News Article: Wings willing to move down from 6?

[ZDH]

Interesting bit from TSN article after talking about willing to move back from 6 but not out of top 10. —->

“While the Red Wings are open to dropping back early, the could opt to move forward a short time later. The Red Wings own the Vegas Golden Knights' first-round pick (No. 30 or 31 overall) and the Ottawa Senators second-round pick (No. 33) in addition to their own (No. 36). Holland may package some combination of those picks, or use his extra second-round pick next season (from the Islanders) to move up.
“If somebody on your list starts to slide, then you start to work the phone,” Holland said. “We like a lot of players in that range, in that 30-35 range. We think there’s some pretty good players. Do you package two of those picks and try to move up? Possibly. If somebody high on our lists starts to slide and starts to fall.”


This I like. And I’m warming up to the idea of moving back from 6 but not out of top 10.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

That they said they won't move out of the top 10 is fine by me if they slide down and acquire more assets.

They will know who they are likely taking when they pull the trigger in this scenario. That is fine, we need a lot of help. Just don't move out of the top 10 and I am fine with who we select. I have Bouchard as my #10 player so I can see what they are thinking. After the U-18 Kotkaniemi turned the Top 9 into the top 10 for me. Like all of those guys. Not a fan of trading for both Islanders picks though for instance, I would have big issue with that unless Dobson dropped to us...

Now I don't expect people to be happy. Heck we basically openly did this with both Mantha, fairly popular and Cholowski not as popular. But if they think they can get their guy with the Rangers pick and we get another first rounder, I will sign up for that.

Personally I will be pretty sick to my stomach if we trade Quinn Hughes to the Hawks that is the only scenario I don't want to see happen while sliding down.

 

[lilidk]

Holland said it before, he whold like to get more prospects , now he said that there are plenty good players at beginning of first round. He is not going to trade up for sure. There is enather option it is trade for pics . I wonder what can we get for Nyquist?

 

[Orthodox Caveman]

Whyyyyyy

We need Boqvist or Bouchard at #6.

 

[Ezekial]

If they stay in the top 9 and can pick up a late one of the Hawks/Rangers firsts, I'm all for it.

That being said I want to see who's there at 6 that those teams are moving up for. I don't want to move out of the top 10 and I don't expect they try to. They know how many picks they have in the 30s. They know they can get a true top prospect in the top 10. I just can't wait til the 22nd at this point, I'm pretty anxious and excited to see the 5 picks before us.

 

[Shaman464]

If they stay in the top 9 and can pick up a late one of the Hawks/Rangers firsts, I'm all for it.

That being said I want to see who's there at 6 that those teams are moving up for. I don't want to move out of the top 10 and I don't expect they try to. They know how many picks they have in the 30s. They know they can get a true top prospect in the top 10. I just can't wait til the 22nd at this point, I'm pretty anxious and excited to see the 5 picks before us.

If they get a second late first there is no reason why they shouldn't be gunning to get the Islander's 11th or 12th. It would give them another very good prospect.

 

[NickH8]

That they said they won't move out of the top 10 is fine by me if they slide down and acquire more assets.

They will know who they are likely taking when they pull the trigger in this scenario. That is fine, we need a lot of help. Just don't move out of the top 10 and I am fine with who we select. I have Bouchard as my #10 player so I can see what they are thinking. After the U-18 Kotkaniemi turned the Top 9 into the top 10 for me. Like all of those guys. Not a fan of trading for both Islanders picks though for instance, I would have big issue with that unless Dobson dropped to us...

Now I don't expect people to be happy. Heck we basically openly did this with both Mantha, fairly popular and Cholowski not as popular. But if they think they can get their guy with the Rangers pick and we get another first rounder, I will sign up for that.

Personally I will be pretty sick to my stomach if we trade Quinn Hughes to the Hawks that is the only scenario I don't want to see happen while sliding down.

You act as if Quinn Hughes is already ours. He's not even a Michigan boy, he was born in Orlando.

