• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
ChristopherReevesLegs

Dylan Larkin Is Soft

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, marcaractac said:

IF the three Wings players in question turn out to be anywhere in the realm of these St. Louis counterparts, we'll be in quite good shape considering the next couple drafts will likely net us first rounders that'll be even better than anyone we have now. 

This. We're likely to draft in the top 5 next year as well and in the top 10 the following 2 drafts. Hypothetically, in 4 years the roster could look like:

Laff-2022 1st rounder-Zadina

Bert-Larkin-Mantha

Rass-Veleno-Berggren

2021 1st rounder-Seider

McIsaac-Hronek

DK-Lindstrom

All without trading away any of the better talent on the current roster. Then you can start trading away guys like Mantha and Larkin, acquire more draft picks, and move other guys up to replace them. 

Share this post


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

Guns don't disrespect people. People do.

Gun will do a lot worse than disrespect ya fella

4 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Pretty sure there's a fallacy in there somewhere. Literally no one has said this.

Classic strawman. I honorably retract my statement and issue a formal apology to Larkin, Pavel Datyuk, and anyone afflicted by my boorish words

4 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

This. We're likely to draft in the top 5 next year as well and in the top 10 the following 2 drafts. Hypothetically, in 4 years the roster could look like:

Laff-2022 1st rounder-Zadina

Bert-Larkin-Mantha

Rass-Veleno-Berggren

2021 1st rounder-Seider

McIsaac-Hronek

DK-Lindstrom

All without trading away any of the better talent on the current roster. Then you can start trading away guys like Mantha and Larkin, acquire more draft picks, and move other guys up to replace them. 

I mean you can find these type of 'hopeful future' lineups as far back as 2011. Yet here we are almost 10 years later, worse off than ever.

Take the black-pill. Come back to reality. This team is f***ed for a severely long amount of time. I wish I could have told you that in 2011. But I didn't realize yet.

Ur all laughing at my doom n gloom now, but I'll be the one laughing in looks like 2-3 years according to you.

Edited by ChristopherReevesLegs

Share this post


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

I mean you can find these type of 'hopeful future' lineups as far back as 2011. Yet here we are almost 10 years later, worse off than ever.

Take the black-pill. Come back to reality. This team is f***ed for a severely long amount of time. I wish I could have told you that in 2011. But I didn't realize yet.

Ur all laughing at my doom n gloom now, but I'll be the one laughing in looks like 2-3 years according to you.

Dude, f*** offff with your bulls***...

You think saying that we're a bottom 5 team again next season, and a bottom 10 team for the next three seasons is unrealistic or "hopeful"? I personally think we're one year closer than that. I'll go bottom 5, bottom 10, and then bubble (potential playoff team).

There's a huge difference in a core made up mostly of highly drafted players (Larkin, Mantha, Bertuzzi, Rasmussen, Veleno, Zadina, Seider, Hronek, 2020 top 4 pick) and our old "core" made up mostly of later drafted players (Nyquist, Tatar, Sheahan, Pulkkinen, Jurco, Frk, Jensen, Ouellet, Sproul, Marchenko)...

Being optimistic about that old "core" was foolish, but there's legit reason to be optimistic about this new core, and the Red Wings going forward. If you want to s*** on people for that, you do you, but we'll be laughing at your dumb ass when Yzerman turns this team around, with most of it's current core still in place.

You want to trade Larkin and Mantha. For what? More draft picks? Great plan... Maybe you want to trade them straight up, one for one for another player? Who? The plan to trade two of our best young players that are still (barely) in their prime is beyond dumb. I'm happy Yzerman isn't that dumb. He will not trade either of those players, unless a team massively overpays. It's not going to happen...

Share this post


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

Dude, f*** offff with your bulls***...

You think saying that we're a bottom 5 team again next season, and a bottom 10 team for the next three seasons is unrealistic or "hopeful"? I personally think we're one year closer than that. I'll go bottom 5, bottom 10, and then bubble (potential playoff team).

