Prospect Info: 6th Overall Pick Moritz Seider, Defence, DEL

[deca guard]

sorry if this posted already but this yzerman article bout cider and drafting philosophy is music to my ears . absolute top gun gm today besides sakic whose the other one , wings vs avs rivalry is going to happen again . but these outlooks of yzerman are what ive been dreaming to hear , absolute monster level gm : Yzerman Says Wings Didn't Reach For Seider: "We Had Him Right At Six On Our List"

 

[NotLeddy]

That is not at all what he is saying. Why do people even bother posting **** like this?

Larkin is very good and I am very thankful to have him, but so far he hasn't shown to be a premier center in the league. All he is saying is that we will need a 1C better than Larkin if we are going to have a defense by committee. We need atleast 1 superstar on this roster. If we won a lotto and had Larkin as our 2C, we would be looking very good. Larkin would be one of the best 2Cs in the league.

That is the best part of drafting Seider with the 6th. Between Hronek, Cholo, McIssac and Seider its enough to finally be optimistic that we may have everything we need for a full D core if 3 of these guys pan out and become #3s and up. We could be 1 lotto pick away (elite center) from having the players we need to be a real contender once our players grow a bit.

You need 2 very good centers and 3 good D. Somewhere within those 5 guys you need atleast 1 superstar. Top 6 wingers and 4th-6th D are easy. We already likely have the wingers we need.

I really wonder if some people would be saying this about Kuznetsov, Aho, Scheifele, Barzal, ROR, Duchene, Monahan and a lot of other centers that are on the same tier as Larkin... that they're "not good enough", "not a superstar", "can't be the best player on the team if they want to win a Cup" and all those other chestnuts, despite all having very similar underlying metrics and production (when mostly relative to linemate comparison) to Larkin in 2018-19... (Larkin was actually quite a bit better than Kuznetsov and Scheifele by almost all advanced stats this season too, and had better relative xgf and p1/60 than Aho this season with a much worse defensive core to work with). His PDO was also 98.54, implying that he was more 'unlucky' with his production than what his PPG turned out.

He played 30% of the season with Helm or Abdelkader on his wing, he played four games very visibly hurt from the Kulak scrap (vs Arizona, Colorado, NYI and NYR), and in February he was 2nd in the entire league for most individual 5v5 Corsi created to only Brendan Gallagher. Dylan Larkin is very, very good. Unquestionably a 1C. Top 10 center? No. Top 15 center? Probably not but not that far off.

An NHL team can absolutely win a Cup with Dylan Larkin as their 1C. Do you need more high end talent/superstars? Of course, this team obviously needs all the help they can get, starting with a blue line that is good at puck retrievals and successful zone exits/entries, and doesn't get pressured in high danger situations (eg star defenseman), as well as a "star" winger.

 

[Filppula]

I don’t hate the pick but I hate that a 6th overall projects to be a top 4 defenceman. At 6 I want a guy that projects as a top pairing guy.

 

[TCNorthstars]

I don’t hate the pick but I hate that a 6th overall projects to be a top 4 defenceman. At 6 I want a guy that projects as a top pairing guy.

Those guys that project to be top pair aren’t really around with the 6th pick.

 

[Killerjas]

I don’t hate the pick but I hate that a 6th overall projects to be a top 4 defenceman. At 6 I want a guy that projects as a top pairing guy.

There was no one there, the closest was Seider

 

[Leronziia]

Moritz can very well be a top pairing defenseman, if the definition is a guy who plays 25 minutes against quality competition.

Hronek is our offensive dynamo for the future.

 

[Roomba With a Bauer]

I don’t hate the pick but I hate that a 6th overall projects to be a top 4 defenceman. At 6 I want a guy that projects as a top pairing guy.

It's a lot harder to project defensemen...defensemen who easily project as top-pair are gone in the first four picks, and there is maybe one per draft...and sometimes they bust. That's why there are so many top pair defensemen drafted in like the third and fourth rounds. With the Wings having the young forward group and prospects that they do, expect a lot more of our high picks to be defense.

