The Future is Promising

[JustJokinenAround]

We do have some holes to fill, yeah. But, Larkin is 22/23, Bert (2nd rounder), Mantha, and AA (4th rounder) are 24/25 and improving every year. Hronek has looked good this year, Cholo has shown some flashes, and even Bowey improved. Add Zadina, Veleno, Svech, McIsaac, this year's picks and we have a solid foundation that's attractive to high-end free agents. I give it 2/3 years and we're contending.

i like the direction but if they don't get it right all of the sudden larkin is 27/28 and bert, mantha, and AA are 29/30. the biggest thing they need to find is goaltending. winning this years lottery or being in a position to get byram would be great for the rebuild.

 

[The Zermanator]

Fun fact: Only 37.5% of playoff teams don't have at least 1 lottery pick on it.

And Montreal and Arizona who both just missed out have one as well.

 

[JustJokinenAround]

TB, Washington, San Jose, and Pittsburgh (never count them out unfortunately).

winnipeg has all the tools to get it done but they have not been as great as everyone thought this year and st. louis could make a deep run but that would dependent on binnington being able to replicate his regular season.

i hope pittsburgh gets bombed by the isles.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

I like that idea in theory, and if we don't win the lottery our options will basically be limited to that anyway. I'm just not convinced it can work. Having to work hard in all avenues is a given for any team that wants to succeed, even for those with lottery picks. Teams like Edmonton can get elite players and still be bad because the org around them is a trash fire. Teams like Washington and Pittsburgh still had to build quality teams around their stars to win Cups.

I feel like this debate about tanking/lottery/whatever often gets derailed because people seem to characterize the other side's position as either 'If you get lottery picks everything will fall into place', which is obviously false when looking at Edmonton for example. Or, 'You don't need lottery picks if you build the rest of the team right', which to me seems premature and arbitrary since that scenario hasn't been accomplished yet in the salary cap era.

I just think it's a mix of both. Getting to the promised land means drafting well so that you have players that outplay their expectations, being smart with contracts and the cap, and frankly, having a lottery pick. What makes a lottery pick so important is what they are relative to their peers. The top 10 of any given year is the cream of the crop, the lottery picks tend to be on another tier entirely. It shouldn't be a surprise or controversial to say that these guys often go on to have the same kind of impact in the NHL. Not only the cream of the crop, but the cream of the cream of the crop. That's why, to me, you need one of these guys if you want to get through the entire league and win a Cup.

Yep. And I guess my argument isn't really an argument at all. Just moreso that not winning the lottery isn't a reason to give up or think the rebuild is failing. Because the difference between Cozens and Hughes is far less important than the difference between what a good team does in FA, development, and otherwise and what a bad team does.

And in general, I have faith that Detroit is going to make moves that make them better. Make them prohibitive favorites again? Make them top contenders and stick them there? Probably not... but they will make moves that will get the team better. And I think I've moved on from thinking they'll rebuild into the 90s Wings. That is a bygone era. Now, you make the small moves to get better bit by bit and just run the team with longevity in mind.

 

[Hen Kolland]

Fun fact: Only 37.5% of playoff teams don't have at least 1 lottery pick on it.

And Montreal and Arizona who both just missed out have one as well.

Fun fact 73% of non playoff teams also have a top 3 pick on their roster.

The only teams without a top 3 pick outside of the playoffs are Detroit, New York, Anaheim, and Vancouver. Additionally, Vancouver has 6 top 10 picks, and just lost two all time great top 3 picks in the past year.

Basically, most teams have a former top 3 pick on their roster, somehow.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

i like the direction but if they don't get it right all of the sudden larkin is 27/28 and bert, mantha, and AA are 29/30. the biggest thing they need to find is goaltending. winning this years lottery or being in a position to get byram would be great for the rebuild.

And at that point, you've got the 2022, 2023 picks pushing for time.

