2021 Draft

[LeftWinger 5,090]

Here's another good one about late draft picks. You'll notice 3 Red Wings on the list. Also mentioning Fedorov and Hasek. They mention the Bure situation. I often talk about how Detroit wanted to draft him in the 5th round, but he was still deemed ineligible. Then in the 6th Vancouver snagged him 2 spots before Detroit was going to take the risk. Dang what this team would've looked like with Fedorov and Bure!

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/912897-pavel-datsyuk-and-14-other-late-round-draft-picks-that-turned-into-stars

[LeftWinger 5,090]

10 hours ago, BarkBurgerman said:

The game was easy for him. Almost a similar scenario to Mantha

It it said that The Q over inflates a players stats. While I was very happy when they drafted him, I am a believer in Jimmy D and the brass. I gave Mantha all the objective views I could, but it seemed that Jimmy was right. So thank goodness Yzerman was able to fleece Washington into think they "needed" him! Vrana, once signed, will be a staple in this rebuild to greatness! That being said, I was a fan of Mantha and was really hoping for him to be that 40+ goal guy.

[F.Michael 4,590]

49 minutes ago, BarkBurgerman said:

Another fine example of how Yzerman is 1 of the best GMs in the league.

[Dabura 12,228]

16 hours ago, BarkBurgerman said:

Gonna hijack your McTavish comments.

I agree, and you're not wrong about Ras. Should've gone 12-16 probably. I wrote a few glowing reviews of him when he played for Spokane (it's pronounced Spo-kane-ee, not Spo-kan btw) but looking back I think you're right. The game was easy for him. Almost a similar scenario to Mantha. Why learn to move your feet or dangle or be generally creative when you can just brute force your way through everything with shear size, strength, and wingspan? I guess you can blame junior coaches for allowing them to continue down the path of least resistance?

That all said, I'd give Rasmussen the "most improved" award for 2020/21 Red Wings. He's still playing sheltered time, but he's not out their committing major errors and seems to work hard every shift. He's hitting, he's blocking shots. Much different in this respect from Mantha. I get the feeling he's going to take some time for us and won't peak for a few more seasons. But I still think that peak is prime Coyotes Martin Hanzal. 50-60 pt heavy center. And at 20/21 years old Ras was already Hanzal's height and weight. And Hanzal didn't hit his prime until he was about 26.

I sorta look the other way on Ras and his draft position because I'm a size queen and I adore the unique aspect he brings to the team. I almost look at him like a Holmstrom in that way. Sure you can fawn over Yzerman, Lidstrom, and Feds... but where are some of those old teams without unique dominant roleplayers like Holmstrom? Ras could be Homer and more for us in 2-3 years. I see him as a middle 6 forward that plays both the PP and PK and becomes a staple you can't really live without once he's embedded on the roster. Causing terror in front of opponents nets and freeing up the other guys around him to wreck offesnive havoc while also punishing opponents in the D end.

Big minute Ras and big minute Seider are gonna do great things for this team in the near future I think. They're gonna be the foundational pillars behind our more talented players.

The points you're hitting on are basically how I rationalized the pick to myself on draft day and how I continue to rationalize the pick here in mid-2021.

We can say we made a boring, high-floor pick instead of swinging for the fences on a more high-skill guy. And there's some truth to that. But we can also say Rasmussen is an "If he gets anywhere close to his ceiling, look the f*** out" case. He's not a puck wizard, but he does have soft hands around the net. Combine that with his frame and we have a guy who could be a gamebreaking power play weapon. I think that's still a thing. And he has that scoring potential *while also having Hanzel-esque shutdown potential*. I think that's also still a thing.

So, sure, maybe the pick kinda sucked – but maybe the "We only picked him becuse of his size and now look where we're at" narrative is a little dumb.

I do think about Holmstrom. I also think about Franzen, who we drafted as an overage shutdown 3C. A key difference, of course, is that those guys were part of crazy-deep ensemble casts with legendary talent at the tops of the lineups...whereas we're currently rebuilding in the Age of Parity™ with zero love from the lotto gods.

