Askarov

[RedWingzz]

None of that addresses that small NHL centers are not a thing. Even if you give him that extra inch.

I know he's incredibly talented, he must be to have top 10 pedigree at that size, but I still think drafting a center that small and expecting him to translate well to the NHL is a far bigger gamble than any other player mentioned at #4.

If you're comfortable with that kind of risk,I totally respect that. But I'd like people to acknowledge that it's a risk that's at least as significant at the spooky goalie.

And again, I would absolutely love a player like Rossi to succeed. He seems awesome. I just wish we had more examples like him working out.

Yeah but let's just say you are right about him being too small to have success as a center, then he would still be an excellent winger. I don't really think it's that big of a gamble on Rossi, because if he can't physically compete at the NHL level as a center, he is talented enough to be a winger. That's why I mentioned Konecny, he was drafted as a centerman, but has developed his game into a very good winger.

Also Brayden Point is holding his own as a short centerman, so it definitely can be done. When Rossi has the puck in the offensive zone, he reminds me of Crosby. He gets low to the ice, and his legs are so strong that he is hard to knock off the puck. His puck protection and edge-work remind me of Crosby. Sid is by no means a towering centerman, he's listed at 5'11, but I bet he's actually 5'10, and yet he's the best player in the last 20 years.

 

[Bench]

Put Osgood behind the current Wings team and see if he does the same thing. I for one doubt it.

As if Osgood is the only guy that would suffer on one of the worst teams in the last 20 years.

Ryan Suter is one of the best defenders of his generation, but never the best. Put him, even in his prime, on the current Wings and they still are missing the playoffs and picking top 5. Is that somehow a critique against Suter? I guess I'm trying to follow the logic here of saying good players on bad teams are somehow... not good?

Once again, this Osgood disrespect from Wings fans. You guys weird. Have some pride in your boy. He was better than people give him credit for because they thought goaltending the Wings was easy. As if the Avalanche, Stars, and Devils weren't stacked, too, with multiple HoF defenders throughout.

 

[Hammettf2b]

As if Osgood is the only guy that would suffer on one of the worst teams in the last 20 years.

Ryan Suter is one of the best defenders of his generation, but never the best. Put him, even in his prime, on the current Wings and they still are missing the playoffs and picking top 5. Is that somehow a critique against Suter? I guess I'm trying to follow the logic here of saying good players on bad teams are somehow... not good?

Once again, this Osgood disrespect from Wings fans. You guys weird. Have some pride in your boy. He was better than people give him credit for because they thought goaltending the Wings was easy. As if the Avalanche, Stars, and Devils weren't stacked, too, with multiple HoF defenders throughout.

No, what I'm saying is Osgood wouldn't make a difference with this team so the logic for me is to take the BPA, that's all.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

Everyone keeps saying that like it's a bad thing. Osgood had a fantastic career, despite never being the best of his generation.

As far as #1 overalls go, Fleury is nowhere near the list of busts. He helped beat an elite Wings team in 2009, no matter how much we like to complain about it. And to have long career where he's gone to multiple Cup finals on multiple teams is an achievement very few people have accomplished.

In conclusion...
Are you guys Wings fans? Because Osgood was pretty god damn dope and I feel like everyone is using him as an insult. Osgood has always had borderline Hall of Fame numbers and he had a simply incredible run in 2008 and 2009 - Conn Smythe quality.

So yeah, sign me up for a goalie who is like Osgood. We haven't had anyone even close to his best performances since... Well, Osgood. Our goaltending has been pretty damn mediocre to terrible for a long time and I think it's created some kind of weird Stockholm syndrome.

It's not about insulting Osgood. He was a very good goaltender. Being drafted in the third round he was a great find.

But my point is if Osgood was a top 4 pick, I don't think his career would be what you'd hope for with that choice. Certainly not a bust, also never elite, but solid. For years the Wings employed a "good enough" strategy in net, which Osgood was a big part of.

And mostly I was talking about Fleury. I don't think he's the best case for arguing why taking a goalie with a high pick is a good idea.

 

[Bench]

For years the Wings employed a "good enough" strategy in net, which Osgood was a big part of.

That was never the plan. Goalie is one of the spots Holland was constantly trying to upgrade. Dude kept trying to find goalies. Osgood was merely the safety net.

Vernon was brought in to get them over the hump. Then they paid big dollars for Cujo. Then Hasek. Very aggressive seeking top goaltending, not a "good enough" strategy.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

That was never the plan. Goalie is one of the spots Holland was constantly trying to upgrade. Dude kept trying to find goalies. Osgood was merely the safety net.

