GDT: MON @ DET | 7:30pm EST | 4/5/2018

[Ezekial]

And he seemed to be doing very well at center. I've found it a bit odd that Tri-City has shifted him over for the playoffs, but if they win with it, they win with it. At the very least, it his production since being moved bodes well for next year when he's likely lining up on the wing for Detroit.

Him and Geekie have been geeked up together.

 

[Ezekial]

Edit: sorry I misconstrued your first line.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Reading comprehension is not one your strong points I take it? See my post right above yours that you just made there big guy saying we need to take D with our hi picks for the next couple of years. We have good young kids up front we have no back end at all. Good talk bud.

That post has nothing to do with what you quoted. Like, at all.

I'm beginning to think you just don't read what you post, in the slightest.

You rattled off seven years of draft picks and said the following two things

Based on 17 Middlestat- Rass, 16 Nylander Sergachev, 15 Werenski Meier, 14 Nylander Ehlers, 13 Ristolain Horvath, 12 Trouba Pouliot, 11 Hamilton Coutarier those are 8 and 9 picks going back to 11 I'm sorry I don't see the pick as the huge shot in the ass the team needs. Will it help yes is it gonna change things? Nope not for a bit Add anyone of those players to our roster no change at all.


"And thank you for both proving my point for me. We have a number 9 pick who is not on the team. And yes there are some good players I would ask again if adding just one because that is all we have for picks that high would change the team at all? I say no you add a young top pair D and what does it really do in the long run? It may get us back to a bubble team and more lower picks, more middle aged filler contracts and we float along in this perpetual state of not good enough and not bad enough to improve.

Essentially, you are saying we add one guy on the level of Trouba, it doesn't change our fortunes. In other words, a #9 pick isn't what we need, regardless of the caliber of player, because we need a guy who we can only get top 3.

And if we add a top pair young D it doesn't improve us in the long run, it doesn't materially improve us. It'll get us back to a bubble team, instead of sucking so we can draft another young top pairing D who... according to you will make us a bubble team and not materially affect us. I can't wrap my head around this logic.

Right but Z E and Kroner are not going any where but getting older and slower. When Z bottoms we are gonna be hurting. Larks is a good young player but not on Z's level yet. And the back end well it's a huge mess. We need the best young D we can get in the drat I have thought and thought about it but the next couple of years our highest pick should be used on the best D at that available pick. We have some good young players up front lets fill the back end out first.

You quite literally in one sentence say "what does adding a young top pair D do for us in the long run" and one paragraph later say "Our highest pick should be used on the best D available." Which would be adding a young top pair D.

I'm done with this.

 

[Goalie guy]

That post has nothing to do with what you quoted. Like, at all.

I'm beginning to think you just don't read what you post, in the slightest.

You rattled off seven years of draft picks and said the following two things

Based on 17 Middlestat- Rass, 16 Nylander Sergachev, 15 Werenski Meier, 14 Nylander Ehlers, 13 Ristolain Horvath, 12 Trouba Pouliot, 11 Hamilton Coutarier those are 8 and 9 picks going back to 11 I'm sorry I don't see the pick as the huge shot in the ass the team needs. Will it help yes is it gonna change things? Nope not for a bit Add anyone of those players to our roster no change at all.


"And thank you for both proving my point for me. We have a number 9 pick who is not on the team. And yes there are some good players I would ask again if adding just one because that is all we have for picks that high would change the team at all? I say no you add a young top pair D and what does it really do in the long run? It may get us back to a bubble team and more lower picks, more middle aged filler contracts and we float along in this perpetual state of not good enough and not bad enough to improve.

Essentially, you are saying we add one guy on the level of Trouba, it doesn't change our fortunes. In other words, a #9 pick isn't what we need, regardless of the caliber of player, because we need a guy who we can only get top 3.

And if we add a top pair young D it doesn't improve us in the long run, it doesn't materially improve us. It'll get us back to a bubble team, instead of sucking so we can draft another young top pairing D who... according to you will make us a bubble team and not materially affect us. I can't wrap my head around this logic.

Right but Z E and Kroner are not going any where but getting older and slower. When Z bottoms we are gonna be hurting. Larks is a good young player but not on Z's level yet. And the back end well it's a huge mess. We need the best young D we can get in the drat I have thought and thought about it but the next couple of years our highest pick should be used on the best D at that available pick. We have some good young players up front lets fill the back end out first.

You quite literally in one sentence say "what does adding a young top pair D do for us in the long run" and one paragraph later say "Our highest pick should be used on the best D available." Which would be adding a young top pair D.

I'm done with this.

