Would you say guys like Hronek and walman would fit this description?
I just can't help but think this top 4 would be top 10 easy on NHL
Walman seider
Ed Hronek
Ajo
No, I wouldn't say Hronek and Walman fit the description.
First of all I probably like Hronek more than anyone of the Red Wings fans and didn't want to trade him at all at the time. Yzerman traded him because of two reasons, age not fit with what they wanted+needed more young assets so he was a sacrifice, and two, his playing style was and is a bit untraditional in that sense that he doesn't quite fit in any particular box as a d-man. Yes he is an offensive d-man but not quite at the level you'd want, and his defensive qualities wasn't there then.
Even now he is backing up Hughes to another lackluster season for Vancouver and I can't quite see him being a 100% fit unless you have so many other good pieces that you find him to be overall an okay solution to your team in such position and we would be talking about a better team than Vancouver.
Would I be okay with having him if we had so many other good pieces? Yes probably, do I think he would be the right fit for us to win, I lean towards a no as we don't have juggernaut offensive talent or performances as of now.
When it comes to Walman he is become overrated. He did I think okay to well in Detroit, but there was some issues and he got shipped because of it. Got handed good minutes in San Jose and did well on a bad team without any pressure and got overhyped, then off to Edmonton where he might overall be a better fit than with us. Because they have some guys scoring a lot more, so he doesn't need to be much better than elsewhere if the team keeps scoring. If the team gets into offensive slumps though, I don't think Walman's defense is what is going to bail out such a team. So would I like to have kept him? Yes. Am I certain he would be as valuable of a contributor as we would need when this team is contender ready? I'm not certain of that.
If I were the GM, I'm trying to move Tarasenko.
Fair enough, there could be fits for him elsewhere.
Keep Compher and Copp as they are fine on the bottom six.
They are fits, but should be middle six. For bottom six they are too expensive and I'd say for middle six unless their production level goes up, one has to go minimum. For me it would be Compher that goes.
Trade Danielson for a bottom six young center with some minor potential, and sign Pionk in FA - that's my big target.
Danielson is expected to at minimum become as solid 3C, at best become a 1B, with a fairly likely outcome being a solid defensive 2C. Makes absolutely no sense in trading him for a short term bottom center when Danielson will become more than so.
Pionk would go in the box of being another older FA that done his best work in the past and probably will get blasted in Detroit for performances. I heard some Jets-fans don't like his play, so even if I would be onboard for this before, now I'd say don't risk this one.
In addition, I'm trying to get a goalie who is actually a true starter from a bad team.
Possibly if its one that one can sign to a short to medium length deal.
Maybe I'm kicking the doors on Saros hard, even with his deal signed. Maybe I can get Gibson and try to bring some stability to the position.
So in that regard, no to Saros. Possible yes to Gibson.
Kaspar starts in the bottom six where he can develop.
Kasper is already beyond just starting in the bottom six. However, I would alternate him between 2nd line and 3rd line duties. He need to be comfortable playing tough opponents and need to become comfortable dominating opponents, thus alternating between quality of competition I think would be good for him in the same way Filppula and Hudler was back in the day, though I want more offense out of Kasper than Flip.
Rasmussen/Compher/Copp fight out second line center.
Rasmussen no, unless he gets hit in the head and develop some kind of mean streak and the knowledge of using his physical attributes. Ideally Copp or Compher should have been there, more so Copp, but again. Alter it with Kasper. Move one in a trade package for a good young-ish d-man or better fit forward.
Regarding ASP - I think throwing a young player who is an offensive talent on the blue line right into the NHL is a risky move. I dont "bank" on him coming in and being a 50 point top 4 D.
I agree it is a risky move, and regarding ASP I think that is one I would do. Either straight away or some season in AHL and then up. But, somewhere we can to take some chances and nothing would be better if he got tossed in there, did well and got the confidence to do it right away.
Dont forget, Hutson is getting the most o-zone starts of ANY defenseman in the league. He is amazing, not doubt, but he is also in a position to succeed through matchups and placement by his coach.
Hutson is good, but a bit overrated. It's like you mention, sheltered usage and yes could be a piece to a cup, just waits to be seen if he will be that when the team is better.
See this just reeks of having zero understanding of the team. Kasper, since January 1st, has absolutely been playing like a top 6 C and has zero reason to be in the bottom six. He's 10000x the player of Ras/Copp/Compher, none of whom are even remotely competent 2nd line C.
