GDT: Draft Day

[WingedWheel1987]

I am actually ok with the Rasmussen pick.
Question: should he have his own thread since the rest of the picks do?

It's stickied at the top.

 

[PelagicJoe]

It's stickied at the top.

I rarely ever look at the stickies. Thanks for the tip.

 

[Pavels Dog]

My concern is that we shied away from small puck movers, kind of assuming we're all set there, but I don't think you can ever have too many puck movers (regardless of size). Some of these kids might not even make it.

I think a guy like Gustav Lindstrom might have more offense to him than people think. Allsvenskan is not an easy league to score in.

For reference, Hampus Lindholm had 4 points in 20 games his draft year. Erik Karlsson had 1 point in 7 games his d+1 year, OEL had 17 points in 39 games his draft year and 27 in 42 his d+1 year. And then we're talking about some guys that were drafted much, much higher. Lindstroms offensive numbers look pretty good at every other level, being a young kid playing in a men's league can really make the numbers misleading. A little bit of a Hronek scenario perhaps.

We have 10 d-men in the last two drafts, + Saarijarvi who looks promising from '15 and Hicketts as a UFA. Other than a blue-chip top 10 kind of D prospect, we are building a strong pipeline of D talent imo.

 

[Leronziia]

I think a guy like Gustav Lindstrom might have more offense to him than people think. Allsvenskan is not an easy league to score in.

For reference, Hampus Lindholm had 4 points in 20 games his draft year. Erik Karlsson had 1 point in 7 games his d+1 year, OEL had 17 points in 39 games his draft year and 27 in 42 his d+1 year. And then we're talking about some guys that were drafted much, much higher. Lindstroms offensive numbers look pretty good at every other level, being a young kid playing in a men's league can really make the numbers misleading. A little bit of a Hronek scenario perhaps.

We have 10 d-men in the last two drafts, + Saarijarvi who looks promising from '15 and Hicketts as a UFA. Other than a blue-chip top 10 kind of D prospect, we are building a strong pipeline of D talent imo.

It's highly unlikely that any one of these prospect anchors a top pairing at the NHL level, which is perfectly understandable given where they were drafted.

Hopefully with the addition of a blue-chip 1st pairing upside defenseman in the 2018 draft, things can begin falling into place on the defensive end.

Then spend the 2019, 2020 and 2021 1st rounders on 2 forwards (at least 1 centre) and another defenseman perhaps.

1C's are pretty much exclusively found in the top 5 these days, maaaaaaaaaaybe top 10. Strangely, 1D and 2D can be found in the 1st and 2nd rounds.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

I wonder if they went big character guys this year knowing

- the draft was overall weak and less likely to produce a number of skilled impact players outside the first dozen or so but what was there were the sorts of guys we toik (abdkekader types)

-We will be bad next year without a doubt in a draft that's said to be better and deeper therefore we can draft our skill creative guys

- that ideally the two groups (along with 2019 draft picks and mantha\Larkin all merge around the same time)

 

[HisNoodliness]

I wonder if they went big character guys this year knowing

- the draft was overall weak and less likely to produce a number of skilled impact players outside the first dozen or so but what was there were the sorts of guys we toik (abdkekader types)

-We will be bad next year without a doubt in a draft that's said to be better and deeper therefore we can draft our skill creative guys

- that ideally the two groups (along with 2019 draft picks and mantha\Larkin all merge around the same time)

Yeah I'd love if management would speak more frankly about something like this. If they came out and said: " I know we have a lot of holes in our team and we need to acquire some game changers with elite talent. Unfortunately we didn't think we could get that kind of player this year so we decided to take some high character guys that Will definitely contribute, and intend to address our needs for elite players next year and after." I'd be much more okay with this draft. Personally I think all of Vilardi, Necas and Liljegren have first line potential but if management disagreed and saw them as simply more risky complimentary pieces then I get taking Rasmussen.

 

[Leronziia]

2nd year in a row I am more enthused by the upside in our 2nd round pick.

