What's Up With Dylan Larkin?

[Steve Yzerlland]

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

I didn't say he is better than Larkin. You guys are pretending like no one else is doing anything yet Bertuzzi made it and Larkin didn't. Nice try though sport.

 

[Red Stanley]

Larkin is literally one of the only bright spots on this team and people want to talk abuot drafting Pastrnak instead. Literally no one including most of the NHL knew he would be this good, he also wouldnt be this good with Detroits line up. A wingerlike him is perfect with a center like Bergeron+ with another elite defensive winger so he can focus all out on offense.

Detroit drafted a guy that likely goes top 5 in a redraft at 15 and people are complaining they didnt draft a guy that goes top 2.

There is SO MUCH to complain about this year, Larkin should be the furthest thing from this topic. An even bigger thing to complain about is how awful AA has been and prvoviding 0 secondary offense. Hasnt been able to step up at all, guarantee certain posters in here wont mention that though

 

[Tetsuo]

Larkin is literally one of the only bright spots on this team and people want to talk abuot drafting Pastrnak instead. Literally no one including most of the NHL knew he would be this good, he also wouldnt be this good with Detroits line up. A wingerlike him is perfect with a center like Bergeron+ with another elite defensive winger so he can focus all out on offense.

Detroit drafted a guy that likely goes top 5 in a redraft at 15 and people are complaining they didnt draft a guy that goes top 2.

There is SO MUCH to complain about this year, Larkin should be the furthest thing from this topic. An even bigger thing to complain about is how awful AA has been and prvoviding 0 secondary offense. Hasnt been able to step up at all, guarantee certain posters in here wont mention that though

/thread as far as I am concerned. This Detroit team is atrocious and honestly no single player could make a meaningful difference to the team's outcome. Not even McDavid. Detroit's issues are structural, all the way down to the health of the players. This is a process that is going to take many years to fix as the only quick-fixes are also short-sighted.

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.

I mostly agree with this but I will say that this a bit harsh. Larkin's speed and overall offensive instincts are good enough that if sufficiently skilled (elite) wingers are placed on his line he can absolutely keep up in a scoring role while also being high-end defensively. He is not a game-breaking center by any means but he absolutely can succeed as top 6 center on every team in the league. If he had better, or at least healthier wingers (Mantha!!), his point totals would be pretty solid, I reckon.

The thing is: Larkin isn't above being traded in the right circumstance. He is on a great contract and is still quite young. If Rasmussen and Veleno both meet or exceed their projections we may no longer need Larkin. We may even get lucky in the draft to get a younger, better center prospect. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if in a couple of years Larkin is made available. Right now his organizational value is absurd because after him we have absolutely no top 6 centers in the organization. But if Ras, Veleno or someone else develop after a few more years, Larkin immediately becomes one of the better trade pieces in the league.

 

[Oddbob]

If we drafted Pastrnak instead of Larkin would might very well be worse off, as Pastrnak is better offensively but not defensively and him being expected to do both as our best player might and very likely could be worse for both us and Pastrnak. Pastrnak also may not look so great offensively on our team with no center driving play or other great players like he gets to play with in Boston, as without Larkin we have no one else at center.

 

[Steve Yzerlland]

If we drafted Pastrnak instead of Larkin would might very well be worse off, as Pastrnak is better offensively but not defensively and him being expected to do both as our best player might and very likely could be worse for both us and Pastrnak. Pastrnak also may not look so great offensively on our team with no center driving play or other great players like he gets to play with in Boston, as without Larkin we have no one else at center.

Cool story bro. Too bad it's not true though.

 

[SirloinUB]

Just going to leave this here

 

[newfy]

I didn't say he is better than Larkin. You guys are pretending like no one else is doing anything yet Bertuzzi made it and Larkin didn't. Nice try though sport.

Youre implying it, "yet Bertuzzi made it and Larkin didnt". Bertuzzi is the only other player on the roster having a decent season, youre right you got us, the wings have one other player that is having a decent year.

