Tyler Wright: Red Wings trying to be trend setters at draft

[obey86]

What did I just read? Anaheim was not the most skilled team? They were captained by one of the most skilled defenseman of his era and were led by Chris Pronger, Ryan Getzlaf, and Corey Perry to round things out. An elite winger, an elite center, and two elite defenseman. Skill out their ears with Kunitz and McDonald holding down the complementary units.

Same with LA. Doughty and Kopitar complemented by a sexy next tier of Richards, Carter, and Voynov.

You may have an argument with Boston because that team probably doesn't win a Cup without Tim Thomas, but they also don't win the Cup with that nasty depth down the middle in the very skilled bunch of Bergeron, Krejci, and Seguin. Having Marchand and Lucic didn't hurt either.

Oh, wait. I see where you're going with this. False dichotomy, eh? Skill is a dirty word here, is it? No. Sorry. That's not how it works. Being a dirty piece of **** doesn't keep Perry, Kunitz, and Marchand outside of the skilled group. Being a wrecking ball doesn't make Lucic or Richards unskilled. Being a wall in front of the net and on the boards doesn't mean Pronger and Doughty aren't skilled defenseman.




Obey's example, as I said previously, is a crock. Again, were operating under a false dichotomy. Give me an example of a player who is "skill" 80 and "size" 65. What does that even mean?

What does size mean? Who gets an 80 in size? Is it the emaciated 6'3" Danny Dekeyser who struggles in front of the net or is it the once dominant bull in a China shop Mike Richards at 5'11."

And who gets a higher skill rating? Patrick Kane, Pavel Datsyuk, or Nikita Kucherov?

And what even is skill? How many skill points does Ovechkin get for being arguably the best goal scorer of all time while also being a very incomplete player? How many skill points does Datsyuk get for his takeaways? What counts for more? How many points are rewarded for a skilled shot versus passing versus takeaways versus dekes?

And where the **** is skating in all of this? What if "80" in "size" and "60" in "skill" is also "15" in "skating?" Do we really need to clone prime Jason Allison to find that out?

This whole disingenuous argument is once against set up to fight an argument no one is making. Size is part of a package as is skill, skating, character, etc. But skill is still king. You have big skilled guys who are dominant, you have small skilled guys who are dominant, but you don't have big unskilled guys who are dominant.

I think you missed the point with my extremely simple video game attribute rankings example. No, there is no player who is ranked an 80 in skill, it was simplified to make a point that the most skilled player (on a 1-100 scale or however the heck else you want to define who is most skilled) is not always the best player or best pick just because they are the most skilled. I ever specifically said there are many other attributed to consider when evaluating players as that seems to go against the "we need to just draft the most skilled players!!!!" mindset.

As for the rest of your goboldy gook incoherent rant; you just wrote like 4 paragraphs saying "what is skill?" "we can't even define skill." "it's not possible to compared skilled players to either other because who is more skilled?" "saying skill and ignoring other aspects of a players game is stupid." and then in your last paragraph you basically just said that skill is all that matters. lolz. What is your point exactly....you don't even seem to know.

As for your sentence in bold, that's great. Rasmussen is not lacking skill. Mantha is not lacking skill. Hell, Svechnikov might have been a crappy pick, but he doesn't lack skill either. Three bigger players. Neither does Chowloski. Neither does Hronek. There's simply no evidence to show the Wings are ignoring the drafting of skill to draft a bunch of big and unskilled players no matter how much people here whine about it.

 

[jkutswings]

In the long last of attributes to like about a given draft prospect, height and weight are nowhere near the top of my list. Would I use them as tie breakers between players of similar skill (skating, passing, stick handling, vision, creativity with and without the puck, etc.)? Sure. But if a smaller player appears to have a noticeably better list of other traits that help put the puck in the net, and/or help keep it out of their own, that wins for me, pure and simple.

