RD Moritz Seider (2019, 6th, DET) Part 3

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

Yeah, I take back everything I said. He definitely plays more like a German Andreas Lilja.

 

[Ed Ned and Leddy]

When the expectations for a prospect go up so does the level of criticism. It’s just how it goes. Seider essentially went from a relatively unknown prospect, to basically a top 4 lock, to a potential Norris candidate in the span of two years or so.

If people are saying he is going to be one of the best in the league, people are going to point out flaws in his game. It’s been interesting to read this thread from the beginning.

Yeah I think this is a very fair point.

I love Seider as a prospect, I plan on getting his jersey as soon as it goes on sale, I can't wait to see him play for the Wings. If his projection were still simply a top 4D, I wouldn't fuss about his shot.

But now, folks are hoping that he can be a premier 1D and the potential face of the franchise. I don't think it's an outrageous hope, but if so then it's fair to apply more scrutiny to his game. From that, I think everyone except the most defensive of Red Wings fans would admit that the shot needs some improvement. I don't ever expect him to be rifling bar down from the blueline consistently- frankly, very few blueliners do these days. Defensive systems have improved and goalies track pucks more effectively. But I'd like to see him more consistently get his shot through traffic to generate rebounds and deflections. His vision and iq are very good, and he walks the blueline well. That said, if opposing defenders know that he's always pass-first then they can start cheating on the pass. If he wants to be a good powerplay quarterback at the NHL level, I think the shot will have to continue to improve.

 

[seadawg]

Yeah I think this is a very fair point.

I love Seider as a prospect, I plan on getting his jersey as soon as it goes on sale, I can't wait to see him play for the Wings. If his projection were still simply a top 4D, I wouldn't fuss about his shot.

But now, folks are hoping that he can be a premier 1D and the potential face of the franchise. I don't think it's an outrageous hope, but if so then it's fair to apply more scrutiny to his game. From that, I think everyone except the most defensive of Red Wings fans would admit that the shot needs some improvement. I don't ever expect him to be rifling bar down from the blueline consistently- frankly, very few blueliners do these days. Defensive systems have improved and goalies track pucks more effectively. But I'd like to see him more consistently get his shot through traffic to generate rebounds and deflections. His vision and iq are very good, and he walks the blueline well. That said, if opposing defenders know that he's always pass-first then they can start cheating on the pass. If he wants to be a good powerplay quarterback at the NHL level, I think the shot will have to continue to improve.

This is exactly my point, and better explained than my one-liner. Criticizing one aspect of Seider's game doesn't diminish him as a prospect. Like a lot of players, he has strengths and weaknesses, and I'd even go so far as to say that Seider's only obvious weakness is his shot. Whether it is a lack of velocity, or a lack of confidence, or a combination thereof, he doesn't shoot enough, imo, and without developing more of a shot from the point, it will unfortunately impact his effectiveness at running a power play in the NHL, which ultimately I'd love to see him do.

I'd be lying if I didn't admit that I want Seider to develop into a Norris contender. However, that will never happen unless he can put up elite offensive numbers, and that won't happen unless he improves his shot (in terms of velocity, accuracy, and quantity). It may be unfair to place "Norris-caliber" expectations on a young player, but the same was said of Dahlin when he first entered the NHL, and I'm certain some people had those same expectations for Makar, and now Fox is also being discussed in that regard. I'm thinking why not Seider as well? To me, he could very well be in the same category as those other stud dmen in the very near future.

 

[Henkka]

Yeah, I take back everything I said. He definitely plays more like a German Andreas Lilja.

Easy to imagine Stecher's thoughts "thank god that guy is on the same side at next season".

 

[Boxscore]

This kid is an absolute monster--love his game.

 

[pgfan66]

When the expectations for a prospect go up so does the level of criticism. It’s just how it goes. Seider essentially went from a relatively unknown prospect, to basically a top 4 lock, to a potential Norris candidate in the span of two years or so.

If people are saying he is going to be one of the best in the league, people are going to point out flaws in his game. It’s been interesting to read this thread from the beginning.

Yeah I think this is a very fair point.

I love Seider as a prospect, I plan on getting his jersey as soon as it goes on sale, I can't wait to see him play for the Wings. If his projection were still simply a top 4D, I wouldn't fuss about his shot.