One of the biggest mistakes that any team can make is locking in too much on one core. Saying "We have to win it in X" at the start of a rebuild. If you're Edmonton, yeah, you have a clock ticking on your team with McDavid. But the Wings if they stay down in the top 5 for another year or two are bound to find players at least on Larkin's level and probably superior to him. If Larkin ages out, you go to the next piece.

 

[Winger98]

I just don't see Ras as an NHL center. He wasn't great at the CHL, with his best numbers coming on the wing. His play style just is best suited to be a big bodied winger.

I don't disagree, but I think he has to be given a look at center at some point. If he finds his game there he could be a monster to deal with up the middle. If he ends up staying on the wing, I think he has the game to be a monster there, too.

 

[obey86]

And at that point, you've got the 2022, 2023 picks pushing for time.

One of the biggest mistakes that any team can make is locking in too much on one core. Saying "We have to win it in X" at the start of a rebuild. If you're Edmonton, yeah, you have a clock ticking on your team with McDavid. But the Wings if they stay down in the top 5 for another year or two are bound to find players at least on Larkin's level and probably superior to him. If Larkin ages out, you go to the next piece.

Realistically, even for Edmonton, their clock isn't ticking. They have McDavid under contract for 7 more years and at that point he will still only be 29. So even if it takes 2-3 years from this point for Edmonton, that's still 4 more years of McDavid under contract. And he could obviously re-sign after that too. Even if he starts to decline at like age 30, he will still be among the best in the game most likely.

 

[Shaman464]

I don't disagree, but I think he has to be given a look at center at some point. If he finds his game there he could be a monster to deal with up the middle. If he ends up staying on the wing, I think he has the game to be a monster there, too.

After this season, I still have a fear that he's not what he was hyped to be. He was a man sized player playing against kids in the CHL. His bread and butter was planting in front of the net where those kids couldn't move him in the CHL. The NHL he's playing against men, and doing that is a much taller older. Unless he gets a lot stronger, he's going to need to learn how to play the game in other ways.

 

[Shaman464]

Realistically, even for Edmonton, their clock isn't ticking. They have McDavid under contract for 7 more years and at that point he will still only be 29. So even if it takes 2-3 years from this point for Edmonton, that's still 4 more years of McDavid under contract. And he could obviously re-sign after that too. Even if he starts to decline at like age 30, he will still be among the best in the game most likely.

At this point I hope Edmonton wins a cup just to shut people up about them.

 

[Pavels Dog]

I don't think a team constructed like that will be able to get through the entire league. Several have gotten close but every single time they've eventually come across a team with 1 or more lottery picks as their core and they've come up short.

So what I'm saying is, I'll believe it when I see it. And even if/when one team manages to do it they'll be the first, so the odds will still be heavily weighted heavily against that being a successful strategy. So the best path will still be clear.

Looking at history and trying to replicate successful models is all well and good, but there's also something to be said for not getting locked into a mindset that there's only a set number of ways to be successful. Especially in a league that's constantly changing and currently has a fairly new lottery system that greatly decreases the odds of any one team landing multiple top 3 picks in a short time period and allows even teams 1 point outside the playoffs the chance to win a top 3.

 

[Athana see you later]

After this season, I still have a fear that he's not what he was hyped to be. He was a man sized player playing against kids in the CHL. His bread and butter was planting in front of the net where those kids couldn't move him in the CHL. The NHL he's playing against men, and doing that is a much taller older. Unless he gets a lot stronger, he's going to need to learn how to play the game in other ways.

How many 19 year olds do think can be asked to play a physical game in the nhl like ras has? He’s 19. Most big guys take a while to adjust. Give him a chance.

 

[obey86]

Looking at history and trying to replicate successful models is all well and good, but there's also something to be said for not getting locked into a mindset that there's only a set number of ways to be successful. Especially in a league that's constantly changing and currently has a fairly new lottery system that greatly decreases the odds of any one team landing multiple top 3 picks in a short time period and allows even teams 1 point outside the playoffs the chance to win a top 3.

