Speculation: Who Should Detroit Pick at 4th?

[wingerdinger]

LOL
"Please stop having your opinion."

Great post.

It was a tongue in cheek comment. So relax.

I still think it's a massive reach.

 

[Gniwder]

I think I'd prefer Drysdale over Sanderson. He just has more upside in my eyes. But I agree that we could very well see Stevie solidify our blueline for years to come. Nabbing Drysdale or Sanderson, whoever you prefer, would allow us to slot guys like Hronek and Cholo down a slot, and put less pressure on McIsaac and Johansson. I've always agreed with the philosophy that you should try and figure out your defense early in a rebuild since they take longer to be NHL players, that way they can enter their prime at a similar time as your forwards. And then there's the fact that our forwards will simply have an easier time with Drysdale and Seider moving the puck up the ice, and we have a pretty attainable blueprint to a successful team.

I agree, I actually picked Drysdale. There's the issue of size as well as the fact that he's right handed, but he's got skilz for sure, and way more upside. I suppose Rafalski did OK though, about the same size.

Plenty of good D next season though.... could wind up like the Preds with all D and no scoring.

 

[FMichael]

Unless there's an unexpected selection in the top 3...I'm gonna stick with the idea that there's a lot of 'connections' with Cole Perfetti which is whom we'll see drafted by the Red Wings.

I still get a chuckle from the video when it's mentioned he could wind up a Senator...

 

[NickH8]

I agree, I actually picked Drysdale. There's the issue of size as well as the fact that he's right handed, but he's got skilz for sure, and way more upside. I suppose Rafalski did OK though, about the same size.

Plenty of good D next season though.... could wind up like the Preds with all D and no scoring.

I think we've already got a better center than Nashville's ever had in their time as a competitor. On the wing yes they had more scoring but that could come with Zadina and I think Rasmussen could rack up 30 dirty goals. Also like I said with a stacked D our forwards will have an easier time. I'm happy that we'll either lock up our D for the future or get an elite playmaking winger or possibly center to set up Zadina.

 

[MBH]

It was a tongue in cheek comment. So relax.

I still think it's a massive reach.

I get it man.
You're definitely not alone in that.

But I really doubt he goes past 5-6 in the draft.

 

[Ed Ned and Leddy]

There's a reason why Sanderson rose so much in the rankings and is being talked about at 3rd overall.
You don't see it, that's fine.
But I can easily see him producing like Scott Niedermayer did.

Fair enough. I think for me the difference between Sanderson and a guy like Neidermayer, or many other #1D/Norris-calibre guys, is that Neidermayer had already shown a really dynamic offensive toolkit in Juniors. He led Kamloops through long playoff runs, twice averaging well over a point per game. He was only taken third behind Lindros, who at the time was considered a "generational" prospect, and Pat Falloon, who admittedly didn't work out, but had won the Memorial Cup MVP that year. That said, Neidermayer as a prospect was a much safer bet to be a contribute big offensively than Sanderson is imo.

For that reason, I have a tough time projecting Sanderson as a #1D. Trying to be realistic but optimistic, I see Jonas Brodin as the closest prospect comparable (maybe a bit of Cam Fowler, but I think Sanderson is a bit stronger defensively, weaker offensively). Trying to be realistic but pessimistic, I could also see a Haydn Fleury type projection.

That said, I don't hate the idea of Sanderson at #4. Personally, I'd just see it more as "we didn't love the way that Perfetti/Raymond/Rossi/Holtz projected as elite offensive contributors, so we played it safe and added a solid blueline contributor" than "we're taking a guy we think is a Norris contender and our #1."

I do like a lot about his game though, and if we take him I hope to be proven pessimistic.

 

[MBH]

Fair enough. I think for me the difference between Sanderson and a guy like Neidermayer, or many other #1D/Norris-calibre guys, is that Neidermayer had already shown a really dynamic offensive toolkit in Juniors. He led Kamloops through long playoff runs, twice averaging well over a point per game. He was only taken third behind Lindros, who at the time was considered a "generational" prospect, and Pat Falloon, who admittedly didn't work out, but had won the Memorial Cup MVP that year. That said, Neidermayer as a prospect was a much safer bet to be a contribute big offensively than Sanderson is imo.

