• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Dabura

2019 Offseason Rebuild Thread, Pt. 2 - What's the Yzerplan?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Akakabuto said:

I never was a Babcock hater but a couple of those guys showed promise and I have to wonder if he wasn’t trying to make players into something they were not. You have to let young players play to their strength and at the same time try to trim the deficiencies down. 

Imagine if they wouldn’t have let Yzerman be the type of offensive player he was when he was young. 

Let the kids be the kind of players they are and when they are mature enough you mold them to the players you need them to be. 

Oh god, don't start that whole thing again. There is absolutely nothing to suggest that anything like this happened. 

In regards to Wright/Draper...

Wright came from a position in player development in Columbus, so I don't think he had any more actual scouting experience/expertise than Draper. Even though Draper's title made it sound like he got coffee and hookers and s***, I'm pretty sure scouting was one of his duties.

Share this post


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

Oh god, don't start that whole thing again. There is absolutely nothing to suggest that anything like this happened. 

There's also absolutely nothing to suggest that anything like this didn't happen, or couldn't have happened. It's an opinion. One you disagree with. That doesn't make it wrong...

If you believe that every decision ever made my management and coaching was in the best interest of player development, and no player has ever had their development stunted due to poor management or coaching, cool... I know a lot of people would disagree though, including me.

Share this post


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

Oh god, don't start that whole thing again. There is absolutely nothing to suggest that anything like this happened. 

In regards to Wright/Draper...

Wright came from a position in player development in Columbus, so I don't think he had any more actual scouting experience/expertise than Draper. Even though Draper's title made it sound like he got coffee and hookers and s***, I'm pretty sure scouting was one of his duties.

C’mon, it’s pretty evident that he like his players a certain way. It’s defense first. And second. I’m not saying he ruined any of those players careers but playing for Babs is a tough deal and I do believe one or two of them could have reach a higher ceiling playing for, let’s say, Boudreau. 

The rumblings about Babcocks preferences and player usage started a long time in Toronto too. 

 

 

Share this post


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

I never was a Babcock hater but a couple of those guys showed promise and I have to wonder if he wasn’t trying to make players into something they were not. You have to let young players play to their strength and at the same time try to trim the deficiencies down. 

Imagine if they wouldn’t have let Yzerman be the type of offensive player he was when he was young. 

Let the kids be the kind of players they are and when they are mature enough you mold them to the players you need them to be. 

True. But most of these guys had chances with other teams and couldn't hack it. Conversely, Samuelsson, Lilja, and Cleary came here as castaways from other teams and resurrected their careers here under Babcock. 

17 minutes ago, Akakabuto said:

C’mon, it’s pretty evident that he like his players a certain way. It’s defense first. And second. I’m not saying he ruined any of those players careers but playing for Babs is a tough deal and I do believe one or two of them could have reach a higher ceiling playing for, let’s say, Boudreau. 

The rumblings about Babcocks preferences and player usage started a long time in Toronto too. 

 

 

Until playoff time rolled around. zZING!!!! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/11/2019 at 3:43 PM, Dabura said:

I'm not saying we didn't get good players under Wright. I'm asking if [name pulled from a hat] likely would not have been able to match or outperform Wright's track record with the Wings.

Larkin was a home run, though a lot of people had him going right around where we took him.

Svechnikov is starting to feel like a mistake, though he's had s*** luck with injuries and that hasn't helped his cause one bit.

Cholowski and Hronek are still question marks, though the early returns are very promising.

Rasmussen is a big question mark.

Zadina's probably going to be a very good NHLer, but there are thousands of hockey people who would've taken him where we took him.

Veleno fell into our laps. I give Wright credit for not overthinking that pick (same with Zadina), but at the end of the day the jury's out on Veleno (same with Zadina).

Berggren and McIsaac are question marks who went right around where they were projected to go.

Lindstrom could be Mattias Ekholm or he could be Alexey Marchenko.

Seider was an Yzerman pick.

So, I dunno, you tell me: Are we looking at a big loss? And look at the lesser names we've picked. Does that track record scream "Very smart" or "Not very smart" or "About what you'd expect from your average director of amateur scouting"? I lean towards "About what you'd expect."

