Prospect Info: At 9th Overall the Detroit Red Wings Select Michael Rasmussen

[Nut Upstrom]

On a team devoid of playmakers, it was an awful pick.

Larkin at 15? I guess I can see Fabbri. But Larkin was a center with decent size and a two way game. Given the needs of our franchise (Age of Datsyuk and Zetterberg, Weiss flaming out), it was a no-brainer.

We were and still are devoid of several key players and positions. We couldn't have solved all of them with that pick. We'll see how it works out in the long term.

You really should copy/paste this for future posts: in my opinion
For example: "It was an awful pick in my opinion." Okay, cool.

Opinions are valued and lead to discussions. Arrogant rants of absolute certainty about things none of us could possibly be factually certain about just comes off as a know it all trying to prove his point by talking louder or more frequently than everyone else.

 

[BinCookin]

Jesus, I wanted Mantha, and while I wasn't a fan of Larkin (I wanted Fabbri), but I would consider both of those cases times were the fans were right and the GM was wrong, same with Pesce especially because of the team's defensive woes.

Sorry i don't think i understand... "fans were right and GM was wrong" in regards to whom?

 

[BinCookin]

A big part of this is generally most of the time is spent pushing the guy you want. So I like the whole top 9, I have said that over and over, if we are picking third I will have a guy I like, that doesn't mean I hate the guy that is 6th on my board but the Wings pick third or something like that.

I liked Necas, but by no means did I hate Rasmussen. I wanted Fabbri, but I didn't hate Larkin.

In the moment those choices can be crippling and tough to accept, but it actually doesn't mean black and white you never liked the player. That is an inaccurate way of looking at it. Rasmussen has always had serious selling points, it isn't hard to see why they were really high on him.

Oh I agree with this very much. And this is the right way to look at prospects

 

[BinCookin]

On a team devoid of playmakers, it was an awful pick.

Larkin at 15? I guess I can see Fabbri. But Larkin was a center with decent size and a two way game. Given the needs of our franchise (Age of Datsyuk and Zetterberg, Weiss flaming out), it was a no-brainer.

I get it Redder, you think Holland made a bad pick. Fair enough.

But is there at least a small part of you that hopes Rasmussen plays well and makes our team?
Doesn't his current play help make you think he is merely a poor pick, and not a horrible pick?

 

[Shaman464]

Sorry i don't think i understand... "fans were right and GM was wrong" in regards to whom?

If fans here wanted Pastrnak, Guentzel and Pesce, the team would be better than they are with Mantha, Larkin and Bertuzzi, so they would has been right to draft them over those three.

 

[lomekian]

Yeah, I guess I'm just sour about it. I don't really like tipping pucks as a core skill. Actually, I think I would like it a lot more if the Wings org hadn't been obsessed with it over the years. Seems like after a certain point, it was always the most loathed player on the team that had the role of playing in front of the net. Cleary and Abby, at least.

I LOVED Holmstrom, and the first iteration of Ckeary.

The punishment they took to make our PP better was truly worthy of respect. Like I said, I'd prefer Feds #2.0 but we aren't getting that player with a 9th pick without a LOT of luck.

 

[lomekian]

What is his ceiling to you? From everything I've read he's a big defensively responsible forward who will specialize on the PP but may lack ES offensive ability.

At the same time, many thought Larkin would be a 3rd line center when he was drafted iirc.

His Ceiling? A borderline 1st line goal scoring centre who will be good at both ends of the ice and with good wingers could pit up 70 ish points in the NHL while making our PP Much more effective.

All depends on how much his passing improves and how good his motor is (and staying injury free), as he has shown flashes of clever play making, particularly of late

 

[Shaman464]

His Ceiling? A borderline 1st line goal scoring centre who will be good at both ends of the ice and with good wingers could pit up 70 ish points in the NHL while making our PP Much more effective.

