the Habs would be OK sliding back to 6th where they'd be more comfortable taking Kotkaniemi

Top Center Kotkaniemi Poses a Dilemma For The Habs

 

 

Edited June 5, 2018 by The 91 of Ryans
added content

[krsmith17 7,191]

17 minutes ago, The 91 of Ryans said:

My order of preference at 6

1. Dobson

2. Hughes

3. Whalstrom

4. Kotkaniemi

5. Bouchard

OR

Trade up and get Zadina

I think the Habs would be OK sliding back to 6th where they'd be more comfortable taking Kotkaniemi

Top Center Kotkaniemi Poses a Dilemma For The Habs

For me, it's probably...

1. Bouchard

2. Wahlstrom

3. Dobson

4. Boqvist

5. Hughes

I think trading up with our 6th overall pick would be a huge mistake. The price would be astronomical. Just out of curiosity, what would you be willing to trade to Montreal to move up 3 spots? Mantha? That's probably what it would cost and I definitely wouldn't do that. 

[The 91 of Ryans 3,014]

15 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

For me, it's probably...

1. Bouchard

2. Wahlstrom

3. Dobson

4. Boqvist

5. Hughes

I think trading up with our 6th overall pick would be a huge mistake. The price would be astronomical. Just out of curiosity, what would you be willing to trade to Montreal to move up 3 spots? Mantha? That's probably what it would cost and I definitely wouldn't do that. 

I'm not so sure it would be that steep. Why should it be? The Habs finished 2 pts lower than the Wings. 

Mantha? No, f*** that.

But I'm not sure the ask would be that astronomical. What has me thinking this is that I believe the talk of Kenny moving up is based on something real and he would never do it for an astronomical price because he's Holland. 

What if the Habs want Kotkaniemi as that article suggests? Do they dare take him at 3? What if they could get him at six along with an extra 1st (Vegas') and AA.

Anyway, it's all just talk. If I'm Bergevin, I'm staying put at 3. Just like I'm staying put at 6 if I'm Holland. 

[BinMucker94 302]

1 hour ago, The 91 of Ryans said:

My order of preference at 6

1. Dobson

2. Hughes

3. Whalstrom

4. Kotkaniemi

5. Bouchard

 

OR

Trade up and get Zadina

I think the Habs would be OK sliding back to 6th where they'd be more comfortable taking Kotkaniemi

Top Center Kotkaniemi Poses a Dilemma For The Habs

 

 

My list is pretty similar to this. Maybe swap Bouchard and Kotkaniemi. 

From what I’ve heard Dobson probably has the most solid all around game out of any of the 4 dmen we could take.

Hughes is probably the best skater in the draft and has tremendous vision and the ability to create plays with his speed or passing.

If we go forward it’s gotta be Whalstrom if available. He could be the elite RH scorer this team desperately needs.

Bouchard while probably the most NHL ready defenseman at our position lacks some skating ability and has been known to get beat in 1 on 1 situations by quicker forwards. Gotta love his shot and passing ability tho. It would be hard to pass on him. 

Idk much about Kotkaniemi other than he’s pretty young for this draft. Already has good size and has been playing very well vs older players.

I don’t think I can get mad about any choice management makes unless it’s completely off the board. I just don’t know enough about these players.

[krsmith17 7,191]

29 minutes ago, The 91 of Ryans said:

I'm not so sure it would be that steep. Why should it be? The Habs finished 2 pts lower than the Wings. 

Mantha? No, f*** that.

But I'm not sure the ask would be that astronomical. What has me thinking this is that I believe the talk of Kenny moving up is based on something real and he would never do it for an astronomical price because he's Holland. 

What if the Habs want Kotkaniemi as that article suggests? Do they dare take him at 3? What if they could get him at six along with an extra 1st (Vegas') and AA.

Anyway, it's all just talk. If I'm Bergevin, I'm staying put at 3. Just like I'm staying put at 6 if I'm Holland. 

It doesn't matter where they finished in the standings. It only matters where they finished in the draft lottery. Carolina finished the season with 10 more points and about 16% less odds at a top 3 pick than us. They obviously wouldn't sell low on the 2nd overall pick, and neither would Montreal on the 3rd overall pick.

Has there been anything more to that rumor than Holland saying that he'd be willing to move up or down though? I'm not sure if there was ever an actual deal on the table involving Montreal, was there?