Bertuzzi making the all star game is not even worth bringing up at all, every team needs to send someone and the Atlantic's center depth is likely the best in the entire league. If they just sent the best player from every team, Larkin would have went in a heart beat over Bertuzzi and its not even a question.

Cool story bro. Too bad it's not true though.

Another great take for you, way to go champ!

I'm sure Pastrnak would look the same in Detroit with Filppula centering him and Bertuzzi as he does playing in Boston with Bergeron and Marchand. Filppula and Bergeron are pretty close as players. Marchand only had 100 points last year and is working on his second straight 100 point season. Bertuzzi could probably help Pastrnak keep a similar output in Detroit as Marchand does

 

[Steve Yzerlland]

Youre implying it, "yet Bertuzzi made it and Larkin didnt". Bertuzzi is the only other player on the roster having a decent season, youre right you got us, the wings have one other player that is having a decent year.

Bertuzzi making the all star game is not even worth bringing up at all, every team needs to send someone and the Atlantic's center depth is likely the best in the entire league. If they just sent the best player from every team, Larkin would have went in a heart beat over Bertuzzi and its not even a question.



Another great take for you, way to go champ!

I'm sure Pastrnak would look the same in Detroit with Filppula centering him and Bertuzzi as he does playing in Boston with Bergeron and Marchand. Filppula and Bergeron are pretty close as players. Marchand only had 100 points last year and is working on his second straight 100 point season. Bertuzzi could probably help Pastrnak keep a similar output in Detroit as Marchand does

So Bertuzzi didn't earn his role on the all star team? Is that the new narrative now? Shit on our other players to big up Larkin? Way to go bud....

 

[Tetsuo]

So Bertuzzi didn't earn his role on the all star team? Is that the new narrative now? **** on our other players to big up Larkin? Way to go bud....

I love Bert but he is nowhere near as good of a player as Larkin. Let alone Marchand, which is newfy's point. Pasta is very much a player who was lucky to end up with a team that could develop him and then fully maximize what he could do once he was ready. Without Larkin this team would be unprecedentedly horrendous.

 

[Steve Yzerlland]

I love Bert but he is nowhere near as good of a player as Larkin. Let alone Marchand, which is newfy's point. Pasta is very much a player who was lucky to end up with a team that could develop him and then fully maximize what he could do once he was ready. Without Larkin this team would be unprecedentedly horrendous.

Never said it wouldn't. But to say Larkin has zero help is complete bs...

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

So Bertuzzi didn't earn his role on the all star team? Is that the new narrative now? **** on our other players to big up Larkin? Way to go bud....

Bertuzzi "earned" his spot in that he was the best option on the Wings to go. If they didn't need a rep from every team, not a chance in hell he makes it. Same with Larkin, really. Bertuzzi was taken over Larkin because the Atlantic's C depth >>> Atlantic's wing depth.

Never said it wouldn't. But to say Larkin has zero help is complete bs...

Larkin doesn't have absolutely no help. The Wings do have guys like Bertuzzi who do know how to play hockey. And when Larkin had a whole forward line of guys (Him, Bert, and Mantha), they were a fantastic line. However, with Mantha hurt, the line falls apart because you have a wing slot that is a negative and you've got to have Larkin and/or Bert spend more time covering the D side, which eats their offense. I mean, it's like pulling ****ing teeth discussing anything with you. Pastrnak has Bergeron and Marchand, I think. Probably the best 2-way C in the league and a 40 goal winger on the other side. Relative to what Pastrnak has on his line and in his D-core, Larkin has nothing. Bertuzzi is an ok to good player (0.65 PPG over past two years) and when Mantha is healthy, that's another good player. Right now though, no Mantha means a black hole on Larkin's wing, because that's how shallow the Wings' depth is currently. DDK being hurt and Green/Daley being hampered and old kills that aspect. When Larkin has talent anywhere near his level that he can play with, he looks amazing. When he is saddled with blackholes, he still looks okay and is only "bad" in comparison to himself when he's got support.