All depends on how much his passing improves and how good his motor is (and staying injury free), as he has shown flashes of clever play making, particularly of late

I think his ceiling is a top line winger, and probably would play his best hockey with a Datsyuk like play making center. As a center I see him his ceiling as a 2nd line center. I think its much more likely he's going to end up as a third line energy center featured on a team with a ton of scoring depth in the top 3 lines. Which would be great if they can get their hands on a top line center, and would go a long way towards being a contender.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Of course, we don't know if it will translate, but if he's 6'6 and 220 now, he could yet get bigger and stronger...and if so will be pretty difficult for this generations smaller and faster D to move.

I believe this is lost on many. With the league going more and more towards small, quick PMDs, a 6’6” beast with terrific net-front ability won’t be easily handled. I’d be a lot more concerned if Rasmussen was playing this kind of game but was a few inches shorter.

We also need skilled D to maximize the potential of Rasmussen (as well as the team), but I think he could really become a unique player in the league.

 

[Ulysses31]

With the big frame i see his potential as quite high. Generally speaking i think it takes longer from big players to reach their peak. Could be a mini-matthews(big?) who just took a year longer to show his true ability because of his size

 

[Shaman464]

With the big frame i see his potential as quite high. Generally speaking i think it takes longer from big players to reach their peak. Could be a mini-matthews(big?) who just took a year longer to show his true ability because of his size

No, he's no where near Matthews in style or potential production. I see him more of a Mule/Homer hybrid, making hay below the dots, and in front of the goalie. Matthews on the other hand scores well from all areas on the ice and on the transition.

 

[Ulysses31]

No, he's no where near Matthews in style or potential production. I see him more of a Mule/Homer hybrid, making hay below the dots, and in front of the goalie. Matthews on the other hand scores well from all areas on the ice and on the transition.

Sory but i see but i see a much better player than both those players, especially holmstrom. He will drive his own line IMO

 

[Ulysses31]

A lot of people criticize Ras because of his lack of flash/goals where he dekes the entire team but i see it as more of a positive how effortlessly he finds the net and sets up plays.

 

[Shaman464]

Sory but i see but i see a much better player than both those players, especially holmstrom. He will drive his own line IMO

My comparison wasn't about production, but play style, they are all players. Though if Ras peaks being a 35/25/60 player, which seems to be a firm possibility, he peaks about where Franzen did.

 

[Pavels Dog]

No, he's no where near Matthews in style or potential production. I see him more of a Mule/Homer hybrid, making hay below the dots, and in front of the goalie. Matthews on the other hand scores well from all areas on the ice and on the transition.

Mule/Homer hybrid that can play two-way C and that steps into the NHL at 19 instead of 25 is an absolutely amazing player and possibly the steal of the draft.

 

[Henkka]

No, he's no where near Matthews in style or potential production. I see him more of a Mule/Homer hybrid, making hay below the dots, and in front of the goalie. Matthews on the other hand scores well from all areas on the ice and on the transition.

Mule/Homer hybrid with great defensive abilities to shut down opposite skill center. And great faceoff specialist. O-zone or D-zone, will be as important as Bergeron is for the Bruins. And bigger than any other screener center in the league. Pretty nice package. One-of-a-kind.

He will be a special player to us.

 

[waltdetroit]

From the few games I have seen, Razzle has made some spectacular passes. He also tested out as a top skater at the combine. Many of his tip-ins are when he is skating toward the net as opposed to being parked in front like Homer. Add in his FO & defensive abilities - he wears the C (character) - I think we have a great prospect. Could we have taken someone better? probably but that is true of 95% of all drafts. To quote a Redskin head coach, "Hindsight is 50/50."

 

[jkutswings]

40-50 point middle six winger. Good PP guy, can win some draws if need be. Awesome side dish, but not part of the main course.

 

[HisNoodliness]

My comparison wasn't about production, but play style, they are all players. Though if Ras peaks being a 35/25/60 player, which seems to be a firm possibility, he peaks about where Franzen did.