There's a huge difference in a core made up mostly of highly drafted players (Larkin, Mantha, Bertuzzi, Rasmussen, Veleno, Zadina, Seider, Hronek, 2020 top 4 pick) and our old "core" made up mostly of later drafted players (Nyquist, Tatar, Sheahan, Pulkkinen, Jurco, Frk, Jensen, Ouellet, Sproul, Marchenko)...

Being optimistic about that old "core" was foolish, but there's legit reason to be optimistic about this new core, and the Red Wings going forward. If you want to s*** on people for that, you do you, but we'll be laughing at your dumb ass when Yzerman turns this team around, with most of it's current core still in place.

You want to trade Larkin and Mantha. For what? More draft picks? Great plan... Maybe you want to trade them straight up, one for one for another player? Who? The plan to trade two of our best young players that are still (barely) in their prime is beyond dumb. I'm happy Yzerman isn't that dumb. He will not trade either of those players, unless a team massively overpays. It's not going to happen...

Yeah yeah all those great future lineups posted for the last 10 years were foolish, BUT THIS time it's different. Definitely.

This team needs another 5 years of drafting and building min.

Forgive me for not stroking it to the worst team in the league with very few blue chips.

Share this post


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

This team needs another 5 years of drafting and building min.

Forgive me for not stroking it to the worst team in the league with very few blue chips.

Yes. This team needs a few more years of drafting. Which they will. Because they'll finish near the bottom. And get lottery picks. Without trading away the young talent in the team now.

You seem to think that this team needs to trade away the Larkins and Manthas and get draft picks back. Which wouldn't be lottery picks anyway. Which seems pointless to me. 

If this team becomes successful, it will be because they have gotten top 5 picks for the next few seasons. And drafted well with those picks. And added those draft picks to the existing core. 

The Wings are drafting for sure in the top 4 this draft. And most likely drafting in the top 5 again the following season and at least top 10 the year after that. All 3 of those picks are likely to be high end players at the NHL level. When you consider that we already have 3 likely top 4 dmen and 4 top 6 F on the roster, why would you think we wouldn't be any good if the remaining spots on D and F are filled in the next few drafts with high end draft picks?

Edited by Neomaxizoomdweebie

Share this post


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

Yeah yeah all those great future lineups posted for the last 10 years were foolish, BUT THIS time it's different. Definitely.

Actually it is different now. We weren't getting lottery picks in 2011 because we were still making the playoffs. We were picking in the late teens and 20s.

Now we're getting lottery picks. 4th year in a row picking in the top 10 and 1st time picking in the top 5. And I suspect that will be the case for a few more drafts to come.

So I do think that there is a lot more room for optimism.

Share this post


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

Yes. This team needs a few more years of drafting. Which they will. Because they'll finish near the bottom. And get lottery picks. Without trading away the young talent in the team now.

You seem to think that this team needs to trade away the Larkins and Manthas and get draft picks back. Which wouldn't be lottery picks anyway. Which seems pointless to me. 

If this team becomes successful, it will be because they have gotten top 5 picks for the next few seasons. And drafted well with those picks. And added those draft picks to the existing core. 

The Wings are drafting for sure in the top 4 this draft. And most likely drafting in the top 5 again the following season and at least top 10 the year after that. All 3 of those picks are likely to be high end players at the NHL level. When you consider that we already have 3 likely top 4 dmen and 4 top 6 F on the roster, why would you think we wouldn't be any good if the remaining spots on D and F are filled in the next few drafts with high end draft picks?

Oh it's not that I think we need lottery picks (we do). It's the timeline and dice rolls.

You could of course build a great balanced team and win it all like the Blues this year. But to build a true powerhouse and return to dynastic glory you need multiple truly ELITE players. Yzermans, Lidstroms, Datsyuks, Zetterbergs, Crosbys, McDavids, Ovechkins, Kanes, Mackinnons, etc etc.

