HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Detroit Red Wings
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Red Wings Draft Thread 2013

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-08-2013, 09:03 AM
  #226
P U L L H A R D
 
P U L L H A R D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ottawa
Country: Somalia
Posts: 24,495
vCash: 500
You have to go BPA, especially in the first round. This whole "size" craze is how guys like Giroux don't get picked til the last third of the first round.

P U L L H A R D is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-08-2013, 09:03 AM
  #227
Ottomatic
Registered User
 
Ottomatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,897
vCash: 500
I wouldn't touch Kerby Rychel with a ten-foot pole - he's going to be a huge bust. He doesn't have the talent to score at the pro level and doesn't have the work ethic to play a checking role. He's a cherry picker in the OHL, and plays top line minutes and first line PP because his father is part owner of the Spits - and never backchecks. There will be a lot more skill/talent/upside guys available in the 15-20 range. Kerby to me is a 2nd or even 3rd rounder outside his padded goals. Khokhlachev left to play in Russia in part because he was tired of all the coaches forever telling him to pass it to Kerby.

Ottomatic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-08-2013, 10:20 AM
  #228
Hendricks433
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 746
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eternal Sunshine View Post
You have to go BPA, especially in the first round. This whole "size" craze is how guys like Giroux don't get picked til the last third of the first round.
Agreed, size would be nice but passing up a more skilled player for a few inches is really dumb.

Hendricks433 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-08-2013, 12:37 PM
  #229
Boomhower
Registered User
 
Boomhower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,600
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gretskidoo View Post
Montreal is the smallest team in the league. They're having such big problems playing in the big bad East.

**** drafting a big forward just because he's big. Best pick available, not biggest pick available.
Exactly. You always draft the best player available. The Draft is about obtaining talent.
Free agency and trade is where you address need.

Max Domi is an exciting offensive spark plug. Incredible speed and stickhandling abilities and dangerous in open ice, or on the rush. He is also aggresive in going for goal and he is a finisher. Small, but is built like a fire hydrant and plays low to the ground, making him very strong on the puck. He is going to be a player and I would not be disappointed if Detroit picked Domi. Another small, skilled player, but I believe he will be an offensive impact player at the next level. Also played his best hockey and really stepped up in the playoffs as a rookie 16 year old. He's off to a good start in these playoffs aswell. Seems to play better and find another level in big games/better competition.

Like mentioned Monahan would be great, but doesn't seem realistic for Detroit's draft position. Don't see him sliding at all. Complete package and had nobody to play with for half of the year.

Boomhower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-08-2013, 01:21 PM
  #230
StormSurge9
Registered User
 
StormSurge9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Guelph, ONT
Posts: 1,073
vCash: 500
I want Ryan Hartman. His speed, skill and aggressiveness is a very enticing combo.

StormSurge9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-08-2013, 02:47 PM
  #231
SirloinUB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rzombo4 prez View Post
the two I really don't want are Lazar and Shinkaruk. I would much prefer one of the bigger forwards.
I get what you are saying, given that there are several guys listed 6'3" +, but curtis lazar would be a nice pick. He is 6,0 190, very fast and considered very strong. This kid, protects the puck with ease in the WHL. He would be a very nice pick.

Gauthier and Lazar interest me the most in the first round.

SirloinUB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-08-2013, 03:57 PM
  #232
StormSurge9
Registered User
 
StormSurge9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Guelph, ONT
Posts: 1,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ottomatic View Post
I wouldn't touch Kerby Rychel with a ten-foot pole - he's going to be a huge bust. He doesn't have the talent to score at the pro level and doesn't have the work ethic to play a checking role. He's a cherry picker in the OHL, and plays top line minutes and first line PP because his father is part owner of the Spits - and never backchecks. There will be a lot more skill/talent/upside guys available in the 15-20 range. Kerby to me is a 2nd or even 3rd rounder outside his padded goals. Khokhlachev left to play in Russia in part because he was tired of all the coaches forever telling him to pass it to Kerby.
Seen him a few times as well, I just don't think his game translates. Much better choices in the first round.