All that said, I think it gets tougher and tougher to differentiate, as you progress through each round of a given draft, and so size starts to decide more and more close matches, so to speak. But my definition of a guy that's "hard to play against" is the guy that improves the goal differential, regardless of size.

 

[Henkka]

In a sense you're right. There are tons of NHL players with skill and when put in the right situation under favorable conditions they will shine. The trick is to build a team identity/makeup/whateveryouwanttocallit so that plugging in a Kunitz will work out fine, as opposed to needing a bonafide superstar to get similar results. It's my opinion that building a big, hard-to-play-against team will be easier and will allow us to plug in a Nyquist-type player or two as opposed to mainly shooting for superstars or bust. It'd be absolutely lovely to have both, though.

Justttttttt like his.

If you always draft the most skilled player on every draft position, you will end up with a 30 guy group of midgets. A team full of midgets won't work.

It funny how this success of single midget-individual fools people to think, that we should go only after those, because somebody shines somewhere. They usually shine, because the base drafting of the organization allows them to shine. But without that base drafting they wouldn't shine somewhere else, in a lesser team.

But if you draft mostly bigger guys (or something else) as an team indentity, then, afterwards you can add some low-round skill midgets on the group to finalize the mix.

But you have to draft those identity guys first. Red Wings are now completing a plan, big guys an identity first. These guys will be slowly brought in, as our bad contracts die/are traded from roster year-by-year. Team will get WORSE and WORSE. Draft positions will get HIGHER and HIGHER. We NEARER and NEARER of a lottery win every year.

Then we will get our SUPERSTAR and the team is set, because the identity core was drafted first. Voila!

Perfect.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

Justttttttt like his.

If you always draft the most skilled player on every draft position, you will end up with a 30 guy group of midgets. A team full of midgets won't work.

It funny how this fools people to think that we should go only after those, because somebody shines somwhere. they usually shine, because the base drafting allows them to shine. But without that base drafting they wouldn't shine somewhere else, in a lesser team.

But if you draft mostly bigger guys as an team indentity, then, afterwards you can add some low-round skill midgets on the group to finalize the mix.

But you have to draft those big guys first. Red Wings are now completing a plan, bug gyus an identity first. These guys will be slightly brought in. team will get WORSE and WORSE. Draft positions will get HIGHER and HIGHER. We NEARER and NEARER of a lottery win every year.

Then we will get our SUPERSTAR and the team is set.

Perfect.

Sort of... Now how quickly does fate smile on us in terms of a #1D and #1C. Honestly it can happen in just two years given the draft classes and where we might get to pick. But we also might get unlucky and be at this for five years.

 

[ChadS]

I have no problem drafting big guys, but honestly can't see any reason to specifically plan on drafting big kids first and then smaller guys. Or the opposite for that matter. Besides, the drafting & developing process has no timeline, there is no beginning or end since it's a constant process.

A blend of size & skill (and other factors) in each draft based on who you think are the best players available is the way to go.

 

[Run the Jewels]

Love the way the writer used the anecdotal example of Anderson but then says of the past three draft classes: "Early on, the results have been spotty. There are a lot of factors that go into fairly evaluating those results"

But hey, he had that one good draft pick so it's all good!!

 

[obey86]

since

In the long last of attributes to like about a given draft prospect, height and weight are nowhere near the top of my list. Would I use them as tie breakers between players of similar skill (skating, passing, stick handling, vision, creativity with and without the puck, etc.)? Sure. But if a smaller player appears to have a noticeably better list of other traits that help put the puck in the net, and/or help keep it out of their own, that wins for me, pure and simple.

All that said, I think it gets tougher and tougher to differentiate, as you progress through each round of a given draft, and so size starts to decide more and more close matches, so to speak. But my definition of a guy that's "hard to play against" is the guy that improves the goal differential, regardless of size.

