New New Prospects Thread

[mackel 681]

1 hour ago, Walman6million said:

You got Chiarot, Walman, and likely Edvinsson taking up the LHD spots next year.
We basically have a ton of wingers unless Bertuzzi and Vrana are gone.
And if we sign more centers one of our current centers becomes another wing.

There isn't a glaring hole to me like last year at LHD.

I think you go goalie hunting again, try to get a top flight center again, and sign some depth pieces.

Of course this could radically change in the next 45 days

I think if you can upgrade any position you do it, with reason of cap and allowing spots for rookies.  How can we be happy with our D with how we play defensively?  In a perfect world Chariot would be gone, Matta would be 5,6 or 7 and we'd add 2 good NHL dmen.  Cast off Osterle, Lindstrom, Hagg, etc.  Promote Edvinsson.

[Walman6million 250]

7 minutes ago, mackel said:

I think if you can upgrade any position you do it, with reason of cap and allowing spots for rookies.  How can we be happy with our D with how we play defensively?  In a perfect world Chariot would be gone, Matta would be 5,6 or 7 and we'd add 2 good NHL dmen.  Cast off Osterle, Lindstrom, Hagg, etc.  Promote Edvinsson.

If we're just talking Defense, In a perfect world this is what I'd do:

1. Sell Maata at the deadline
2. Re-sign Walman and Lindstrom (RFA)
3. Release Oesterle and Hagg
4. Go HARD after Ryan Graves, or Slava Gakrikov, or Dimitri Orlov, in UFA in that order

Walman - Seider
Graves - Hronek
Chiarot - Lindstrom
Edvinsson/McIsaac

With Oost and Hagg out of the way Eddogg can be the #1/7th man callup (and he'll get plenty of playing time when the injuries hit as soon as October). McIsaac is the #2 callup, and then we sign some more Kampfer types who can spend most of their time with the Griffs, but are also decent enough to be called up if needed.

 

[Jonas Mahonas 1,872]

52 minutes ago, Walman6million said:

If we're just talking Defense, In a perfect world this is what I'd do:

1. Sell Maata at the deadline
2. Re-sign Walman and Lindstrom (RFA)
3. Release Oesterle and Hagg
4. Go HARD after Ryan Graves, or Slava Gakrikov, or Dimitri Orlov, in UFA in that order

Walman - Seider
Graves - Hronek
Chiarot - Lindstrom
Edvinsson/McIsaac

With Oost and Hagg out of the way Eddogg can be the #1/7th man callup (and he'll get plenty of playing time when the injuries hit as soon as October). McIsaac is the #2 callup, and then we sign some more Kampfer types who can spend most of their time with the Griffs, but are also decent enough to be called up if needed.

 

YOU SIR, are crazy.

 

We need to move Chiarot.  Thats priority #1.  Vrana and Bertuzzi can remove themselves.  Thats 14 mil of cap GONE.

Picture this:

 

________ - Larkin - Raymond

Kubalik - ________ - Perron

Zadina - Kasper - Fabbri

Veleno - Rasmussen - Sundqvist

Soderblom/_________

 

Edvinsson - Seider

Wallinder - Hronek

Maata - Walman

Lindstrom

 

Husso

Cossa

 

Now picture Stevie signing Kane, Towes, and Monohan in UFA.

[Walman6million 250]

1 hour ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

YOU SIR, are crazy.

 

We need to move Chiarot.  Thats priority #1.  Vrana and Bertuzzi can remove themselves.  Thats 14 mil of cap GONE.

Picture this:

 

________ - Larkin - Raymond

Kubalik - ________ - Perron

Zadina - Kasper - Fabbri

Veleno - Rasmussen - Sundqvist

Soderblom/_________

 

Edvinsson - Seider

Wallinder - Hronek

Maata - Walman

Lindstrom

 

Husso

Cossa

 

Now picture Stevie signing Kane, Towes, and Monohan in UFA.

whoa

[Jonas Mahonas 1,872]

https://detroithockeynow.com/2023/01/18/former-swedish-pro-kasper-will-be-playing-for-red-wings-next-season/

[redw1ngs 149]

Kaspers gonna be elite

[Jonas Mahonas 1,872]

1 hour ago, redw1ngs said:

Kaspers gonna be elite

I think he's going to be like O'Reilly.  Not elite, but the next best thing.

[redw1ngs 149]

9 minutes ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

I think he's going to be like O'Reilly.  Not elite, but the next best thing.

Tim Stutzle 2.0 except Kasper will stick at C.

[AtlantaHotWings 987]

14 hours ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

YOU SIR, are crazy.