But now, folks are hoping that he can be a premier 1D and the potential face of the franchise. I don't think it's an outrageous hope, but if so then it's fair to apply more scrutiny to his game. From that, I think everyone except the most defensive of Red Wings fans would admit that the shot needs some improvement. I don't ever expect him to be rifling bar down from the blueline consistently- frankly, very few blueliners do these days. Defensive systems have improved and goalies track pucks more effectively. But I'd like to see him more consistently get his shot through traffic to generate rebounds and deflections. His vision and iq are very good, and he walks the blueline well. That said, if opposing defenders know that he's always pass-first then they can start cheating on the pass. If he wants to be a good powerplay quarterback at the NHL level, I think the shot will have to continue to improve.

Honestly, I don't think it's that. The problem with hyping players in a draft system as we have it in the NHL, all hype has implications for other players.

If you say "Seider is a high-end prospect and can be a top-pairing NHL D" – sure, there's no way to argue that. Based on everything we know, that's a reasonable assessment. Everything beyond that, re. potential Norris Trophy wins etc., is pure speculation as there were 11 different Norris Trophy winners in the past 12 years and nobody's ever a lock to win it. But still, Seider one day having a chance to get there? Sure, why not.

The problem is when people like Gord Miller swoop in and say "Anyone who criticized the Red Wings for taking Moritz Seider 6th overall in the 2019 draft should beg for forgiveness." Because that implies that he is very clearly and objectively better than all the players selected after him and, in some cases, the players before him. It implies that he is and will be better than Dylan Cozens, Trevor Zegras, Victor Söderström, Spencer Knight, Cole Caufield, Alex Newhook and a bunch of other high-end prospects. And I don't think that's a lock to happen. So it's fair to "criticize" Seider by laying out his weaknesses that could prevent him from becoming the 6th best player of this draft class when all is said and done.

The Red Wings got a good one here and I can see him becoming a fan favourite from the first day he touches the ice in Detroit to the day he retires in red and white after a 20-year career with the club. But the same could have happened with Zegras or Newhook as their No. 1 centre or Spencer Knight as their Vezina-calibre goalie.

 

[Northwing19]

German pronger, tossing guys around and dominating against NHL caliber players. He will instantly be the red wings best player after a few games in the show.

 

[Pavels Dog]

The problem is when people like Gord Miller swoop in and say "Anyone who criticized the Red Wings for taking Moritz Seider 6th overall in the 2019 draft should beg for forgiveness." Because that implies that he is very clearly and objectively better than all the players selected after him and, in some cases, the players before him. It implies that he is and will be better than Dylan Cozens, Trevor Zegras, Victor Söderström, Spencer Knight, Cole Caufield, Alex Newhook and a bunch of other high-end prospects. And I don't think that's a lock to happen.

It only implies he's proven to have been a very good selection who can easily be compared to any other top prospect from the draft.

And if you wait for things to be a lock, you'll wait until their careers are over. It's still not a lock that Elias Pettersson is and will be a better player than Michael Rasmussen.

 

[pgfan66]

It only implies he's proven to have been a very good selection who can easily be compared to any other top prospect from the draft.

And if you wait for things to be a lock, you'll wait until their careers are over. It's still not a lock that Elias Pettersson is and will be a better player than Michael Rasmussen.

You’re so close to getting my point.

 

[Eye of Ra]

draft simon edvinsson, who is giant monster. edvinsson, seider, albert johansson....a future stanley cup corp

 

[J15]

You’re so close to getting my point.

Your point is wrong though.

The problem is when people like Gord Miller swoop in and say "Anyone who criticized the Red Wings for taking Moritz Seider 6th overall in the 2019 draft should beg for forgiveness." Because that implies that he is very clearly and objectively better than all the players selected after him and, in some cases, the players before him.

This statement is the problem. If you want to interpret praise for Seider as being inherently critical of the players drafted after him, that’s purely your own projection and definitely not implied by the statement. Saying that Seider wasn’t a reach at 6, says absolutely nothing about any other particular player in the draft.