 

[deca guard]

Moritz can very well be a top pairing defenseman, if the definition is a guy who plays 25 minutes against quality competition.

Hronek is our offensive dynamo for the future.

exactly . its a perfect match with a power play qb and a stud shut down man that can deal with anybody from mckinnons power game to johnny hockeys dangles . while still being an excellent passer which is the most important aspect of a dmans offensive abilities imo as his passes from own end are extremely important to generating chances in opponant end . a shut down dman is the least sexy player needed in a 5 man top unit , the centerman - scoring winger - powerplay qb dman all being sexier , but he still is very very important without having the big stats that everybody can see on paper . yzerman was aiming for a top unit dominant player and obviously didnt see one in all of cozens-zegras-broberg-etc . but in cider he saw a dominant shut down guy that a coach is going to love sicking on opponant scoring lines .

 

[WaW]

I don’t hate the pick but I hate that a 6th overall projects to be a top 4 defenceman. At 6 I want a guy that projects as a top pairing guy.

Picking him at 6 means Yzerman disagrees with that projection and he/his scouts almost certainly see him as a 1/2 guy.

 

[obey86]

which just isn't good enough out of your best forward if you're also going for a committee approach on defense

41 players put up more than 73 points this year

The leading scorer for the Stanley Cup Champions had 77 points this season and put up a lower ppg than Larkin did.

 

[Hen Kolland]

I don’t hate the pick but I hate that a 6th overall projects to be a top 4 defenceman. At 6 I want a guy that projects as a top pairing guy.

The organization without a doubt is projecting Seider as a top pairing defenseman. Seider's floor feels like a shutdown NHL defenseman. Easily should become a top 4 defenseman unless his development never gets under way. But his ceiling is a top pairing defenseman, so let's try not to overreact. Let's give the kid more than a week to display who he is and what he can do.

 

[ricky0034]

The leading scorer for the Stanley Cup Champions had 77 points this season and put up a lower ppg than Larkin did.

they also had Alex Pietrangelo

maybe read my post?

 

[obey86]

they also had Alex Pietrangelo

maybe read my post?

Your post is wrong.

There is no arbitrary point total your #1 center has to meet if you don't have a stud #1 defender. What a silly concept.

Anyways, if Larkin was playing with better defenders (even if it's just a good overall group without a stud #1, gasp!) and a better supporting cast on the roster he likely has more than "just" 73 points....rendering your point completely moot.

 

[Hen Kolland]

The leading scorer for the Stanley Cup Champions had 77 points this season and put up a lower ppg than Larkin did.

This debate is getting out of hand. I know we love to puff out our chest when it comes to Larkin scoring for this team, but he's also given the most opportunity and takes more shots than anyone on the team by a long shot. Larkin was #9 in the league in shots on goal with 287; that's 71 more than the next closest, and around 17% of the team's total shots on goal by forwards. We talk about how playing for the Wings suppresses Larkin's offense, but it probably also inflates his offense to a certain extent. The truth lies somewhere in the middle.

The O'Reilly example for St Louis doesn't address the point that he was making. He was highlighting how a winning team realistically can't rely on Larkin being the primary source of offense and have a defense by committee approach that is lacking elite players. STL is stacked on the back end. Pietrangelo, Parayko, Dunn, Bouwmeester, Edmundson all would have been top pairing defenseman for the Wings this year. It's unfortunate, but it's true. O'Reilly was very good this year, and his supporting cast of Tarasenko, Schenn, Perron, Bozak, and a few others give the needed boost up front, with the help from a hot goalie and the loaded back end to be a good team.

Now I will agree, I don't think Larkin is given credit to the level he should be given, but it's not just because of his offense. Yes, there were 41 players who scored more than 73 points, but not all players are created equal. You can break it down to PPG and weed out some of the players above Larkin, and you can further dig in to find players who scored more but are probably less of impact players. Jake Guentzel scored 76 points this year, am I supposed to credit him as a more impactful player than Larkin? Same goes for Teravainen or Kessel or a handful of others.