Would Bergevin dare to make a bold (dumb) move? Never! If I'm Bergevin and Kotkaniemi is seriously at the top of my list (no idea why...), I do whatever I can to trade back. If I'm Holland, there's no way I trade up to 3, unless it was extremely cheap. Even then, I'd probably prefer to stay at 6 and take Wahlstrom over Zadina at 3 and lose any assets.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

Kotkaniemi is coming...

[amato 3,210]

8 hours ago, LeftWinger said:

In a heart there are four chambers, in my life I was blessed with four individuals that filled those chambers with life and love, today I lost one. I will be taking a break from things for a while. Stay awesome my friends.

Sorry for your loss  

[nyqvististhefuture 1,002]

5 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

I'm not sure if Athanasiou and the Vegas pick would be enough to move up to 10, but it is Chiarelli we're talking about, so you never know. If that package could get us Wahlstrom (if he falls), I'd be ecstatic. Unfortunately, I think Wahlstrom will be gone before then though. Maybe take Wahlstrom at 6, and hope one of Bouchard or Dobson is available at 10 would be the better option.

Getting another top 10 pick is a pipe dream though. I think Holland will be busy at the draft, but I highly doubt he can pull that off.

I'd use Svechnikov in a package for Bean to reunite the brothers in Carolina. I'd like to trade up for any of the defensemen I mentioned, or Bokk, Kaut or Dellandrea, depending on who we take before that.

I was hoping we'd draft one of Kylington or Andersson back in 2015, but I wouldn't have much interest in trading a high pick for either of them in this draft.

I Guess i over value our players maybe, so be it .... just think a 23 yr old kid whos got 16 and 18 goals in Like 65 games playing on a bottom line with scrubs has value and getting rid of him can be a move we one day regret 

I also dont think we Will land a top 10 pick and wouldnt trade up To move 3 spots unless it was just a pick .... if someone said we can get dobson at 9 guaranteed and land the 28th as Well id do it and try To then move up for dellandrea 

Trading for bean fabbro or a Young damn is a must, trading for a current top dman would Cost too much 

Well id consider a 2nd for Anderson depending what happens , say nyi offer 41 and 42 for 30 maybe we offer one ... or maybe trade Ericsson with 750k for a dallas 2nd? Id Call the leafs and offer glendening and get more assets To then trade,.... we both know sadly holland wont move them

4 hours ago, The 91 of Ryans said:

My order of preference at 6

1. Dobson

2. Hughes

3. Whalstrom

4. Kotkaniemi

5. Bouchard

 

OR

Trade up and get Zadina

I think the Habs would be OK sliding back to 6th where they'd be more comfortable taking Kotkaniemi

Top Center Kotkaniemi Poses a Dilemma For The Habs

 

 

Dobson 

Kotkaniemi 

Whalstrom

Bouchard 

Hughes 

[nyqvististhefuture 1,002]

4 hours ago, The 91 of Ryans said:

I'm not so sure it would be that steep. Why should it be? The Habs finished 2 pts lower than the Wings. 

Mantha? No, f*** that.

But I'm not sure the ask would be that astronomical. What has me thinking this is that I believe the talk of Kenny moving up is based on something real and he would never do it for an astronomical price because he's Holland. 

What if the Habs want Kotkaniemi as that article suggests? Do they dare take him at 3? What if they could get him at six along with an extra 1st (Vegas') and AA.

Anyway, it's all just talk. If I'm Bergevin, I'm staying put at 3. Just like I'm staying put at 6 if I'm Holland. 

Mantha or Vegas pick And AA ? Those deals are both way High for 3 spots.... most id ever do is the Vegas pick and they say no and I'm good  , shouldn't risk the farm for 3rd can still get a good player, if it was svechnikov available maybe I'd offer more .... maybe 

[krsmith17 7,191]

https://theathletic.com/377049/2018/06/02/evan-bouchard-is-ahead-of-his-years-and-his-nhl-draft-class-after-historic-season/

This is a big reason I'm so high on Bouchard, and why I think (assuming he's still there) the Wings will take him at 6.

I'll bet anything that one of Bouchard or Dobson will be a Red Wing in three weeks. I'm hoping it's Bouchard, but if we trade back and take Dobson, I won't be too upset.

Now if we could just put a package together to get another top 10 pick to get Wahlstrom. I doubt he gets past 9, but if he's still there when the Oilers pick at 10, I'd be calling Chiarelli and offering him Athanasiou and a pick or two (2018 1st (VGK) / 2019 2nd (NYI))...

