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

[Frk It]

The draft is a hard one, to truly evaluate a draft you almost have to do it 3 years later.

Yeah, to claypool’s point, some more patience would do everyone some good.

Unfortunately this website is notorious for being knee jerk, and using small sample sizes. I think someone literally made a re-draft thread like 3 months after the 2017 Draft on the prospect board? Bananas.

Rasmussen isn’t a bad prospect, and he’s not having a bad +1 year. Also sometimes bigger guys break out in their +2 year, like we are seeing with Kieffer Bellows. But we are in uncharted territory a bit, not really getting the benefit of the doubt with our picks like we did when I joined this board. I was just saying I don’t think the loss of faith in scouting is unwarranted, even if unfortunately people take it too far.

Ras is a safe bet to give you the expected return for a typical #9 pick, and we are good at not outright whiffing on our picks. Just not sure he’s a good bet to vastly outproduce that draft position. Only pick we have really done that with lately is Larkin, and he had the most impressive +1 season (and 1 season improvement) since being drafted I can remember in forever.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Why is always the same people on the side of management?

I'm pretty agnostic on the trade that Holland made with the Datsyuk deal.
Thought it was a good deal, but i thought Cholo was not a good pick and Hronek was.

I'm also not sold that Chychrun is a god of sort, either -- even if he has, by far, the best tool box of Hronek, Cholo and himself.

But whatever. It's so weird that the same people who defend the company line on every damn issue are once again doing it here.
Or maybe it's not.

Maybe this just who humans organize themselves - into two camps.

And people "organize into two camps" because someone like you comes out with a strong opinion about something and if a person doesn't choose your side, then they're against you. And not only that, the points used in the argument are generally cherry-picked, knowingly misleading, or something like that.

The argument to keep Mrazek and trade Howard is based on Mrazek peaking a little bit and getting his stats on Howard's level and it ignores two years of below average play. The argument to not even countenance the trade offer of AA for Faulk is that Faulk has been terrible for 54 games and ignoring that he was a borderline top pairing guy for three years. The argument to "overpay" AA's comparables when it came to his RFA contract is based on him putting up fantastic rate stats in minutes against 3rd line competition.

And also, most fans aren't "on the side of management". They're just not looking to burn management in effigy when they make a move we don't like. They aren't looking to lambaste management for waiving AHL fodder guys like Pulkkinen, Frk, Ferraro, etc. They aren't even looking to eviscerate management for dealing guys who end up being 30 point players in "better" situations like Jarnkrok and Janmark. Most of the moves that Holland and Co are just endlessly lampooned for are complete nothing burgers in the trajectory of the team. This team would not be a materially better hockey team if they had held onto Calle Jarnkrok, Teemu Pulkkinen, Mattias Janmark, Mattias Backman, and Landon Ferraro.

 

[Pavels Dog]

With top draft picks you can know within a couple years. How long did it take for us to realize with Larkin? Mantha? We knew by year 2 about what we had.

Yeah a "couple of years". Not days. Not months. Years.

And while you can see by maybe year 2 sort of what direction things are going, the total busts start becoming clear etc., things aren't set in stone by a long shot before 5-10 years. Look at the 2011 draft. Coutourier is just breaking out offensively. Mikael Granlund, the #9 pick in 2010 has taken a big step in the last year or two.
Larkin and Mantha aren't done developing by a long shot either. Knowing we have solid picks is different from knowing exactly what they are.

A bottom 5 team with no highly ranked prospects... yeah, people have probably lost some faith in the drafting... what do you expect?

I do agree people need to educate themselves more, but that works both ways. Some people will support any player Detroit drafts, just as long as they are DRW property, while knowing that same basic bare minimum info.

And what's the point in not supporting the people the Wings draft? There's nothing to gain by hoping they fail. Personally I don't pay much attention to prospects before they're drafted, I don't have the time and I don't see the use. So some 17 year old has nice looking stats? Great. How do you even begin to compare it with another 17 year old playing halfway across the globe, with a completely different toolset and circumstances in order to reach a level of "info" where I can say I have any idea which of them will turn out better? This is the job of full-time professionals and even they get it wrong A LOT. So now I'm supposed to dislike a Red Wings pick because internet armchair scouts think that other kid was a better bet?

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

Yeah, to claypool’s point, some more patience would do everyone some good.

Unfortunately this website is notorious for being knee jerk, and using small sample sizes. I think someone literally made a re-draft thread like 3 months after the 2017 Draft on the prospect board? Bananas.

