2021 Draft

[LeftWinger 4,963]

46 minutes ago, F.Michael said:

Not everyone here can be an "O.G." like me ...

I got 2003 seniority!

[F.Michael 4,590]

9 minutes ago, LeftWinger said:

I got 2003 seniority!

[krsmith17 7,191]

35 minutes ago, Hookersarethefuture said:

So alnefelt is a surefire #1 starter? I dont recall even seeing him on a top 50/100 prospects list ... it’s all nice and dandy to collect a teams goalie prospect and hope one finally pans out but why take the risk and keep doing the same thing we been doing for 25 yrs without success when a top goalie prospect is there for the taking

korpisalo is 27 and his numbers are ok nothing special and probably need another goalie to split games with

I’ll be glad when this draft us over and done with

I wouldn't say Alnefelt is a "surefire #1 starter", but I don't think (m)any 18-20 year old goaltenders are, and that includes Askarov and Wallstedt. Sure, they look great now, but we've seen goalies this good flame out in the past. It could happen with these guys as well. Again, if Yzerman takes Wallstedt 6th overall, I'll trust the pick, and hope it works out, but it wouldn't be my first choice. I'd much rather acquire a goaltender via trade or free agency. I've mentioned Alnefelt in the past, and it makes a ton of sense.

"Why take the risk and keep doing the same thing we've been doing for 25 years without success"? Umm you are aware that we've won 4 Stanley Cups in that span, right?... If anything, that proves that maybe we shouldn't "waste" a top 10 pick on a goaltender. All of those Cup teams were built around elite skaters. 

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

2 hours ago, Hookersarethefuture said:

So alnefelt is a surefire #1 starter? I dont recall even seeing him on a top 50/100 prospects list ... it’s all nice and dandy to collect a teams goalie prospect and hope one finally pans out but why take the risk and keep doing the same thing we been doing for 25 yrs without success when a top goalie prospect is there for the taking

korpisalo is 27 and his numbers are ok nothing special and probably need another goalie to split games with

I’ll be glad when this draft us over and done with

The Red Wings have never had any problem acquiring top tier goalies.

2 hours ago, LeftWinger said:

No, I am not talking some big revelation, but in all this talk about our G prospect pool and how important it is to get that spot filled via a young kid I just felt that with all the talk about whether or not you take a G in the top 10, we may have lost sight of the trade possibility with a team that needs to dump salary. I didn't look at Columbus, but they are not in need to dump salary, so acquiring one of theirs may cost too much, plus they are 27 already, not sure if that fits the rebuild timeline or model. Alnefelt is only 20 and Tampa will be desperate to shed salary. Not sure if they want to play the "cap-circumvention" game for a whole 82 games season this time.

We already have a 1st round draft pick in goal. His name is Bernier.

2 hours ago, Hookersarethefuture said:

Jesus has nothing on you

I think he joined in 2005.

[The 91 of Ryans 3,015]

3 minutes ago, BarkBurgerman said:

The Red Wings have literally drafted 5 starting goalies in the history of the franchise: Rutherford, Cheveldae, Osgood, Howard, and Mrazek... but yeah it's super easy to draft good goalies. I wouldn't even call Rutherford, Howard, Mrazek, or Cheveldae good starters. So really we've only ever drafted one good starter in Osgood.

Goalies are a dice roll. 

Yzerman has to decide if he wants to assume that risk at #6 I guess. 

[The 91 of Ryans 3,015]

1 minute ago, BarkBurgerman said:

Goalies outside the 1st are a 90 sided dice role. 1st round goalies are a coin flip. Top 10 goalies work out particularly well besides guys named Montoya and Dipietro.

Is Wallsted a top 10 worthy goalie? Knight and Askarov went like 12th in 2 fairly strong drafts. Splitting hairs I know, but is he in the same tier as those guys? 

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

1 hour ago, Hookersarethefuture said:

Who are these top tier goalies you speak of? Bernier a career backup has a few decent seasons and hes a top tier goalie? So top no one cared to make a trade for him at the deadline

The last top tier goalie we had that came here was hasek as a free agent , this bernier stuff is nonsense

Yes wallstedt closing the door and future captain seider destroying bodies in front of him . This is the future i want and need

97 team won a cup with an acquired thru trade Mike Vernon. 02 team won with a traded for Hasek. 08 team had Osgood and Hasek, both of whom were signed as free agents. The team also signed Curtis Joseph in 2002 who was considered an elite goalie.