 

We need to move Chiarot.  Thats priority #1.  Vrana and Bertuzzi can remove themselves.  Thats 14 mil of cap GONE.

Picture this:

 

________ - Larkin - Raymond

Kubalik - ________ - Perron

Zadina - Kasper - Fabbri

Veleno - Rasmussen - Sundqvist

Soderblom/_________

 

Edvinsson - Seider

Wallinder - Hronek

Maata - Walman

Lindstrom

 

Husso

Cossa

 

Now picture Stevie signing Kane, Towes, and Monohan in UFA.

What did you do with Copp?

[Jonas Mahonas 1,872]

1 hour ago, AtlantaHotWings said:

What did you do with Copp?

oh s***!  I like Copp.

[kipwinger 8,522]

What's everyone's thoughts on "over rippening" prospects? Under Holland that was the de facto strategy, with guys like Tatar and Nyquist staying in the AHL until they were 22-23. Fans were pretty sour about it that at the time. But if you look at the developmental paths of Zadina, Veleno, Berggren, and McIsaac (all drafted in the same year) it almost seems like the additional wait time has really been beneficial for the latter three. We've seen similar things play out around the league with high draft picks coming straight to the NHL and floundering. So my question is, unless you've got a McDavid or Crosby on your hands is it better to give them a few years elsewhere before bringing them to the NHL?

[marcaractac 3,963]

15 hours ago, kipwinger said:

What's everyone's thoughts on "over rippening" prospects? Under Holland that was the de facto strategy, with guys like Tatar and Nyquist staying in the AHL until they were 22-23. Fans were pretty sour about it that at the time. But if you look at the developmental paths of Zadina, Veleno, Berggren, and McIsaac (all drafted in the same year) it almost seems like the additional wait time has really been beneficial for the latter three. We've seen similar things play out around the league with high draft picks coming straight to the NHL and floundering. So my question is, unless you've got a McDavid or Crosby on your hands is it better to give them a few years elsewhere before bringing them to the NHL?

Definitely comes down to the player. With Canadians, it's a slippery slope because you get kids far too good for junior but struggle at the NHL level. So you have to wonder, is figuring it out in the NHL more beneficial than a cakewalk in junior?

With many players from overseas, it's usually not bad because they can get development time in Euro leagues or even the AHL.  

The USA college hockey program seems to have s*** figured out. Canada gets boned by the CHL agreement. 

Jack Huges is probably a good example of this. He struggled early and was called a bust by many. But after two tough seasons, he figured it out. Some players in that situation would get killed by their confidence and Jurco their way out of the league. 

[Walman6million 250]

17 hours ago, kipwinger said:

What's everyone's thoughts on "over rippening" prospects? Under Holland that was the de facto strategy, with guys like Tatar and Nyquist staying in the AHL until they were 22-23. Fans were pretty sour about it that at the time. But if you look at the developmental paths of Zadina, Veleno, Berggren, and McIsaac (all drafted in the same year) it almost seems like the additional wait time has really been beneficial for the latter three. We've seen similar things play out around the league with high draft picks coming straight to the NHL and floundering. So my question is, unless you've got a McDavid or Crosby on your hands is it better to give them a few years elsewhere before bringing them to the NHL?

Never had a problem with over-ripening. But I hate calling it over-ripening. Makes it sound like we waited too long. I would just call it ripening. If it's a tie between two players, go with the veteran. If Holland was being true to that - and not holding young guys back past this - I think it's a good policy.

You also don't want to insert guys solely because of magical mystery potential. You want them to cut their teeth and perform and force you to put them on the roster.

I think most teams practice "ripening" to the same degree that the Red Wings do. And over-ripening is an overstated meme by Wings fans, that only gained traction because we had such a loaded vet team for years that young guys rarely got a shot. Holland inserted guys like Larkin very quickly when he couldn't get anything better. McDavid's and Crosby's make their respective teams right out the gate because - not only are they supremely talented - the teams drafting those guys are awful and have no good vet competition for the position.

[kipwinger 8,522]

1 hour ago, Walman6million said:

Never had a problem with over-ripening. But I hate calling it over-ripening. Makes it sound like we waited too long. I would just call it ripening. If it's a tie between two players, go with the veteran. If Holland was being true to that - and not holding young guys back past this - I think it's a good policy.

You also don't want to insert guys solely because of magical mystery potential. You want them to cut their teeth and perform and force you to put them on the roster.

I think most teams practice "ripening" to the same degree that the Red Wings do. And over-ripening is an overstated meme by Wings fans, that only gained traction because we had such a loaded vet team for years that young guys rarely got a shot. Holland inserted guys like Larkin very quickly when he couldn't get anything better. McDavid's and Crosby's make their respective teams right out the gate because - not only are they supremely talented - the teams drafting those guys are awful and have no good vet competition for the position.