For that reason, I have a tough time projecting Sanderson as a #1D. Trying to be realistic but optimistic, I see Jonas Brodin as the closest prospect comparable (maybe a bit of Cam Fowler, but I think Sanderson is a bit stronger defensively, weaker offensively). Trying to be realistic but pessimistic, I could also see a Haydn Fleury type projection.

That said, I don't hate the idea of Sanderson at #4. Personally, I'd just see it more as "we didn't love the way that Perfetti/Raymond/Rossi/Holtz projected as elite offensive contributors, so we played it safe and added a solid blueline contributor" than "we're taking a guy we think is a Norris contender and our #1."

I do like a lot about his game though, and if we take him I hope to be proven pessimistic.

Sanderson is kind of a late riser.
Second half Sanderson was about a point-per-game.
But even if he tops out as a 35-point guy who plays 24 minutes a night and is an elite transition player (Ie - he stops on defense and turns into offese) who kills penalties, I think he probably earns the 4 pick.

It's not like we're drafting Luke Schenn or Griffin Reinhart.

Defense generally take longer to develop.
So if we draft Sanderson, we're going to be sitting here with Sanderson, Seider and Hronek - plus hopefully 1-2 of the other defensive prospects.... Our blue line is going to tough to beat.

 

[Frk It]

If I want a LD I’ll take one next year when there are better options.

 

[Ed Ned and Leddy]

If I want a LD I’ll take one next year when there are better options.

I get that, but I think it's dangerous to try and call a draft a year out. In '18 everyone thought we'd address the blue line with one of Hughes/Bouchard/Dobson/Boqvist, and we took Zadina. '19 a lot of people thought we'd add a #2C with one of Dach/Cozens/Turcotte/Zegras and we took Seider.

I think there's a pretty good chance we go LD next year, but for all we know we might end up with a Johnson/Beniers/Raty. It's just tough to say at this point. That's why I would take Sanderson if you think he's the best guy available at #4 (which I don't). Honestly even taking Sanderson this year and a guy like Power/Hughes/Lambos next year I wouldn't hate. A top 4 of something like

'21 top 5 pick/Seider
Sanderson/Hronek

Could look great 3-5 years from now. I've got no issue trying to build from the blue line, I think Carolina is showing how effective that can be at the moment. I just also think that this might be our best chance to an elite offensive talent for the rebuild, so I'd probably prefer we take our pick among Raymond/Rossi/Perfetti/Holtz. Despite all of those guys having some pretty legitimate concerns, I think they also have an upside I'm not sure I see in Sanderson.

 

[deca guard]

DRAFT STRATEGY DE JOUR :

do not want to draft a smallish player with 4th pick , rossi-perfetti-drysdale-raymond . ide rather trade back and get an extra asset

 

[Oddbob]

I think we should just pull a Monopoly Deal Breaker card and draft Lafreniere with it!

 

[newfy]

He (Ottawa's GM) also mentioned it post draft lottery. He didn't say who he saw in T2, and also Ottawa sometimes makes boneheaded decisions. I think there's a slim chance they don't pick Stutzle if he's available at #3, but I also don't think they would pass up Byfield if he's available at 3.

Just about the only thing the sens do well is draft. Dont count on them bungling it up

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

Sanderson is kind of a late riser.
Second half Sanderson was about a point-per-game.
But even if he tops out as a 35-point guy who plays 24 minutes a night and is an elite transition player (Ie - he stops on defense and turns into offese) who kills penalties, I think he probably earns the 4 pick.

It's not like we're drafting Luke Schenn or Griffin Reinhart.

Defense generally take longer to develop.
So if we draft Sanderson, we're going to be sitting here with Sanderson, Seider and Hronek - plus hopefully 1-2 of the other defensive prospects.... Our blue line is going to tough to beat.

It's an older article, but one that might be worthwhile reading.