And Bernier just proves my point. A 1st round pick who ended up as a lower level starter. And the Wings got him in free agency while someone else wasted their first round pick on him.

50 minutes ago, BarkBurgerman said:

I don't know a lot about Knight, other than he's doing really well at a young age now. Askarov is ******* good thou. I think he ends up looking like a top5 pick. Best Russian goalie since Tretiak.

Couldnt agree more. They both flop on the world stage.

[krsmith17 7,191]

1 hour ago, BarkBurgerman said:

>two elite goalies in the entire history of a 90 year old franchise

eLiTE GoALieS ARe EazY tO gEt gUYs DoNt WOrRy

I don't think a single person is saying that "elite goalies are easy to get"... What some people are saying is that you don't need "elite" goalies to win. Which is absolutely true. Again, if Yzerman believes Wallstedt is the best player available, this is the one year I'd be somewhat okay with taking the goaltender. If that is the route he wants to go, I hope he attempts a trade back, and swings for the fences with his other 1st, and 2nd round picks...

[F.Michael 4,590]

1 hour ago, The 91 of Ryans said:

Is Wallsted a top 10 worthy goalie? Knight and Askarov went like 12th in 2 fairly strong drafts. Splitting hairs I know, but is he in the same tier as those guys? 

Some compare him to countryman Lundqvist with his demeanor and style of play.

 

[Dabura 12,207]

On 6/29/2021 at 3:50 PM, kipwinger said:

An easier way of saying this is that you're not going to make it through the playoffs with a bunch of 6ft, 190 lb., pantywaists. All of Vrana, Raymond, Berggren, and Zadina are good, or going to be good, NHL wingers. But if those guys, plus Bertuzzi, Larkin and Veleno, are in your top six you're going to get pushed around in the playoffs. We see it every year. There's a reason Tampa went out and got Barcley Goodrow (for a 1st round pick) after they basically got checked to death by Columbus two years ago.

Facts.

It's a speed & skill league...in the regular season. In the playoffs, it's a systems & checking league. Same as it ever was.

On 6/29/2021 at 3:50 PM, kipwinger said:

My only concern with drafting McTavish is that his playmaking is suspect, and if he's going to play 2C he's going to need to distribute the puck well. Currently it's the weakest part of his game. If he can't make plays he can't be a center, and we REALLY don't need more wingers until we get that figured out. You could always trade a Zadina or Berggren for a power winger down the road but you're not getting a top center in a trade very often. If they think his playmaking will improve and he'll slot in as a 2C down the road then I'm fine with him as a 6th pick. But they better be sure, because if we come out of these bottom out years without another decent center we're in real trouble.

I feel McTavish's playmaking is better than his stats would suggest. I think he's such a shoot-first player because, well, why wouldn't he be? If you're an ultra-competitive teenager with a shot like that, your game is going to be built around getting that shot off. Same deal with Chaz Lucius (who's arguably a deadlier shooter than McTavish).

It's not a bad point you're making, though. If I'm gonna knock 2017 Rasmussen for his highlight compilations being nothing but cleaning up around the net and firing hard shots, I should acknowledge that McTavish's highlight compilations are basically just him burying shots and throwing his weight around. I maintain that McTavish is the more capable playmaker, but I do feel he's likely a winger at higher levels and that the playmaking is one of the reasons why.

But here's the thing: I dunno that we need our not-Larkin top-six centerman to be a great playmaker, because we really do have a lot of playmaking talent on the wings – most notably Raymond, whose whole thing is that he's a freakishly good problem-solver and puck-distributor and possession-driver. If he lives up to expectations, he's going to be a serious bus-driver.