Had a gut feel that Hronek would have a strong +1 year, feel the same now about Lindstrom.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Yeah I'd love if management would speak more frankly about something like this. If they came out and said: " I know we have a lot of holes in our team and we need to acquire some game changers with elite talent. Unfortunately we didn't think we could get that kind of player this year so we decided to take some high character guys that Will definitely contribute, and intend to address our needs for elite players next year and after." I'd be much more okay with this draft. Personally I think all of Vilardi, Necas and Liljegren have first line potential but if management disagreed and saw them as simply more risky complimentary pieces then I get taking Rasmussen.

Why would management speak more frankly on it?

Why is this something that people get so damn caught up on? Would the moves be "better" if the Wings threw this draft class under the bus and said "hey, this year sucked, what do you want us to do?"

You either give them the benefit of the doubt that there is logic behind their moves or you come out against the moves. Whatever the GM says means less than nothing to me. They routinely lie and posture in their quotes to the media.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

Why would management speak more frankly on it?

Why is this something that people get so damn caught up on? Would the moves be "better" if the Wings threw this draft class under the bus and said "hey, this year sucked, what do you want us to do?"

You either give them the benefit of the doubt that there is logic behind their moves or you come out against the moves. Whatever the GM says means less than nothing to me. They routinely lie and posture in their quotes to the media.

While i don't expect mgmt to come out say that, I think it's refreshing when mgmt any mgmt is more honest overall as opposed to trying to deceive fans/media

Not specific to this draft just in general and the more you choose to not be honest the more cynical people become of your motives/intentions

And can't just be lip service either, action has to follow

 

[Frk It]

Yeah I'd love if management would speak more frankly about something like this. If they came out and said: " I know we have a lot of holes in our team and we need to acquire some game changers with elite talent. Unfortunately we didn't think we could get that kind of player this year so we decided to take some high character guys that Will definitely contribute, and intend to address our needs for elite players next year and after." I'd be much more okay with this draft. Personally I think all of Vilardi, Necas and Liljegren have first line potential but if management disagreed and saw them as simply more risky complimentary pieces then I get taking Rasmussen.

Regardless of the character/size quotes or whatever, they don't take Michael Rasmussen at #9 if they don't think he has significant potential. So therefore, they aren't going to make a quote like that.

The only other reason I can think of, and actually Flashy suggested this in another thread, was maybe they were opting for a guy who might make a more immediate impact to try and get back in the playoffs... now THAT would be quite disappointing for all of us if it was in fact true. If that was prioritized over potential.

The "we are going to get elite players in other drafts" retort going on seems like more of a HF-created baked in excuse for people to protect this pick in case it fails, IMO. Holland thinks he is going to be a playoff team so not sure how that would lend itself towards getting elite players in other drafts.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

Regardless of the character/size quotes or whatever, they don't take Michael Rasmussen at #9 if they don't think he has significant potential. So therefore, they aren't going to make a quote like that.

The only other reason I can think of, and actually Flashy suggested this in another thread, was maybe they were opting for a guy who might make a more immediate impact to try and get back in the playoffs... now THAT would be quite disappointing for all of us if it was in fact true. If that was prioritized over potential.

The "we are going to get elite players in other drafts" retort going on seems like more of a HF-created baked in excuse for people to protect this pick in case it fails, IMO. Holland thinks he is going to be a playoff team so not sure how that would lend itself towards getting elite players in other drafts.

I think we will know for sure by Saturday what Holland thinks of this team

No changes before/at expansion draft

No changes before/at entry draft

If no changes in week before free agency

If no changes by 3pm July 1st then you will know he disent didn't believe in this roster as a playoff team because it wasn't this year and wasn't even close so no big changes indicates he is prepared to miss again

 

[Pavels Dog]

Why would management speak more frankly on it?

Why is this something that people get so damn caught up on? Would the moves be "better" if the Wings threw this draft class under the bus and said "hey, this year sucked, what do you want us to do?"

You either give them the benefit of the doubt that there is logic behind their moves or you come out against the moves. Whatever the GM says means less than nothing to me. They routinely lie and posture in their quotes to the media.