StormSurge9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-08-2013, 07:45 PM
  #233
Guru Meditation
Service Unavailable
 
Guru Meditation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 8,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boomhower View Post
Exactly. You always draft the best player available. The Draft is about obtaining talent.
Free agency and trade is where you address need.
I hear this all the time, but what on earth does BPA mean? That suggests some sort of videogame-style objective talent score that a GM can simply access. It doesn't work like that in real life. For example, we typically talk about prospects along the lines of released rankings like ISS. But when it comes to the actual draft, NHL teams often have drastically different lists. Which one is ranking the player properly?

But we generally hold that there is a "best" player available in the absolute sense—there will inevitably be a player who will be preferable to have. The problem is, if what we're dealing with is likely a fundamentally imperfect scouting mechanism, "take the BPA" simply comes down to "take the guy your scouting process claims is the best." That statement has no real content. It's like telling a player that he should try to win the game.

Now, maybe "take the BPA" can be used to really express the negative statement "don't draft out of positional need against your own scouting process' results," which seems more reasonable. But even then, there are situations where that's the appropriate thing to do. If you rank the players available at roughly the same level, it would seem reasonable to take the one that fills the greatest need for your team's prospect system. If you have no solid prospect goaltender, it's probably a decent idea to take a goaltender as long as his talent level is close to the highest available talent level (as determined by your scouting process).

Typically the fear of drafting out of need is that you may no longer need a player at that position and that you may sacrifice overall value. But at least the former is kind of a weak knock against the practice, because you might not need the 'BPA' that you've drafted either. Perhaps it would be nice to have that 'BPA' even at a stacked position, but then you have to wonder if it's a concern in the case of drafting out of need either. You'd simply end up with one solid NHL player you have no real need for.

and, again, the idea that you could sacrifice overall value by not drafting BPA is kind of an odd one. It doesn't make much sense to say that a team is ever not drafting BPA; they at least believe they are. To say that a team is not interested in drafting BPA is to say that they are uninterested in making the best pick for their team according to their scouts, which is absurd and irrational in my view.

Guru Meditation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-08-2013, 09:05 PM
  #234
P U L L H A R D
 
P U L L H A R D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ottawa
Country: Somalia
Posts: 24,495
vCash: 500
My definition of taking the BPA is taking the kid with hype and upside at ~#20 overall rather than flip that pick for #37 and #52 or whatever. We have plenty of projects and boom/busts, time for us to take a pick we can feel more certain about moving forward.

P U L L H A R D is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2013, 06:45 AM
  #235
detredWINgs
Registered User
 
detredWINgs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,885
vCash: 500
If there was ever a year where the Wings decided to move up in the draft instead of back, this would be the year to do it. I could see Homer in Philly willing to trade down from 6th (as of today) in exchange for a package atypical of the usual pick-for-pick trades. If either Barkov or Lindholm were available at that point, I'd love to see us make that push. I'd be much more content with wallowing in 8th seed mediocrity for a few more years if I knew that we had a potential franchise center just 2-3 years away from joining the squad.

detredWINgs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2013, 09:51 AM
  #236
TheFirebird
Resurget Cineribus
 
TheFirebird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Yoshinoyama, Nara
Country: Japan
Posts: 770
vCash: 418
Quote:
Originally Posted by detredWINgs View Post
If there was ever a year where the Wings decided to move up in the draft instead of back, this would be the year to do it. I could see Homer in Philly willing to trade down from 6th (as of today) in exchange for a package atypical of the usual pick-for-pick trades. If either Barkov or Lindholm were available at that point, I'd love to see us make that push. I'd be much more content with wallowing in 8th seed mediocrity for a few more years if I knew that we had a potential franchise center just 2-3 years away from joining the squad.
Out of curiosity, what about Lindholm do you find justifies taking him that high? I can only go off of his stats, as I haven't seen him play, but it would seem that he is another slick playmaker AND the cousin of Jarnkrok. Doesn't sound as if he is an elite goal scoring prospect, and it doesn't sound as if he has the size or grittiness of N.A. prospects.