Then why do you keep trying so hard ? Yes I say adding a top paring d is not going to fix our problems not at all. Yes we have to add D and good d for 3 or 4 years before we will see any difference on this team. Again I don't see how that i hard to under stand? One good D man is not turning this team around sorry if you don't like that but that is the cold hard truth. We are not in for a fast turn around we are not a Truba away from being a good team. But again this is not the first or the last time you will be rude to someone who disagrees you.

 

[jkutswings]

Nobody thinks that just one player - even Dahlin - is fixing this roster. But that doesn't mean adding a good defenseman wouldn't be a measurable step in the right direction.

It'll be hitting on several draft picks that ultimately turns things around. But they're not all going to be McDavids and Karlssons, and yet they can still be good, helpful guys to add.

 

[Goalie guy]

Nobody thinks that just one player - even Dahlin - is fixing this roster. But that doesn't mean adding a good defenseman wouldn't be a measurable step in the right direction.

It'll be hitting on several draft picks that ultimately turns things around. But they're not all going to be McDavids and Karlssons, and yet they can still be good, helpful guys to add.

Oh there are a lot of people that think this is only going to be a year or 2 slump. My question was not even to that guy it was a guy saying he was so excited for our draft pick and I asked why he was so excited it's not like we have a top 3 pick that was all.

 

[jkutswings]

Oh there are a lot of people that think this is only going to be a year or 2 slump. My question was not even to that guy it was a guy saying he was so excited for our draft pick and I asked why he was so excited it's not like we have a top 3 pick that was all.

I could see that logic last year, in a weaker draft class (although every decent player helps, in a dumpster fire). But I think just about anybody in this year's top ten will be a good pick to make. Agree to disagree, I guess.

 

[Goalie guy]

I could see that logic last year, in a weaker draft class (although every decent player helps, in a dumpster fire). But I think just about anybody in this year's top ten will be a good pick to make. Agree to disagree, I guess.

No I agree I'm just not of the thought that we are getting a fix for all our problems. Yes every good player helps I'm just not all excited about it we are still going to be a bad team I don't see Ras being on the team at the start next year or any of the young D players. I hope they can come in and make the team and make a difference, I don't trust Kenny and his puppet to do that though.

 

[Red Stanley]

Oh there are a lot of people that think this is only going to be a year or 2 slump. My question was not even to that guy it was a guy saying he was so excited for our draft pick and I asked why he was so excited it's not like we have a top 3 pick that was all.

It's exciting because past #1, there are a few guys rotating in and out of the top 3 depending on whom you ask and the top ten overall are very interchangeable because they're all very good. That's why finishing no higher than 6th worst was so important. Anyway, from what I can tell for this particular draft the #2, 3, and 4 picks most often talked about are all forwards. You said it yourself you'd rather we get a defenseman so why are you stuck on this top 3 pick idea?

 

[Goalie guy]

It's exciting because past #1, there are a few guys rotating in and out of the top 3 depending on whom you ask and the top ten overall are very interchangeable because they're all very good. That's why finishing no higher than 6th worst was so important. Anyway, from what I can tell for this particular draft the #2, 3, and 4 picks most often talked about are all forwards. You said it yourself you'd rather we get a defenseman so why are you stuck on this top 3 pick idea?

Well this is the thing I'm torn on, Do we take the best d just because we need d or do we take just the best player at that spot? Say there is a good D but a good C we could use both.

 

[Red Stanley]

Well this is the thing I'm torn on, Do we take the best d just because we need d or do we take just the best player at that spot? Say there is a good D but a good C we could use both.

If we end up with a lottery pick other than #1 we'll have three options. One, get either Svetch or Zadina. Two, get the defenseman we want most regardless of rankings. Three, trade down a few spots if we think the guy we want will still be there. Out of these option two looks least appealing to me, but they're still first-world problems so to speak. I'd rather deal with that than end up dropping in the draft instead. I think Svetch, Zadina and Tkachuk will all go top 5.

 

[TheMule93]

If we land #2 overall don't don't take svech ima go on a rampage, watch out

 

[Frk It]

If we end up with a lottery pick other than #1 we'll have three options. One, get either Svetch or Zadina. Two, get the defenseman we want most regardless of rankings. Three, trade down a few spots if we think the guy we want will still be there. Out of these option two looks least appealing to me, but they're still first-world problems so to speak. I'd rather deal with that than end up dropping in the draft instead. I think Svetch, Zadina and Tkachuk will all go top 5.

Same. I see us picking 7-8 where a defenseman is going to be BPA. One of Hughes, Bouchard, or Dobson.

Which is why I’ve been saying this should work itself out nicely as far as what we need and where we will pick.