Still, there's something to be said for having the right mix of player types. Like I said re: McTavish, we have Larkin and Vrana and Zadina and Veleno and Raymond and Berggren and Niederbach. How many hard-nosed power-forwards with laser shots do we have in the system? Maybe this particular hard-nosed power-forward with a laser shot isn't all that special in a vaccum – but maybe he's a fit for what we're trying to build. Maybe we think he could be a great complement to our otherwise smallish, well-mannered forwards.

Maybe we think of the power play possibilities. Imagine, for example, Vrana and Raymond working the half-walls with Ramussen as the net-front guy and McTavish as the bumper and Seider running point.

Rasmussen
Raymond -- McTavish -- Vrana
Seider

In theory, that's a Zdeno Chara parked in front of the net...and an absolute firing squad in Raymond, McTavish, Vrana...and a playmaking possession monster in Raymond...and a tank owning that middle ice in McTavish...and Seider doing Seider things.

Edited June 29, 2021 by Dabura

[The 91 of Ryans 3,019]

2 minutes ago, Dabura said:

The points you're hitting on are basically how I rationalized the pick to myself on draft day and how I continue to rationalize the pick here in mid-2021.

We can say we made a boring, high-floor pick instead of swinging for the fences on a more high-skill guy. And there's some truth to that. But we can also say Rasmussen is an "If he gets anywhere close to his ceiling, look the f*** out" case. He's not a puck wizard, but he does have soft hands around the net. Combine that with his frame and we have a guy who could be a gamebreaking power play weapon. I think that's still a thing. And he has that scoring potential *while also having Hanzel-esque shutdown potential*. I think that's also still a thing.

So, sure, maybe the pick kinda sucked – but maybe the "We only picked him becuse of his size and now look where we're at" narrative is a little dumb.

I do think about Holmstrom. I also think about Franzen, who we drafted as an overager shutdown 3C. A key difference, of course, is that those guys were part of crazy-deep ensemble casts with legendary talent at the tops of the lineups...whereas we're currently rebuilding in the Age of Parity™ with zero love from the lotto gods.

Still, there's something to be said for having the right mix of player types. Like I said re: McTavish, we have Larkin and Vrana and Zadina and Veleno and Raymond and Berggren and Niederbach. How many hard-nosed power-forwards with laser shots do we have in the system? Maybe this particular hard-nosed power-forward with a laser shot isn't all that special in a vaccum – but maybe he's a fit for what we're trying to build. Maybe we think he could be a great complement to our otherwise smallish, well-mannered forwards.

Maybe we think of the power play possibilities. Imagine, for example, Vrana and Raymond working the (off-wing) half-walls with Ramussen/Bertuzzi as the net-front guy and McTavish as the bumper and Seider running point.

Rasmussen
Raymond -- McTavish -- Vrana
Seider

In theory, that's a Zdeno Chara parked in front of the net...and an absolute firing squad in Raymond, McTavish, Vrana...and a playmaking possession monster in Raymond...and a tank owning that middle ice in McTavish...and Seider doing Seider things.

Ah. More rational, big boy fan thinking. I love it!

[kipwinger 8,732]

18 minutes ago, Dabura said:

The points you're hitting on are basically how I rationalized the pick to myself on draft day and how I continue to rationalize the pick here in mid-2021.

We can say we made a boring, high-floor pick instead of swinging for the fences on a more high-skill guy. And there's some truth to that. But we can also say Rasmussen is an "If he gets anywhere close to his ceiling, look the f*** out" case. He's not a puck wizard, but he does have soft hands around the net. Combine that with his frame and we have a guy who could be a gamebreaking power play weapon. I think that's still a thing. And he has that scoring potential *while also having Hanzel-esque shutdown potential*. I think that's also still a thing.