TheFirebird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2013, 10:29 AM
  #237
InjuredChoker
Registered User
 
InjuredChoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: LTIR or golf course
Posts: 20,353
vCash: 682
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFirebird View Post
Out of curiosity, what about Lindholm do you find justifies taking him that high? I can only go off of his stats, as I haven't seen him play, but it would seem that he is another slick playmaker AND the cousin of Jarnkrok. Doesn't sound as if he is an elite goal scoring prospect, and it doesn't sound as if he has the size or grittiness of N.A. prospects.
Maybe not elite goal scoring but I think he's around 6´1. With strong built. He uses his body well, excellent hands. Great work ethic and very smart.

Personally have him ranked at 5th.

InjuredChoker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2013, 11:59 AM
  #238
Huffman
Registered User
 
Huffman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,748
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFirebird View Post
Out of curiosity, what about Lindholm do you find justifies taking him that high? I can only go off of his stats, as I haven't seen him play, but it would seem that he is another slick playmaker AND the cousin of Jarnkrok. Doesn't sound as if he is an elite goal scoring prospect, and it doesn't sound as if he has the size or grittiness of N.A. prospects.
He's certainly got more grit than the other top forwards in this draft. He is not small either, 184 cm is almost 6´1 and his weight (194 pounds) won't be a problem either. I'd say he's more NHL ready than his cousin. Many of the very best players in the NHL are not elite goal scorers.

Huffman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2013, 12:49 PM
  #239
gretskidoo
Registered User
 
gretskidoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,804
vCash: 500
Being worried about the size of an 18 year old kid that already weighs about as much as Zetterberg/Datsyuk is a bit silly. Or is length the only thing people care about these days?

gretskidoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2013, 06:04 PM
  #240
joe89
#5
 
joe89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,756
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFirebird View Post
Out of curiosity, what about Lindholm do you find justifies taking him that high? I can only go off of his stats, as I haven't seen him play, but it would seem that he is another slick playmaker AND the cousin of Jarnkrok. Doesn't sound as if he is an elite goal scoring prospect, and it doesn't sound as if he has the size or grittiness of N.A. prospects.
Just about everything in Lindholm's draft season justifies his ranking actually. Best SWE draft production since Sedins and top5 all-time to go with a two-way game. But you're right, he's not a goal scoring prospect.

joe89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2013, 06:16 PM
  #241
detredWINgs
Registered User
 
detredWINgs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFirebird View Post
Out of curiosity, what about Lindholm do you find justifies taking him that high? I can only go off of his stats, as I haven't seen him play, but it would seem that he is another slick playmaker AND the cousin of Jarnkrok. Doesn't sound as if he is an elite goal scoring prospect, and it doesn't sound as if he has the size or grittiness of N.A. prospects.
I understand you haven't seen him, and given that he's a skilled Swede, I can see why you make the assumption that Lindholm is just a "slick playmaker" without much grit, but having said that, that judgment is WAY off.

First, I wouldn't even classify him as a "slick playmaker" simply because that suggests he doesn't have the toolbox he does. This kid can literally score goals however you want them. He LOVES going to the net and with his hand-eye coordination and compete level, he could, as a last resort, be the next Tomas Holmstrom.

Then there's the grit factor - Not only is Lindholm willing to go to the dirty areas of the ice, but he has no problem throwing his weight around. And he really seemed to step up his physical game in the WJC, to the point where there were a few shifts where he literally looked like Helm in the way that Helm uses his skating to boost the impact of his hits.

And then there's his two-way game. Its actually more of a "North American style" of checking than it is the "European" style, if that that makes sense - In other words, he involves his body in his two-way game as much as his stick - more so than say, Datsyuk or Zetterberg. And he's great at it.

The only thing I'm not sold on is his shot. I don't think he'll ever be a sniper in the NHL, but that doesn't mean he won't be a goal scorer - his willingness to score dirty goals combined with his hockey IQ should allow him to beat goaltenders with his positioning, rather than his shot alone.

I've seen a lot of people compare him to Zetterberg (if he reaches his full potential), but I honestly think that's not doing Lindholm enough justice. He's got all the tools that Zetterberg has, but he has more size, more speed, more tenacity, and more grit.

I honestly think he could end up being a "dumbed down" Forsberg. And at worst, I don't think you'll get anything short of a Dan Cleary (in his prime) type or, with the right training, the next Tomas Holmstrom.

detredWINgs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2013, 06:22 PM
  #242
detredWINgs
Registered User
 
detredWINgs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gretskidoo View Post
Being worried about the size of an 18 year old kid that already weighs about as much as Zetterberg/Datsyuk is a bit silly. Or is length the only thing people care about these days?
On paper, its always a concern. But anyone who watches hockey knows size can be remedied by any one, or a combination of, positioning, skating, tenacity, and intelligence.