Can Larkin carry the team to success? Maybe, we won't know until he does. But I'm not really interested in finding out the answer when management has the ability to find the talent needed to supplement his talent. We can get better offensive players, we can get better defensive players, we can get better goalies. Seider looks like the first step in accomplishing just that.

 

[obey86]

This debate is getting out of hand. I know we love to puff out our chest when it comes to Larkin scoring for this team, but he's also given the most opportunity and takes more shots than anyone on the team by a long shot. Larkin was #9 in the league in shots on goal with 287; that's 71 more than the next closest, and around 17% of the team's total shots on goal by forwards. We talk about how playing for the Wings suppresses Larkin's offense, but it probably also inflates his offense to a certain extent. The truth lies somewhere in the middle.

The O'Reilly example for St Louis doesn't address the point that he was making. He was highlighting how a winning team realistically can't rely on Larkin being the primary source of offense and have a defense by committee approach that is lacking elite players. STL is stacked on the back end. Pietrangelo, Parayko, Dunn, Bouwmeester, Edmundson all would have been top pairing defenseman for the Wings this year. It's unfortunate, but it's true. O'Reilly was very good this year, and his supporting cast of Tarasenko, Schenn, Perron, Bozak, and a few others give the needed boost up front, with the help from a hot goalie and the loaded back end to be a good team.

Now I will agree, I don't think Larkin is given credit to the level he should be given, but it's not just because of his offense. Yes, there were 41 players who scored more than 73 points, but not all players are created equal. You can break it down to PPG and weed out some of the players above Larkin, and you can further dig in to find players who scored more but are probably less of impact players. Jake Guentzel scored 76 points this year, am I supposed to credit him as a more impactful player than Larkin? Same goes for Teravainen or Kessel or a handful of others.

Can Larkin carry the team to success? Maybe, we won't know until he does. But I'm not really interested in finding out the answer when management has the ability to find the talent needed to supplement his talent. We can get better offensive players, we can get better defensive players, we can get better goalies. Seider looks like the first step in accomplishing just that.

You have to get yourself in position to generate shots, and high quality shots at that. A high shot total doesn't happen just because you like take a lot of shots and anyone can do it. It happens because you are good at getting yourself into position to take shots.

I don't think there's a single person on this message board who has ever said that the team constructed as is, with Larkin as the only true top end offensive player, with a garbage defensive corps, is good enough to win anything. Where the heck did you get that idea? The offensive supporting cast and defensive supporting cast need to get much better around Larkin......not sure anyone has ever said otherwise.

Jake Guentzel was stapled to the hip of Sidney Crosby all season, a top 5 NHL player in the league........so no, that would be stupid for the aforementioned reason. And Kessel? Yeah? He is (and has been for a long time) a high end offensive player...better offensively than Larkin is....not sure why you would think that's controversial in any way. TT? Great player. Also is a winger (not a center) and plays with Aho on a team with a bunch of good defenders. Not exactly comparable situations to what Larkin is dealing with.

---

All in all, i'm not really sure what you're trying to argue or what your overall point is. That the team around Larkin needs to get much better or else we aren't going anywhere? No shit. That we can't win a Stanley Cup with Mike Green and Danny Dekeyser on the top pairing? No shit. No one is arguing Larkin is good enough to carry this garbage roster to the SCF - but it seems like that's the point you're arguing against. So again, not sure what the point of your post was.

 

[Hockey Know it all]

This is a very optimistic view. Cholo doesn't look like he has the tools to be a top pairing D guy. And Seider has never played on North American ice, form a league that has never been known to produce elite talent (Seidenberg, and Ehrhoff are the only two major players to come out of that league). The chances that they both hit as top guys is near 0. Though I am much more hopeful Seider will become a #2 defensive d-man than I am that Cholo becomes more than a #4 PMD.