Rasmussen isn’t a bad prospect, and he’s not having a bad +1 year. Also sometimes bigger guys break out in their +2 year, like we are seeing with Kieffer Bellows. But we are in uncharted territory a bit, not really getting the benefit of the doubt with our picks like we did when I joined this board. I was just saying I don’t think the loss of faith in scouting is unwarranted, even if unfortunately people take it too far.

Ras is a safe bet to give you the expected return for a typical #9 pick, and we are good at not outright whiffing on our picks. Just not sure he’s a good bet to vastly outproduce that draft position. Only pick we have really done that with lately is Larkin, and he had the most impressive +1 season (and 1 season improvement) since being drafted I can remember in forever.

Hronek has some very impressive forward momentum for a second round pick. I think a part of this is the caution over some of went wrong with the last generation. They weren't bad players, a lot of them were NHL guys, but they just weren't good enough to fill some massive shoes.

I like our top 4 prospects. Guys like Pronman have been high on Vili Saarijarvi, I am not quite as high on him to be honest. We should get a couple more drafts of high-end guys here this year and next. We need one of the two goalies to hit but both have decent qualities to them. I don't think all is lost. We just have to hit in 2018 and 2019. We also need one more low round pick to hit along with Hronek in my opinion and you have an intriguing core. Will it be hard to do? Sure, but I don't need to be negative on it until I need to be negative on it. That is really how I treat our prospects. Evaluate their talents see where they might fit and try to be positive. Sometime it backfires, sometimes they don't keep progressing. But I am not sure expecting the worst is the way to go, I find that kind of miserable and try to stay away from it. More power to those that can, I just generally have a rosier outlook on our prospects and follow them closely which helps that.

I like you but probably not as in depth like to evaluate the draft. I really liked Necas but that doesn't mean Rasmussen is a bad pick. He has things that are fairly rare, if he can put it together he is a really tough guy to defend and play against. Maybe he only becomes Martin Hanzal though... We aren't sure right now. I think what is a must for us to turn this around quickly is to hit on our pick in 2018 and 2019. That must happen or this rebuild becomes lengthy in my opinion.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Yeah a "couple of years". Not days. Not months. Years.

And while you can see by maybe year 2 sort of what direction things are going, the total busts start becoming clear etc., things aren't set in stone by a long shot before 5-10 years. Look at the 2011 draft. Coutourier is just breaking out offensively. Mikael Granlund, the #9 pick in 2010 has taken a big step in the last year or two.
Larkin and Mantha aren't done developing by a long shot either. Knowing we have solid picks is different from knowing exactly what they are.


And what's the point in not supporting the people the Wings draft? There's nothing to gain by hoping they fail. Personally I don't pay much attention to prospects before they're drafted, I don't have the time and I don't see the use. So some 17 year old has nice looking stats? Great. How do you even begin to compare it with another 17 year old playing halfway across the globe, with a completely different toolset and circumstances in order to reach a level of "info" where I can say I have any idea which of them will turn out better? This is the job of full-time professionals and even they get it wrong A LOT. So now I'm supposed to dislike a Red Wings pick because internet armchair scouts think that other kid was a better bet?

Frk It is saying not to blindly support. Like say that Ouellet could easily be a top 4 D or that Joe Hicketts is a bonafide top 4 NHL D because he can pass the puck a little bit. Or complain to the point of exhaustion about the "misue" of Ryan Sproul or Alexei Marchenko or whoever and say that they would have been better if, damn it, they just got a shot.

Have you heard one iota of a word about Ryan Sproul since he was traded? Me neither.
Hasn't Marchenko been waived again?

He's saying that guys who have proven to be mediocre continue to be given the benefit of the doubt or a guy like Rasmussen will get some latitude just because he has a Winged Wheel on his draft day sweater.

But I do agree that overly scouting the junior level as a fan is a fools game. I always go back in my mind to Kirk Maltby putting up 50 goals in a junior season during his draft time. He was a complete black hole offensively in Detroit but ended up a nice hockey player because he was a pest. Stats against other kids don't do much for me. A guy like Vilardi putting up 2 PPG+ just tells me he's WAY WAY too ****ing talented for that league. It doesn't give me any indication that he'll transfer it to the NHL.

 

[TheMule93]

And what's the point in not supporting the people the Wings draft? There's nothing to gain by hoping they fail.

I can guarantee you that nobody here is rooting for our draft picks to fail - we are all rooting for them to be the very best that they can be.