Vernon was brought in to get them over the hump. Then they paid big dollars for Cujo. Then Hasek. Very aggressive seeking top goaltending, not a "good enough" strategy.

I was thinking of more salary cap years, but regardless that doesn't exactly help what you've been saying about Osgood, which also has parallels with Fleury. How many times has Fleury not been the goaltender of choice in key situations for his team?

Using Fleury as an argument for taking a goalie with a top 4 pick is still not a good one.

 

[jkutswings]

That was never the plan. Goalie is one of the spots Holland was constantly trying to upgrade. Dude kept trying to find goalies. Osgood was merely the safety net.

Vernon was brought in to get them over the hump. Then they paid big dollars for Cujo. Then Hasek. Very aggressive seeking top goaltending, not a "good enough" strategy.

And for all those aggressive moves, the highest draft capital used was 30th overall as part of the Hasek trade.

If Yzerman manages to land a premier forward at #4, then packages #32 and other assets to get Askarov later in the top 10, I'd absolutely consider it (depending on what's going out the door, obviously). But to take him at 4, at the expense of getting a high-end skater in the first round, is a price I'm just not willing to pay.

 

[Bench]

Using Fleury as an argument for taking a goalie with a top 4 pick is still not a good one.

He was starter for 3 teams that went to the Cup Finals. Backstopped the Penguins to 9 playoff wins during the 2017 Cup. Finals with two different teams as a starter. Won once.

Half the skaters drafted in his top 10 aren't even in the league anymore. You could have done a lot worse than Fleury, is what I'm saying. People say goalies are risky, but ignore all the busts around him while he's still plugging away.

And yeah, if I thought Askarov was going to be as good as Fleury, why the hell would I call him the BPA. It's an argument in risk, not potential. I don't see these high end goalies as all that risky, honestly.

In one sentence: I'm a lot more worried about drafting Nikolay Zherdev at #4 than Fleury.

 

[Bench]

And for all those aggressive moves, the highest draft capital used was 30th overall as part of the Hasek trade.

Not the point that was being discussed there. The point was to contradict the idea that the Wings of old were designed to be a team of "good enough" goaltending. That's revisionist history. Holland chased elite goalies every opportunity he could. It was an arms race with the other big spenders who all had HoF goalies. The Wings just kept striking out and needing to default back to our boy Ozzie.

Who I now understand is criminally underrated and boy, that kind of sucks to see. No wonder other fans don't respect him when his own fans kinda throw him under the bus.

 

[Kronwalled55]

No, what I'm saying is Osgood wouldn't make a difference with this team so the logic for me is to take the BPA, that's all.

I don't think Lafreniere would either to be honest.

All three levels of positions are huge weaknesses for this team right now.

 

[Hammettf2b]

I don't think Lafreniere would either to be honest.

All three levels of positions are huge weaknesses for this team right now.

But can we agree that Lafreniere would be the best player available and be taken before Askarov? That's my argument. Not that whoever else we would draft other than Askorov would make this team better right away. My argument is take the BPA over Askarov.

 

[Bench]

But can we agree that Lafreniere would be the best player available and be taken before Askarov? That's my argument.

That's an argument you're having with yourself, though. Because if we had a top 3 pick, I wouldn't have a thing to say about Askarov other than, "Damn, kid is going to be amazing." And then I'd draft up my new Stutzle avatar and work on my Toaster Stutzle with Apple Seider puns.

 

[Hammettf2b]

That's an argument you're having with yourself, though. Because if we had a top 3 pick, I wouldn't have a thing to say about Askarov other than, "Damn, kid is going to be amazing."

My argument still applies for the 4th pick which was my original argument to begin with. Take the BPA.

 

[Bench]

My argument still applies for the 4th pick which was my original argument to begin with. Take the BPA.

Right but... Who doesn't want the best player available?

I'm starting to uncover why I'm so confused here.

 

[Hammettf2b]

Right but... Who doesn't want the best player available?

I'm starting to uncover why I'm so confused here.

The people that want Askarov at #4.

 

[Bench]

The people that want Askarov at #4.

Well, ok, thanks for the troll job. But I've been trying to actually have this conversation in good faith.

 

[Hammettf2b]

Well, ok, thanks for the troll job. But I've been trying to actually have this conversation in good faith.

um, so have I. Is that not what the thread is about? Imo, Askarov is not the BPA at #4.

