C Michael Rasmussen - Tri-City Americans, WHL (2017, 9th, DET)
- Thread starter Get North
- Start date
Frk It
Mo Seider Less Problems
- Jul 27, 2010
- 36,859
- 15,735
Nope. His talent level or production weren’t questioned. It was always his compete level.
Michael Brand Eggs
Knee Guard
You've got me confused with somebody else. I'm complaining about how boring deflections/dirty goals are. We've already got Zetterberg and Larkin who throw it on net from below the goal line like 10 times per game. I wish they would have drafted somebody flashy and entertaining.
If anything, I'd like them to draft somebody good on the power play. This team really needs a guy who can set up at the half wall and run the passing game like Datsyuk used to.
Dotter
THE ATHLETIC IS GARBAGE
- Zetterberg-era is about over.
- Larkin doesn't really tip goals.
- RAM's bread-and-butter is that he can improve a PowerPlay.
- A goal scoring weapon is a goal scoring weapon. (they don't ask how; they ask how many)
- Flashy and entertaining don't always win games.
- You don't rebuild in 1-draft.
Pavels Dog
Registered User
Yeah I'd like a generational talent at #9 in a weak draft too.
Hatter of the Beach
I’m the real hero
16 goals in 20 games = 66 goal pace if he played a full 82*. Couple that with PKing, great faceoff numbers, and the fact he looked good in the preseason agaisnt NHL players, and I really am happy.
He has far exceeded my expectations. Still would have gambeled with a few other guys, but anyone who acts like this guy is already out of the top 15 in a redraft is flat out ignorant.
*I know the WHL plays 72 games, just doing a comparison since most people automatically think 82.
He has far exceeded my expectations. Still would have gambeled with a few other guys, but anyone who acts like this guy is already out of the top 15 in a redraft is flat out ignorant.
*I know the WHL plays 72 games, just doing a comparison since most people automatically think 82.
Last edited:
Frk It
Mo Seider Less Problems
- Jul 27, 2010
- 36,859
- 15,735
More possible games? OHL plays even less games, actually. Using 82 games is pointless, considering no junior leagues do that.
Hatter of the Beach
I’m the real hero
My mistake, I could have sworn they did. Regardless, his GPG is looking in line with other top goal scoring prospects
ChadS
Registered User
- Jun 30, 2009
- 4,866
- 1,480
I don’t know about the others, but last time I checked Rasmussen’s shot-% on the WHL site it was sky high. In the 30s I think.
Dotter
THE ATHLETIC IS GARBAGE
newfy
Registered User
- Jul 28, 2010
- 14,983
- 8,764
I'm sure he'll be a guy whose shooting % will be high his whole career. He scores a bunch of his goals in tight around th net banging in rebounds and tipping pucks. Those are higher percentage shots than some small skilled guy like Nyquist throwing a wrister on net from the top of the circle. Obviously not 30% high, but youre also giving the WHL stat trackers a lot of credit. I doubt those numbers are completely accurate.
Go Wings
Registered User
Dominance
99-66-4-9-87/97
I really thought it was a good pick for you guys. In the middle of a rebuild, why would you take a chance on a boom/bust guy over a definite top-quality middle-sixer? And Rasmussen looked amazing in preseason.
Yep. Also Necas and Suzuki are also available. Would've preferred any of those 3 over Rasmussen. The premium should be put on skill, not size in this case when drafting up so high. I want to get a game breaker and Yamamoto has shown some signs of that.
Would've also been ok with one of the dmen that came shortly after, especially Brannstrom.
newfy
Registered User
- Jul 28, 2010
- 14,983
- 8,764
I guess I can sort of understand people that want to draft skill really high. I probably wouldnt have loved Suzuki being picked there but I wouldnt have hated it either. Kinda how I am with Rasmussen, no prospect picked there was going to be a guaranteed first line NHLer. I dont mind the wings taking a huge goal scoring center and probably prefer it over the small winger, but Suzuki I could get behind. Yamamoto, no chance. Waaaayyy too small for that spot. I'm not sure on Brannstrom its not like hes some for sure future stud either, but hes a skilled guy and a bit undersized. I see why you liked who you did, its a personal preference thing more than anything. I'm just personally sick of watching small skilled guys on the wings that do nothing out there (Nyquist the last 2 years). They havent won anything with guys like that. The league is going small and skilled, but I hope the wings are onto something by drafting bigger and harder to play against. They could build a team that other teams dont match up well with because they can use their size to their advantage. Only time will tell though.
As for wanting Necas, I see this a lot. I swear people see a European name and assume theyre bursting with skill. Necas is a smaller, safe pick that plays a good two way game and isnt really dynamic. People need to get over him, hes definitely not a better prospect than Rasmussen
Ainec
Panetta was not racist
- Jun 20, 2009
- 21,784
- 6,431
it's only weak because Patrick was top 2 and Sweden had a bad year but Finland, Czech, USA make up for it
I think you get what I'm aiming at for the most part. I'm no way saying any of those other players i wanted are any safer picks or garaunteed. I'd just rather gamble on their packages. As far as Necas is concerned, watching him in training camp, hes good and dynamic is a pretty good word for him I think. Definitely needs to add muscle and mass though. Yamamoto is more or less the same way as well I think.
My dislike of drafting safe picks for size stems from the Sutter era of drafting in Calgary (where I live) and while size is nice to have, in my opinion, I'd rather gamble on packages of skill over using size as a high priority.
I don't dislike Rasmussen as a player. I think he has some good pro features for sure. I just would've not wanted to get him with that pick.
Go Wings
Registered User
It is a good thing you are not in charge of the Wings draft then. Taking Suzuki, Necas or Vilardi would have been fine but taking a winger when Detroit is loaded with young wingers is foolish. It is also part of the reason they are in the mess they are in.
Go Wings
Registered User
I like Necas and woul have been fine if Detroit had drafted him however there isn't evidence to show that Necas is definitetly (as you say) a better prospect.
Ainec
Panetta was not racist
- Jun 20, 2009
- 21,784
- 6,431
um where did you see me saying Necas was definitely a better prospect?
the guy above my post said Rasmussen was "definitely better"
also personally, I think the perfect player for Detroit in the 2017 draft was Chytil. Mannn
Lampedampe
Registered User
- Feb 26, 2015
- 2,277
- 898
I have made my peace with the Rasmussen pick largely because I think they clearly have an NHL center with him. I would have been fine with Suzuki or Vilardi, but I can't really buy them as centers at the next level. Necas was my preferred pick but there is no sense in crying about it now.
I think Ras will be an effective and productive NHL player even if he isn't elite. At 9 that isn't the worst thing in the world.
newfy
Registered User
- Jul 28, 2010
- 14,983
- 8,764
Yeah I guess in hindsight he is having a really great year so far in the AHL, but its also 15 games in and theres no proof hes for sure going to be better than Rasmussen. He also went all the way back at pick 21, its definitely a case of hindsight is 20 20. I remember everyone talking about Rasmussen in that pick range where he went, I dont remember anyone hyping Chytil for the top 10
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
Jamie Benn with his standard reckless, intent-to-injure hit- Latest: The Hockey Tonk Man