The Danger of Drafting 'Defensive' Defensemen

 

[Hen Kolland]

DRAFT STRATEGY DE JOUR :

do not want to draft a smallish player with 4th pick , rossi-perfetti-drysdale-raymond . ide rather trade back and get an extra asset

Talent is talent. Some of those players you have listed would be pushing for the most talented player on the roster in a few years. The others, while may never having that label, aren't bad hockey players, and look to be better than a lot of the bigger options that can be projected as available at 4 or later

 

[Frk It]

I get that, but I think it's dangerous to try and call a draft a year out. In '18 everyone thought we'd address the blue line with one of Hughes/Bouchard/Dobson/Boqvist, and we took Zadina. '19 a lot of people thought we'd add a #2C with one of Dach/Cozens/Turcotte/Zegras and we took Seider.

I think there's a pretty good chance we go LD next year, but for all we know we might end up with a Johnson/Beniers/Raty. It's just tough to say at this point. That's why I would take Sanderson if you think he's the best guy available at #4 (which I don't). Honestly even taking Sanderson this year and a guy like Power/Hughes/Lambos next year I wouldn't hate. A top 4 of something like

'21 top 5 pick/Seider
Sanderson/Hronek

Could look great 3-5 years from now. I've got no issue trying to build from the blue line, I think Carolina is showing how effective that can be at the moment. I just also think that this might be our best chance to an elite offensive talent for the rebuild, so I'd probably prefer we take our pick among Raymond/Rossi/Perfetti/Holtz. Despite all of those guys having some pretty legitimate concerns, I think they also have an upside I'm not sure I see in Sanderson.

Sanderson and Owen Power are only 4 months apart. Sanderson and Carson Lambos are only 6 months apart.

I don’t think it’s a case where you know what one is but not the other, necessarily. And honestly l, any of them could take a step backwards next year.

 

[Killerjas]

Stutzle > Perfetti > Rossi

 

[deca guard]

Talent is talent. Some of those players you have listed would be pushing for the most talented player on the roster in a few years. The others, while may never having that label, aren't bad hockey players, and look to be better than a lot of the bigger options that can be projected as available at 4 or later

im trading for the say 8/9/10 and also getting back a prospect d or g . then drafting a sanderson/askerov/lundell/holloway . im not saying im standing on this hill , im just looking at all angles like a team staff has to . say we get back a g prospect then draft askerov were set in net . say we get back a big body stay at home #4 dman then draft lundell weve possibly filled two big holes . say we get a #4 d prospect and draft sanderson our defense could be rebuilt . sitting at 4 has put red wings front office on overtime

 

[simonedvinsson]

As much as I like Rossi-Perfetti-Holtz-Raymond, I’d be tempted to bulk up the back end and draft one of Schneider-Drysdale-Sanderson. If we get another defenseman next year (Power?), we could look a lot like a Blues team that took the cup last year in just a few years.

 

[Hen Kolland]

im trading for the say 8/9/10 and also getting back a prospect d or g . then drafting a sanderson/askerov/lundell/holloway . im not saying im standing on this hill , im just looking at all angles like a team staff has to . say we get back a g prospect then draft askerov were set in net . say we get back a big body stay at home #4 dman then draft lundell weve possibly filled two big holes . say we get a #4 d prospect and draft sanderson our defense could be rebuilt . sitting at 4 has put red wings front office on overtime

So basically all you are saying is that the team should see if trading back is an option. That's fine. Not really saying anything of substance, but fine.

Just realize that teams aren't punting on a higher tier of player when they see one.

 

[ArmChairGM89]

As much as I like Rossi-Perfetti-Holtz-Raymond, I’d be tempted to bulk up the back end and draft one of Schneider-Drysdale-Sanderson. I’d we get another defenseman next year (Power?), we could look a lot like a Blues team that took the cup last year in just a few years.

I’m starting to lean this way as well. Give me a drysdale or Sanderson this year and a power/lambos/Hughes next year and we actually have a unit on this team that can push for tops in the league. Build a huge strength as opposed to spreading it out.

 

[Ed Ned and Leddy]

Sanderson and Owen Power are only 4 months apart. Sanderson and Carson Lambos are only 6 months apart.

I don’t think it’s a case where you know what one is but not the other, necessarily. And honestly l, any of them could take a step backwards next year.

Sorry, maybe I phrased that poorly. I didn't mean to write that I don't think highly of those prospects- I really like all of Power and Lambos.

I only think that it's difficult to project the player that you'll draft a year out. We may win the lottery and Brandt Clarke has cemented himself as the 1OA. We might pick 3OA and Lucius or Johnson or Raty is the consensus guy there.