[Buppy 1,720]

7 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Of course handedness isn't the be-all end-all, but it definitely does factor into a team's success (especially on the power-play). No one is saying we should trade left-handed players for worse right-handed players, or draft right-handed players over better left-handed players. All else being equal though, we should be looking to acquire more right-handed players for balance. It's not really much different than us being deep up front, and shallow on the back end, and looking to acquire defensemen via trade or through the draft. It's common sense.

It's no coincidence that the top power-play units have triggermen on both sides of the ice. ....

Most of these teams only have left-handed shooters on the power-play, with the exception of Columbus, DeBrincat with the Hawks and Fischer with the Coyotes, who are both rookies, and Frk with the Wings, who is a bottom 6 forward, and might not even be back next season...

We need some elite level right-handed shooters. If you think it's not an issue whatsoever, and we should continue to employ a team completely left-handed shooters (top six), I don't know what else to say...

You're being awfully selective. It is a coincidnece, because literally every team does have both L and R shooters. All of those bad teams have RH shooters, some of them just didn't perform very well. But that's a catch-22; if the players had performed well then the PP on the whole would have been better, regardless of handedness.

Case in point: Chicago had better L/R balance than the NYI. Last year Edm had one of the better PPs in the league last season and the only difference is swapping Eberle for Strome (both RH). 2014-15 the Wings had the #2 PP with only Pulk for 30 games and Zidlicky for 20. 2008 we were 3rd with just Sammy and Rafalski. It is the quality of the performance, not the handedness of the shooters, that will have a real impact.

We had a similar argument last year, where I said Frk wouldn't fix our PP because he wasn't good enough. Now you want to argue that he doesn't count as a RH shot because he isn't good enough.

But you're kind of saying two different things here: We need to add RH shots, but also that we shouldn't go out of our way to prioritize handedness over other qualities. As Kip said earlier, "all else" is seldom equal. You have to evaluate players irrespective of handedness if you really want to pick the best players. That would normally result in a decent mix of R/L shooters anyway.

I'm not saying we need to stay so unbalanced, nor even that handedness shouldn't be considered when choosing between similar players. Just that it isn't why we were successful in the past, nor would having better balance fix what's wrong now.

[Son of a Wing 1,644]

 

[nyqvististhefuture 1,002]

16 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

https://theathletic.com/377049/2018/06/02/evan-bouchard-is-ahead-of-his-years-and-his-nhl-draft-class-after-historic-season/

This is a big reason I'm so high on Bouchard, and why I think (assuming he's still there) the Wings will take him at 6.

I'll bet anything that one of Bouchard or Dobson will be a Red Wing in three weeks. I'm hoping it's Bouchard, but if we trade back and take Dobson, I won't be too upset.

Now if we could just put a package together to get another top 10 pick to get Wahlstrom. I doubt he gets past 9, but if he's still there when the Oilers pick at 10, I'd be calling Chiarelli and offering him Athanasiou and a pick or two (2018 1st (VGK) / 2019 2nd (NYI))...

Problem with that is if he actually fell back to 10 (I also doubt it ) oilers will just think with whalstrom's shot they'll take him instead to play with mcdavid and they wouldn't be wrong... sadly I think we can only a have 1 player before the 10 spot unless we made a big splash and just took the 2 spot from Carolina,  I'd personally have no problem throwing in a Rasmussen in a package deal (not high on him as some people ) to land the 2nd to get svechnikov 

 

Besides that I think MTL ott Ari all pick,  along with canucks 

11 minutes ago, Buppy said:

You're being awfully selective. It is a coincidnece, because literally every team does have both L and R shooters. All of those bad teams have RH shooters, some of them just didn't perform very well. But that's a catch-22; if the players had performed well then the PP on the whole would have been better, regardless of handedness.

Case in point: Chicago had better L/R balance than the NYI. Last year Edm had one of the better PPs in the league last season and the only difference is swapping Eberle for Strome (both RH). 2014-15 the Wings had the #2 PP with only Pulk for 30 games and Zidlicky for 20. 2008 we were 3rd with just Sammy and Rafalski. It is the quality of the performance, not the handedness of the shooters, that will have a real impact.

We had a similar argument last year, where I said Frk wouldn't fix our PP because he wasn't good enough. Now you want to argue that he doesn't count as a RH shot because he isn't good enough.