I think everyone would be ecstatic if he's a 35/25/60 player. I think most of us just worry that he's more of a 20/10/30 3C with almost all of that production coming in the PP.

 

[Lampedampe]

We were and still are devoid of several key players and positions. We couldn't have solved all of them with that pick. We'll see how it works out in the long term.

You really should copy/paste this for future posts: in my opinion
For example: "It was an awful pick in my opinion." Okay, cool.

Opinions are valued and lead to discussions. Arrogant rants of absolute certainty about things none of us could possibly be factually certain about just comes off as a know it all trying to prove his point by talking louder or more frequently than everyone else.

This.

If we picked Necas or Vilardi we'd be devoid of size down the middle. Players like Necas, Vilardi and Rasmussen don't grows on tree's but I'd say that massive centres like Ras with top-6 upside paired with a 200-foot game is slightly more rare (hence why he was picked and ranked top-10), while players with similar upside as Necas and Vilardi are pretty picked up in the top-10 every year and we'll have plenty of top-10 picks going forward. The Ras pick isn't the prettiest, but I've grown to appreciate it and I believe his skill-set will enable players around him while being a big utility on the PP and PK.

Let's not pretend like we passed on 2 elite playmaking centres, neither Necas or Vilardi has played a single nhl game yet.

This in itself can be a pretty big discussion, but drafting is a very delicate business and it takes years up on years of drafting to build a contender, and it goes more into drafting than to pick the players with highest upside every draft.

 

[BinCookin]

If fans here wanted Pastrnak, Guentzel and Pesce, the team would be better than they are with Mantha, Larkin and Bertuzzi, so they would has been right to draft them over those three.

Ah i see what you are saying... Actually i looked at our old threads and i can tell you who WE would have drafted:


2014 --> Fabbri
2015 --> Colin White
2016 --> Chychrun
2017 --> Vilardi

 

[TheMule93]

This.

If we picked Necas or Vilardi we'd be devoid of size down the middle. Players like Necas, Vilardi and Rasmussen don't grows on tree's but I'd say that massive centres like Ras with top-6 upside paired with a 200-foot game is slightly more rare (hence why he was picked and ranked top-10), while players with similar upside as Necas and Vilardi are pretty picked up in the top-10 every year and we'll have plenty of top-10 picks going forward. The Ras pick isn't the prettiest, but I've grown to appreciate it and I believe his skill-set will enable players around him while being a big utility on the PP and PK.

Let's not pretend like we passed on 2 elite playmaking centres, neither Necas or Vilardi has played a single nhl game yet.

This in itself can be a pretty big discussion, but drafting is a very delicate business and it takes years up on years of drafting to build a contender, and it goes more into drafting than to pick the players with highest upside every draft.

Vilardi is 6'3 201lbs and Larkin is 6'1 198lbs

Yzerman was 5'11 185lbs and Fedorov was 6'1 200lbs

Datsyuk was 5"11 194lbs and Zetterberg was 6"0 197lbs

What do you mean we'd be devoid of size? That would be our biggest set of top 6 centers in decades in terms of both height and weight. And this is an era in which size matters the least.

 

[Ezekial]

Vilardi is 6'3 201lbs and Larkin is 6'1 198lbs

Yzerman was 5'11 185lbs and Fedorov was 6'1 200lbs

Datsyuk was 5"11 194lbs and Zetterberg was 6"0 197lbs

What do you mean we'd be devoid of size? That would be our biggest set of top 6 centers in decades in terms of both height and weight. And this is an era in which size matters the least.

Was it Tyler Wright or Draper that said the organization doesn't see him as a center?

 

[Claypool]

40-50 point middle six winger. Good PP guy, can win some draws if need be. Awesome side dish, but not part of the main course.

Vilardi? I agree.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

Upside hopefully is a getzlaf

Hold out a lot of hope for him

We need it