I kind of agree with what you say, but size *can* have noticeable advantages which help players succeed. For example, Mantha, due to his size and (a byproduct of that) his long reach, he can more easily use his body and reach to shield the puck away from defenders and does a very good job of that. I think that is a simple example of size giving a player a distinct on ice advantage that a player like, say Nyqvist, does not have.

So, in short, the end result of Mantha's size is that it gives him a distinct on-ice advantage that many smaller players do not have. Some smaller players can compensate in other ways (for example, Zetterberg is great at shielding the puck despite being a much smaller player) but most cannot.

 

[obey86]

Does everyone here agree with this train of thought?

The Wings should draft the player they believe (based on their scouting) will tilt the ice in their favor the most based on a variety of factors and scouting characteristics, many of which have nothing to do with size or skill (skating, likelihood of reaching their potential, work ethic, hockey IQ, etc). Because of this approach, sometimes the players they choose in the draft will be among the most skilled on the board and sometimes they will be among the biggest players on the board, and sometimes they will be more rounded in both aspects.

 

[Reddwit]

I think you missed the point with my extremely simple video game attribute rankings example. No, there is no player who is ranked an 80 in skill, it was simplified to make a point that the most skilled player (on a 1-100 scale or however the heck else you want to define who is most skilled) is not always the best player or best pick just because they are the most skilled. I ever specifically said there are many other attributed to consider when evaluating players as that seems to go against the "we need to just draft the most skilled players!!!!" mindset.

As for the rest of your goboldy gook incoherent rant; you just wrote like 4 paragraphs saying "what is skill?" "we can't even define skill." "it's not possible to compared skilled players to either other because who is more skilled?" "saying skill and ignoring other aspects of a players game is stupid." and then in your last paragraph you basically just said that skill is all that matters. lolz. What is your point exactly....you don't even seem to know.

As for your sentence in bold, that's great. Rasmussen is not lacking skill. Mantha is not lacking skill. Hell, Svechnikov might have been a crappy pick, but he doesn't lack skill either. Three bigger players. Neither does Chowloski. Neither does Hronek. There's simply no evidence to show the Wings are ignoring the drafting of skill to draft a bunch of big and unskilled players no matter how much people here whine about it.

First of all, it’s not incoherent - it’s just more complex than some black and white wave of the hand. Follow the post above that it was addressing. I find that helps.

Second, you’re just inviting a semantics debate if you want to talk about your “skill” and it’s ratings versus skill itself. Skill. Talent. Intelligence. Talk about skill and people know what you’re talking about in a general sense, but talk about “skill” as though it’s something you assign a number to and there will be questions.

Lastly, suggesting that anyone is complaining about drafting size is a useless bastardizaton. The argument is not that size doesn’t matter; the argument is not that the Wings have acted in a way that suggests that they’ve abandoned all but drafting for size then skill. The argument is simply that adopting any mindset that is directed towards establishing a trend or crafting a certain philosophy when drafting anyone creates an exclusionary practice that values anything other than the fundamental that is most valuable - you guessed it: skill.

 

[Run the Jewels]

The only thing the Wings are good at drafting are bottom 6-9 forwards and bottom pair d-men. The drafting on defense in particular had been a catastrophic failure. I don't want the current Brain trust having anything to do with upcoming drafts when we should be building up the next core that needs to become competitive.

Everyone who drafts at the top of the draft gets either size and skill or proven, NHL ready skill. To pretend Tyler Wright has cracked some sort of code is absolutely embarrassing.

 

[Reddwit]

Justttttttt like his.

If you always draft the most skilled player on every draft position, you will end up with a 30 guy group of midgets. A team full of midgets won't work.

It funny how this success of single midget-individual fools people to think, that we should go only after those, because somebody shines somewhere. They usually shine, because the base drafting of the organization allows them to shine. But without that base drafting they wouldn't shine somewhere else, in a lesser team.

But if you draft mostly bigger guys (or something else) as an team indentity, then, afterwards you can add some low-round skill midgets on the group to finalize the mix.