Kasper has been good, we can all agree on that. He hasn't been GREAT, but good. I think there is reasons to put him as 3C, but alternate as 2C/3C and winger, cause he just need to learn more in different situation and get "mileage" in it.
Trading Danielson for a bottom six centre is insane given that's like his mid to low-end outcome anyway...
Yes, this would be crazy. There is theory that it would work out of course, but I would put my ticket in for Danielson becoming much better than a random bottom six center.
Goalie also hasn't been the issue at all. Talbot has won them several games they had no business being in. Husso was horrible and cost them several games. Outside of acquiring some star goalie, there's little utility in anything other than just letting Cossa and Augustine develop, both of whom look like potential future starters.
Well goalies have been on hot and cold streaks in Detroit. So let's say even if it hasn't been the direct problem, its not been a solution so far and not a longer term solution.
Thus it makes the most sense to give the chance and benefit of doubt to the younger guys and wait to see if one or both work out.
Pionk is fine, sure. Provorov for 6 is something i do 8 out of 7 days of the week, that's an easy yes.
No thank you to Pionk. Provorov is a question of what do you want to get out of him before deciding to sign such a player.
Sure, throwing ASP into the NHL is a risky move, but if he isn't great, then they are kind of screwed on D anyway and need to start looknig else where for a 2nd pairing RD. He has done everything possible in his power to show he is ready for the NHL. He has dominated a professional league all season playing against men. There is zero reason for him to be in the AHL, and he won't be.
Yes, and as mentioned above I think one of the risks they should take is throwing him out there and see if he sink or swim. If ASP swim, we got a good piece to our team.
The supplemental talent in 19-21 wasn't great, but 22 and 23 look promising. Why is Buchelnikov, for one, being ignored over and over? Has put up phenomenal numbers in the KHL and looks like a young Panarin. He's got sky-high potential. Does he reach it? Probably not. Why would we not put him in a position to succeed and see if he's something special?
Agree with this, Buchelnikov is also one of those that I believe you have to through out there and see how he does. Russians spending longer period of time in AHL tend to not pan out to anything more often than not, so put him out there and if he swims great, if not, can always send him down for adjustments, but then the road could end up longer or never pan out. I think its a risk one should take in regards to him.
Second, Kasper’s not going to the bottom 6 to develop with Tarasenko, Berggren, Rasmussen, Copp, Compher and whatever other trash the wings have there next year. He’s already better than these bums. The second line has scored decently with him there even if he’s been cold a couple of games. Raymond and Larkin stopped scoring the second he moved off their line.
As mentioned a couple of times, I think he should get sent a bit up and down the lineup to get used to different situations and build confidence in all before getting the 2C permanently if he show that he got it.
Does average have to be a criticism? Kaspar is a young 3rd line player with second line upside at 7th overall - that's "fine"
Well at the moment he is I'd say in between those. Not solidified 2C yet, but of what he has shown he gives the impression that he surely has the tools to be a 2C, though as mentioned I would want him a bit up and down to build his craft.
Cossa is a decent goaltending prospect where the scouting report you shared to me said "dont give up on him". He has traits - but we haven't see production to say he is going to be an upper echelon starter in the league. Which, if I'm drafting him 15th overall, I'd want. Again - average pick, maybe he turns out well.
There was to major goalie propects that year. Wallstedt and Cossa. There was not doubt that of the class, those were the two guys with the most starter potential. They traded up to draft him. So I would say he is a very good/solid/excellent goalie prospect. Whatever lingo you want to use. It doesn't mean he gets there in the end, but until he makes it or fails, he is that.
ASP looks solid in Sweden - we need to see his game translate. He had a fine year, and dialed it up in the playoffs. Does his offense transition? We will need to see.
Agreed we need to see it and as mentioned above, I think he is one of those they need to risk it with and put him out there to see. As too many times let's say of the smaller d-men and especially Swedish they have been put in situations and/positions to develop things they are not good at without being in a position of also using what they are good at. So through him out there as the Offensive D-man with Edvinsson or potentially Seider and see how it floats.
Danielson looks ok, probably tops out as a middle six center. Maybe better, but I would be more confident in him being middle six.
I answered this above on your post. But to double down, then it makes absolutely no sense to trade him for a bottom six guy. IF he tops out as a very good middle six center he's topping out as let's say slightly above average of his potential. He could be much more.
I'd rather take Benson at 9, or But, or Oliver Moore at 9. But again, average 9th overall pick.