But you're kind of saying two different things here: We need to add RH shots, but also that we shouldn't go out of our way to prioritize handedness over other qualities. As Kip said earlier, "all else" is seldom equal. You have to evaluate players irrespective of handedness if you really want to pick the best players. That would normally result in a decent mix of R/L shooters anyway.

I'm not saying we need to stay so unbalanced, nor even that handedness shouldn't be considered when choosing between similar players. Just that it isn't why we were successful in the past, nor would having better balance fix what's wrong now.

We had the Russians in the past .... caps have the Russians 

 

We need more Russians 

[krsmith17 7,191]

8 minutes ago, Buppy said:

You're being awfully selective. It is a coincidnece, because literally every team does have both L and R shooters. All of those bad teams have RH shooters, some of them just didn't perform very well. But that's a catch-22; if the players had performed well then the PP on the whole would have been better, regardless of handedness.

Case in point: Chicago had better L/R balance than the NYI. Last year Edm had one of the better PPs in the league last season and the only difference is swapping Eberle for Strome (both RH). 2014-15 the Wings had the #2 PP with only Pulk for 30 games and Zidlicky for 20. 2008 we were 3rd with just Sammy and Rafalski. It is the quality of the performance, not the handedness of the shooters, that will have a real impact.

We had a similar argument last year, where I said Frk wouldn't fix our PP because he wasn't good enough. Now you want to argue that he doesn't count as a RH shot because he isn't good enough.

But you're kind of saying two different things here: We need to add RH shots, but also that we shouldn't go out of our way to prioritize handedness over other qualities. As Kip said earlier, "all else" is seldom equal. You have to evaluate players irrespective of handedness if you really want to pick the best players. That would normally result in a decent mix of R/L shooters anyway.

I'm not saying we need to stay so unbalanced, nor even that handedness shouldn't be considered when choosing between similar players. Just that it isn't why we were successful in the past, nor would having better balance fix what's wrong now.

I wasn't being selective at all. I was simply listing the top power-play teams and the top producers on those power-plays. Yes, every team has left and right handed players, but not every team has elite left and right handed shooters that they utilize on the power-play. That's my point. We need some elite (top 6) right-handed shooters.

I'm not saying that having balanced handedness would fix our problems, but it would certainly go a long way in helping our problem scoring and setting up in the offensive zone.

I never said "Frk would fix our power-play". I said he would help our power-play, which he did. Just like I'm not saying that a right-handed sniper would fix our power-play, but he would certainly help. I also didn't say "Frk doesn't count as a right-handed shot because he isn't good enough". All I said was that he probably won't even be back next season. That's a knock on management, not Frk as a player. I think Frk should be back, because he is good enough.

I'm not saying two different things at all... I'm saying that adding some high end right-handed shots should be a priority, but we shouldn't pass up on better players just because of handedness. Why is this so difficult for you to comprehend?

I believe a balanced attack on forward and defense plays a huge role in a teams success. You don't think it matters whatsoever. Whatever.

[krsmith17 7,191]

19 minutes ago, nyqvististhefuture said:

Problem with that is if he actually fell back to 10 (I also doubt it ) oilers will just think with whalstrom's shot they'll take him instead to play with mcdavid and they wouldn't be wrong... sadly I think we can only a have 1 player before the 10 spot unless we made a big splash and just took the 2 spot from Carolina,  I'd personally have no problem throwing in a Rasmussen in a package deal (not high on him as some people ) to land the 2nd to get svechnikov 

Again, it's Chiarelli we're talking about, so all common sense goes out the window. My hope would be that he wants a quick turnaround (or he could lose his job). As much as some think Wahlstrom could step into the NHL next season, it isn't a sure thing. Athanasiou gives them immediate help up front, and like you've said, he could be a good compliment on McDavid's wing. Of course, I know it won't happen, but that's my dream scenario...

I still say trading up would be a huge mistake. As much as I'd love to get Svechnikov, the price would simply be waaay too high.

[Dabura 12,207]

5 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Has there been anything more to that rumor than Holland saying that he'd be willing to move up or down though? I'm not sure if there was ever an actual deal on the table involving Montreal, was there?

My understanding is that the talk is based on reporting by Craig  Custance and Khan :

Red Wings open to moving down from No. 6 slot, plus draft combine tidbits [Craig Custance, The Athletic, 5/30]

Paywalls r dumb.