While I think it's likely we go LD next year, I don't think it's a certainty. So I wouldn't pass on Sanderson (if you think he's BPA at 4OA) just because you think we're likely to go LD next year.

Sanderson is kind of a late riser.
Second half Sanderson was about a point-per-game.
But even if he tops out as a 35-point guy who plays 24 minutes a night and is an elite transition player (Ie - he stops on defense and turns into offese) who kills penalties, I think he probably earns the 4 pick.

It's not like we're drafting Luke Schenn or Griffin Reinhart.

Defense generally take longer to develop.
So if we draft Sanderson, we're going to be sitting here with Sanderson, Seider and Hronek - plus hopefully 1-2 of the other defensive prospects.... Our blue line is going to tough to beat.

I largely agree, and that's why I wouldn't mind Sanderson at 4OA. I just don't see the offensive production for a #1D upside with Sanderson, so I'd prefer one of the forwards who I think shows a higher upside.

 

[MBH]

Sorry, maybe I phrased that poorly. I didn't mean to write that I don't think highly of those prospects- I really like all of Power and Lambos.

I only think that it's difficult to project the player that you'll draft a year out. We may win the lottery and Brandt Clarke has cemented himself as the 1OA. We might pick 3OA and Lucius or Johnson or Raty is the consensus guy there.

While I think it's likely we go LD next year, I don't think it's a certainty. So I wouldn't pass on Sanderson (if you think he's BPA at 4OA) just because you think we're likely to go LD next year.

Exactly, next year's crop does not matter at all when factoring your 2020 picks.
We don't know what those kids look like a year from now. We don't know where we finish - and even if we did, we don't know were we draft.

I largely agree, and that's why I wouldn't mind Sanderson at 4OA. I just don't see the offensive production for a #1D upside with Sanderson, so I'd prefer one of the forwards who I think shows a higher upside.

I just can't draft another winger.
Rasmussen (will be a winger, IMO).
Zadina.
Svechnikov.
Mantha.
Frk.
Jurco.
Since 2011 - we've been using our top pick to draft wingers.
That's 6 times in 9 years.
You can eliminate Frk and Jurco and make it 4 times in 7 years if you want.
Either way, I think you build up the middle.

 

[lilidk]

not going to upset if we get defenseman at 4, but I wouldn't do it. its harder to predict future for goalkeeper or defenseman . there is better chance to get great defenseman in late rounds rather than forward . Our scouts knows more about Perfetti than anybody else . Raymond , Stutzle, Rossi will play before draft . Someone going to improve and we going to get that one

 

[SirloinUB]

Exactly, next year's crop does not matter at all when factoring your 2020 picks.
We don't know what those kids look like a year from now. We don't know where we finish - and even if we did, we don't know were we draft.





I just can't draft another winger.
Rasmussen (will be a winger, IMO).
Zadina.
Svechnikov.
Mantha.
Frk.
Jurco.
Since 2011 - we've been using our top pick to draft wingers.
That's 6 times in 9 years.
You can eliminate Frk and Jurco and make it 4 times in 7 years if you want.
Either way, I think you build up the middle.

This is an interesting post but off the mark imo. I certainly agree that because you can’t control how next draft will unfold that you can’t let it dictate how you play this draft.

Similarly though, you can’t control how the 2020 prospects develop. Therefore you can’t just draft a D or C because we previously drafted wingers. You have to take the player you believe has the greatest chance at having the greatest impact. If that’s Drysdale, Lundell or Sanderson, great! But you don’t just draft one of them because 4 of our last 7 top picks have been wingers. It’s the wrong rational.

If Raymond, Rossi, Holtz or Perfetti project to have the largest impact, then they are my pick regardless of what position they project to at the NHL.

For the record, Raymond, Perfetti & Drysdale look like the best prospects to me. I also really like Holtz and Lundell but they seem to be perceived as reaches at 4.

 

[Frk It]

Similarly though, you can’t control how the 2020 prospects develop. Therefore you can’t just draft a D or C because we previously drafted wingers.

ding ding ding

There’s the question of what do we need... then the question of what does this draft have to offer.

When you force yourself to merge those two is when you make bad picks.