Personally I don't pay much attention to prospects before they're drafted, I don't have the time and I don't see the use. So some 17 year old has nice looking stats? Great. How do you even begin to compare it with another 17 year old playing halfway across the globe, with a completely different toolset and circumstances in order to reach a level of "info" where I can say I have any idea which of them will turn out better? This is the job of full-time professionals and even they get it wrong A LOT.

In a greater sense, nothing we post about anything hockey-related matters here. Why bother posting at all? Should we just leave? ...probably not, we're fans and want stuff to talk about regardless of whether or not we are "qualified" to discuss the topic.

So now I'm supposed to dislike a Red Wings pick because internet armchair scouts think that other kid was a better bet?

Nobody is telling you how to feel. People are sharing their opinions.​

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

Frk It is saying not to blindly support. Like say that Ouellet could easily be a top 4 D or that Joe Hicketts is a bonafide top 4 NHL D because he can pass the puck a little bit. Or complain to the point of exhaustion about the "misue" of Ryan Sproul or Alexei Marchenko or whoever and say that they would have been better if, damn it, they just got a shot.

Have you heard one iota of a word about Ryan Sproul since he was traded? Me neither.
Hasn't Marchenko been waived again?

He's saying that guys who have proven to be mediocre continue to be given the benefit of the doubt or a guy like Rasmussen will get some latitude just because he has a Winged Wheel on his draft day sweater.

But I do agree that overly scouting the junior level as a fan is a fools game. I always go back in my mind to Kirk Maltby putting up 50 goals in a junior season during his draft time. He was a complete black hole offensively in Detroit but ended up a nice hockey player because he was a pest. Stats against other kids don't do much for me. A guy like Vilardi putting up 2 PPG+ just tells me he's WAY WAY too ****ing talented for that league. It doesn't give me any indication that he'll transfer it to the NHL.

I have little doubt that Xavier Ouellet is a top 4 D-man in the NHL with skating gains. Unfortunately they never came. It isn't that our D picks haven't had significant talent or upside for the last decade. They just didn't pan out unfortunately, but I am not embarrassed to have believed in several of them. I saw a ton of Vlasic in Ouellet, he just didn't make the necessary skating gains to take advantage of his other hockey gifts.

 

[Frk It]

And what's the point in not supporting the people the Wings draft? There's nothing to gain by hoping they fail. Personally I don't pay much attention to prospects before they're drafted, I don't have the time and I don't see the use. So some 17 year old has nice looking stats? Great. How do you even begin to compare it with another 17 year old playing halfway across the globe, with a completely different toolset and circumstances in order to reach a level of "info" where I can say I have any idea which of them will turn out better? This is the job of full-time professionals and even they get it wrong A LOT. So now I'm supposed to dislike a Red Wings pick because internet armchair scouts think that other kid was a better bet?

Those are some fair points. I wasn’t saying you (or anyone) should not support who the Wings draft. I do see that happening and that is unfortunate. People should support whoever the Wings pick, I think that was more of the atttude when I first joined. Unfortunately we are at a low point here, and even the guys who do get paid to evaluate prospects don’t think that much of our guys. But they’ve liked our guys and been wrong, too.

A lot of people on here have opinions on prospects before they even belong to NHL teams, and then are consistent with them after the draft happens. So even though they are amateur, or armchair scouts or whatever, they have opinions before the draft even happens. That’s actually largely why this website was created, FYI. That’s why I like that “who would you have drafted thread” we do, so folks can have some accountability with that, and then also realize just how damn hard it is to evaluate 17 year old kids like you said. For every 1 you get right, you’ll get like 3 wrong (at least) . It’s also OK to be wrong, even the pros get it wrong. Own it and learn from it.

So if you don’t have any pre-draft opinions and want to defend whoever your team picks, you’re probably going to struggle with these folks. I’m personally optimistic that unlike the last 2 years, most people are going to like who we take this year (those with opinions beforehand and not), and then also as we draft higher I think it’s easier for fans to like those picks as well. So I do think it will get better here soon.

 

[Redder Winger]

And what's the point in not supporting the people the Wings draft?

Define support.
Rasmussen and Cholo are Red Wings property.
I want them to be as good as they can be.
Is that support?

But can I also have the ability use my head and assess the information I have? If that leads me to disagree with those picks, I guess it's not support.

 

[Dotter]

If what I am reading about how the #9 pick went down last year is correct, how they seemed very high on Necas and there were reports that they may even have taken him to lunch? It seemed like a sure lock they were taking Necas, right? Maybe they had no expectations of RAS even being on the board when they picked. And perhaps when they saw Rasmuessen on the board, they did backflips and immediately knew who they were picking.