Red Wing willing to trade No. 6 pick in NHL draft: report [NHL.com, 5/30]

The Detroit Red Wings are willing to trade the No. 6 pick in the 2018 NHL Draft, general manager Ken Holland told The Athletic on Wednesday.

"I'm open to possibly move," Holland said.

[ . . . . ]
"I've started to talk to some teams about a lot," Holland said. "As you work your way toward Dallas at the draft, draft movement possibilities, I think at this stage in the game, everybody is kicking tires as to what might be out there."

[ . . . . ]
"If somebody on your list starts to slide, then you start to work the phone," Holland said. "We like a lot of players in that range, in that 30-35 range. We think there's some pretty good players. Do you package two of those picks and try to move up? Possibly, if somebody high on our lists starts to slide and starts to fall."

Detroit Red Wings trying to move up in draft [Ansar Khan, MLive.com, 6/2]

The Detroit Red Wings have the sixth pick in the June 22 draft, their highest selection since 1990.

But it might not be high enough to suit them. A couple of the players they covet, right wing Filip Zadina and defenseman Evan Bouchard, might be off the board.

That's why the Red Wings are trying to move up the draft, to as high as No. 3, a league source said.

Will Detroit Red Wings make pitch for Ilya Kovalchuk? [Ansar Khan, MLive.com, 6/4]

Red Wings will try to move up in draft

Q: Do the Wings plan to look for a lot of trade-up opportunities at the draft and use extra picks to move up? – Tom

A: They will try. They would like to move up to No. 3 for a shot at right wing Filip Zadina or No. 4 or 5 to get defenseman Evan Bouchard. If they do trade up or down it would happen during the draft on June 21 and of course depend on what transpires ahead of them.

What would it take to move up? At minimum, in addition to swapping the No. 6 pick, the Red Wings surely would need to relinquish their other first-round selection (30 or 31, depending on whether Vegas wins the Stanley Cup) or one of their second-round picks (No. 33 or 36).

___________

Bonus:

Petrella's Pre-Lottery Look at the Red Wings' Options [Clark Rasmussen, DetroitHockey.Net, 4/20]

For what it’s worth, the Wings seem to be leaning Zadina, who The Athletic named as the one guy they’d go off-script to grab, if given the chance. More on that later.

[ . . . . ]
Craig Custance had a really great article on The Athletic a few weeks ago. In it, he identified a pool of eight players that, even in the worst-case scenario where the Wings move down to 8^th, one or more will be available for selection. They are the same eight players listed above (before discussing Wahlstrom and Veleno).

Custance also mentions that Svechnikov and Tkachuk don’t fit any organizational need. And then there’s this tidbit: “The Red Wings like both players but the crucial need is on defense and it would be hard to pass on a potential top pair defenseman for another winger in the system. The one exception would be Filip Zadina. The organization is well aware they need a game-breaker to compete with the best teams in what’s becoming a one-goal league. Zadina is that guy.”

___________

A couple of days ago I said I doubt the Wings are truly serious about moving up to 3. But where's there smoke, there's usually fire -- and there does seem to be smoke here. Maybe Holland feels it might not actually take a king's ransom to move up to 3.

"In what world would it not cost a king's ransom?"

Maybe no one's willing to pay out the ass for that pick and so Bergevin could be willing to settle for a smaller return. If Bergevin wants a player he fully expects to be available at 6, then he should trade back. He can tell GMs he won't trade the pick for anything less than a king's ransom, but if he wants to get something (anything?) out of the situation, he might have to settle for a return that we might actually be ok with paying.

Let's say Bergevin wants Kotkaniemi. He could get Kotkaniemi + a king's ransom...but maybe he couldn't actually get that ransom, because maybe no one's actually willing to pay that price. So he could be looking at two options: A) Kotkaniemi or B) Kotkaniemi + pretty good haul.

Edited June 6, 2018 by Dabura

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

6 minutes ago, Dabura said:

A couple of days ago I said I doubt the Wings are truly serious about moving up to 3. But where's there smoke, there's usually fire -- and there does seem to be smoke here. Maybe Holland feels it might not actually take a king's ransom to move up to 3.

"In what world would it not cost a king's ransom?"

Maybe no one's willing to pay out the ass for that pick and so Bergevin could be willing to settle for a smaller return. If Bergevin wants a player he fully expects to be available at 6, then he should trade back. He can tell GMs he won't trade the pick for anything less than a king's ransom, but if he wants to get something (anything?) out of the situation, he might have to settle for a return that we might actually be ok with paying.