 

[2xJack]

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.

I understand the point you were trying to make. Players like Yzerman and McDavid cannot win the Cup by themselves. However, you kind of shot yourself in the foot with those examples. Both of those players made an immediate impact on the teams that drafted them.

Let's take a look at Yzerman. He was drafted at #3 overall in 1983. His first year with the Wings we improved to finishing 7th from the bottom and made the playoffs for the first time in six seasons. The next season we moved up another notch to 8th. In the 1985-86 season we did terribly, though, finishing dead last. Uh oh, does this negate my point? No, it actually proves it. Yzerman had an injury riddled season and only managed 42 points in 51 games. His contributions were so vital to team success by this point that not being able to rely on him to carry the load on a nightly basis made a glaring difference. The following season he was healthy and not only did the Wings make the playoffs, but we won a first round series.

You can likewise look at McDavid's arrival in Edmonton and directly correlate it with improved regular season results. Edmonton only saw a small bump during McDavid's rookie season, but the following one was the franchise's first 100 point season in 30 years. Edmonton did miss the playoffs in season 3 and 4 of McDavid's career, but the floor was still much higher than prior to his arrival.

In baseball they use WAR, Wins Above Replacement, to gauge how much an individual player directly impacts his team's results. I have absolutely no doubt that players like Yzerman and McDavid have a much higher WAR than someone like Larkin, if we could accurately craft such a stat. So while it is true that no one person is good enough to carry an absolutely horrible team, it is also true that just because someone is good or better than average doesn't mean you should never trade them. There are degrees of "good" and there are means of differentiating them. I put Yzerman and McDavid at the "unicorn" status level. You simply don't move players like that unless there are extenuating circumstances. Larkin is tiers lower than that. I'd move Larkin if we win the trade.

 

[2xJack]

Just going to leave this here

Nothing to dispute there. I did say earlier in the thread that Larkin turned out better than a team can usually hope for with someone drafted in the middle of the first round. He's a legit top line center and franchise player. Most years, that's an easy top 5 pick.

I don't want people to get the wrong impression. I like Larkin. He's one of the few reasons I still tune into Wings games. I'd be sad if we moved him. That said, I realize that the team is likely going to be bad for his entire prime, and would be perfectly fine with trading him if it legitimately helped the rebuild. There is nobody on the roster I'd hesitate to move for the right price.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

I understand the point you were trying to make. Players like Yzerman and McDavid cannot win the Cup by themselves. However, you kind of shot yourself in the foot with those examples. Both of those players made an immediate impact on the teams that drafted them.

Let's take a look at Yzerman. He was drafted at #3 overall in 1983. His first year with the Wings we improved to finishing 7th from the bottom and made the playoffs for the first time in six seasons. The next season we moved up another notch to 8th. In the 1985-86 season we did terribly, though, finishing dead last. Uh oh, does this negate my point? No, it actually proves it. Yzerman had an injury riddled season and only managed 42 points in 51 games. His contributions were so vital to team success by this point that not being able to rely on him to carry the load on a nightly basis made a glaring difference. The following season he was healthy and not only did the Wings make the playoffs, but we won a first round series.

You can likewise look at McDavid's arrival in Edmonton and directly correlate it with improved regular season results. Edmonton only saw a small bump during McDavid's rookie season, but the following one was the franchise's first 100 point season in 30 years. Edmonton did miss the playoffs in season 3 and 4 of McDavid's career, but the floor was still much higher than prior to his arrival.

In baseball they use WAR, Wins Above Replacement, to gauge how much an individual player directly impacts his team's results. I have absolutely no doubt that players like Yzerman and McDavid have a much higher WAR than someone like Larkin, if we could accurately craft such a stat. So while it is true that no one person is good enough to carry an absolutely horrible team, it is also true that just because someone is good or better than average doesn't mean you should never trade them. There are degrees of "good" and there are means of differentiating them. I put Yzerman and McDavid at the "unicorn" status level. You simply don't move players like that unless there are extenuating circumstances. Larkin is tiers lower than that. I'd move Larkin if we win the trade.