I think the Wings drafted pretty well under Wright. There were two or three drafts that I was really pleased with at the time. I just don't feel like we're losing anything terribly special in Wright. I could be wrong.

Its so hard to asses Wright because at the end of the day these picks ultimately fell on Holland. Wrights job is to provide Holland with all the info he has, but its entirely possible Wright wanted someone else in 2015, and Holland took Svech instead, just as its possible Wright wanted someone else in 2014, and Holland took Larkin instead. Who knows.

Share this post


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

I never was a Babcock hater but a couple of those guys showed promise and I have to wonder if he wasn’t trying to make players into something they were not. You have to let young players play to their strength and at the same time try to trim the deficiencies down. 

Imagine if they wouldn’t have let Yzerman be the type of offensive player he was when he was young. 

Let the kids be the kind of players they are and when they are mature enough you mold them to the players you need them to be. 

I dont know about that, when kids are developing its so important to instill good habits. I see what you are saying, but if you wait too long the player sometimes gets stuck in their ways and is a lost cause. Look at Alexei Kovalev for example, imagine the type of player he could have been if a coach pushed him harder at the beginning like what Blashill is doing with AA. I have heard so many players say he was one of the most talented guys ever, but he never lived up to that because of his work ethic

Anyone remember this gem lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Akakabuto said:

C’mon, it’s pretty evident that he like his players a certain way. It’s defense first. And second. I’m not saying he ruined any of those players careers but playing for Babs is a tough deal and I do believe one or two of them could have reach a higher ceiling playing for, let’s say, Boudreau. 

The rumblings about Babcocks preferences and player usage started a long time in Toronto too. 

GDI, you see what you did? Are you happy now? Proud of yourself? We had this idiocy dragon slain years ago, now you just saunter in and resurrect it like it's nothing. I doubt any of us will survive now. You're an agent of chaos, and I hope your ancestors are weeping in the hereafter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

There's also absolutely nothing to suggest that anything like this didn't happen, or couldn't have happened. It's an opinion. One you disagree with. That doesn't make it wrong...

If you believe that every decision ever made my management and coaching was in the best interest of player development, and no player has ever had their development stunted due to poor management or coaching, cool... I know a lot of people would disagree though, including me.

But this is an appeal to ignorance fallacy, or proving non-existence fallacy. If I said unicorns are real because you can't prove they're not, you'd call me an idiot, and you'd be right.  Or more on topic, If I said I think Kronwall is better suited for forward... just because you can't categorically prove he's not is not evidence that supports my claim. Basically, it's unsubstantiated rumor.

So if your opinion is: Babs ruined player X, and your evidence of that is: You can't prove he didn't, It's pretty clear that's a very weak opinion to stand on.

Of course no player is ever handled 100% perfectly by a team, but I think it's pretty weak to say a team ruined a player just because he didn't live up to your personal perceived cieling of said player.

34 minutes ago, Akakabuto said:

C’mon, it’s pretty evident that he like his players a certain way. It’s defense first. And second. I’m not saying he ruined any of those players careers but playing for Babs is a tough deal and I do believe one or two of them could have reach a higher ceiling playing for, let’s say, Boudreau. 

The rumblings about Babcocks preferences and player usage started a long time in Toronto too. 

 

 

Meh, basically what you're saying is different coaches have different styles and strategies. That's true and different players should in theory play differently in a different system. But I think that impact is very minimal. You can play NHL hockey or you can't. I don't think a different system would have suddenly made these players into NHL caliber players.

Share this post


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

Meh, basically what you're saying is different coaches have different styles and strategies. That's true and different players should in theory play differently in a different system. But I think that impact is very minimal. You can play NHL hockey or you can't. I don't think a different system would have suddenly made these players into NHL caliber players.

That’s all I’m saying. Though I disagree with the part of the impact being very minimal. 

Anyway, my point was that drafting wasn’t our only problem back then. For a long period of time we didn’t get to see almost any of our prospects reaching their projected ceilings or even floors. 

 

Share this post


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

That’s all I’m saying. Though I disagree with the part of the impact being very minimal. 

Anyway, my point was that drafting wasn’t our only problem back then. For a long period of time we didn’t get to see almost any of our prospects reaching their projected ceilings or even floors. 