Again Shaman, watch highlights of Cholo on YouTube,search “Cholowski Awood40”. His games from October to December, CHOLO looked elite as. 20 year old. Then fell off as he played due to NHLschedule and workload against pro players. I don’t get your infatuation with hating on the wings even though you’re a wings fan. Cholowski is only 21. He has at least 2-3 more seasons until we know what he will be at the NHL level.

 

[Oddbob]

That is not at all what he is saying. Why do people even bother posting **** like this?

It is no more "shit" than setting an absolute certainty that X must happen otherwise a Cup or contending team is out of the question.

 

[Hen Kolland]

I didn't want to have to do this to you, but here we go. I was both agreeing and disagreeing with you. Mainly to illustrate how petulant your response was and how the debate was arguing things that shouldn't even matter.

You have to get yourself in position to generate shots, and high quality shots at that. A high shot total doesn't happen just because you like take a lot of shots and anyone can do it. It happens because you are good at getting yourself into position to take shots.

I don't think you are really grasping the point. Larkin is taking shots because he's a shoot first player. The team relies heavily on the rush at this stage, and he is the puck carrier most often on the team. He takes a lot of shots because it's who he is. His numbers are inflated because of so much of the offense flows through him. On a more balanced team with stronger support players, the offense probably doesn't hinge on Larkin as much. That being said, he probably ends up with higher quality chances, or teammates who convert more, and his numbers would improve. Like I said, the truth is in the middle. I'm not saying he's a 50 point forward on a good team, and I'm not saying he's a 100 point forward on a good team. You are over emphasizing the positive impact and ignoring the negative impact.

I don't think there's a single person on this message board who has ever said that the team constructed as is, with Larkin as the only true top end offensive player, with a garbage defensive corps, is good enough to win anything. Where the heck did you get that idea? The offensive supporting cast and defensive supporting cast need to get much better around Larkin......not sure anyone has ever said otherwise.

Someone literally made the point that Dylan Larkin probably isn't enough of a high end center to lead a team to a Stanley Cup. You came back with a response of "Yeah well STL just won with a center who only scored 77 points and a lower PPG." To which I am pointing out that STL was stacked on the back end. You didn't even respond to the f***ing point he made. You took half the argument he made and put together a response with half of an intelligent thought.

Jake Guentzel was stapled to the hip of Sidney Crosby all season, a top 5 NHL player in the league........so no, that would be stupid for the aforementioned reason. And Kessel? Yeah? He is (and has been for a long time) a high end offensive player...better offensively than Larkin is....not sure why you would think that's controversial in any way. TT? Great player. Also is a winger (not a center) and plays with Aho on a team with a bunch of good defenders. Not exactly comparable situations to what Larkin is dealing with.

Here I literally agreed with you that Larkin is undervalued because his impact does not stop at the amount of points he produces. He's a complete center, similar to Toews or Bergeron, or yes, even O'Reilly. I picked names that scored more than 73 points this year who I don't believe have nearly as much impact as Larkin, agreeing with the concept that you were arguing. Guentzel, Kessel, TT, none of them stack up with Larkin from an impact level when you consider the full spectrum of their games.

All in all, i'm not really sure what you're trying to argue or what your overall point is. That the team around Larkin needs to get much better or else we aren't going anywhere? No ****. That we can't win a Stanley Cup with Mike Green and Danny Dekeyser on the top pairing? No ****. No one is arguing Larkin is good enough to carry this garbage roster to the SCF - but it seems like that's the point you're arguing against. So again, not sure what the point of your post was.

This is called a conclusion. It brings everything together. Could Larkin carry a team to success as the team's best forward/player? Perhaps. I'd prefer we didn't have to find out. I'd love to find better players to add to the fold and take the burden off Larkin's shoulders.

Seider is the beginning of an attempt to build that Blues defense that you were pointing to as a way to have success.

 

[raymond23]

Well, we made it 23 pages. Not bad people!