My point is that because Larkin is not in that unicorn tier (I agree with you that he isn't) you're not getting a trade offer for him where you win it. Because he's fantastic and on a great value contract. Obviously if someone blows your doors off with something you can't turn down you trade him. However, it has to be a slam dunk offer. If I'm dealing Dylan Larkin, it's not remotely for anything close to "fair" value. That's how I deem "untouchable". Say you could get Zach Werenski for Larkin straight up... I don't think I'd do it. Because sure, we'd get a damn good D man, but we'd also be giving up our only current C with any remote claim to being a 1C. If we added Byfield and he was WOMG good, then I can look at making that trade, potentially. Larkin has too important a position on the team with too much excess value from being on a "cheap" contract for term for me to seriously consider any offer that is not immensely tilted in Detroit's favor.

And I certainly would not have any interest in moving him for a draft pick unless that pick is guaranteed to be a top 3 pick. The chance of me getting a Dylan Larkin or equivalent from let's say... draft slots 9 + 40 + 68 (1st, 2nd, 3rd) or 9 this year, 13 next year, 40 this year (two firsts and a second), is actually not very high.

Any Larkin trade would, in my eyes, have to be a hockey trade.

 

[2xJack]

My point is that because Larkin is not in that unicorn tier (I agree with you that he isn't) you're not getting a trade offer for him where you win it. Because he's fantastic and on a great value contract. Obviously if someone blows your doors off with something you can't turn down you trade him. However, it has to be a slam dunk offer. If I'm dealing Dylan Larkin, it's not remotely for anything close to "fair" value. That's how I deem "untouchable". Say you could get Zach Werenski for Larkin straight up... I don't think I'd do it. Because sure, we'd get a damn good D man, but we'd also be giving up our only current C with any remote claim to being a 1C. If we added Byfield and he was WOMG good, then I can look at making that trade, potentially. Larkin has too important a position on the team with too much excess value from being on a "cheap" contract for term for me to seriously consider any offer that is not immensely tilted in Detroit's favor.

And I certainly would not have any interest in moving him for a draft pick unless that pick is guaranteed to be a top 3 pick. The chance of me getting a Dylan Larkin or equivalent from let's say... draft slots 9 + 40 + 68 (1st, 2nd, 3rd) or 9 this year, 13 next year, 40 this year (two firsts and a second), is actually not very high.

Any Larkin trade would, in my eyes, have to be a hockey trade.

I think we're close to, if not exactly on the same page. My ideal Larkin trade would be for a prospect(s) who projects to be as good as or preferably better than Larkin but is years away still. Maybe we get that with multiple firsts in return? It's a risk. Like you said, the odds are not good unless the pick is a top 3. Maybe the trade happens at the draft so we know the pick is a good one. For a mid-season trade I'd rather get back prospects rather than picks.

Whatever the return is, the trade would have to be lopsided enough so that outsiders are questioning how Yzerman managed to talk another GM into the deal. I think it is unlikely this kind of trade will actually happen. I think it is much more realistic that we hang onto Larkin until closer to the end of his contract. At that point the return won't have to be so amazing to get me to listen.

 

[newfy]

So Bertuzzi didn't earn his role on the all star team? Is that the new narrative now? **** on our other players to big up Larkin? Way to go bud....

Bertuzzi is my favourite player on the wings, he earned a spot because the NHL has a rule that every team needs to send someone. Its a lot easier to sneak a winger in there than it is a center. Neither deserved to be there based on the best players at their position in the division. Marchand is a 100 point player and he didnt go over Duclair or Bertuzzi.

Center is even tougher to crack. Is Larkin really going to make it over Eichel, Bergeron, Tavares, Matthews, Stamkos, Point or Barkov? Bringing up the all star game is ridiculously stupid to prove any point youre trying to make.