 

Projected ceiling and floor? Projected by whom? Corey Pronman? Other fans on the internet? The overwhelming majority of prospects never make the NHL. Most will never live up to their "projection". I don't blame any team for that. Each team is trying to give its prospects every chance to succeed. That's the goal of development. Players don't suddenly forget how to score and wash out because a coach has a certain defensive system. I think that's ludicrous.

Look at Babcock with Kadri. Turned him into a defensively dominant player, and yet he's still a 45 to 65 pt center. Look at Tyler Ennis under Boudreau and Babcock. Ennis faired better offensively in Babcocks system.

There's absolutely nothing to substantiate that the Red Wings or Babcock "ruined" anyone. Everyone claimed for years Babs was holding Jurco back. Whoopdeedoo, the Blackhawks failed to turn him into a Dylan Strome story after us and now he's still a career minor league with a 3rd organization. Did we really ruin him, or did he just not live up to the youtube hype?

At the end of the day these players have to grow and adapt into NHL players and earn a role. The team affords them tools and opportunities to do this. Failing to make the team or even get signed after the draft is mostly on the player.

 

Share this post


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

But this is an appeal to ignorance fallacy, or proving non-existence fallacy. If I said unicorns are real because you can't prove they're not, you'd call me an idiot, and you'd be right.  Or more on topic, If I said I think Kronwall is better suited for forward... just because you can't categorically prove he's not is not evidence that supports my claim. Basically, it's unsubstantiated rumor.

How is it a non-existent fallacy? It's something we seen... It's nothing like unicorns or whatever you're talking about... We seen how some of our top prospects at the time were being utilized. A lot of fans felt they were being mismanaged. Other fans think because these coaches and managers are pros they can't make mistakes. I think it's foolish to blindly trust everything these guys do. I'm not saying Jurco or Sproul or whoever else would have been elite if it weren't for the way they were managed early on in Detroit, but I do think it's possible that they could have been regular NHLers, if a few things were handled differently. We'll never know for sure though, so whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, krsmith17 said:

How is it a non-existent fallacy?

Because not being able to prove something doesn't exist isn't evidence that it does exist. That's the definition. Appeal to ignorance.

2 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

We seen how some of our top prospects at the time were being utilized. A lot of fans felt they were being mismanaged.

A lot of fans felt Moritz Seider at #6 was never gonna happen too...

Go ahead, lay out which prospects were mismanaged and evidence of it. I'm happy to hear it.

6 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Other fans think because these coaches and managers are pros they can't make mistakes. I think it's foolish to blindly trust everything these guys do.

52 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Of course no player is ever handled 100% perfectly by a team, but I think it's pretty weak to say a team ruined a player just because he didn't live up to your personal perceived cieling of said player.

Now you're exaggerating my POV. A straw-man fallacy. I certainly do not blindly trust coaches and managers or think they are incapable of mistakes, as demonstrated in my initial response I've highlighted here. I do however trust their opinions much more than yours or mine.

11 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

I'm not saying Jurco or Sproul or whoever else would have been elite if it weren't for the way they were managed early on in Detroit, but I do think it's possible that they could have been regular NHLers, if a few things were handled differently. We'll never know for sure though, so whatever.

Here's the thing. Jurco and Sproul also could have been drafted by a different team and developed worse in those systems than they did in ours. We'll never know for sure though, so whatever.

Both players have tried with multiple organizations now and failed. If you wanna blame the Red Wings and Babcock or whomever for their failings in NY, CHI, or any other organization, more power to ya, I think its silly though. We tried our best with them and it didn't work out. They didn't become Dylan Stromes elsewhere though so I'd lean on the fact that they're just not anything special.

 

Share this post


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

A lot of fans felt Moritz Seider at #6 was never gonna happen too...

What does this have to do with anything?

30 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Go ahead, lay out which prospects were mismanaged and evidence of it. I'm happy to hear it.

Nah. It's already been discussed countless times and can't be proven right or wrong. So what's the point?

31 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Now you're exaggerating my POV. A straw-man fallacy. I certainly do not blindly trust coaches and managers or think they are incapable of mistakes, as demonstrated in my initial response I've highlighted here. I do however trust their opinions much more than yours or mine.

Not exaggerating anything. Never even said anything about you specifically.

