When does the Yzerplan start getting criticized?

[schuelma24]

It's very clear most people commenting do not watch the Wings and have no real clue about their roster or draft picks or recent history.

Which is fine! I don't expect random fan of team X to know as much about my team as I do.

But I also don't claim to be an expert on any other teams roster because I have the self-awareness to realize I'd be making a fool out of myself.

But sure, try and convince long suffering Wings fans that Holland left Yzerman a totally awesome situation.

The funny thing is, if you go to the Wings forum here, there are very heated and rigorous debates over the state of the roster and mistakes Yzerman has made. No one thinks he's perfect and no one is claiming he's for sure building a cup contender.

But Wings fans have the gall to factually explain the difficult spot Yzerman took over and they're the ones detached from reality?

 

[TKB]

You can read, the column under "GP" shows how many NHL games each player has played.

Genuinely, are you being serious? Brock Faber??

Over Wallinder? Yes.

It''s way too early to determine who will have a bigger NHL impact, and no way he would have been playing in Detroit this year if Edvinson isn't.

They are both late draft birthdays, and Wallinder just came to NA this year. That race is far from over.

 

[RedHawkDown]

Lol, so everyone else that makes the NHL is a bust but players that get 16 game callups are "Franchise Gamebreaking talent". This is a comical double standard with how Red Wings prospects versus every other prospect is judged.

What? I didn’t say anything about franchise game breaking talents. I’m just saying those are the only 3 players that would make the Wings rebuild look any different today. Do you disagree?

I’m not sure why you keep dodging the points that are made.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Over Wallinder? Yes.

It''s way too early to determine who will have a bigger NHL impact, and no way he would have been playing in Detroit if Edvinson isn't.

They are both late draft birthdays, and Wallinder just came to NA this year. That race is far from over.

I would imagine most neutral observers would take Faber over Wallinder.

What? I didn’t say anything about franchise game breaking talents. I’m just saying those are the only 3 players that would make the Wings rebuild look any different today. Do you disagree?

I’m not sure why you keep dodging the points that are made.

I’m not dodging anything. I think the Wings didn’t draft particularly well outside the first round in 2019 and 2020 and no amount of deflections or “oh yeah? [insert deflection]” will probably change that. Only players coming in and playing well will do that.

 

[RedHawkDown]

I would imagine most neutral observers would take Faber over Wallinder.
I’m not dodging anything. I think the Wings didn’t draft particularly well outside the first round in 2019 and 2020 and no amount of deflections or “oh yeah? [insert deflection]” will probably change that. Only players coming in and playing well will do that.

But you still haven’t answered my question? I didn’t deflect anything, I directly addressed your assertion that they drafted poorly outside the first round in those years. For that to be true, there have to be players they COULD have picked that would have made a tangible improvement to the team over the players they did pick. I listed Faber, Maccelli, and JJP. That’s three guys over hundreds of picks.

Can you name any others that would move the needle for the current Detroit team that they should have picked in 19/20? If not, I don’t get how you can say Detroit drafted poorly in those years, unless you say every single team other than LA, Arizona, and Buffalo drafted poorly in those years.

 

[WarriorofTime]

But you still haven’t answered my question? I didn’t deflect anything, I directly addressed your assertion that they drafted poorly outside the first round in those years. For that to be true, there have to be players they COULD have picked that would have made a tangible improvement to the team over the players they did pick. I listed Faber, Maccelli, and JJP. That’s three guys over hundreds of picks.

Can you name any others that would move the needle for the current Detroit team that they should have picked in 19/20? If not, I don’t get how you can say Detroit drafted poorly in those years, unless you say every single team other than LA, Arizona, and Buffalo drafted poorly in those years.

What’s the point of this exercise? You think every other player drafted in the nhl sucks and will suck going forward? Stop asking bizarre questions and then reaching more bizarre conclusions based on how you answer that. If you are saying the drafting was great, say so and stop dodging that central point with your “but what could have been done???” deflections.

 

[RedHawkDown]

What’s the point of this exercise? You think every other player drafted in the nhl sucks and will suck going forward? Stop asking bizarre questions and then reaching more bizarre conclusions based on how you answer that. If you are saying the drafting was great, say so and stop dodging that central point with your “but what could have been done???” deflections.

What? It’s not a deflection? It’s a literal question. Of course I don’t think every drafted player will suck - if you want to go on potential, you can change the exercise to players to think have much higher potential to be top 6 players or top 4 dmen compared to the guys Detroit picked. The exercise remains the same. If there are many guys with much higher potential than the guys Yzerman picked, you have a point. If there aren’t, you don’t …

The point is…”good” or “bad” drafting is relative…there has to be an alternative that is better for drafting to be bad. If only 2 or 3 teams have difference makers from the 19/20 drafts outside the 1st round 4/5 years out …it can also mean that the drafts were poor, instead of a specific team being bad at drafting. I’m not sure why you’re so agitated, it’s a really simple point.