 

[Frk It]

That they said they won't move out of the top 10 is fine by me if they slide down and acquire more assets.

They will know who they are likely taking when they pull the trigger in this scenario. That is fine, we need a lot of help. Just don't move out of the top 10 and I am fine with who we select. I have Bouchard as my #10 player so I can see what they are thinking. After the U-18 Kotkaniemi turned the Top 9 into the top 10 for me. Like all of those guys. Not a fan of trading for both Islanders picks though for instance, I would have big issue with that unless Dobson dropped to us...

Now I don't expect people to be happy. Heck we basically openly did this with both Mantha, fairly popular and Cholowski not as popular. But if they think they can get their guy with the Rangers pick and we get another first rounder, I will sign up for that.

Personally I will be pretty sick to my stomach if we trade Quinn Hughes to the Hawks that is the only scenario I don't want to see happen while sliding down.

I think the most likely scenario is we keep our pick and take a defenseman. I even think most people will support it. We will see how it shakes out.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

You act as if Quinn Hughes is already ours. He's not even a Michigan boy, he was born in Orlando.

I am just super high on him. I hate U of M as most of the posters around here can tell you. Probably one of the biggest University of Michigan haters you will meet so it isn't that. I just love his skill set, I will root for him regardless unless it is Chicago or Toronto that he suits up for. I mean it wouldn't be massively different than this year where I was rooting for his team to lose every game I guess.

I really don't want him in Chicago, he could help them a lot in my opinion.

 

[TheOtherOne]

I don't really see why this is interesting. Everything should be possible for the right price. Would anybody reasonable turn down 7+8 for 6? The only question is exactly where is the cutoff.

 

[Ezekial]

If they get a second late first there is no reason why they shouldn't be gunning to get the Islander's 11th or 12th. It would give them another very good prospect.

I'd love it, but I don't think the Rangers would move both to move to 6. So if 28/30-31 is enough I'd totally do it, but it seems like not enough to me. Do we give them their 2019 second back too? Leaves us with no extra picks in the top 4 rounds next year but - 9, 12, 33, 36, +3 thirds is quite the haul.

E: nm

 

[lilidk]

Whyyyyyy

We need Boqvist or Bouchard at #6.

Please anybody but Boqvist.

 

[Whoshattenkirkshoes]

Not enough Dobson talk on this board

 

[Pavels Dog]

Whyyyyyy

We need Boqvist or Bouchard at #6.

When 25% are saying that, 25% says we’re fools if we don’t take Hughes, 25% says it’s all about Dobson, and the remaining 25% talks about how Kotkaniemi and Wahlstrom are the best options, you start to realize that you can definitely move down and still get someone very good. Our pick at #6 won’t make everyone happy, and our pick at #7-10 wouldn’t make everyone happy.. but at least in the second scenario we get additional asset(s).

For what it’s worth I could see Boqvist being a faller like Liljegren was. Definitely an idea to move down to 8-9, get Dobson/Bouchard/Hughes, them trade up to 12-15 and get Boqvist if he’s around (or someone else that falls).

 

[Henkka]

When 25% are saying that, 25% says we’re fools if we don’t take Hughes, 25% says it’s all about Dobson, and the remaining 25% talks about how Kotkaniemi and Wahlstrom are the best options, you start to realize that you can definitely move down and still get someone very good. Our pick at #6 won’t make everyone happy, and our pick at #7-10 wouldn’t make everyone happy.. but at least in the second scenario we get additional asset(s).

For what it’s worth I could see Boqvist being a faller like Liljegren was. Definitely an idea to move down to 8-9, get Dobson/Bouchard/Hughes, them trade up to 12-15 and get Boqvist if he’s around (or someone else that falls).

If there's a big talent drop after TOP9 and players at 5-6-7-8-9 are almost equal (like this endless debate kind of proves), the best bet is to trade down, but not further than 9th. Then we could get some extra value elsewhere (another higher pick or something else).

But you need to find a partner with opposite needs.

