What's Up With Dylan Larkin?

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Cool topic sentence.

Do you have any argument or counterpoint that you'd like to make?

Did you make an argument or just say that he's lost captain luster? He's still doing a lot of things that a young captain should do. The All-Star game thing was a poorly chosen word/time for a joke and nothing less. Larkin is still the best player on the Wings. He's still facing the music in post-game interviews.

 

[SirloinUB]

4th rounders if they even make it to the NHL they are outliers. This thread is about Larkin. You want me to say Slavin should have been picked over AA? Make a thread about it.

If you want to talk about Larkin how about the fact that he is our best player, leading the team in points and ice time while being signed to a good value contract long term. He has 15 point in his last 16 games. He is not a problem

 

[Steve Yzerlland]

If you want to talk about Larkin how about the fact that he is our best player, leading the team in points and ice time while being signed to a good value contract long term. He has 15 point in his last 16 games. He is not a problem

What's the thread title?

 

[Steve Yzerlland]

Would Steve Y consider trading Larkin ?

fixed* And I believe the answer to this should be yes. There are no generational players on this roster and ALL players should be considered if it means DRW are better going forward.

 

[Steve Yzerlland]

But I do think this year has been a downgrade to his leadership stock, and maybe also a year where his developmental ceiling is becoming more apparent.

Brace yourself vladdy16. This type of opinion isn't allowed on here, you must know that by now. "Larkin is the reason we are........ "(exactly).

 

[nbwingsfan]

I don't care about the other boards. And this thread is about Larkin for the 1000th time. Read the title of the thread. He has regressed from last year. Face it man.

I don’t even think he’s regressed. On historically bad teams, no one ever does well. Mackinnon “regressed” to a 50pt player playing on an equally bad Avs team and then exploded next season when they had a competent hockey team. Larkin isn’t a franchise level player that can carry an awful hockey team.

 

[Hen Kolland]

What's the thread title?

Have you answered the question in the title yet?

 

[Steve Yzerlland]

Have you answered the question in the title yet?

I don't respond to people that throw around personal attacks just because they don't like someone's opinion. Run along.

 

[2xJack]

fixed* And I believe the answer to this should be yes. There are no generational players on this roster and ALL players should be considered if it means DRW are better going forward.

This, 100%. There is nobody on the roster who should be untouchable because the simple fact is none of them are good enough to be held in that regard. Larkin is a very good player and I would not trade him for a bag of hockey pucks. However, if a good enough offer comes along then by all means we should ship him out. Same goes for Bert, Mantha, etc.

I'd call Larkin a franchise player. I think he's good enough to anchor a Cup winning team, but it would take a ton of talent around him. We're unlikely to acquire that much talent while Larkin is still in his prime. He is not a generational player like a McDavid or Ovechkin. Larkin is better than a team can usually hope to get at his draft position, but he obviously can't carry a team by himself. We're in last with him, we'd be in last without him.

 

[SirloinUB]

What's the thread title?

what’s up with Larkin?

answer: he is playing well despite a severe lack of support, is our best player and most valuable asset while being signed to a good contract for several more years.

 

[Borlag]

I don’t even think he’s regressed. On historically bad teams, no one ever does well. Mackinnon “regressed” to a 50pt player playing on an equally bad Avs team and then exploded next season when they had a competent hockey team. Larkin isn’t a franchise level player that can carry an awful hockey team.

Uh, I recall a certain Steve Yzerman who couldn't do that either when the rest of the team was bad... We really should've traded him for something to improve the team, right? Or if that's too touchy subject, then how about a certain McDavid fella who's supposedly good, most definitely franchise level, quite possibly generational too. How's the Edmonton fared with him? McJesus couldn't carry them? Oh what a shame...off to the trade block.

Simply put, no one person is good enough to carry an absolutely horrendous team.

 

[Hen Kolland]

I don't respond to people that throw around personal attacks just because they don't like someone's opinion. Run along.

There’s no personal attack here. I just haven’t seen you actually articulate what you think is wrong with Larkin.

What specifically is wrong with his production?

What about his game do you think is flawed?