Along these lines, I could easily see a playoff bubble team just outside the playoffs get lucky and get a lottery pick and then their future is absolutely set because they didn't have to tear down the entire team like a Buffalo to achieve that top pick/top player. So they luckily get their Jack Hughes or whoever at the top of the draft and they are ready to take off running with a solid roster already, unlike the typical bottom tier team.

Now, the odds of that scenario happening are very very slim, but rebuilds take a lot of luck, no matter what picks you have or how good your GM is - so that scenario would just be part of that luck. I certainly wouldn't count on it, but at least it's a possibility if things fall your way.

 

[DetroitRed]

You have to look at draft position. Winning and selling 1st round picks at the TDL took a toll on the Wings talent pool.
How many top 10 picks have the Wings had during the time you're judging them? When evaluating the Wings drafting board over the last 20 years you must take into account how low all the picks have been. Then look at the amount of NHL regulars they managed to draft. It's also unfair to scrutinize the amount of 30 goal scorers they have drafted and then claim the one(s) they have drafted was dumb luck. Larkin was heavily scouted and the Wings felt he dropped to them. He was high on their board not because he was from Michigan but because of the player that he is.

But it's not just a 30-goal scorer, I made that perfectly clear, and a 30-goal scorer is not necessarily even an all-star caliber player. It's not asking a lot of an organization that is supposedly good at drafting to find these types of players late in the first or in later rounds. That's something the guys in the video claim the Wings do, but which the Wings haven't done well for almost 20 years

We have been good at drafting absolutely nothing over this span: no goalies (who we don't even draft from the first round), let alone the 13 years between Zetterberg and Athansiou just to draft a 30-goal forward. Teams who are good at drafting find those players instead of making excuses. A 30-goal scorer or a reliable goalie should not be that big of a deal if you are a team that is good at drafting. How many years since Osgood? 1991? 28 years and counting to draft a reliable goalie? Think about that. That's a team that is good at drafting?

And it's not unfair at all. What is unfair is knowing they were intentionally scouting and drafting guys over others just because they were from Michigan, and then trying to bend that into a good decision somehow just because you happened to get lucky with Larkin.

 

[Winger98]

After this season, I still have a fear that he's not what he was hyped to be. He was a man sized player playing against kids in the CHL. His bread and butter was planting in front of the net where those kids couldn't move him in the CHL. The NHL he's playing against men, and doing that is a much taller older. Unless he gets a lot stronger, he's going to need to learn how to play the game in other ways.

And I think it takes longer for a guy with that game to adjust to the league and make it work in the NHL. On top of being 19, I think he was also playing in a league about a level above where he should have been. But he wasn't allowed to go to the AHL, and I don't think going back to the CHL would have done him any good. I don't doubt he would have put up some big numbers, but he wouldn't have had to grow his game at all to do it.

His development could always plateau. But I didn't see anything that was a big red flag. He was a good skater, especially for his size. He showed some good hands. He looked to be working hard out there. He showed he had the right idea of what to do in each zone. Did he always do it successfully? Clearly not, but I didn't see anything that had a big red flag.

 

[DanZ]

There's really only maybe 1 or 2 (if any) players picked outside the top 10 any given year that become elite. Hoping one of ours become that is very optimistic, hoping for more than 1 is unrealistic.

Zadina was drafted top ten and I included our top 5 pick from this year. So that's 2 going by your criteria.

I don't think it's that optimistic to expect 1 or 2 more out of Veleno, McIssac, Cholowski, and Hronek. Cholo was picked at 19, Veleno would already go top 15 in a re-draft, and McIssac and Hronek would be first rounders as well.

Drafting is a crapshoot, I'm going to go by what these players have done since their draft. Every contender has numerous core players drafted outside the top ten I don't know why we're pretending this is so unrealistic.

 

[SCD]

We don't know how linear the development will be with these freshman. As good as Larkin has become, his sophomore year was certainly not what many expected.

I would not expect huge improvement in all these players next year. Our young core is still several years away from hitting stride.