So, sure, maybe the pick kinda sucked – but maybe the "We only picked him becuse of his size and now look where we're at" narrative is a little dumb.

I do think about Holmstrom. I also think about Franzen, who we drafted as an overager shutdown 3C. A key difference, of course, is that those guys were part of crazy-deep ensemble casts with legendary talent at the tops of the lineups...whereas we're currently rebuilding in the Age of Parity™ with zero love from the lotto gods.

Still, there's something to be said for having the right mix of player types. Like I said re: McTavish, we have Larkin and Vrana and Zadina and Veleno and Raymond and Berggren and Niederbach. How many hard-nosed power-forwards with laser shots do we have in the system? Maybe this particular hard-nosed power-forward with a laser shot isn't all that special in a vaccum – but maybe he's a fit for what we're trying to build. Maybe we think he could be a great complement to our otherwise smallish, well-mannered forwards.

Maybe we think of the power play possibilities. Imagine, for example, Vrana and Raymond working the half-walls with Ramussen as the net-front guy and McTavish as the bumper and Seider running point.

Rasmussen
Raymond -- McTavish -- Vrana
Seider

In theory, that's a Zdeno Chara parked in front of the net...and an absolute firing squad in Raymond, McTavish, Vrana...and a playmaking possession monster in Raymond...and a tank owning that middle ice in McTavish...and Seider doing Seider things.

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.

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.

Edited June 29, 2021 by kipwinger

[The 91 of Ryans 3,019]

1 minute ago, 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 Veleno 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.

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.

Agreed. Problem is, with this year's draft, you'll be assuming risk with whatever potential center or even player you take at 6. No different than any draft I guess. 

[F.Michael 4,590]

9 minutes ago, The 91 of Ryans said:

Agreed. Problem is, with this year's draft, you'll be assuming risk with whatever potential center or even player you take at 6. No different than any draft I guess. 

Maybe slightly off topic here, but this is why 've been warming up to the idea of seeing Grand Master Y drafting Wallstedt at #6.

 

 

[kipwinger 8,732]

Just now, The 91 of Ryans said:

Agreed. Problem is, with this year's draft, you'll be assuming risk with whatever potential center or even player you take at 6. No different than any draft I guess. 

I think it's overblown to an extent. Sure Kent Johnson is skinny, so was Elias Pettersson but he grew. Sure McTavish is a bit slower than idea, so was Rasmussen and Vilardi and they both keep up fine now. Lucius had a bad knee, so does Robby Fabbri and he's fine.

I think the focus on these guys shortcomings is just content. There's no "so and so is an ungodly talent" stories to write so the horse race focus on the minor differences between the top guys has become the narrative IMO.

[LeftWinger 5,090]

instead of drafting a G at #6 have we forgotten about deals?

Quote

 

Acquire prospect Hugo Alnefelt from the Tampa Bay Lightning as part of a salary cap/expansion draft deal along with one of Tampa Bay’s expensive contracts. 

 

Not only is Tampa icing a $100m team in the Final's, but they are already over the cap by $5M for next season with only 19 players under contract, a deal like this more than likely will resurface in the coming weeks.

https://thehockeywriters.com/the-grind-line-red-wings-goalies/?fbclid=IwAR10xkByIsUe6JIWClAyN4gZsFkRpe7VKFMEdmYYgqmkPtDiHYAxvJuPi3Q

 

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

9 hours ago, Hookersarethefuture said:

Ya i know that , heard stories of mogilny and the wings players we drafted etc.. just never heard anything about hasek being this great euro star who teams avoided cause of everything going on

Thanks for this

Still think hes popping 35-40 next year

Czechoslovakia was a Soviet Bloc country. So Hasek would have been a huge risk to draft.

4 hours ago, F.Michael said:

Maybe slightly off topic here, but this is why 've been warming up to the idea of seeing Grand Master Y drafting Wallstedt at #6.

 

 

He's the new Tippett and Hague.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

The biggest issue I have with McTavish is that I will always think his name is missing an "A".