I like Benson, would have drafted him if one had the chance and had another pick. So far I think he's done quite alright with the Sabres. Benson though, is at best a very good to excellent complimentary player. There was a lot of risks around him in regards to size etc. I think Benson is a guy you take if you already got a piece or pieces you think are "impact-players" and Benson is sort of the cherry on top. I wouldn't take him ahead of those we did.
Average doesnt mean criticism. It means average. If you have superstars and a great lineup, average can work well to keep a team rolling. When you are trying to build your team up to a winner, you need to hit on not just top 6 picks, but picks throughout the draft.
Then its not necessarily average, but good.
Yes you do, but you also got to let them develop and age a bit before you pass down the sentence.
To your point about impact players, in 2019 Detroit picks at 34, 54, 60, 66 and gets a bottom pairing dman out of it. They miss on Lacombe, Hoglander, Kcohetkov, Korzcak, Vlasic, Struble, Helleson who were all selected after 34.
Well for now, you are looking at they get one in Albert Johansson. There is another lower picked player named Elmer Soderblom in the lineup. And Antti Tuomisto might make it. So there might be one more from your listed picks and one more in the draft that makes it as a regular.
but detroit deserves criticism when they had 4 picks from 34-66 and get one NHL player.
Yes and no. The average of 2nd rounders becoming NHL'ers is 34% and if you get one you get 33% and if you get two you get 66% as pick 66 is a third round pick. Small sample size, we still need to let some years pass and players develop to see the through results of those 2nd round picks in those years around that time frame.
Again, I think Yzerman and Detroit have been C+ with their drafting over the last 5 drafts. Above average with their top 6 picks, ok with their mid first selections, and a lot to be desired over their remaining items
They been really good with their top picks (1st round) and the rest waits to be seen. Can't grade before the paper is finished.
1. Kasper was picked 8th, and getting a 2nd line C at 8 is a great pick.
Yes, if he continues developing that way its a great pick.
2. Cossa is rated the 4th best goalie prospect in the world. Again, if that’s just a questionable pick then what does that make every other goalie prospect?
And top two of that draft year.
3. ASP is literally a top 10 prospect in the world on the rankings. You think that’s still a questionable pick at 17. If your definition of a good prospect is someone who’s established themselves in the NHL, the apparently players like Demidov are just questionable, right? Michkov was a questionable pick before this season? ASP is literally setting records in the SHL and the was the first D in like 20 years to win back to back top WJC D awards. But sure, that’s an average pick
Well I can see reasons to question it, in the same way I'd question picking Cole Eiserman. Just some tools that are questionable and if it works out in the NHL. But, based on pre-draft hype picking ASP at 17 is a good pick. Even better if its a pick that fits this team with the skillset he has and develops. He could be a worse pick for some other team looking for a different type of skillset.
Kasper has looked amazing since the new year and could be a long-term 2C for Detroit.
Danielson I see as a high-end middle-6 center too in a couple years, once Copp slides down the lineup. Danielson hasn't produced an incredible amount in the AHL but regularly flashes good skill and intelligence, and I think he could actually get started on the Red Wings on a line with Kasper next season or on a lower line if need be.
Kasper has looked good since 2025 started and keeps improving. Danielson is what many question, I believe he has solid top six C qualities if he can translate offense into the NHL level. His peers say he is one of the most difficult players they played against, so there is every reason that could develop into the top level and I believe he is one of those where the offense will come based on building out his overall game.
Carter Mazur and Amadeus Lombardi have acquitted themselves pretty well at the AHL level, but both are unproven at this point and should start down the lineup if they even make the Red Wings out of camp next season.
I think players in general should be put in positions where they have the best chance of success according to the abilities they currently have and with the potential development of other abilities. So not necessarily down the lineup if it doesn't make sense to have them there. Let them be good at what they are good at, and develop and round out their game.
A guy like MBN still needs at least a year before he's ready for the show, but could be a second-line power-winger, or maybe even a facilitator on a top-line if all goes well for him.
MBN is physically ready. He played vs. men in World Championship and had no problems. He played a season in SHL and no problems. If he is down in AHL it would be for full time adjustment to smaller rink and confidence/building offense/getting top six playing time. Maybe he need a year of that, couldn't hurt him, but also given he's ready physically. I'd might just give him 3rd line duties and try him 2nd line at some point. Agree with rest of your statement. 2nd line PP wing guy with future that could develop into 1st line, but could also end up being a solid middle six winger (most likely outcome).