Its kind of funny, considering some of the most tenacious and physical players in the NHL are under 6'0 - Brown, Clutterbuck, Helm, Richards, Tootoo...

And 2 of the most tenacious forwards that will likely both go in the first round - Domi and Harman - are under 6'0 also.

detredWINgs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2013, 06:27 PM
  #243
Jurky
Free the HolySlapper
 
Jurky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,833
vCash: 500
Lindholm would be a dream come true but I really can't see Holland being aggressive enough to trade up and I can't see a team with the draft position to take him giving him up. It's still fun to think about though.

Jurky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2013, 06:37 PM
  #244
mindfly
KEN HOLLAND OUT
 
mindfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Bloomfield Hills, MI
Country: Sweden
Posts: 8,947
vCash: 500
There's always a player who drops a lot more than one would expect... like Cam Fowler and Filip Forsberg, I wonder who this year's player will be?

mindfly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2013, 06:53 PM
  #245
joe89
#5
 
joe89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,756
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mindfly View Post
There's always a player who drops a lot more than one would expect... like Cam Fowler and Filip Forsberg, I wonder who this year's player will be?
Maybe Monahan? Just a feeling of mine, though.

joe89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2013, 06:54 PM
  #246
DatsyukToZetterberg
Alligator!
 
DatsyukToZetterberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Newfoundland
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,364
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mindfly View Post
There's always a player who drops a lot more than one would expect... like Cam Fowler and Filip Forsberg, I wonder who this year's player will be?
I would have gone with Valeri Nichushkin but if TB misses out on Mack/Jones/Drouin I think that he's there next pick. He also will fit in nicely with the Russian All-Star team he is trying to develop there.

I know Holland doesn't take Russians anymore but if he falls to us and we pass him up I will not be a happy camper. You don't pass up a player who would be fighting for the #1 overall spot if he was from anywhere but Russia, especially if he's around at 14-16.

As for who I think will drop I think it'll be one of Barkov, Nurse, Shinkaruk or Pulock falling out of the top 5/top 10.

DatsyukToZetterberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2013, 07:10 PM
  #247
detredWINgs
Registered User
 
detredWINgs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dolph Lundgren View Post
Lindholm would be a dream come true but I really can't see Holland being aggressive enough to trade up and I can't see a team with the draft position to take him giving him up. It's still fun to think about though.
If its Philly, I could see it happening.

They already have Giroux, Schenn, and Couturier. Sure, Lindholm is the BPA if he's still there at the 5th or 6th position, but not only does Philly not need skilled centers, they also have a glut of other young offensive talent in Voracek, Simmonds, and Read.

Then there's the fact that Philly isn't really rebuilding, nor is Homer the type of GM who has the patience for that. And outside of Jones, I don't see any other defenseman in this draft who could contribute steadily fresh out of the draft, unless you buy into all the Nurse hype.

With the addition of DeKeyser, the development of Kindl, and the emergence of Backman, I would gladly give up Sproul (because I think that's who Philly would want if they're passing up the opportunity to take Nurse) and our 1st round pick for the Lindholm pick, and a 2nd or 3rd in 2014 to boot.

Is that a ton to give up? Yes. But I think it radically changes the course of the Red Wings future, and effectively surpasses a true rebuild. A talent like Lindholm could be brought in 2 years and, with the help of Jarnkrok and Zetterberg, smooth out the transition from the Zetterberg/Datsyuk era in the same way those two did for an aging Yzerman/Fedorov.

But of course, there's too much creativity involved here for Holland to bite.

detredWINgs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2013, 07:14 PM
  #248
The Nose
#thefuture
 
The Nose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 7,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by detredWINgs View Post
If its Philly, I could see it happening.

They already have Giroux, Schenn, and Couturier. Sure, Lindholm is the BPA if he's still there at the 5th or 6th position, but not only does Philly not need skilled centers, they also have a glut of other young offensive talent in Voracek, Simmonds, and Read.