But you have to draft those identity guys first. Red Wings are now completing a plan, big guys an identity first. These guys will be slowly brought in, as our bad contracts die/are traded from roster year-by-year. Team will get WORSE and WORSE. Draft positions will get HIGHER and HIGHER. We NEARER and NEARER of a lottery win every year.

Then we will get our SUPERSTAR and the team is set, because the identity core was drafted first. Voila!

Perfect.

Your first paragraph insinuates that the most skilled players available are also the smallest in any given scenario. Yet that ignores skating, character, attitude, stats, leagues, whether you’re talking about height or weight, age at draft day, etc. If what you said was true, every late round draft steal would be a midget, yet that is rarely the case.

Second, who is saying we should only go after small players? Seriously, why do people take message board posting so personally that they feel the need to pervert the debate to make themselves feel better. Literally no one is saying draft small.

Third, no, you don’t draft identity guys first. Scouts or organizations may have tendencies when they draft by nature of staff carryover but that’s another discussion. If drafting for identity were a thing then drafting for BPA couldn’t be and vice versa.

Lastly, your draft plan makes no sense. Drafting for identity doesn’t mean perpetually getting worse lottery picks or remaining a lottery team. Nor does drafting for identity mean a player that matches this alleged identity will be there where we draft. Nor does it mean we will ever get a superstar. And if we do have a shot at a superstar, what the hell happens when he doesn’t match our identity??

 

[Reddwit]

The only thing the Wings are good at drafting are bottom 6-9 forwards and bottom pair d-men. The drafting on defense in particular had been a catastrophic failure. I don't want the current Brain trust having anything to do with upcoming drafts when we should be building up the next core that needs to become competitive.

Everyone who drafts at the top of the draft gets either size and skill or proven, NHL ready skill. To pretend Tyler Wright has cracked some sort of code is absolutely embarrassing.

And if that’s all you’re good at drafting, then you need to change your approach.

At the most basic level, drafting should be about getting for free the type of talent you can rarely get at the trade table or in free agency.

 

[obey86]

The only thing the Wings are good at drafting are bottom 6-9 forwards and bottom pair d-men. The drafting on defense in particular had been a catastrophic failure. I don't want the current Brain trust having anything to do with upcoming drafts when we should be building up the next core that needs to become competitive.

Everyone who drafts at the top of the draft gets either size and skill or proven, NHL ready skill. To pretend Tyler Wright has cracked some sort of code is absolutely embarrassing.

Who's pretending that?

 

[obey86]

Let's see some more quotes from Tyler Wright, to maybe get some more context on how fe feels about the draft:

"I'm actually thinking about what we have to draft next year. We're going to get a little bit more of an emphasis on higher-end skill, maybe get a little bit riskier in the forward position," Wright said. "We wanted to address it. We addressed defense this year because we deemed as a staff to be a fairly deep defense draft.

"Next year we got to add some skill set guys that are going to be able to work the half-wall on the power play, guys that are going to be the pure goal scorers. When you take a little bit more of a calculated risk, you got to give something up sometimes."

"We had so many picks, and it wasn't that we were overlooking any skill or anything for that matter, there was a clump of defensemen that we really liked that we figured were going to fall in the range where we had a lot of picks and that was from the 38th to the 102 mark."

"I don't want to mislead people by saying we wanted to get bigger and harder to play against, we also want to keep the identity of what a Red Wing is," said Wright. "When you look into the dictionary of what a Philadelphia Flyer is or what a Detroit Red Wing is, you're going to have two completely different definitions of what a player is. That's just the general philosophy of the organization. We want to keep our identity of what we are as an organization, but we want to alter it in a little standpoint and I think we did that with the defense.