I knew very little of Necas or Vilardi before draft day. But after draft how many on this board complained Kenny Holland didn't pick 'their' guy, I took notice of the other two. I watched Vilardi and thought "how unimpressive". He was basically a non-factor. I couldn't see anything watching him play live what the hype was all about. During that same span, I watch RAS take over games and single-handedly put on a show on a more consistent basis.

I find the Necas/Vilardi vs RAS discussions interesting because I see nothing in their respective game that overwhelms me enough to say Detroit made the wrong decision. I can't say bad things about Necas and Vilardi, but Vilardi's skating is very subpar. And we've learned our lesson on drafting skilled players hoping they'd advance in the skating department, then never do.... and bust.

If there was a re-draft today I would take RAS again over Necas and Vilardi without any hesitation. I think he's going to have the best and most impactful NHL career out of the other two.

 

[Frolov 6'3]

I watched Vilardi and thought "how unimpressive". He was basically a non-factor. I couldn't see anything watching him play live what the hype was all about.

No offense but than I wonder what you have been watching.

I do agree with Zetterberg era, many players put up a lot of points in juniors but never translated it into the NHL.

Personally I really get excited when they do it in the AHL. I was a big fan of Austin Wagner but he is really struggling right now. The gap between Junior hockey and professional hockey is big.

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

And what's the point in not supporting the people the Wings draft? There's nothing to gain by hoping they fail. Personally I don't pay much attention to prospects before they're drafted, I don't have the time and I don't see the use. So some 17 year old has nice looking stats? Great. How do you even begin to compare it with another 17 year old playing halfway across the globe, with a completely different toolset and circumstances in order to reach a level of "info" where I can say I have any idea which of them will turn out better? This is the job of full-time professionals and even they get it wrong A LOT. So now I'm supposed to dislike a Red Wings pick because internet armchair scouts think that other kid was a better bet?

I'm tired of seeing people fail upward in this organization. They've been below average for years now, and yet they still act like they deserve the benefit of a doubt. They act like they're bleeding edge professionals. They're not. They haven't earned it. Other teams have outdrafted the Wings for years, even in later rounds. True, lots of teams passed on some of those guys, but the Wings are in the unique position of not getting lucky on that type of player in recent memory. After a decade, that starts to tell the tale.

And inevitably somebody is going to turn around and say "But what about Larkin? What about Mantha?" The sad thing is, Larkin and Mantha aren't the home runs we think they are. They're good, but not great. Larkin is a good second line center. Mantha is ridiculously inconsistent. That's how low our standards have become. We're so desperate to believe the Wings are doing well that we'll downgrade the rest of the league in our minds to keep pace.

And we still do that. We're doing it now.

 

[Flowah]

Yeah a "couple of years". Not days. Not months. Years.

And while you can see by maybe year 2 sort of what direction things are going, the total busts start becoming clear etc., things aren't set in stone by a long shot before 5-10 years. Look at the 2011 draft. Coutourier is just breaking out offensively. Mikael Granlund, the #9 pick in 2010 has taken a big step in the last year or two.
Larkin and Mantha aren't done developing by a long shot either. Knowing we have solid picks is different from knowing exactly what they are.

You can always find exceptions, but you and I both know that the vast majority of top picks are pretty predictable in how they turn out within a couple years.

Hell, for top top picks, you can know before they're even drafted. No one needed to see Matthews or Eichel in an NHL game first to know they'd be stars.

 

[Dotter]

I'm tired of seeing people fail upward in this organization. They've been below average for years now, and yet they still act like they deserve the benefit of a doubt. They act like they're bleeding edge professionals. They're not. They haven't earned it. Other teams have outdrafted the Wings for years, even in later rounds. True, lots of teams passed on some of those guys, but the Wings are in the unique position of not getting lucky on that type of player in recent memory. After a decade, that starts to tell the tale.

And inevitably somebody is going to turn around and say "But what about Larkin? What about Mantha?" The sad thing is, Larkin and Mantha aren't the home runs we think they are. They're good, but not great. Larkin is a good second line center. Mantha is ridiculously inconsistent. That's how low our standards have become. We're so desperate to believe the Wings are doing well that we'll downgrade the rest of the league in our minds to keep pace.