Then there's the fact that Philly isn't really rebuilding, nor is Homer the type of GM who has the patience for that. And outside of Jones, I don't see any other defenseman in this draft who could contribute steadily fresh out of the draft, unless you buy into all the Nurse hype.

With the addition of DeKeyser, the development of Kindl, and the emergence of Backman, I would gladly give up Sproul (because I think that's who Philly would want if they're passing up the opportunity to take Nurse) and our 1st round pick for the Lindholm pick, and a 2nd or 3rd in 2014 to boot.

Is that a ton to give up? Yes. But I think it radically changes the course of the Red Wings future, and effectively surpasses a true rebuild. A talent like Lindholm could be brought in 2 years and, with the help of Jarnkrok and Zetterberg, smooth out the transition from the Zetterberg/Datsyuk era in the same way those two did for an aging Yzerman/Fedorov.

But of course, there's too much creativity involved here for Holland to bite.
I'd give a **** ton to move up into Lindholm/Barkov range.

The Nose is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2013, 07:56 PM
  #249
DatsyukToZetterberg
Alligator!
 
DatsyukToZetterberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Newfoundland
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,364
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by detredWINgs View Post
If its Philly, I could see it happening.

They already have Giroux, Schenn, and Couturier. Sure, Lindholm is the BPA if he's still there at the 5th or 6th position, but not only does Philly not need skilled centers, they also have a glut of other young offensive talent in Voracek, Simmonds, and Read.

Then there's the fact that Philly isn't really rebuilding, nor is Homer the type of GM who has the patience for that. And outside of Jones, I don't see any other defenseman in this draft who could contribute steadily fresh out of the draft, unless you buy into all the Nurse hype.

With the addition of DeKeyser, the development of Kindl, and the emergence of Backman, I would gladly give up Sproul (because I think that's who Philly would want if they're passing up the opportunity to take Nurse) and our 1st round pick for the Lindholm pick, and a 2nd or 3rd in 2014 to boot.

Is that a ton to give up? Yes. But I think it radically changes the course of the Red Wings future, and effectively surpasses a true rebuild. A talent like Lindholm could be brought in 2 years and, with the help of Jarnkrok and Zetterberg, smooth out the transition from the Zetterberg/Datsyuk era in the same way those two did for an aging Yzerman/Fedorov.

But of course, there's too much creativity involved here for Holland to bite.
I'm not sure that Sproul+16th overall+46th overall is enough to be move up to the top 5. While we love Sproul he has a HUGE risk factor associated with him, he may have the ability QB a 2nd unit PP right now but his defence is still years behind. I think we're looking at at least 2-3 years in the AHL for him, then a year or 2 of being sheltered in the NHL. If we're trading for that pick I think Philly wants someone that's ready to contribute either now or within the next 2 years. I think something like Smith+46th overall pick might get it done. Smith is a safe bet to be a #4 dman, can help Philly out next year and he still has top pairing potential.

Lindhom/Barkov both have #1 C potential, Barkov is still quite young, I think Lindholm is something like 9 months older then him, but Barkov is also out 5 months with a shoulder injury. It would have been nice to see how we played at this years WC. On that note is there any chance that Lindholm plays with Sweden at this years WC?

DatsyukToZetterberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2013, 10:16 PM
  #250
Guru Meditation
Service Unavailable
 
Guru Meditation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 8,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DatsyukToZetterberg View Post
I'm not sure that Sproul+16th overall+46th overall is enough to be move up to the top 5. While we love Sproul he has a HUGE risk factor associated with him, he may have the ability QB a 2nd unit PP right now but his defence is still years behind. I think we're looking at at least 2-3 years in the AHL for him, then a year or 2 of being sheltered in the NHL. If we're trading for that pick I think Philly wants someone that's ready to contribute either now or within the next 2 years. I think something like Smith+46th overall pick might get it done. Smith is a safe bet to be a #4 dman, can help Philly out next year and he still has top pairing potential.
Even then, we'd have to find a team in the top 5 who is willing to trade quality for quantity AND needs something other than center for this draft. The problem is few GMs will do quantity for quality and even fewer will think they don't have room for a center with that top 5 pick.

Guru Meditation is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:55 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.