 

[obey86]

I didn't want to have to do this to you, but here we go. I was both agreeing and disagreeing with you. Mainly to illustrate how petulant your response was and how the debate was arguing things that shouldn't even matter.



I don't think you are really grasping the point. Larkin is taking shots because he's a shoot first player. The team relies heavily on the rush at this stage, and he is the puck carrier most often on the team. He takes a lot of shots because it's who he is. His numbers are inflated because of so much of the offense flows through him. On a more balanced team with stronger support players, the offense probably doesn't hinge on Larkin as much. That being said, he probably ends up with higher quality chances, or teammates who convert more, and his numbers would improve. Like I said, the truth is in the middle. I'm not saying he's a 50 point forward on a good team, and I'm not saying he's a 100 point forward on a good team. You are over emphasizing the positive impact and ignoring the negative impact.



Someone literally made the point that Dylan Larkin probably isn't enough of a high end center to lead a team to a Stanley Cup. You came back with a response of "Yeah well STL just won with a center who only scored 77 points and a lower PPG." To which I am pointing out that STL was stacked on the back end. You didn't even respond to the ****ing point he made. You took half the argument he made and put together a response with half of an intelligent thought.



Here I literally agreed with you that Larkin is undervalued because his impact does not stop at the amount of points he produces. He's a complete center, similar to Toews or Bergeron, or yes, even O'Reilly. I picked names that scored more than 73 points this year who I don't believe have nearly as much impact as Larkin, agreeing with the concept that you were arguing. Guentzel, Kessel, TT, none of them stack up with Larkin from an impact level when you consider the full spectrum of their games.



This is called a conclusion. It brings everything together. Could Larkin carry a team to success as the team's best forward/player? Perhaps. I'd prefer we didn't have to find out. I'd love to find better players to add to the fold and take the burden off Larkin's shoulders.

Seider is the beginning of an attempt to build that Blues defense that you were pointing to as a way to have success.

I didn't want to have to do this to you, but here we go. I was both agreeing and disagreeing with you. Mainly to illustrate how petulant your response was and how the debate was arguing things that shouldn't even matter.



I don't think you are really grasping the point. Larkin is taking shots because he's a shoot first player. The team relies heavily on the rush at this stage, and he is the puck carrier most often on the team. He takes a lot of shots because it's who he is. His numbers are inflated because of so much of the offense flows through him. On a more balanced team with stronger support players, the offense probably doesn't hinge on Larkin as much. That being said, he probably ends up with higher quality chances, or teammates who convert more, and his numbers would improve. Like I said, the truth is in the middle. I'm not saying he's a 50 point forward on a good team, and I'm not saying he's a 100 point forward on a good team. You are over emphasizing the positive impact and ignoring the negative impact.



Someone literally made the point that Dylan Larkin probably isn't enough of a high end center to lead a team to a Stanley Cup. You came back with a response of "Yeah well STL just won with a center who only scored 77 points and a lower PPG." To which I am pointing out that STL was stacked on the back end. You didn't even respond to the ****ing point he made. You took half the argument he made and put together a response with half of an intelligent thought.



Here I literally agreed with you that Larkin is undervalued because his impact does not stop at the amount of points he produces. He's a complete center, similar to Toews or Bergeron, or yes, even O'Reilly. I picked names that scored more than 73 points this year who I don't believe have nearly as much impact as Larkin, agreeing with the concept that you were arguing. Guentzel, Kessel, TT, none of them stack up with Larkin from an impact level when you consider the full spectrum of their games.



This is called a conclusion. It brings everything together. Could Larkin carry a team to success as the team's best forward/player? Perhaps. I'd prefer we didn't have to find out. I'd love to find better players to add to the fold and take the burden off Larkin's shoulders.

Seider is the beginning of an attempt to build that Blues defense that you were pointing to as a way to have success.