[F.Michael 4,590]

12 minutes ago, Hookersarethefuture said:

The team was also stacked with a hall of fame roster which if i recall was a big reason for hasek wanting to come . (Not to mention with that good of a roster you can put martin biron in nets and still win ) . Thats not the case this time around + elite #1 goalies arent hitting free agency anymore

I dont recall anyone praising bernier for being a sure fire #1 star goalie in his draft class , i remember talk of fleury,price,lehtonen and the obvious guys of the last 3 years . Wings got him in free agency like 12 yrs later , guys gonna be 33 and hes nothing to brag about .... you can say we wasted a pick on rasmussen , on kindl etc... your just so hell bent on it cause its a goalie , every pick is a gamble 

You think teams arent pissed at themselves for passing on vasilevsky? Teams will be pissed in a few yrs they passed on knight . Every draft pick you can make is a gamble , you f*** up and you look like an idiot regardless

Do you need an elite goalie to win a cup ? No, you need an elite #1 dman and i believe we have that and i dont think we’ll get that at 6 , can we get an elite #1 c at 6? I dont believe so

can we get an elite #1g at 6? I believe so , why not add that with our #1dman and build a strong back end . You cant look back at our cup winning teams and just say we can win without 1 , we’ll likely never see a roster like that in detroit ever again

We gotta take a good hard look at what we have - there's no shining offensive stars as of yet wearing the Winged Wheel (Raymond?).

If Yzerman & Co feel there's no legit 1st line forward, nor top pair Dman at #6 - why not go for the guy who many scouts feel might end up 1 of the top players from this draft?

Having a potential star between the pipes would go great with a stud Dman.

Edited June 30, 2021 by F.Michael

[LeftWinger 4,963]

FWIW, Osgood has better stats than MAF. Even after factoring in the years he spent on crappy Isles and Blues teams. He's also won 2 Cups as a starter, MAF only 1 and it took a goal post to even win that.

 Ozzie deserves the Hall...especially if MAF gets in.

Back on subject.

Edited June 30, 2021 by LeftWinger

[krsmith17 7,191]

7 minutes ago, Hookersarethefuture said:

Do you need an elite goalie to win a cup ? No, you need an elite #1 dman and i believe we have that and i dont think we’ll get that at 6 , can we get an elite #1 c at 6? I dont believe so

can we get an elite #1g at 6? I believe so , why not add that with our #1dman and build a strong back end . You cant look back at our cup winning teams and just say we can win without 1 , we’ll likely never see a roster like that in detroit ever again

There may not be a franchise altering skater available at 6, but there likely will be at least one 1C and / or 1D available at 6. Who that is, I have no idea. I would hope Yzerman and his staff do know, or at least have a better idea than any of us here. Maybe it's Johnson. Maybe it's McTavish. Maybe it's Edvinsson. Maybe it's Hughes. But if any of those guys are available, and Yzerman believes they will develop into legit top line guys, I say take one of them over the goalie. But again, if he takes Wallstedt, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

For me, I just think top goalies are less important to the makeup of a team than any skater position, and are also easier to fill via trade or free agency. Or maybe we luck out and one of the guys currently in the system pans out (unlikely). I'd rather build up forward and defense, and worry about goaltending later. Just because it has been, and still is somewhat of a crapshoot....

[F.Michael 4,590]

2 minutes ago, LeftWinger said:

FWIW, Osgood has better stats than MAF. Even after factoring in the years he spent on crappy Isles and Blues teams. He's also won 2 Cups as a starter, MAF only 1 and it took a goal post to even win that.

 Ozzie deserves the Hall...especially if MAF gets in.

Back on subject.

Unfortunately netminders are held to a higher standard when it comes to the HoF.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

1 hour ago, BarkBurgerman said:

K so who wanna trade for?

Let's wait to see what happens with Petro first and then wait until after we have a good team of skaters before we think about goalies. Always some good ones available in free agency.

1 hour ago, F.Michael said:

Some compare him to countryman Lundqvist with his demeanor and style of play.

 

Every prospect is compared to someone. But how often do they actually measure up?

[F.Michael 4,590]

3 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

 

Every prospect is compared to someone. But how often do they actually measure up?

99.99999%

[kipwinger 8,529]

50 minutes ago, Dabura said:

Facts.

It's a speed & skill league...in the regular season. In the playoffs, it's a systems & checking league. Same as it ever was.

I feel McTavish's playmaking is better than his stats would suggest. I think he's such a shoot-first player because, well, why wouldn't he be? If you're an ultra-competitive teenager with a shot like that, your game is going to be built around getting that shot off. Same deal with Chaz Lucius (who's arguably a deadlier shooter than McTavish).

It's not a bad point you're making, though. If I'm gonna knock 2017 Rasmussen for his highlight compilations being nothing but cleaning up around the net and firing hard shots, I should acknowledge that McTavish's highlight compilations are basically just him burying shots and throwing his weight around. I maintain that McTavish is the more capable playmaker, but I do feel he's likely a winger at higher levels and that the playmaking is one of the reasons why.