 

[Steve Yzerlland]

Bertuzzi "earned" his spot in that he was the best option on the Wings to go. If they didn't need a rep from every team, not a chance in hell he makes it. Same with Larkin, really. Bertuzzi was taken over Larkin because the Atlantic's C depth >>> Atlantic's wing depth.



Larkin doesn't have absolutely no help. The Wings do have guys like Bertuzzi who do know how to play hockey. And when Larkin had a whole forward line of guys (Him, Bert, and Mantha), they were a fantastic line. However, with Mantha hurt, the line falls apart because you have a wing slot that is a negative and you've got to have Larkin and/or Bert spend more time covering the D side, which eats their offense. I mean, it's like pulling ****ing teeth discussing anything with you. Pastrnak has Bergeron and Marchand, I think. Probably the best 2-way C in the league and a 40 goal winger on the other side. Relative to what Pastrnak has on his line and in his D-core, Larkin has nothing. Bertuzzi is an ok to good player (0.65 PPG over past two years) and when Mantha is healthy, that's another good player. Right now though, no Mantha means a black hole on Larkin's wing, because that's how shallow the Wings' depth is currently. DDK being hurt and Green/Daley being hampered and old kills that aspect. When Larkin has talent anywhere near his level that he can play with, he looks amazing. When he is saddled with blackholes, he still looks okay and is only "bad" in comparison to himself when he's got support.

K.

 

[Steve Yzerlland]

Bertuzzi is my favourite player on the wings, he earned a spot because the NHL has a rule that every team needs to send someone. Its a lot easier to sneak a winger in there than it is a center. Neither deserved to be there based on the best players at their position in the division. Marchand is a 100 point player and he didnt go over Duclair or Bertuzzi.

Center is even tougher to crack. Is Larkin really going to make it over Eichel, Bergeron, Tavares, Matthews, Stamkos, Point or Barkov? Bringing up the all star game is ridiculously stupid to prove any point youre trying to make.

The original "point" was "Larkin has no help..." which is clearly a lie....

 

[Henkka]

Ehhh... Larkin isn't our problem. The team depth is.

5+8 = 13 points in last 12 games.

That was my last update and now it is:

7+10 = 17 points in last 17 games.

 

[ArmChairGM89]

There is some weird flexing going on in here. Now I’m pissed we didn’t draft kucherov, we had what? Three shots at him. Errrmagurrd

 

[Red Stanley]

That was my last update and now it is:

7+10 = 17 points in last 17 games.

So since your last update he is producing at a lower rate. I.e. clearly regressing

 

[Henkka]

So since your last update he is producing at a lower rate. I.e. clearly regressing

Know you are joking, but quite a remarkable difference:

First 38 games, 7+15 = 22 points (0.58 points per game)
Last 17 games, 17+10 = 17 points (1.00 points per game)

One example how playing after/with an pre-season injury could affect.

 

[Red Stanley]

Know you are joking, but quite a remarkable difference:

First 38 games, 7+15 = 22 points (0.58 points per game)
Last 17 games, 17+10 = 17 points (1.00 points per game)

One example how playing after/with an pre-season injury could affect.

You mean getting carried by all-star Tyler Bertuzzi

Ok, I'll stop now. Honest.

 

[Steve Yzerlland]

You mean getting carried by all-star Tyler Bertuzzi

Ok, I'll stop now. Honest.

So we went from Larkin has no help, I say Bertuzzi makes the all star team so he has some help. Now you're implying I said Bertuzzi is carrying Larkin? Never change HFF....

 

[Red Stanley]

So we went from Larkin has no help, I say Bertuzzi makes the all star team so he has some help. Now you're implying I said Bertuzzi is carrying Larkin? Never change HFF....

In the moment, I said what I said, but I really do regret that. I didn't mean to disrespect your post. I feel that I disrespected you and any player who's ever been voted into the event, like 3-time all-star Jimmy Howard, whom I'm sure you have a big issue with me disrespecting like that. My main goal as a poster on this board is to represent myself and be a good example for the kids growing up posting here. I felt I wasn't that, so I'm sorry about that.