 

[newfy]

The problem is when people like Gord Miller swoop in and say "Anyone who criticized the Red Wings for taking Moritz Seider 6th overall in the 2019 draft should beg for forgiveness." Because that implies that he is very clearly and objectively better than all the players selected after him and, in some cases, the players before him. It implies that he is and will be better than Dylan Cozens, Trevor Zegras, Victor Söderström, Spencer Knight, Cole Caufield, Alex Newhook and a bunch of other high-end prospects. And I don't think that's a lock to happen. So it's fair to "criticize" Seider by laying out his weaknesses that could prevent him from becoming the 6th best player of this draft class when all is said and done.

I dont think it really implies what youre saying at all. Seider was a shock, ridiculed by A LOT of people at the draft and was fairly off the board. Friedman called him a shock to Yzermans face and Yzerman kinda got mad about it at the draft. You didnt hear any of that about any of those other guys and they all went right around where was kinda expected. It doesnt imply that hes necassrily better than those players but that hes absolutely on the same level as them and none of them got ridiculed in the media or by fans.

To me, Gord more sounds like hes saying hes absolutely worth the draft slot and is showing to be as good or better than basically any of those guys. And that because of that it wasnt worth all the hooplah at draft time

 

[pgfan66]

This statement is the problem. If you want to interpret praise for Seider as being inherently critical of the players drafted after him, that’s purely your own projection and definitely not implied by the statement. Saying that Seider wasn’t a reach at 6, says absolutely nothing about any other particular player in the draft.

This is objectively incorrect. Whether or not a player was a reach in a given draft position always stands in relation to who was drafted around him and cannot be judged by itself. Don't get me wrong, Seider at 6 was fine. The Red Wings will be very happy, and they absolutely should be. But we can't just look back at the draft today and say Seider was a great pick without accounting for his development in the past two seasons as well as the players drafted around him.

Hypothetically, let's assume there were 10 McDavid-level players picked after Seider. In this scenario, Seider at 6 would still be fine. The Red Wings would still be happy with the player they got. But objectively, they probably should have picked someone else, as the players selected after Seider are objectively better. In other words: Seider would have been a massive reach.

Of course, there were no 10 McDavids available after Seider. But there were some high-end prospects selected, some of which have already shown they can be impact players at the NHL level. This isn't hindsight – we knew there were other high-end prospects available at pick 6 and after. People should be allowed to point that out when talking about Seider and his draft position.

Again: the Red Wings will be very happy with the player they got. But anyone who said he shouldn't have been picked 6th overall will have plenty of arguments to support that claim.

I dont think it really implies what youre saying at all. Seider was a shock, ridiculed by A LOT of people at the draft and was fairly off the board. Friedman called him a shock to Yzermans face and Yzerman kinda got mad about it at the draft. You didnt hear any of that about any of those other guys and they all went right around where was kinda expected. It doesnt imply that hes necassrily better than those players but that hes absolutely on the same level as them and none of them got ridiculed in the media or by fans.

To me, Gord more sounds like hes saying hes absolutely worth the draft slot and is showing to be as good or better than basically any of those guys. And that because of that it wasnt worth all the hooplah at draft time

But how is that a reasonable thing to say? At the time of the draft, Seider at 6 overall was unexpected and it was a gamble. It was one that paid off but still a gamble. Even in hindsight it doesn't look like Seider was a slam-dunk of a pick. And people who questioned it back when it happened shouldn't be ridiculed today and have no need to apologize to anyone.

 

[RedHawkDown]

Not sure what kind of nonsense is going on here now but just came to say that he has been absolutely incredible at the WC for Germany. Didn’t miss a beat.

 

[J15]

This is objectively incorrect. Whether or not a player was a reach in a given draft position always stands in relation to who was drafted around him and cannot be judged by itself. Don't get me wrong, Seider at 6 was fine. The Red Wings will be very happy, and they absolutely should be. But we can't just look back at the draft today and say Seider was a great pick without accounting for his development in the past two seasons as well as the players drafted around him.

Hypothetically, let's assume there were 10 McDavid-level players picked after Seider. In this scenario, Seider at 6 would still be fine. The Red Wings would still be happy with the player they got. But objectively, they probably should have picked someone else, as the players selected after Seider are objectively better. In other words: Seider would have been a massive reach.

Of course, there were no 10 McDavids available after Seider. But there were some high-end prospects selected, some of which have already shown they can be impact players at the NHL level. This isn't hindsight – we knew there were other high-end prospects available at pick 6 and after. People should be allowed to point that out when talking about Seider and his draft position.