It's not the 90s anymore. We're not gonna be getting those players in the 3rd or 7th or whatever. We need 1st rounders and we need an abundance of them in a short amount of time. Acquiring multiple of these players in a few short years could happen, but it's highly unlikely, especially only picking once in the 1st round like Yzerguy has us doing this year.

Consider this team doesn't currently have any elite players unless you want to count Zadina or Seider (you know which one I do and I don't). I personally can't in good conscious even count Seider yet myself because he's never even played an NHL game yet.

Consider that there is only about 1-4 (depending on the year) elite players coming out of every draft. Most coming out of the top5 or top10, but more than a few even coming in the later half.

Consider that we have only one dice roll in the 1st this year (albeit a good roll), the chances of that roll being one of the 1-4 ELITE players are good but certainly not guaranteed. Especially worse I think if that roll isn't Lafreniere.

Consider that that player might be a Larkin/Mantha and not truly ELITE, and that we are adding only a good player while also Yzerman reshapes and betters the team outside the draft. In that case maybe we're aren't picking top5 the next year. Maybe we bump down to 6,7,8 and those results begin compounding as more impact players are drafted and Yzerman trading and signing.

Consider that this multi-year process is not going to result in us selecting an ELITE player each year, and our chances each year will likely decline less and less. We might get a Lafren this year, but we also might need to wait 2 or 3 drafts before that player comes to us.

The argument I'm making is that we need to achieve critical mass. That we have to SEIZE these bottom years and maximize the inputs each year. We are getting 1 good dice roll, but it would be much better to have 1 or 2 average dice rolls on top of that. The only way I see us getting those is to begin stripping our core. With these extra picks we not only have a chance of getting our Lafren, but also our Pastranak.

Now you could say "But CRL look at Deadmonton. They picked #1 4/5 years!" Not only is it not likely that we will get these same chances, how many ELITE players did they obtain from that?... ONE. That's the game we're playing, a game of chance. Some basement dwellers are gonna get lucky and get Crosby's and Malkin's in quick succession. Other teams will struggle for years to find these players. We are probably somewhere in between. The more rolls we have in the draft the better chance we have at accelerating this s*** hole and achieving max glory.

It behooves us to weaponize all our assets in this window to increase our chances at these players and find them as quickly as possible, because the second part of the problem is also temporal. Yzerman has a window here to tank, but that's not forever. Eventually he has to produce results or be fired. That means a better team coming down the road with less percentage chance at adding ELITES. If he can't get a Lafren in the next 3 seasons (a real possibility) we may be stuck with an average bubble team.

It could take us 5+ years to add the elite players we need to get the dynasty restored. In that time Larkin/Bertuzzi/Mantha could all be walking out on us anyway. So I don't think it's unwise at all to get picks/prospects you want for them now.

TLDR: If you wanna tank, tank hard

8 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Actually it is different now. We weren't getting lottery picks in 2011 because we were still making the playoffs. We were picking in the late teens and 20s.

Now we're getting lottery picks. 4th year in a row picking in the top 10 and 1st time picking in the top 5. And I suspect that will be the case for a few more drafts to come.

So I do think that there is a lot more room for optimism.

The point I was trying to drive home was that good likeable draft picks OFTEN fail. For every Larkin or Mantha there is a Sheahan or Svechnikov. For every McDavid or Draisitl there is a Yakupov or Pulijarvi. For every Tatar there is a Jurco. And we will continue to have our fair share of theses. Many players we were hopeful about came nowhere near perceived expectation.

So I think it's rather naive to put into a future lineup (X 1st round pick) on the 1st line. That pick might suck, or might only make us good enough to not draft top5 anymore

At the end of the day I don't want a good Red Wings team. I want a great one. Maximizing this trough also maximizes our cieling for a future dynasty. If I have to burn Larkin or Mantha for that so be it. The weak must die so the strong can reign in the sun.

 

 

Edited by ChristopherReevesLegs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If all your here for is cutting down the team and our players leave you have to be able to find something better to do then waist your time on a  opposing fansite 

Share this post


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

Did you watch the season?