 

[jkutswings]

Not the point that was being discussed there. The point was to contradict the idea that the Wings of old were designed to be a team of "good enough" goaltending. That's revisionist history. Holland chased elite goalies every opportunity he could. It was an arms race with the other big spenders who all had HoF goalies. The Wings just kept striking out and needing to default back to our boy Ozzie.

Fair, but don't forget those arms races largely took place without a salary cap. Which places greater urgency on, "must find core players in the draft" along with scrutinizing where every penny goes.

Maybe I'm just being picky. But I feel like a big name goalie is guaranteed to eventually be a big money goalie, and since I'm not expecting another draft pick higher than #4, I foresee said goaltender playing behind an underpowered roster that doesn't score a ton of goals and isn't a lot of fun to watch.

It feels like THIS draft class might be Detroit's last chance to hit on a (much needed) cornerstone on offense, and I just can't pass that up.

 

[Bench]

It feels like THIS draft class might be Detroit's last chance to hit on a (much needed) cornerstone on offense, and I just can't pass that up.

Which is completely reasonable. I've been very clear from the start of this process that if you firmly believe you can get a top line player at #4, then absolutely that's a great way to go. I think that's just good decision making.

But if you're like me and you're not completely in love with the remaining options, I'm saying it's a mistake to overlook the goalie. He's so good you only see one like him every decade or more. It's a rare event. I haven't advocated drafting a specific goalie yet in the decade I've been on this forum.

I think Stutzle is going to be a special player. He was my first choice for the Wings. With that off the board, I really like Raymond a lot but I'm less sure.

And so when I'm projecting about who I think has the highest likelihood of being an impact player, I keep circling back to the damn goalie.

Much of this discussion now is not even about Askarov, but an avenue for me to express why I think goaltending is undervalued by fans but is paradoxically still highly coveted by NHL GMs.

 

[jkutswings]

Much of this discussion now is not even about Askarov, but an avenue for me to express why I think goaltending is undervalued by fans but is paradoxically still highly coveted by NHL GMs.

No issue with any of your reply. As for this last part, I'd suggest it's not really a paradox at all:

General managers act based on what they and/or the owner want (a product that wins and that makes money). Fans act based on what they want (to be entertained). Sometimes those goals don't overlap perfectly.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

Which is completely reasonable. I've been very clear from the start of this process that if you firmly believe you can get a top line player at #4, then absolutely that's a great way to go. I think that's just good decision making.

But if you're like me and you're not completely in love with the remaining options, I'm saying it's a mistake to overlook the goalie. He's so good you only see one like him every decade or more. It's a rare event. I haven't advocated drafting a specific goalie yet in the decade I've been on this forum.

I think Stutzle is going to be a special player. He was my first choice for the Wings. With that off the board, I really like Raymond a lot but I'm less sure.

And so when I'm projecting about who I think has the highest likelihood of being an impact player, I keep circling back to the damn goalie.

Much of this discussion now is not even about Askarov, but an avenue for me to express why I think goaltending is undervalued by fans but is paradoxically still highly coveted by NHL GMs.

Got a meme/gif for one person being cornered and taking on all comers?

Because that's how it's starting to feel in this thread Bench.

 

[Bench]

Got a meme/gif for one person being cornered and taking on all comers?

Because that's how it's starting to feel in this thread Bench.

 

[Retire91]

I feel completely on the fence which is an unusual feeling. I can see the pros and the cons of this and just can't see on side clearly over the other. I just hope 6 years from now we can all look back and agree Yzerman got the BPA

 

[Ghost of Ethan Hunt]

Value wise is 4th = Cirelli? Not saying TBL would/should/could/will do this. I feel like Yzerman will pounce on a good trade by draft. Lots of cap casualties + the actual dumps.

 

[Bench]

I feel completely on the fence which is an unusual feeling. I can see the pros and the cons of this and just can't see on side clearly over the other. I just hope 6 years from now we can all look back and agree Yzerman got the BPA

I mean, I have no clue, other than Askarov looks unreal as a goalie. Right now he looks as good as Price did, which is exciting. But he's a kid. Who the hell knows what's up in 5 years. It's just fun to talk about and take our armchair guesses.

Five years ago I loved the Evgeny Svechnikov pick. Skilled, big, Russian winger? Sign me up. He looked like a lock to be a productive NHL player with his toolbox. In hindsight, for that draft I should have been advocating for a different Russian. The goalie, Ilya Samsonov, taken 3 picks later.