What reasons do you believe that he is unqualified to be the captain of the team?

I’d like to have a legitimate conversation with someone who falls on the other side of the argument, but you, as well as others, won’t provide any justification for you opinion. It’s just continued “he’s not that good” or “he isn’t a good leader” or “he isn’t fit to be a captain”. All I’m asking is for you to bring some reasons to the table.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

This, 100%. There is nobody on the roster who should be untouchable because the simple fact is none of them are good enough to be held in that regard. Larkin is a very good player and I would not trade him for a bag of hockey pucks. However, if a good enough offer comes along then by all means we should ship him out. Same goes for Bert, Mantha, etc.

I'd call Larkin a franchise player. I think he's good enough to anchor a Cup winning team, but it would take a ton of talent around him. We're unlikely to acquire that much talent while Larkin is still in his prime. He is not a generational player like a McDavid or Ovechkin. Larkin is better than a team can usually hope to get at his draft position, but he obviously can't carry a team by himself. We're in last with him, we'd be in last without him.

I don't think he's untouchable. I just don't see Sam Reinhart and Rasmus Ristolainen as being interesting for me. Don't really care for Risto as he's another Green, Hronek, what we hope Cholo will be, etc. He's all offense, no defense. Also, Larkin is signed for four more years at 6.1M. Reinhart is up for a new deal at the end of this year. If there is a CLEAR upgrade on Larkin from moving him as part of a package, I do that. If I'm merely shuffling pieces, **** no I don't want to trade him.

 

[vladdy16]

You tell me what the downgrade is. Is it because he is visibly pissed about losing on the ice? Is it because he didn't want to play in the ASG? You tell me.

Larkin is not, and never will be the robot that you want him to be, but it certainly doesn't make him less of a leader.

I'm with you. The guys contract is great, his upbringing is great, and his commitment to the organization is great.

I want him to be less of a robot if anything. It's just that the reality is that the Illitches, and holland and Yzerman have sold out this year. As a leader, Larkin is caught in between.

I just think there is an advantage to his contract and versatility, that makes the idea of him also needing to be a generational leader for the franchise kind of superficial.

I would rather him be an advocate for the play of 17, 21,59,14,ras, Svech, Smith etc, than be a guy that is distraught and unfocused at the end of games he shouldnt be expecting to win.

As a fan, Larkin has nothing to prove to me. From a birds eye view, I think his leadership role is best suited as a bridge and mediator between two disparite generations of red wings.

I do not want to see him the captain of a ship that is otherwise purposefully sinking.

 

[Steve Yzerlland]

Uh, I recall a certain Steve Yzerman who couldn't do that either when the rest of the team was bad... We really should've traded him for something to improve the team, right? Or if that's too touchy subject, then how about a certain McDavid fella who's supposedly good, most definitely franchise level, quite possibly generational too. How's the Edmonton fared with him? McJesus couldn't carry them? Oh what a shame...off to the trade block.

Simply put, no one person is good enough to carry an absolutely horrendous team.

Using McDavid to validate Larkin as a player? Ummm ,ok.

 

[vladdy16]

Did you make an argument or just say that he's lost captain luster? He's still doing a lot of things that a young captain should do. The All-Star game thing was a poorly chosen word/time for a joke and nothing less. Larkin is still the best player on the Wings. He's still facing the music in post-game interviews.

I agree. In general I have less doubts than before about Larkin.

Imo, it's just simpler to pass the baton at this point. The level of organizational failure over the decade, and Larkins top notch secondary leadership skills are whats motivating me to want to at least turn some pages on notions of the past through this abominable year.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

I agree. In general I have less doubts than before about Larkin.

Imo, it's just simpler to pass the baton at this point. The level of organizational failure over the decade, and Larkins top notch secondary leadership skills are whats motivating me to want to at least turn some pages on notions of the past through this abominable year.

So I'm confused then. You were saying Larkin had lost his leadership luster and we're seeing a developmental cap on him... and now you're saying you want him to be captain?

Using McDavid to validate Larkin as a player? Ummm ,ok.