[LeftWinger 5,090]

7 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Czechoslovakia was a Soviet Bloc country. So Hasek would have been a huge risk to draft.

He's the new Tippett and Hague.

Nah, actually I hope he doesn't draft a G at #6. But if he does, then it's all part of the plan!

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

3 minutes ago, BarkBurgerman said:

If you knew anything about NITF you woulda said Brannstrom here. Shame.

I don't generally follow what he posts very much.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

Just now, BarkBurgerman said:

Wait till you find out about hookers

Oh I know the story.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

22 minutes ago, BarkBurgerman said:

Ah sorry, I know you don't follow what he posts very much

One username disappears and another one comes along with a similar name. Not too hard to figure out.

It's the "cool" thing to do now.

[diehardredwingsfan58 157]

On 6/28/2021 at 5:16 PM, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Hot take:

Wings take Wally and Bruins take Cossa

What does Petro do?

Well Petru grew up a diehard Bruins fan, So he signs a 2 year deal with the Bruins more then likely.

[F.Michael 4,590]

13 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

One username disappears and another one comes along with a similar name. Not too hard to figure out.

It's the "cool" thing to do now.

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

[The 91 of Ryans 3,019]

6 minutes ago, F.Michael said:

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

"Old Geezer"

[kipwinger 8,732]

17 hours ago, LeftWinger said:

instead of drafting a G at #6 have we forgotten about deals?

Not only is Tampa icing a $100m team in the Final's, but they are already over the cap by $5M for next season with only 19 players under contract, a deal like this more than likely will resurface in the coming weeks.

https://thehockeywriters.com/the-grind-line-red-wings-goalies/?fbclid=IwAR10xkByIsUe6JIWClAyN4gZsFkRpe7VKFMEdmYYgqmkPtDiHYAxvJuPi3Q

 

Wait, are you suggesting that the Wings could acquire a top end goalie prospect WITHOUT using a top 10 pick in the draft?  I'm flabbergasted. Next you're gonna tell me that Columbus has two starting goalies and they're looking to trade one. This is just crazy.

[LeftWinger 5,090]

3 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Wait, are you suggesting that the Wings could acquire a top end goalie prospect WITHOUT using a top 10 pick in the draft?  I'm flabbergasted. Next you're gonna tell me that Columbus has two starting goalies and they're looking to trade one. This is just crazy.

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.

[kipwinger 8,732]

2 minutes 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.

You're missing the point. I'm agreeing with you that trading with Tampa is a good idea. I'm also making a point that you can get top goaltending talent in a number of ways that DON'T require using a top 10 pick. Tampa and Columbus are just two examples.

[LeftWinger 5,090]

6 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

You're missing the point. I'm agreeing with you that trading with Tampa is a good idea. I'm also making a point that you can get top goaltending talent in a number of ways that DON'T require using a top 10 pick. Tampa and Columbus are just two examples.

I honestly would prefer the trade with Tampa (or someone who needs cap relief) in order to get assets and keep our #6 and use it on a LHD (my preference) or a forward that we may need, rather than use it for a G. Even if we acquired Alnefelt, I am still good if we were able to get Cossa at 22 though! Those two right there would potentially turn our G pool 180 degrees.

Edited June 30, 2021 by LeftWinger

[kipwinger 8,732]

5 minutes ago, LeftWinger said:

I honestly would prefer the trade with Tampa (or someone who needs cap relief) in order to get assets and keep our #6 and use it on a LHD (my preference) or a forward that we may need, rather than use it for a G. Even if we acquired Alnefelt, I am still good if we were able to get Cossa at 22 though! Those two right there would potentially turn our G pool 180 degrees.

SMH. Why, if you already had Alnefelt, would you waste a first round pick on Cossa?

[amato 3,210]

42 minutes ago, F.Michael said:

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

dang, you've got a few years on me.... barely around these days though. i thought this site was done for when it was down for a while this year.

glad to see it back up.