Red Wings Will Focus On Skilled Forwards In 2018 NHL Draft

Tyler Wright on creating a Red Wings culture

Complain about their ability to evaluate how good a player will be from the draft, that's fair. However, despite the complaining, there's simply nothing to indicate the Wings are boxing themselves in in the draft and entirely avoiding certain types of players when it comes to building the roster.

 

[Frk It]

Kind of weird to you that he’s saying what the strategy is for next year already right after the last draft happened?

Hmm, it’s almost like maybe that’s because it’s something they’ve been neglecting and he’s feeling some heat because of it.

 

[Redder Winger]

Does everyone here agree with this train of thought?

The Wings should draft the player they believe (based on their scouting) will tilt the ice in their favor the most based on a variety of factors and scouting characteristics, many of which have nothing to do with size or skill (skating, likelihood of reaching their potential, work ethic, hockey IQ, etc). Because of this approach, sometimes the players they choose in the draft will be among the most skilled on the board and sometimes they will be among the biggest players on the board, and sometimes they will be more rounded in both aspects.

To me, it's important to draft the kinds of players who you might not be able to get any other kind of way.
So I wouldn't even bother trying to draft the kind of player with 3rd or 4th line potential.

Sure, a guy like Helm helped us win the cup in 08.

But for the most part, you find the Clearys and Abdelkaders and Ericssons and Quinceys in free agency at a decent price.

It's been a long time since a franchise D or franchise C was available in free agency. It's rare, even, that legit top sixers at a playable age are available.

So focus on top 6 forwards, and top 4 D and starting goalies.

Don't bother with checking line guys, stay-at-home defenders, etc.

If you're going to waste your 7th round pick, take a shot at greatness.

 

[Redder Winger]

Let's see some more quotes from Tyler Wright, to maybe get some more context on how fe feels about the draft:

"I'm actually thinking about what we have to draft next year. We're going to get a little bit more of an emphasis on higher-end skill, maybe get a little bit riskier in the forward position," Wright said. "We wanted to address it. We addressed defense this year because we deemed as a staff to be a fairly deep defense draft.

"Next year we got to add some skill set guys that are going to be able to work the half-wall on the power play, guys that are going to be the pure goal scorers. When you take a little bit more of a calculated risk, you got to give something up sometimes."

"We had so many picks, and it wasn't that we were overlooking any skill or anything for that matter, there was a clump of defensemen that we really liked that we figured were going to fall in the range where we had a lot of picks and that was from the 38th to the 102 mark."

"I don't want to mislead people by saying we wanted to get bigger and harder to play against, we also want to keep the identity of what a Red Wing is," said Wright. "When you look into the dictionary of what a Philadelphia Flyer is or what a Detroit Red Wing is, you're going to have two completely different definitions of what a player is. That's just the general philosophy of the organization. We want to keep our identity of what we are as an organization, but we want to alter it in a little standpoint and I think we did that with the defense.

Red Wings Will Focus On Skilled Forwards In 2018 NHL Draft

Tyler Wright on creating a Red Wings culture

Complain about their ability to evaluate how good a player will be from the draft, that's fair. However, despite the complaining, there's simply nothing to indicate the Wings are boxing themselves in in the draft and entirely avoiding certain types of players when it comes to building the roster.

This was the "walk it back" article.
Then he came out with the "trend setter" comments.

More recently:
The stakes are high for Tyler Wright, and the Red Wings
“It's tricky. You have a philosophy. The philosophy is the No. 1 thing in the organization,” Wright told The Athletic. “How do we want this team to look? How do you want this team to play?… The last 25 years, the identity was skill and speed.”

Note the word WAS.

That sounds great. But it's hard to look at the Red Wings 2017 draft class and say it fits that identity of skill and speed, the foundation on which the Red Wings championship teams were built. There was a lot of size, character and players who compete. Wright explained the reason why.

“When the Penguins come in and go small, with speed and no one can catch them, everyone tries to play catch up,” Wright said, defending the 2017 draft. “Where is the NHL going? We're on the other side of that. We're trying to be trend setters.”