Look at Seattle, their handling of Shane Wright at the beginning of the season was idiotic. I understand that sending him back to a league he just dominated isn't ideal, but bringing him up then sitting him then scratching him then sending him down just wasted a year of his development IMO. You'd have been better off sending him to play in Sweden for a year.

2 hours ago, marcaractac said:

Definitely comes down to the player. With Canadians, it's a slippery slope because you get kids far too good for junior but struggle at the NHL level. So you have to wonder, is figuring it out in the NHL more beneficial than a cakewalk in junior?

With many players from overseas, it's usually not bad because they can get development time in Euro leagues or even the AHL.  

The USA college hockey program seems to have s*** figured out. Canada gets boned by the CHL agreement. 

Jack Huges is probably a good example of this. He struggled early and was called a bust by many. But after two tough seasons, he figured it out. Some players in that situation would get killed by their confidence and Jurco their way out of the league. 

See my comment above too, but wouldn't it be better to send some of these Canadian kids to play in Europe for a year if they're too good for the CHL and not good enough for the NHL. Think about Rasmussen in his D+1 year. He should have been playing in the SHL (if he was willing). We saw during COVID that North American players can go over there for a year (on a limited basis obviously).

[marcaractac 3,963]

23 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Look at Seattle, their handling of Shane Wright at the beginning of the season was idiotic. I understand that sending him back to a league he just dominated isn't ideal, but bringing him up then sitting him then scratching him then sending him down just wasted a year of his development IMO. You'd have been better off sending him to play in Sweden for a year.

See my comment above too, but wouldn't it be better to send some of these Canadian kids to play in Europe for a year if they're too good for the CHL and not good enough for the NHL. Think about Rasmussen in his D+1 year. He should have been playing in the SHL (if he was willing). We saw during COVID that North American players can go over there for a year (on a limited basis obviously).

Sending guys overseas would be nice, but I feel like if every team started sending players not eligible for the AHL, there wouldn't even be close to enough roster spots available for them. Complete speculation, but there has to be a reason why we never see this as an option outside of scenarios that shut down the league. 

Wright vs Beniers is an interesting case. Beniers got to play in college on a stacked team for one more year. A much more competitive program vs the CHL where certain players just flat-out dominate the leagues. Seattle definitely should have s*** or get off the pot with Wright though. If you're scratching an 18 yo, maybe send him down so he can at least play. 

It definitely seems like the CHL agreement is the biggest obstacle facing player development. I feel making exceptions for top 10 picks would solve a lot of it. Or even every team gets one player that they can make AHL eligible that otherwise wouldn't be. 

[kipwinger 8,522]

Just now, marcaractac said:

Sending guys overseas would be nice, but I feel like if every team started sending players not eligible for the AHL, there wouldn't even be close to enough roster spots available for them. Complete speculation, but there has to be a reason why we never see this as an option outside of scenarios that shut down the league. 

Wright vs Beniers is an interesting case. Beniers got to play in college on a stacked team for one more year. A much more competitive program vs the CHL where certain players just flat-out dominate the leagues. Seattle definitely should have s*** or get off the pot with Wright though. If you're scratching an 18 yo, maybe send him down so he can at least play. 

It definitely seems like the CHL agreement is the biggest obstacle facing player development. I feel making exceptions for top 10 picks would solve a lot of it. Or even every team gets one player that they can make AHL eligible that otherwise wouldn't be. 

You're absolutely right, in most European leagues they're only allowed so many non-native players on the roster (because they're club teams tied to certain geographic localities). So it would be limited to the better players. Not going to have 3rd or 4th rounders playing over there, but those guys need the extra year in the CHL anyway. American college hockey is another option too, as you've pointed out. But I tend to think the reason it doesn't happen is because A) 18 year olds probably don't want to move to Europe, and B) for some reason people still think the CHL is a good league.

[marcaractac 3,963]

14 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

You're absolutely right, in most European leagues they're only allowed so many non-native players on the roster (because they're club teams tied to certain geographic localities). So it would be limited to the better players. Not going to have 3rd or 4th rounders playing over there, but those guys need the extra year in the CHL anyway. American college hockey is another option too, as you've pointed out. But I tend to think the reason it doesn't happen is because A) 18 year olds probably don't want to move to Europe, and B) for some reason people still think the CHL is a good league.

I think B is the answer here. Quality players come from the CHL program out of sheer volume. America has been catching up based on the quality of its program. 

Also, make hockey more accessible to lower-income families! The cost of being a successful hockey player growing up in Canada is ******* insane. Which is why we get so many rapey rich kids. It sucks.