Agreed. Imagine that happy feeling of being drafted, then the GM comes out and says "we're drafting the really good players NEXT year!".

Personally I doubt they took Rasmussen because they think he's "safe". They took a really risky pick last year over the much safer Chychrun. I see them drafting players that have that big, big upside, but they're trying to be smart about it and find those guys that for whatever reason have been overlooked a little bit. That may not be popular since they're drafting a lot of guys that make fans go "huh?", but I see it as a deliberate strategy. Larkin had a lot more offense in him than he was able to show playing behind Eichel. Hronek's an offensive PMD who was playing limited minutes in a men's league. Rasmussen may have been passed by a little because of injury and/or concerns about his ES production. Time will tell but I don't think they're crazy, I think they know what they're doing. If it works out or not is another question.

 

[Frk It]

Agreed. Imagine that happy feeling of being drafted, then the GM comes out and says "we're drafting the really good players NEXT year!".

Personally I doubt they took Rasmussen because they think he's "safe". They took a really risky pick last year over the much safer Chychrun. I see them drafting players that have that big, big upside, but they're trying to be smart about it and find those guys that for whatever reason have been overlooked a little bit. That may not be popular since they're drafting a lot of guys that make fans go "huh?", but I see it as a deliberate strategy. Larkin had a lot more offense in him than he was able to show playing behind Eichel. Hronek's an offensive PMD who was playing limited minutes in a men's league. Rasmussen may have been passed by a little because of injury and/or concerns about his ES production. Time will tell but I don't think they're crazy, I think they know what they're doing. If it works out or not is another question.

"Off the board" isn't necessarily a bad thing. But as far as the particular off the board picks we made this year being "big, big upside" guys... Not sure about that. Maybe Lindstrom. We will see.

 

[Tatar Shots]

So I finally found a bit of free time to put in my 2 cents on the draft. As some might recall, I made several comments about how I hoped the team would go back to prioritizing skill over size and grittiness/pest, and well that didn't happen.

Rasmussen: I was really high on Vilardi, had him 3rd in this draft, so it was tough to see the team pass on him for Rasmussen. He has great size and will battle in front of the net all day long, but he will never be mistaken for the playmaker we desperately needed down the middle. Having said that, he is the type of player we have needed for a guy like Nyquist to operate at his best. Rasmussen will create space for his wingers and be a threat to bang in rebounds in front of the net. His hands are pretty solid in tight for a big man which is nice to see. He needs to take an extra step in his skating ability, but its nice to hear he is a great work ethic kid.

Lindstrom/Kotkansalo: While there were some other guys I would have preferred, I think some around here are being a little to pessimistic about there offensive skill set. Both guys have nice size and are solid in their own end and can move the puck well. The Allsvenkan league is hard to put up points in, and Lindstrom's 9 points in 48 games isn't bad for a Dman. In the U20 league this year Lindstrom put up 6 goals and 10 points in 6 games, while also putting up 7 points in 4 games for the National U19 team. Those are pretty good numbers for a Dman. Add in the fact that it is a Hakan pick and his claim that several scouts told him they were targeting Lindstrom latter on in the 2nd and I don't see how you can get to mad at this pick. Kotkansalo's numbers in the USHL are pretty lackluster, but you have to account for the fact his team was pretty awful, losing nearly twice as many games as they won. He had a better showing offensively for the U20 National team, putting up 6 points in 13 games. He is going to BU next year so it will be interesting to keep tabs on him.

Zablocki/Gallant: Taking both of these guys is what I really just don't understand. How many in your face/pest guys does this team really need to target? There was some boom/bust talent still available and it doesn't make any sense to me not to target a single one of them with 6 top 100 picks. Both of these guys will be bottom 6 grinders if they make it. Joining the list of other top 90 picks recently of Bertuzzi, Turgeon, and Smith.

Petruzzelli: Team needed a goalie, team got one of the best ones available in the draft who has immense tools to work with. Not sure how anyone could not like this pick.

I'll stop there, but one last comment i'll add is that I think the success of this draft hinges on the development of Lindstrom and Kotkansalo