Let's say he wants Kotkaniemi. He could get Kotkaniemi + a king's ransom...but maybe he couldn't actually get that ransom, because maybe no one's actually willing to pay that price. So he could be looking at two options: A) Kotkaniemi or B) Kotkaniemi + pretty good haul.

If you're Bergevin, and you want Kotkaniemi, are you really going to take him at 3? I think that could be too much of a reach there. It actually makes the most sense for him to trade #3 to Holland for #6 and #30 and still get (can we call him Coke Can?) at #6 without looking like an amateur.

[krsmith17 7,191]

6 minutes ago, Dabura said:

My understanding is that the talk is based on reporting by Craig  Custance and Khan :

Paywalls r dumb.

A couple of days ago I said I doubt the Wings are truly serious about moving up to 3. But where's there smoke, there's usually fire -- and there does seem to be smoke here. Maybe Holland feels it might not actually take a king's ransom to move up to 3.

"In what world would it not cost a king's ransom?"

Maybe no one's willing to pay out the ass for that pick and so Bergevin could be willing to settle for a more modest return. If Bergevin wants a player he fully expects to be available at 6, then he should trade back. He can tell GMs he won't trade the pick for anything less than a king's ransom, but if he wants to get something (anything?) out of the situation, he might have to settle for a return that we might actually be ok with paying.

Let's say he wants Kotkaniemi. He could get Kotkaniemi + a king's ransom...but maybe he couldn't actually get that ransom, because maybe no one's actually willing to pay that price. So he could be looking at two options: A) Kotkaniemi or B) Kotkaniemi + pretty good haul.

Yeah, I had already read most of those articles, including Custance' Athletic article. The one I hadn't seen was the last Kahn article, so thanks for that. I still don't see it happening and I still hope it doesn't happen, unless it's very cheap (which it won't be)...

One thing that confused the hell out of me though... In what world is Zadina the player we so badly need but Svechnikov isn't? I don't get that. Isn't Svech regarded to be the better player at virtually every aspect of the game?

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

23 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

I wasn't being selective at all. I was simply listing the top power-play teams and the top producers on those power-plays. Yes, every team has left and right handed players, but not every team has elite left and right handed shooters that they utilize on the power-play. That's my point. We need some elite (top 6) right-handed shooters.

I'm not saying that having balanced handedness would fix our problems, but it would certainly go a long way in helping our problem scoring and setting up in the offensive zone.

I never said "Frk would fix our power-play". I said he would help our power-play, which he did. Just like I'm not saying that a right-handed sniper would fix our power-play, but he would certainly help. I also didn't say "Frk doesn't count as a right-handed shot because he isn't good enough". All I said was that he probably won't even be back next season. That's a knock on management, not Frk as a player. I think Frk should be back, because he is good enough.

I'm not saying two different things at all... I'm saying that adding some high end right-handed shots should be a priority, but we shouldn't pass up on better players just because of handedness. Why is this so difficult for you to comprehend?

I believe a balanced attack on forward and defense plays a huge role in a teams success. You don't think it matters whatsoever. Whatever.

Agreed. It's not that a team HAS to be balanced to be successful or that well balanced teams WILL BE MORE successful, but when you lack a RH-LH balance on ur roster, its a weakness that has to be compensated for. Some teams have enough overall talent to overcome it, some don't. I just think that more balance = less weakness/compensation.

[krsmith17 7,191]

5 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Agreed. It's not that a team HAS to be balanced to be successful or that well balanced teams WILL BE MORE successful, but when you lack a RH-LH balance on ur roster, its a weakness that has to be compensated for. Some teams have enough overall talent to overcome it, some don't. I just think that more balance = less weakness/compensation.

Exactly this. Playing against a team like the Wings who lack right-handed snipers and are forced to run their offense on the right side of the ice makes defending / penalty killing so much easier. Our better players are going to put up points regardless, but having more options everywhere on the ice would benefit the players and team.

[krsmith17 7,191]

Some notable rankings...

He has Kotkaniemi at 5. Bouchard at 9 (behind Hughes and Dobson). Wahlstrom dropping to 10. Wilde, Thomas, and Dellandrea ranking from 16-18, three players I'd like to trade up for. Veleno, Bokk, Miller and Samuelsson ranking from 28-33, all interesting options with our picks 30, 33 and 36. Kaut at 47, a player I think could be a steal that late...