Edited January 20, 2023 by marcaractac

[kipwinger 8,522]

2 minutes ago, marcaractac said:

I think B is the answer here. Quality players come from the CHL program out of sheer volume. America has been catching up based on the quality of its program. 

Also, make hockey more accessible to lower-income families! The cost of being a successful hockey player growing up in Canada is ******* insane. 

The CHL is suuuuuuch a racket. They basically have these kids in a stranglehold and won't let go unless they absolutely have to. They have junior teams in Europe too. The difference is that if you're good enough to play on the pro team you can. There are no pro (developmental) leagues in Canada any they won't let kids play in the AHL or the ECHL or (for most draft eligibles) the NCAA. So you end up having kids like Wright and Lafreniere who are way too good to play against 16 year olds, but who generate enough revenue that the CHL has no interest whatsoever in letting them go outside the country to play in a pro league. The only people that suffer are the kids. Hell, if they just tiered the CHL and added relegation so that half the league were full of really good teams with older players, and half the league was young players on lower level teams, you'd have a better system than they currently have.

[marcaractac 3,963]

3 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

The CHL is suuuuuuch a racket. They basically have these kids in a stranglehold and won't let go unless they absolutely have to. They have junior teams in Europe too. The difference is that if you're good enough to play on the pro team you can. There are no pro (developmental) leagues in Canada any they won't let kids play in the AHL or the ECHL or (for most draft eligibles) the NCAA. So you end up having kids like Wright and Lafreniere who are way too good to play against 16 year olds, but who generate enough revenue that the CHL has no interest whatsoever in letting them go outside the country to play in a pro league. The only people that suffer are the kids. Hell, if they just tiered the CHL and added relegation so that half the league were full of really good teams with older players, and half the league was young players on lower level teams, you'd have a better system than they currently have.

Their excuse is always "we need to sell tickets" which is ******* bulls*** considering how much money Hockey Canada makes. 

[kipwinger 8,522]

1 minute ago, marcaractac said:

Their excuse is always "we need to sell tickets" which is ******* bulls*** considering how much money Hockey Canada makes. 

Yeah, that's such bullsh*t. What else is there to do in Moncton on a Friday night? The only difference with tiering would be that s***ty teams would finally have something to play for instead of getting fed to perennial powerhouses every night. Fans of s***ty teams would actually buy MORE tickets if they knew their local team wasn't going to get murdered every single game. And fans of the higher end teams (who are already doing fine) would sell more tickets because they'd see an increase in the quality of the players and competition. 

[Walman6million 250]

I like the tiering/relegation idea. Thats the solution here IMO.

Instead of WHL, OHL, QMJHL...

Go CHL, CHL minors, CHL juniors, with a relegation system. 

This should cut rape rates by 2/3, as only guys on the CHL teams will have the clout to pull it off. 

[mackel 681]

On 1/19/2023 at 4:57 PM, kipwinger said:

What's everyone's thoughts on "over rippening" prospects? Under Holland that was the de facto strategy, with guys like Tatar and Nyquist staying in the AHL until they were 22-23. Fans were pretty sour about it that at the time. But if you look at the developmental paths of Zadina, Veleno, Berggren, and McIsaac (all drafted in the same year) it almost seems like the additional wait time has really been beneficial for the latter three. We've seen similar things play out around the league with high draft picks coming straight to the NHL and floundering. So my question is, unless you've got a McDavid or Crosby on your hands is it better to give them a few years elsewhere before bringing them to the NHL?

Over ripen = rotten 

I thinknit destroyed a few if our prospects back in the day.  

[kipwinger 8,522]

3 minutes ago, mackel said:

Over ripen = rotten 

I thinknit destroyed a few if our prospects back in the day.  

Which?

[mackel 681]

15 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Which?

Smith and Jurco spring to mind.

We also boxed out Janrkrok such that we traded him.

Edited January 20, 2023 by mackel

[kipwinger 8,522]

2 minutes ago, mackel said:

Smith and Jurco spring to mind.

We also boxed out Janrkrok such that we traded him.

You might be on to something with Jarnkrok and Smith, but I'm not so sure about Jurco. I think of "over ripe" as a guy who's obviously too good for the AHL but who is forced to spend significant time down there anyway. Kinda like Berggren was for the latter part of last season and the AHL games he played this season. Other guys like that were Howard, Jensen, Nyquist, and Tatar. Jurco was never a dominant AHL player. And he only played about a season and a half for the Griffs before his call up. Some guys spend a ton of time in the AHL because they're just genuinely not very good (Pulkkinen, Frk). I tend to put Jurco in that camp.