 

[Yooper906]

I agree with the analysts in the video. Ken Holland has done a good job. We’re clearly taking steps forward and signing Blash will give us stability to keep progressing. Which I believe we are. Its easy to come onto message boards with a negative attitude and criticize every move a gm or coach makes. For some reason people get off on that. Doesn’t mean it’s true. I’ll give Kenny credit. He’s done about as good of a job as he could given the position we were in. I’ll be more than happy to welcome Stevey Y if he happens to come. But it’s not because KH has done a bad job. Feeing very optimistic about this teams future, regardless of where we end up drafting after tonight

 

[Gniwder]

At this point I hope Edmonton wins a cup just to shut people up about them.

Nah, I hope they wind up with the #1 pick for the next two decades so that their entire roster comprises of #1 picks. They will still find some way to miss the playoffs.

 

[SimonEdvinssonAtSix]

But it's not just a 30-goal scorer, I made that perfectly clear, and a 30-goal scorer is not necessarily even an all-star caliber player. It's not asking a lot of an organization that is supposedly good at drafting to find these types of players late in the first or in later rounds. That's something the guys in the video claim the Wings do, but which the Wings haven't done well for almost 20 years

We have been good at drafting absolutely nothing over this span: no goalies (who we don't even draft from the first round), let alone the 13 years between Zetterberg and Athansiou just to draft a 30-goal forward. Teams who are good at drafting find those players instead of making excuses. A 30-goal scorer or a reliable goalie should not be that big of a deal if you are a team that is good at drafting. How many years since Osgood? 1991? 28 years and counting to draft a reliable goalie? Think about that. That's a team that is good at drafting?

And it's not unfair at all. What is unfair is knowing they were intentionally scouting and drafting guys over others just because they were from Michigan, and then trying to bend that into a good decision somehow just because you happened to get lucky with Larkin.

How many NHL regulars have we drafted in that time, arbitrary 30 goal mark aside.
I won't argue over the Larkin thing, you're clearly set on your opinion and that's ok.

 

[DetroitRed]

How many NHL regulars have we drafted in that time, arbitrary 30 goal mark aside.
I won't argue over the Larkin thing, you're clearly set on your opinion and that's ok.

Well, answer me this if its true that we "live" in those later rounds. How many guys have we picked in the last decade after the 4th round who played 100 NHL games?

 

[SimonEdvinssonAtSix]

Well, answer me this if its true that we "live" in those later rounds. How many guys have we picked in the last decade after the 4th round who played 100 NHL games?

Why are you quoting "live". where did I say we "live" there.
Stop moving the goal post, I asked a simple question. your response to prove a point is for me to count the number of NHLers we've drafted from the last 10 years, in rounds 5,6,7, who have played 100 games? You expect picks in rounds 5,6,7 to have 100 games from 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018? Come on man, get real.

 

[DetroitRed]

Why are you quoting "live". where did I say we "live" there.
Stop moving the goal post, I asked a simple question. your response to prove a point is for me to count the number of NHLers we've drafted from the last 10 years, in rounds 5,6,7, who have played 100 games? You expect picks in rounds 5,6,7 to have 100 games from 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018? Come on man, get real.

The men in the video said we "live" in those later draft rounds. The video is what this thread is about. I'm saying we haven't done anywhere near that recently.

Also, a decade would take us back to 2009, not just 2015, and many years we had multiple picks in either the 5th, 6th or 7th rounds. So, it's a lot of picks. -I'll give you the answer. It's zero. Now, how much further back it holds true before 2009, I'm not sure. But if you want, I'll look that up. I only looked it up for ten years.

Your question is simply how many NHLers have we developed? We had no choice but to develop our picks into NHLers. That's basically just an argument for us being at the drafts. The argument should be whether or not we're actually good at drafting in comparison to other teams.

 

[TheMule93]

still not seeing where we're going to get a superstar from. We'll probably improve a bit next season and make our lottery odds even worse.

 

[Ezekial]

We're gonna get the 6 overall pick again next year and ride that 666 all the way to the promised land baby.