32 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Here's the thing. Jurco and Sproul also could have been drafted by a different team and developed worse in those systems than they did in ours. We'll never know for sure though, so whatever.

Exactly my point. There's no way to determine whether or not these players would have been better or worse off under different circumstances. So what's the point in discussing it? 

34 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Both players have tried with multiple organizations now and failed. If you wanna blame the Red Wings and Babcock or whomever for their failings in NY, CHI, or any other organization, more power to ya, I think its silly though. We tried our best with them and it didn't work out. They didn't become Dylan Stromes elsewhere though so I'd lean on the fact that they're just not anything special.

I agree that neither would have likely been anything special. I do think that either or both Jurco and Sproul could have been regular NHLers under different circumstances though. You disagree, and that's fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, krsmith17 said:

What does this have to do with anything?

Fans are often wrong. I put very little merit in "fans disagreed with X"

1 minute ago, krsmith17 said:

Nah. It's already been discussed countless times and can't be proven right or wrong. So what's the point?

What's the point, IS my point. Saying Red Wings ruined player X is dumb because you can't prove a smidget of that assumption.

3 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Not exaggerating anything. Never even said anything about you specifically.

Interesting that you chose to say it in response to me.

4 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Exactly my point. There's no way to determine whether or not these players would have been better or worse off under different circumstances. So what's the point in discussing it?

Then why consistently bring this conspiracy theory up? As Buppy pointed out this should be put to rest. It's been nothing but fan theory since day one.

6 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

I agree that neither would have likely been anything special. I do think that either or both Jurco and Sproul could have been regular NHLers under different circumstances though. You disagree, and that's fine.

You and I could've been NHLers under different circumstances too. I don't blame my peewee coach or the team I was on for that though. 

Share this post


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

Fans are often wrong. I put very little merit in "fans disagreed with X"

What's the point, IS my point. Saying Red Wings ruined player X is dumb because you can't prove a smidget of that assumption.

Interesting that you chose to say it in response to me.

Then why consistently bring this conspiracy theory up? As Buppy pointed out this should be put to rest. It's been nothing but fan theory since day one.

You and I could've been NHLers under different circumstances too. I don't blame my peewee coach or the team I was on for that though. 

Yeah, okay. Good talk. 

Share this post


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

Its so hard to asses Wright because at the end of the day these picks ultimately fell on Holland. Wrights job is to provide Holland with all the info he has, but its entirely possible Wright wanted someone else in 2015, and Holland took Svech instead, just as its possible Wright wanted someone else in 2014, and Holland took Larkin instead. Who knows.

Definitely.

I think you can get a sense of the man from the body of work...but even then, we're a few years out from really knowing how we fared in roughly half of his drafts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wondering how you guys feel about tendering an offer sheet to Werenski? I am sure Columbus would match anything we could afford to offer, but wouls you like to see one? Going by the chart below, it'd at least cost us a 1st, 2nd and 3rd in compensation.  But I think Columbus would match anything under the $8.454 threshold.  But if they did not, would you be ok with losing our 2020 picks? Considering we may be a lottery team again?  Columbus may let Werenski go for that reason alone.  They could possibly score a 1st overall out of it.

image.png.7e0e18a8bc373137d604a30cd379ba30.png

Share this post


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

Wondering how you guys feel about tendering an offer sheet to Werenski? I am sure Columbus would match anything we could afford to offer, but wouls you like to see one? Going by the chart below, it'd at least cost us a 1st, 2nd and 3rd in compensation.  But I think Columbus would match anything under the $8.454 threshold.  But if they did not, would you be ok with losing our 2020 picks? Considering we may be a lottery team again?  Columbus may let Werenski go for that reason alone.  They could possibly score a 1st overall out of it.

image.png.7e0e18a8bc373137d604a30cd379ba30.png

I absolutely love this kid and would take him in a heartbeat. A 1st, 2nd and 3rd would be a steal. Looking at what Calgary gave up to get Hamilton (who has since been shipped out of town due to rumored attitude/mental health issues), I think that would be a great price. But I agree, I don't see Columbus letting him go. One of the best young d men in the league.

In theory, our pick will certainly be a lotto pick. Just not sure at what percentage. But Werenski would instantly and significantly improve our defensive group.

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