 

[ChadS]

Chicago and NYR seem to be the optimal trade partners for us, they're at #8 & #9 and both have have extra late 1st round picks. Here are some trades that could happen with about the same value going both ways, using this chart (value in brackets).

DET - 6th (1650)
NYR - 9th, 26th (1630)

DET - 6th (1650)
NYR - 9th, 28th, 70th (1659)

DET - 6th, 67th (1738)
CHI - 8th, 27th (1750)

They might even be able to get both NYR late 1st by adding in the Vegas pick
DET - 6th, 30/31 (1970/1990)
NYR - 9th, 26th, 28th (2010)

Edit: Okay looks like this was discussed already on the previous page

 

[Frk It]

Not enough Dobson talk on this board

I agree! But I can only pump up his tires so much...

 

[Nut Upstrom]

Not enough Dobson talk on this board

Go to the prospects or mock draft boards, there is a groundswell of Dobson talk with a couple people saying he will be drafted in the top 3.
At this point it's hard to separate a trend/hype and who is actually the better prospect. Trying to consistently select the better of these kids is dizzying and I don't know how you all do it so well.
This is my first year really trying to keep up with the prospects and at this point I have my personal favorites but I've already thrown my hands up and said I'll just have to trust that our scouts take the best player available to us.

 

[Hammettf2b]

I agree! But I can only pump up his tires so much...

I'm in the boat of anybody but Hughes. Seems like theres a good mix of different people liking the different defenseman, which is prob a good thing for us.

 

[Ezekial]

Dobson just seems to have that steady support from everyone, Bouchard, Hughes, and Boqvist seem to have peaks and valleys of support.

I don't see people saying stay away from Dobson like some(hfboards members) seem to say about the other 3.

 

[Ezekial]

Hit quote instead of edit.

 

[Henkka]

Dobson just seems to have that steady support from everyone, Bouchard, Hughes, and Boqvist seem to have peaks and valleys of support.

I don't see people saying stay away from Dobson like some(hfboards members) seem to say about the other 3.

Dobson is the safe bet, which we should avoid.

 

[Ezekial]

Dobson is the safe bet, which we should avoid.

I still like Bouchard as my guy. I think his ability to stretch the ice and his shot are going to translate mighty fine, and his skating won't be a detriment to his game.

 

[Henkka]

I still like Bouchard as my guy. I think his ability to stretch the ice and his shot are going to translate mighty fine, and his skating won't be a detriment to his game.

Brown: A data-driven comparison of Evan Bouchard and Noah...

This was just phenomenal article. Never seen anything anybody wrote better based on statistical analysis. NEVER.

The guy took everything in account. How Bouchard's skating did look sluggish, because he plays 30-35min in back-to-back-to-backs etc. etc,

Final conclusion was that guys are razor thin even. Bouchard is better offensively and has more Elite tools, but Dobson's defensive numbers did look better. The writer did also mention that their team's defensive styles are totally different, which causes a big difference favoring Dobson. That's imo, is where all Dobson love comes. Their numbers vs. team-averages did not give an edge for either.

My conclusion is, that Drafters have to see how Bouchard's/Dobson's current playing style and team-style will fit in NHL style. That's the main question.

I'm also a Bouchard-guy. I have watched those videos and after this article I still love those descriptions about his ability to "get shots through" and "get shots towards the net". Also his long stretch-passes are what I like. The writer describes Dobson's passing more safe. He doesn't say it, but it was my analyze about the passing analyze he wrote.

I like these Elite abilities Bouchard has. Again, many of his offensive abilities are what Lidstrom had. Long strech passes... those are killers ES for AA or Larkin. Getting shots through traffic... but towards the goal. Not wide that much as others. I just already imagine Rasmussen there screening and tipping them in...

 

[FireBird71]

I still like Bouchard as my guy. I think his ability to stretch the ice and his shot are going to translate mighty fine, and his skating won't be a detriment to his game.

I've seen plenty of Bouchard in person...he would be a great pick...but if Dobson is still there I'd be fine with him instead