Huh? Not home runs? They are proving to be better players than their draft position is expected. Isn't that the goal? To hopefully draft players that become better players than where they were drafted? Anthony Mantha is doing pretty damn good for being drafted 20th overall. You are disappointed with that? Your first mistake is believing it's common to draft Datsyuk's in the 6th round still to this day.

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

Huh? Not home runs? They are proving to be better players than their draft position is expected. Isn't that the goal? To hopefully draft players that become better players than where they were drafted? Anthony Mantha is doing pretty damn good for being drafted 20th overall. You are disappointed with that? Your first mistake is believing it's common to draft Datsyuk's in the 6th round still to this day.

I expect the Wings to draft as many late round gems as other teams do. They haven't.

Or even the 2nd round! I'm setting my standards pretty low here. I wanted them to get a core player outside of the first round this decade, which is something tons of teams have managed to do.

 

[newfy]

I expect the Wings to draft as many late round gems as other teams do. They haven't.

Or even the 2nd round! I'm setting my standards pretty low here. I wanted them to get a core player outside of the first round this decade, which is something tons of teams have managed to do.

The previous scouting department did that quite a bit. The current one hasnt really been around long enough to complain that much about it yet. Guys like Larkin, Mantha, Bertuzzi all look like really good picks but ya there isnt any fourth round first line centers in there. But thats not something you do in 3 drafts either

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

The previous scouting department did that quite a bit. The current one hasnt really been around long enough to complain that much about it yet. Guys like Larkin, Mantha, Bertuzzi all look like really good picks but ya there isnt any fourth round first line centers in there. But thats not something you do in 3 drafts either

The last decade. Nothing. How much rope do they get?

 

[Dotter]

I expect the Wings to draft as many late round gems as other teams do. They haven't.

Or even the 2nd round! I'm setting my standards pretty low here. I wanted them to get a core player outside of the first round this decade, which is something tons of teams have managed to do.

Who are these "tons" of teams that draft their core from 2nd round and later picks?

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

Who are these "tons" of teams that draft their core from 2nd round and later picks?

The criterion is simple: in the last 10 years, draft 1 core player from a round other than the 1st. Plenty of teams meet that standard. Detroit does not.

 

[Dotter]

The criterion is simple: in the last 10 years, draft 1 core player from a round other than the 1st. Plenty of teams meet that standard. Detroit does not.

But in your criterion, we are not allowed to use Larkin or Mantha? Is that correct?

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

But in your criterion, we are not allowed to use Larkin or Mantha? Is that correct?

I'm just going to quote myself.

The criterion is simple: in the last 10 years, draft 1 core player from a round other than the 1st. Plenty of teams meet that standard. Detroit does not.

 

[Dotter]

I'm just going to quote myself.

Right so we can't use 1st rounders, we can't use late picks the past 3 years as they are still developing, thus we can't use what the current scouts have done... so by using your criterion, you want to make sure nobody can prove your cute little princess point wrong? ... but it's 10 years, you say.... so it should be easy.

Since Jim Nill went to Dallas in 2013, we are not allowed to use Jimmy Howard or Johan Franzen, correct? Because that doesn't fit in your criterion even tho those guys are within 10 years since Jim Nill's last year here, but can't use new scouting staff since their picks are still developing currently. Interesting how you completely boxed this one down so you can prove some rosey vanilla point.

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

Right so we can't use 1st rounders, we can't use late picks the past 3 years as they are still developing, thus we can't use what the current scouts have done... so by using your criterion, you want to make sure nobody can prove your cute little princess point wrong? ... but it's 10 years, you say.... so it should be easy.

Since Jim Nill went to Dallas in 2013, we are not allowed to use Jimmy Howard or Johan Franzen, correct? Because that doesn't fit in your criterion even tho those guys are within 10 years since Jim Nill's last year here, but can't use new scouting staff since their picks are still developing currently. Interesting how you completely boxed this one down so you can prove some rosey vanilla point.

Franzen was drafted in 2004. Howard was drafted in 2003.

I'm talking about 2007-2017.

Really, this discussion is making my point for me; in order to find a player who could meet my description, you have to go back to 2004.

 

[Claypool]

The criterion is simple: in the last 10 years, draft 1 core player from a round other than the 1st. Plenty of teams meet that standard. Detroit does not.

What's a "core player"?

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

What's a "core player"?

That's up to you, but I think it's a player you wouldn't trade at the deadline because you're trying to build around them. You'd sell off the other pieces, but not that guy.

Larkin is a core player. Tatar and Nyquist are not.

Jamie Benn is a core player. PK Subban is a core player. And so on.