In a year where you're asking "what's wrong with Dylan Larkin?", he's still performing reasonably well when accounting for the absolute atrocity that is the rest of the Red Wings active roster. Nathan MacKinnon on a similarly bad Colorado team had 53 points in 82 games. Take Larkin's performance this year (37 in 54) and rate it out over 82 games... that's a 56 point pace. What he's really getting at is for Larkin to perform at the level that you seemingly want to hold him to, he'd have to be a Connor McDavid level player. Larkin's "off" this year because the Wings ****ing suck. When guys were healthy at the start of the year and you had BLM as the top line, you and Redder weren't asking "what's up with Dylan Larkin?"

 

[bedtime20]

question is what is Yzerplan ? Everybody are playing below they potential . If it is Blashill , then why is he still here ?. Why can someone interview Steven and not try to soften questions to know the truth

Tank for a couple of years to get high draft picks, Stevie is developing prospects like veleno and Seider in the AHL while exposing guys like Zadina and smith to the NHL. I think the real truth is Blashill only has a job right now because Stevie is trying to tank for a high draft pick and Blashill cant win a game for his life.

 

[vladdy16]

So I'm confused then. You were saying Larkin had lost his leadership luster and we're seeing a developmental cap on him... and now you're saying you want him to be captain?

I'm saying I think his secondary leadership skills are strong as heck, but there are on ice lapses that he registers at times, that make me think he's best suited as a stalwart Kesler-esque secondary leader, than a make or break captain of the future.

Aside from that, as far as development goes, I just think if Larkin was going to develop any high level horizontal hockey, we would have seen so by now.

Overall though, I think he is a capable 1C, and a potential ace in the hole, shutdown 2C. Which is far from critical, imo.

 

[nbwingsfan]

Uh, I recall a certain Steve Yzerman who couldn't do that either when the rest of the team was bad... We really should've traded him for something to improve the team, right? Or if that's too touchy subject, then how about a certain McDavid fella who's supposedly good, most definitely franchise level, quite possibly generational too. How's the Edmonton fared with him? McJesus couldn't carry them? Oh what a shame...off to the trade block.

Simply put, no one person is good enough to carry an absolutely horrendous team.

..... your last sentence is exactly what my point was?

 

[Borlag]

Using McDavid to validate Larkin as a player? Ummm ,ok.

Not validating anything, simply saying that no matter who you put in his place, he wouldn't look good as literally no one can single handedly save a bad team from being bad.

 

[newfy]

I'm saying I think his secondary leadership skills are strong as heck, but there are on ice lapses that he registers at times, that make me think he's best suited as a stalwart Kesler-esque secondary leader, than a make or break captain of the future.

Aside from that, as far as development goes, I just think if Larkin was going to develop any high level horizontal hockey, we would have seen so by now.

Overall though, I think he is a capable 1C, and a potential ace in the hole, shutdown 2C. Which is far from critical, imo.

Dont disagree with any of this. I think he could be a captain in the NHL without a doubt but I dont mind the wings waiting and seeing who they draft this year and how other players develop. If they get first overall this year and take LAfreniere, hes a guy with equally as strong or stronger leadership skills with superstar potential. I think a guy like that should wear the C over Larkin. Seider is a guy that depending on how fast he develops is showing a tonne of captain potential. Allthough I think Seider strikes me more as a similar calibre player/leader as Larkin its impossible to know right now.

If they get Lafreniere though its going to be an A for Larkin for the rest of his time in Detroit

 

[Steve Yzerlland]

Not validating anything, simply saying that no matter who you put in his place, he wouldn't look good as literally no one can single handedly save a bad team from being bad.

Larkin wasn't even an all star this year, Bertuzzi was. What is he "single handedly" doing???

 

[Borlag]

One of these cases I see...ignored

 

[newfy]

Larkin wasn't even an all star this year, Bertuzzi was. What is he "single handedly" doing???

Yeah good point, Bertuzzi went to the All star game so hes better than Larkin. Hes pretty well single handedly still having a respectable season. Bertuzzi and Larkin are a couple bright spots this year but lets not pretend Bertuzzi is as good because he went to the all star game.

All that has to do with the Atlantics depth at each of their positions