And more:
A potential issue with the 2017 draft approach? One could argue the Red Wings didn’t take enough big swings, considering the high number of picks at their disposal and lack of elite talent in the organization.

“If you swing for the fences every time and you’re in a slump, you’re not hitting the ball out of the ballpark all the time,” Wright said when the issue was raised. “You can set the organization back years.”

---
So? What the f*** is Wright saying?
They're not trying to swing for the fences?
They're slumping and afraid to swing?

 

[Pavels Dog]

Finding another Nyquist or Tatar doesn’t do anything for us. But finding a Kucherov does.

Our issue isn’t that we have small players, it’s just that our small players didn’t become elite players.

But to your first point, it is possible Wright was given a direction and is just going with that direction.... hard to say.

This ‘18 draft should tell us a lot. It should be Wright’s highest pick to date AND he said he is going to look more for skill this year. So he’s setting the bar high, hopefully he can deliver.

There's only one Kucherov though. You can draft a 100 small scoring wingers and not find a Kucherov, but get a lot of Nyquists/Tatars/Pulkkinens/Frks. Personally I'm always a big fan of the small, skilled type of players. Gaudreau is my favorite non-Wing. I don't think it means you should actively hunt for those guys with many picks. We could have a slightly better mix than what Wright has drafted so far, but once again there's been a huge focus on centers and d-men. Not a ton of forward picks. Which I think is very, very logical. And with the forward picks they've had, it's not unreasonable to feel like one thing the Wings DON'T need to draft is small scoring wingers.

What did I just read? Anaheim was not the most skilled team? They were captained by one of the most skilled defenseman of his era and were led by Chris Pronger, Ryan Getzlaf, and Corey Perry to round things out. An elite winger, an elite center, and two elite defenseman. Skill out their ears with Kunitz and McDonald holding down the complementary units.

Same with LA. Doughty and Kopitar complemented by a sexy next tier of Richards, Carter, and Voynov.

You may have an argument with Boston because that team probably doesn't win a Cup without Tim Thomas, but they also don't win the Cup with that nasty depth down the middle in the very skilled bunch of Bergeron, Krejci, and Seguin. Having Marchand and Lucic didn't hurt either.

Oh, wait. I see where you're going with this. False dichotomy, eh? Skill is a dirty word here, is it? No. Sorry. That's not how it works. Being a dirty piece of **** doesn't keep Perry, Kunitz, and Marchand outside of the skilled group. Being a wrecking ball doesn't make Lucic or Richards unskilled. Being a wall in front of the net and on the boards doesn't mean Pronger and Doughty aren't skilled defenseman.

I think you missed the point here tbh, considering you're basically agreeing with it while sounding like you're arguing against it. If you could place every player on a 1-100 rating skill-wise, those LA/Anaheim/Boston teams were definitley less skilled than Detroit, Pittsburgh and maybe some other. Once again, we're not talking about skill as something a player either has or hasn't. Getzlaf is very skilled, but if he was Datsyuk's size he simply wouldn't be anywhere close to as good. And if Datsyuk was 6'5'' he would have been Mario Lemieux 2.0. Pronger was skilled, but again, part of that skill was his physical play. He was not Lidstrom in terms of pure skill and IQ. Kopitar is great but with zero doubt less skilled than Crosby and Malkin. He makes up for some of that with defensive play.

All of this means what? That because Rasmussen is a big guy who likes to crash the net doesn't make him unskilled. Because Larkin is speedy he's not unskilled. Because Mantha has some lazy tendencies he's not unskilled. That a team can win despite not being the MOST skilled team in the league. Size, physicality, two-way play, skating, depth.. these things can make up for the fact that you don't have a couple of Patrick Kanes and an Erik Karlsson on D.

This whole disingenuous argument is once against set up to fight an argument no one is making. Size is part of a package as is skill, skating, character, etc. But skill is still king. You have big skilled guys who are dominant, you have small skilled guys who are dominant, but you don't have big unskilled guys who are dominant.