 

[WarriorofTime]

What? It’s not a deflection? It’s a literal question. Of course I don’t think every drafted player will suck - if you want to go on potential, you can change the exercise to players to think have much higher potential to be top 6 players or top 4 dmen compared to the guys Detroit picked. The exercise remains the same. If there are many guys with much higher potential than the guys Yzerman picked, you have a point. If there aren’t, you don’t …

Everyone that has cracked an nhl lineup is better until proven otherwise. At the age of prospects in those drafts, that’s a fair statement.

 

[RedHawkDown]

Everyone that has cracked an nhl lineup is better until proven otherwise. At the age of prospects in those drafts, that’s a fair statement.

If that’s your benchmark, then fair enough. I disagree because when a player makes a team is highly dependent on the teams philosophy, but I understand that point.

 

[Fatass]

If that’s your benchmark, then fair enough. I disagree because when a player makes a team is highly dependent on the teams philosophy, but I understand that point.

Coaches are trying to win games. If a player is helping with winning then he’s going to play, regardless of his age.

 

[RedHawkDown]

Coaches are trying to win games. If a player is helping with winning then he’s going to play, regardless of his age.

It’s not the coach but rather Detroits philosophy with prospects that has been the same for 30 years. Wallinder should have been up this year, Edvinsson last, and Johansson last year as well. I really don’t see the point in arguing this - it doesn’t seem like Wings fans will change any of your minds, and you’re certainly not convincing us we’re wrong about the philosophy of the team we’ve watched our whole lives.

 

[TKB]

I would imagine most neutral observers would take Faber over Wallinder.
I’m not dodging anything. I think the Wings didn’t draft particularly well outside the first round in 2019 and 2020 and no amount of deflections or “oh yeah? [insert deflection]” will probably change that. Only players coming in and playing well will do that.

I would imagine most neutral observers would take Faber over Wallinder.
I’m not dodging anything. I think the Wings didn’t draft particularly well outside the first round in 2019 and 2020 and no amount of deflections or “oh yeah? [insert deflection]” will probably change that. Only players coming in and playing well will do that.

It wouldn't be "most", it would be nearly unaminous.

To clarify what I am really getiing at:

I don't think Wallinder over Faber is some example of poor drafting. Considering the Wings knew pretty early that Seider had the potential to be a horse on the right side. Taking a smooth skating "tree" on the left side who fits the MO Yzerman is looking for and in an area they have scouted well. He may not measure up to Faber specifically, but I still think Wallinder will contrbute to Detroit, or possbily used in a trade.

Long term draft success doesn't alway come down to is this specific pick going to be a better player than the other. Its about who fits your philosophy and needs. The later you get the more chances you need to take. With all that in mind, I just don't agree that the 2018 and 2019 drafts are such a failure by Detroit. THere just wasn't much there that was going to change the fortunes to date or they haven't drafted in subsequent drafts.

 

[Fatass]

It’s not the coach but rather Detroits philosophy with prospects that has been the same for 30 years. Wallinder should have been up this year, Edvinsson last, and Johansson last year as well. I really don’t see the point in arguing this - it doesn’t seem like Wings fans will change any of your minds, and you’re certainly not convincing us we’re wrong about the philosophy of the team we’ve watched our whole lives.

Are you suggesting the Wings are trying to lose games by intentionally playing lesser players? When a young player will help with winning, he’s going to play. If he’s not able to that, then he won’t play. It’s really that simple.

 

[norrisnick]

Are you suggesting the Wings are trying to lose games by intentionally playing lesser players? When a young player will help with winning, he’s going to play. If he’s not able to that, then he won’t play. It’s really that simple.

Welcome to the Wing fan mantra every training camp.

 

[FMichael]

He had a better SHL season at 18 than Veleno had at 20-21. And a better AHL season at 19.

How does he compare to Zadina ?

 

[SensFactor]

I'd say he is fired next year if Wings miss again or start bad

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

How does he compare to Zadina ?

Apples to oranges.

 

[Dotter]

I’m not dodging anything. I think the Wings didn’t draft particularly well outside the first round in 2019 and 2020 and no amount of deflections or “oh yeah? [insert deflection]” will probably change that. Only players coming in and playing well will do that.

Just because they're still in the oven doesn't mean they're toast. Yzerman is drafting and DEVELOPING because he has that luxury. He's building a lasting contender, not sporadic playoff achievers.

Slow cooking and marinating later round players is smart asset management that offers up better reward.

That being said, Yzerman didn't even scout 2019 - he just called their names. KH's scouting staff was in charge of nearly all those players while Yzerman was still employed with Tampa -- Yzerman eventually fied KH's scouting staff and brought his own in.

Yzerman revealed he did personally follow Seider, that's his pick. Coincidently Seider is a stud.

 

[Ezekial]

Yzerman literally said Aljo and Edvinsson could have played in the NHL this year but he prefers developing players to be effective in large roles. It's the philosophy of the organization. Seider and Raymond were effective NHL rookies in large roles.

I think Ed would have been given that opportunity to have a big role in the NHL this season but his surgery affected it and he ended up beating the timeline of recovery.

Next year both of them will be on the team and I expect one of Mattaa and Holl to not be.