I agree (as does everyone on this message board) with you that if the Red Wings want to find success, they need to build a better overall roster to supplement Larkin

 

[HisNoodliness]

People that have seen Seider more, I have some observations I'd like to see if you agree:

How do you feel about his passing, especially his stretch passing? It seems like he's very comfortable making passes under pressure, through forecheckers and over quite a distance... But in my limited viewings a lot of his stretch passes miss their mark. He gets them through the defense but doesn't hit his teammate. Is that a problem in his game, or did his teammates just fail to corrale pucks in the games I watched?

I also want to comment on his shot from the point. When he joins the rush he seems pretty lethal with his wrist shot from the high slot and circles, but when his team gets set up in zone, he usually hangs pretty high at the blue-line. From there his shot seems pretty weak. Do you guys see him cutting down into the slot on in zone possessions more? Does he ever beat a defender to create that type of opportunity? It seems like if he goes low on in zone possession it's usually to cutoff a breakout.

Lastly I just want to comment that I love the way Seider can explode through the neutral zone to join the rush. He'll be pretty clearly behind the play when it starts but level with the forwards and moving quickly by the time he gets to the opposing blueline. I love D that can do that and I see Seider as having great top speed and acceleration. I don't love his agility though. Small turns in tight, stopping and starting and quick minor changes to speed and direction all seem like areas he can improve his skating to me. Right now I think he's like a horse, he can cover large amounts of ice quickly but isn't the most nimble. Would you agree?

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

He seems very much like a Jaybo or Marc Eduard Vlassic type dman.

Steady
Will log big minutes
Top pairing
But not flashy

 

[TheOctopusKid]

He seems very much like a Jaybo or Marc Eduard Vlassic type dman.

Steady
Will log big minutes
Top pairing
But not flashy

Jaybo feels like a stretch. When Jay came into the league, he was often considered an extremely talented skater with elite level acceleration and edge work. Still has a great fluid stride and has always relied on his speed to make up for questionable defensive decisions.

I agree that it feels like he plays a very unassuming, consistent and steady game. The most current example I can honestly think of in his style of play is another #6OA Defenseman from 2012, Hampus Lindholm.

Seider doesn't look as agile as Lindholm at first glance, but I think much of that has to do with the length of his skating stride to Lindholm. I don't actually believe he's moving any slower than him. They both play a very modest, strong all-round game that is marked by excellent awareness in all three zones, efficient and sound positioning and anticipation. I think there is probably a bit more overall power in Seider's game (body and shot) at the expense that that he is probably less adept in the transition and joining the rush than Lindholm.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Jaybo feels like a stretch. When Jay came into the league, he was often considered an extremely talented skater with elite level acceleration and edge work. Still has a great fluid stride and has always relied on his speed to make up for questionable defensive decisions.

I agree that it feels like he plays a very unassuming, consistent and steady game. The most current example I can honestly think of in his style of play is another #6OA Defenseman from 2015, Hampus Lindholm.

Seider doesn't look as agile as Lindholm at first glance, but I think much of that has to do with the length of his skating stride to Lindholm. I don't actually believe he's moving any slower than him. They both play a very modest, strong all-round game that is marked by excellent awareness in all three zones, efficient and sound positioning and anticipation. I think there is probably a bit more overall power in Seider's game (body and shot) at the expense that that he is probably less adept in the transition and joining the rush than Lindholm.

Dude, if Seider is Hampus Lindholm, I'm super on board with that pick. Like unbelievably so.

 

[TheOctopusKid]

Dude, if Seider is Hampus Lindholm, I'm super on board with that pick. Like unbelievably so.

More of a potential upside here - I would also say that the low end result of this is that he never finds his confidence in his game or in the system of play, his skating never improves, and he gets thicker and slower and morphs into Braydon Coburn-clone.

The point being, he's not going to be a lights outs 50pt+, speedy offensive defensemen. He's a large, two-way defenseman who does not appear to be overtly physical, but does use his length and size for leverage and positioning, and shows a mature understanding and some potential offensive acumen.

Where he ends up - who knows...