Exactly.

 

[Henkka]

Kind of weird to you that he’s saying what the strategy is for next year already right after the last draft happened?

Hmm, it’s almost like maybe that’s because it’s something they’ve been neglecting and he’s feeling some heat because of it.

Andersson said the same after the draft. They pretty much said that because that 2017 was good for defencemen but overall weak and lacked overall forward skill, so they sacrifised that draft to go after defencemen and size/skating/character. In a big picture you need those kind of guys, but other drafts before and after are better to hunt more skilled guys again.

It sounded nothing but reasonable. They executed a plan. I just don't understand you problem finders in here. Everywhere must a problem or something done wrong.

 

[ChadS]

It sounded nothing but reasonable. They executed a plan. I just don't understand you problem finders in here. Everywhere must a problem or something done wrong.

Looking at the standings, the roster and our prospect pool, it shouldn't be a huge surprise that people are talking about problems and things done wrong...

 

[obey86]

Looking at the standings, the roster and our prospect pool, it shouldn't be a huge surprise that people are talking about problems and things done wrong...

Why would someone have higher expectations for a team that had made the playoffs for 20+ straight seasons and has had an entire one offseason of rebuilding?

 

[Redder Winger]

Why would someone have higher expectations for a team that had made the playoffs for 20+ straight seasons and has had an entire one offseason of rebuilding?

I would expect a team with the highest pick it's hard in years and the most picks since going to the seven-round draft, and a team lacking in potential stars at center and defense, to do everything in it's power to draft high skill guys.

 

[obey86]

I would expect a team with the highest pick it's hard in years and the most picks since going to the seven-round draft, and a team lacking in potential stars at center and defense, to do everything in it's power to draft high skill guys.

Rasmussen isn't lacking skill.

 

[Henkka]

Looking at the standings, the roster and our prospect pool, it shouldn't be a huge surprise that people are talking about problems and things done wrong...

You can look on the standings as much as you want. But our new drafting squad has proably 1% influnce on that situation.

Our current core and players in prime were drafted by Jim Nill and Joe McDonell. Go ask for them about drafting problems. Tyler Wright's results will be seen later.

If he drafts for 9 drafts like later Red Wings scouting directors, his last draft will be at 2023 and players from that draft reach their prime 6-8 years after. So we can give a final grade for Tyler Wright somewhere at ~2030. 12 years after this current moment.

Then Wright's first pick Larkin is 33-year old, starting to be past his prime and we have seen some parts of the career primes of every player Wright ever drafted.

That's how you analyze scouting directors.

 

[Dotter]

You can look on the standings as much as you want. But our new drafting squad has proably 1% influnce on that situation.

Our current core and players in prime were drafted by Jim Nill and Joe McDonell. Go ask for them about drafting problems. Tyler Wright's results will be seen later.

If he drafts for 9 drafts like later Red Wings scouting directors, his last draft will be at 2023 and players from that draft reach their prime 6-8 years after. So we can give a final grade for Tyler Wright somewhere at ~2030. 12 years after this current moment.

Then Wright's first pick Larkin is 33-year old, starting to be past his prime and we have seen some parts of the career primes of every player Wright ever drafted.

That's how you analyze scouting directors.

It's because people who never seen the prospect play a game before drafting believe he is the absolute best pick because some random scouting report guy wrote a report and the fan likes the name on the back of the jersey; thinks it sounds cool. When that player they believe has a cool name on their back isn't drafted, they automatically think the Red Wings scouts are stupid. Lol.

That's what it really boils down to. We can look no further than last draft to see it. RAM was declared a "bust" before any of those people ever watched him play. I bet dollars to donuts he hones out a better NHL career than both Valardi and Necas. I watched all of them play. Was never impressed with the latter two guys.

Time will tell =)