But here's the thing: I dunno that we need our not-Larkin top-six centerman to be a great playmaker, because we really do have a lot of playmaking talent on the wings – most notably Raymond, whose whole thing is that he's a freakishly good problem-solver and puck-distributor and possession-driver. If he lives up to expectations, he's going to be a serious bus-driver.

I suppose you could try to turn the conventional line of gritty winger-playmakeing center-shooter on it's head and have gritty winger-shooting center-playmaker. In which case I suppose McTavish would work (though in that case I'd rather have Lucius since he's the better faceoff guy). A top nine as follow might be fine, depending on how Raymond, McTavish/Lucius, and Berggren turn out but it's still fairly small.

Bert-Larkin-Vrana

Ras/Veleno-McTavish/Lucuis-Raymond

Fabbri/Berggren-Ras/Veleno-Zadina

I think I'd still prefer a playmaking center with this pick. As I've said elsewhere, I'd draft Johnson/Eklund and spend the next two years teaching them to be top centers in the AHL. I'd pick up Ryan Johanson for peanuts to be a workhorse for the next two years and eventually be our 3C at the end of his contract (or trade him). I'd move Veleno AND Rasmussen to the wings to give us the grit we need. And I'd look to fix our LD and goalie situations by trading Fabbri and Zadina/Berggren. In three years we'd have:

Bert-Larkin-Raymond

Veleno-Johnson/Eklund-Vrana

Ras-Johansen-Zadina/Berggren

Smith-Glen-Pearson (or something like that).

 

 

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

46 minutes ago, F.Michael said:

Unfortunately netminders are held to a higher standard when it comes to the HoF.

This has actually been debunked. There 289 players in the HHOF. 36 are goaltenders, or 12.5% of inductees. 

Considering that goaltenders make up less than 10% of the NHL, goalies in the Hall are actually overrepresented.

9 minutes ago, F.Michael said:

99.99999%

Is that Wisconsin math?

[F.Michael 4,590]

2 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

 

Is that Wisconsin math?

101%

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

1 hour ago, Hookersarethefuture said:

The team was also stacked with a hall of fame roster which if i recall was a big reason for hasek wanting to come . (Not to mention with that good of a roster you can put martin biron in nets and still win ) . Thats not the case this time around + elite #1 goalies arent hitting free agency anymore

I dont recall anyone praising bernier for being a sure fire #1 star goalie in his draft class , i remember talk of fleury,price,lehtonen and the obvious guys of the last 3 years . Wings got him in free agency like 12 yrs later , guys gonna be 33 and hes nothing to brag about .... you can say we wasted a pick on rasmussen , on kindl etc... your just so hell bent on it cause its a goalie , every pick is a gamble 

You think teams arent pissed at themselves for passing on vasilevsky? Teams will be pissed in a few yrs they passed on knight . Every draft pick you can make is a gamble , you f*** up and you look like an idiot regardless

Do you need an elite goalie to win a cup ? No, you need an elite #1 dman and i believe we have that and i dont think we’ll get that again at 6 , can we get an elite #1 c at 6? I dont believe so

can we get an elite #1g at 6? I believe so , why not add that with our #1dman and build a strong back end . You cant look back at our cup winning teams and just say we can win without 1 , we’ll likely never see a roster like that in detroit ever again

So you agree then that you can win without elite goaltending. So why can't we just sign one later after the team in front of him is built?

And you mention Lehtonen. He was drafted by Atlanta and later traded to Dallas for Ivan Vishnevsky and a 4th round draft pick. The Stars didn't have to use a high draft pick to acquire their elite goalie.

[F.Michael 4,590]

12 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

This has actually been debunked. There 289 players in the HHOF. 36 are goaltenders, or 12.5% of inductees. 

Considering that goaltenders make up less than 10% of the NHL, goalies in the Hall are actually overrepresented.

I'm not talking about the actual number of skaters VS netminders - I'm talking about this set of standards.

What made guys like Ciccerelli/Andreychuk/Sundin worthy but not Osgood?