If you don't like 'Murica you can geeeeet out!

53 minutes ago, blgillett said:

If all your here for is cutting down the team and our players leave you have to be able to find something better to do then waist your time on a  opposing fansite 

Do you realize the tagline next to your avatar says, "Stevie the one and only Captian".  And your post says "your" instead of "you're" and "waist" instead of "waste".  Maybe if you should go do something else too.  Like read a book or find an elementary school teacher to date or something. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UKDC8PV.png

That's right. Your bonafide 1C glorious leader and "defensive stud" Dylan Larkin got exactly zero votes for the Selke.

When do we finally admit to ourselves that this kid isn't a top offensive or defensive centers and a new 1C needs to be put on top of him? Now? 3 more years of average play? 5?

Share this post


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

UKDC8PV.png

That's right. Your bonafide 1C glorious leader and "defensive stud" Dylan Larkin got exactly zero votes for the Selke.

When do we finally admit to ourselves that this kid isn't a top offensive or defensive centers and a new 1C needs to be put on top of him? Now? 3 more years of average play? 5?

So Larkin is not a top 15 center as far as Selke voting goes. There are 9 centers on that list that are better than Larkin overall. Crosby and Malkin got no votes either. I guess they suck too.

Share this post


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

How good a forward is is clearly defined by how he places in Selke voting. Lol.

Its really not funny. Our best player is a 60 pt center who's not on the radar defensively. Thats sad. U should have a problem with that. Especially when every fan boys excuse for him is that "hes elite defensivly". Hes not. 

Im telling u now. Ur the fans that enabled the dead wings. U accept mediocrity. I dont. This is bull s***. Im not happy that our best player is a 2C on another team. I demand better. 

 

 

Share this post


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

Its really not funny. Our best player is a 60 pt center who's not on the radar defensively. Thats sad. U should have a problem with that. Especially when every fan boys excuse for him is that "hes elite defensivly". Hes not. 

Im telling u now. Ur the fans that enabled the dead wings. U accept mediocrity. I dont. This is bull s***. Im not happy that our best player is a 2C on another team. I demand better. 

Larkin has already proven that he has the ability to score 70+ points. I think he'll end up closer to that range most seasons than the 60+ he was on pace for this season. Larkin is still very young, playing on a historically bad team. I don't expect you to take that into consideration, but it absolutely is a factor in his production. "BuT hIs LiNeMaTeS pRoDuCeD mOrE!"... None of them were directly matched up against Crosby, McDavid, Matthews, MacKinnon, etc. 

I'm surprised Larkin didn't get a single Selke vote, but I'm sure he will in the coming years. Again, he's just coming off his age 23 season, and still has a lot of room for growth at both ends of the ice. He'll be fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Its really not funny. Our best player is a 60 pt center who's not on the radar defensively. Thats sad. U should have a problem with that. Especially when every fan boys excuse for him is that "hes elite defensivly". Hes not. 

Im telling u now. Ur the fans that enabled the dead wings. U accept mediocrity. I dont. This is bull s***. Im not happy that our best player is a 2C on another team. I demand better. 

 

 

The 31st best center in the NHL is still a 1C.

And let's be honest here. Does the best defensive F ever win the Selke? It has been given to the best well rounded forward in the NHL for some time. Larkin is good defensively. He clearly had a down year in point production. He really didn't deserve Selke consideration for that reason. It wasn't his D that kept him from nomination. As a homer, even I would not have nominated him. Not because he's awful, but because there were clearly guys more deserving.

Edited by Neomaxizoomdweebie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, these awards are voted on by the PHWA, and are basically meaningless. I am kind of surprised Larkin didn't receive a single top 5 vote, especially when you consider players like Luke Glendening and Teddy Blueger (who?) received votes. But really, all it means is that some of the voters are completely out to lunch, and none of the voters see Larkin as a top 5 defensive center (which I would agree with).