Again: the Red Wings will be very happy with the player they got. But anyone who said he shouldn't have been picked 6th overall will have plenty of arguments to support that claim.



But how is that a reasonable thing to say? At the time of the draft, Seider at 6 overall was unexpected and it was a gamble. It was one that paid off but still a gamble. Even in hindsight it doesn't look like Seider was a slam-dunk of a pick. And people who questioned it back when it happened shouldn't be ridiculed today and have no need to apologize to anyone.

Pay close attention to what I said. Saying that Seider was not a reach at 6 might be a statement about the draft class in general, but it doesn't say anything about any player in particular. If I told you Cale Makar was a good pick at 4, does that mean I'm criticizing Heiskanen at 3 or Pettersson at 5?

As for your other points, I'm still not quite sure what you're trying to get at. There were a group of people at the time that thought Seider was a reach, there was another group that didn't think he was (Red Wings scouts being in that group). It's pretty clear which group was right.

 

[WingsMJN2965]

draft simon edvinsson, who is giant monster. edvinsson, seider, albert johansson....a future stanley cup corp

He'll be gone by the time Detroit is up.

 

[Crunchy]

But how is that a reasonable thing to say? At the time of the draft, Seider at 6 overall was unexpected and it was a gamble. It was one that paid off but still a gamble. Even in hindsight it doesn't look like Seider was a slam-dunk of a pick. And people who questioned it back when it happened shouldn't be ridiculed today and have no need to apologize to anyone.

This is a bad argument. Clearly Yzerman and the DRW believed Seider was worthy of the 6th overall pick. Others didn't and stated it as a reach and a huge gamble. Yzerman disagreed. Looking at it today, would Seider be picked somewhere around 6th in that draft? Yes? So, at least right now, Yzerman looks reasonably correct in his assessment. The people that appear to be wrong, especially those making grandiose statements, may then be called out. Such is life.

 

[RationalExpectations]

This is a bad argument. Clearly Yzerman and the DRW believed Seider was worthy of the 6th overall pick. Others didn't and stated it as a reach and a huge gamble. Yzerman disagreed. Looking at it today, would Seider be picked somewhere around 6th in that draft? Yes? So, at least right now, Yzerman looks reasonably correct in his assessment. The people that appear to be wrong, especially those making grandiose statements, may then be called out. Such is life.

I would pick him top 3 given his last season. People don t realize how competitive SHL really is. He may be the best D in this draft.

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

draft simon edvinsson, who is giant monster. edvinsson, seider, albert johansson....a future stanley cup corp

He'll be going top 5 or 6 and more likely we're picking 7th.

 

[Kibe]

Personaly i think Edvinsson is a bit overrated and more in the Lambos/Ceulemans level than Power/Hughes/Clarke level. But i would be ok with the pick and think there's a good chance he's still there.

 

[wetcoast]

This is exactly my point, and better explained than my one-liner. Criticizing one aspect of Seider's game doesn't diminish him as a prospect. Like a lot of players, he has strengths and weaknesses, and I'd even go so far as to say that Seider's only obvious weakness is his shot. Whether it is a lack of velocity, or a lack of confidence, or a combination thereof, he doesn't shoot enough, imo, and without developing more of a shot from the point, it will unfortunately impact his effectiveness at running a power play in the NHL, which ultimately I'd love to see him do.

I'd be lying if I didn't admit that I want Seider to develop into a Norris contender. However, that will never happen unless he can put up elite offensive numbers, and that won't happen unless he improves his shot (in terms of velocity, accuracy, and quantity). It may be unfair to place "Norris-caliber" expectations on a young player, but the same was said of Dahlin when he first entered the NHL, and I'm certain some people had those same expectations for Makar, and now Fox is also being discussed in that regard. I'm thinking why not Seider as well? To me, he could very well be in the same category as those other stud dmen in the very near future.

Funny I was thinking that he might have a Ryan Suter type of career, which IMO is a HHOF one.

 

[Cyborg Yzerberg]

He'll be going top 5 or 6 and more likely we're picking 7th.

Ehhh, maybe. I don’t think that’s a guarantee.

 

[HockeyNightInAsia]

Seider a reach? I can't believe after this being yet another example of many, that consensus ranking are never the gospel, and different teams, even different armchair GMs like myself, can think differently.