[kipwinger 8,529]

20 minutes ago, Hookersarethefuture said:

But that 1C or 1D for all we know might end up being pick 47 in the draft for all we know , we know alot of people in the hockey world smarter than us think wallstedt will be a game changing goalie for a team and thats a position thats non existent right now for us

For all we know maybe yzerman gets that 1D to go with seider at pick 37 to add to wallstedt and we look back and think damn what a great draft we had .... andddd we got wright the following draft ? damnnn lol

Thats fine dude that you feel that way i just dont see it the same way . Teams arent trading you #1 guys and they arent making free agency anymore . Can you get a korpisalo? Sure , i wouldnt consider him a #1 guy  . An aging guy like  Fleury ? sure but those guys are at the end of their careers. I look back at our draft history regarding goalies and free agency and id say its not easy to fill that position .

You can look at bernier and say hes putting up decent numbers but for all we know hed crumble under the pressure like he did in toronto. Some goalies just play better when they have no pressure which is the case right now in detroit

Again , anyone you pick at 6 might be a crapshoot and end up a rasmussen or a 3-4 dman or a 2/3rd line guy . Id rather go for the homerun pick solidify our goalie for over a decade and build frim the back end and have a strong back core . Nothings stopping us from picking a really good forward at 22 and with our 2nds

Why is Wallstedt a “homerun pick” and not a Dipietro or Campbell or Montoya? 

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

1 hour ago, F.Michael said:

I'm not talking about the actual number of skaters VS netminders - I'm talking about this set of standards.

What made guys like Ciccerelli/Andreychuk/Sundin worthy but not Osgood?

Okay. I see what ur saying. My argument would be that the HOF has it right when it comes to goalies, but is far too generous when it comes to skaters.

Too many guys get in that shouldn't. Of your group, I think Sundin should be, but not Dino or Andreychuk. Just my opinion.

Fedorov and Bure? Of course. Mogilny? Not so sure. And if you have to think about it, they shouldn't be there.

As much as I love Ozzie, I just don't think he belongs. When it comes to his generation, Brodeur, Roy, Hasek, Belfour...yes. But I wouldn't put Ozzie at that talent level.

[kipwinger 8,529]

10 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Okay. I see what ur saying. My argument would be that the HOF has it right when it comes to goalies, but is far too generous when it comes to skaters.

Too many guys get in that shouldn't. Of your group, I think Sundin should be, but not Dino or Andreychuk. Just my opinion.

Fedorov and Bure? Of course. Mogilny? Not so sure. And if you have to think about it, they shouldn't be there.

As much as I love Ozzie, I just don't think he belongs. When it comes to his generation, Brodeur, Roy, Hasek, Belfour...yes. But I wouldn't put Ozzie at that talent level.

I think there’s a bias in favor of flashy players, whether skaters or goalies. And so guys who aren’t flashy will never get any love relative to their flashier counterparts. Hence why Orr is considered better than Lids despite never playing defense ever. But you’re as good as your results say you are. And Ozzy, Dino, Sundin, and Andreychuk constantly delivered at the same levels as they’re flashier counterparts. Ozzy’s results are in line with his peers, and his playoff performances were frequently better. 
 

Now, one might argue that it’s not the Hall of Hockey Effectiveness. So maybe being a dull player SHOULD get you excluded, but then that means you need to kick out Brodeur and add Alex Kovalev and other such things

Edited July 1, 2021 by kipwinger

[kipwinger 8,529]

5 minutes ago, Hookersarethefuture said:

And why’s he not a price?lehtonen?fleury? Cause he’s a goalie and you cant trust a goalie in the top 10? Would vasilevsky not been a top 10 pick if the draft was redone ?Whats to stop the guy you want at 6 from being a mediocre forward or dman ... alot of people are givng wallstedt high praises , guys a kid and always played in leagues with players older than him .

Alot of ppl said he’d the best swedish goalie prospect in the last 25 yrs but sure lets take another winger  cause we’ll be a wuss and stay away from picking a goalie until pick 47 and cross our fingers he pans out actually wants to sign with us

 

 

You’re the one claiming he’s a slam dunk pick and a future franchise goalie, the onus is on you to back that up. Something tells me you can’t.
 

People projected Carey Price and Fleury to go at the top of the draft for a reason, nobody has said any such thing about Wallstedt. DiPietro and Campbell and Montoya too. If you’re so sure Wallstedt is more like the former and not the latter then it should be pretty easy for you to explain why? And you’ve made it clear you’re very sure.  So what is it?

 

Edited July 1, 2021 by kipwinger