38 players receiving votes when Larkin didn't receive a single one, does not mean that those 38 players are better, or even better defensively, than him. I mean, who really thinks that half of the players on that list are top 5 defensive players in the league? Some of the votes really make you questions one's sanity.

If instead of voting, this were decided on by actual quantifiable stats, I'm sure Larkin would be there ahead of a lot of those players. Instead it's a dumb award voted on by dumb writers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

The 31st best center in the NHL is still a 1C.

And let's be honest here. Does the best defensive F ever win the Selke? It has been given to the best well rounded forward in the NHL for some time. Larkin is good defensively. He clearly had a down year in point production. He really didn't deserve Selke consideration for that reason. It wasn't his D that kept him from nomination. As a homer, even I would not have nominated him. Not because he's awful, but because there were clearly guys more deserving.

What are u on about? Noel Accari and Brandon Tanev are getting votes. Both great defensive players but not offensive ones. Ur "well rounded" theory is straight made up head movie bungus. 

10 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Yeah, these awards are voted on by the PHWA, and are basically meaningless. I am kind of surprised Larkin didn't receive a single top 5 vote, especially when you consider players like Luke Glendening and Teddy Blueger (who?) received votes. But really, all it means is that some of the voters are completely out to lunch, and none of the voters see Larkin as a top 5 defensive center (which I would agree with).

38 players receiving votes when Larkin didn't receive a single one, does not mean that those 38 players are better, or even better defensively, than him. I mean, who really thinks that half of the players on that list are top 5 defensive players in the league? Some of the votes really make you questions one's sanity.

If instead of voting, this were decided on by actual quantifiable stats, I'm sure Larkin would be there ahead of a lot of those players. Instead it's a dumb award voted on by dumb writers.

Now that folks more qualified than u and me weigh in the award is BS? Lol. Typical.

Glendening is by far a better defensive forward than Larkin. Thats why hes valuable. Ive warned u all that this "but larkin is focusing on D" is crutch leaning BS all season. Dont hate the messanger. Take off ur rosey glasses already. 

 

Share this post


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

Now that folks more qualified than u and me weigh in the award is BS? Lol. Typical.

Glendening is by far a better defensive forward than Larkin. Thats why hes valuable. Ive warned u all that this "but larkin is focusing on D" is crutch leaning BS all season. Dont hate the messanger. Take off ur rosey glasses already. 

What makes them more qualified? Because they get paid to cover the sport? There are some members of that board that I would say are MUCH more qualified than anyone here. Others, not so much. Bob McKenzie, Pierre Lebrun and Elliotte Friedman cover every team and probably don't carry any bias. But then there's a bunch of other guys that cover specific teams and absolutely carry bias. Steve Simmons (complete moron) - Toronto Sun, Larry Brooks - New York Post, Craig Morgan - Arizona Sports, etc. definitely carry bias. Just because some of these guys have a voice, doesn't mean they're worth listening to. Some of their takes are awful. Hence, someone thinking that Teddy Blueger is a top 5 defensive forward in the league...

If the voting were done without any bias, I'm sure the list would be much shorter. Maybe 10 or so players, rather than 38. Regardless, Larkin wouldn't be on that list, nor should he be. He's not a top 10 defensive player. But not many 23 year old players are.

You can continue to hate on Larkin all you want. He's a very good player, that's only going to get better. He's also going to be the next captain of the Detroit Red Wings.

Share this post


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

What are u on about? Noel Accari and Brandon Tanev are getting votes. Both great defensive players but not offensive ones. Ur "well rounded" theory is straight made up head movie bungus. 

Now that folks more qualified than u and me weigh in the award is BS? Lol. Typical.

Glendening is by far a better defensive forward than Larkin. Thats why hes valuable. Ive warned u all that this "but larkin is focusing on D" is crutch leaning BS all season. Dont hate the messanger. Take off ur rosey glasses already. 

 

You'll be singing the same tune once said folks snub Seider of Norris votes every year because he doesn't score 60+ points. 

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
Sign in to follow this