 

[SympathyForTheDevils]

He's building a lasting contender, not sporadic playoff achievers.

Is he? Detroit will eventually be a playoff team, but there's nothing about their current collection of talent that suggests "lasting contender".

Yzerman is a good GM, but I think he pushed the "end rebuild" button a year or two too early. Brought in a bunch of mediocre veterans on dubious contracts, and just failed to make the playoffs, while also ensuring the team won't have a great draft position. Now I'm not sure how the team will escape the pit of mediocrity in the middle of the league standings. Even if Edvinsson, Kasper, Danielson, Sandin-Pellikka all become what they're reasonably tracking to become, that's not enough to turn Detroit into a contender.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

Scroll up please

Or learn how to use an internet search engine to do your own research


Glad to know we have another prospect Nostradamus in the thread.

Now instead of posting here, why not use your predictive powers to lock up a full time NHL gig lol

The point I am making is saying "Yzerman inherited a top-10 prospect pool" is less correct than saying "Yzerman inherited what appeared to be a top-10 prospect pool at the time." That is an important distinction when we are talking about the quality of players that Yzerman had to work with when he started. If the players aren't good enough then it makes no difference what pundits believe.

Do you believe, with the information we have today, that the Red Wings had a top-10 prospect pool in 2019? Don't defer to what people predicted five years ago, tell me what you believe to be the case.

 

[Bank Shot]

Okay I'll ask you the same type of question that nobody esle seems to be able to answere when asked?

Were are all these great picks that were available to Detroit in 2nd round or later in 2019 and 2020?

Who could they have drafted that would have had a material impact to date, or potentially make a significant impact in the future?

Perterka? Not sure I take him over Wallinder for the long-term, but honestly don't know much about him.

Asking honestly, is there some late blooming prospect or even established player out there the WIngs could have picked?

Am I missing someone?

Kochetkov had a better save percentage over 42 games this season than both Detroit goalies, so that is an easy one right there.

Just go to IHDB and look at players from the second round in 2019 and 2020.

Evanglista for example coming off a 39 point season. There are a bunch of guys from the second rounds of both those drafts that would have helped the Wings more than the 0 games they got from those 6 draft picks so far.

I mean you are talking about Wallinder only, because the other 5 have essentially already busted.

The bigger question is why I have to answer this question for you, rather than you just going and looking it up?

 

[Lampedampe]

?

I have no idea what you are even talking about.

I've never said anything close to that.

Perhaps you don't understand what it is a GM does?

Picks, prospects, cap space, roster players... This what a GM is managing.

How effectively they do so is reflected in the on ice results.

After 4 seasons and 5 offseasons, the on ice results remain mediocre.

The prospect pool 5 years ago was top 10, it's arguably better today (5 more years of drafting in the top 10 + selling assets to add additional 1st & 2nd round picks makes that inevitable).

Nothing stated above suggests he should have "traded the prospects he inherited"... That's a silly inference to make.

But if the only evidence of the "success" of his tenure this far is that the Red Wings still have a top ranked prospect pool (as they did in 2018-19), that's a very low bar imo.

I'm not a wings fan, but I am a fan of Yzerman... I just don't think he's done a particularly good job with this rebuild. Which also does not mean that in 3-4 years the Wings won't finally be back in cup contention... 8 years is a long time, especially with the quality rebuild situation he walked into.

Hope that clears up your confusion

Haha well no, you see I am asking you a question so you have a chance to explain yourself. Your argument about the prospect pool is basically this;

I buy stock options that some analysts rate as good bets. I then die, so my children now inherit these stock options.

However the options go on to expire worthless, so in the end they essentially inherited 0 capital from those stock-options.

Now some people (you) come along and say that my children inherited a fortune.

You could argue that yeah they could've traded those options before expiring. Hence the question, but this doesn't seem to be your point.

So yeah I don't see how it's even relevant that Red wings prospect pool ranked highly when he took over. Because in the end nothing came of those prospects, he started with shit.

 

[Dotter]

They only had 6 second round picks in those two draft years. Can't be expected to nail them all.

The NHL isn't a development league. They are still learning their craft developing at the appropriate levels.

There's no reason for them to be in the NHL when Yzerman is working on phase #2; building a winning culture.

 

[Miller Time]

The point I am making is saying "Yzerman inherited a top-10 prospect pool" is less correct than saying "Yzerman inherited what appeared to be a top-10 prospect pool at the time." That is an important distinction when we are talking about the quality of players that Yzerman had to work with when he started.

No, it isn't.

You continue to confuse hindsight.

A top 10 pick has value today. That a player picked with it ends up busting 5 years later doesn't change the value at the time.

Kasper has value today. He'll have value next year, perhaps a bit more or a bit less but not as little as he'd have if he ends up faltering like Zadina, or worse, by his D5 year.

If the players aren't good enough then it makes no difference what pundits believe.

Still confused about what the word "prospect" means, eh

Do you believe, with the information we have today, that the Red Wings had a top-10 prospect pool in 2019? Don't defer to what people predicted five years ago, tell me what you believe to be the case.