When does the Yzerplan start getting criticized?

[Indrid Cold]

Ladies and gentlemen, Holland has left the rebuilding.

 

[Miller Time]

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.

Yes.

If you held on to Blockbuster stock and chose not to buy any Netflix stock in the 2000's, then today you'd have terrible returns and be viewed as mediocre at managing a portfolio.

Thank you for making my point.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Raymond has to improve upon finishing tied for 46th in points tied for 36th in goals in a season he plays a full 82 to be a "franchise forward", especially with the 9th highest shooting percentage in the league (6.4 % higher than his prior two combined years, which leads to an extra 10 goals). Not simply "not regress". Great hot streak to end the season, usually we look a little bit beyond that to make determinations like "franchise forward".

A 21 year old increased his shooting% compared to when he was a rookie or in a sophomore slump? That's some truly shocking stuff.

The reason you have to look at more than pure numbers is to avoid looking really dumb. Look at where he ranks among U23 or U25 skaters.

His shooting% was a bit high, sure. But he also played just ~17 minutes per game most of the season and wasn't on the top PP for large parts of it. You think he can't produce similar or better numbers with 2-3 minutes more per game even if his shooting% regresses? That's on you.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

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.


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

Nobody is saying they have zero value, but having value does not mean having a 1:1 value to whatever you might trade them for as projected from the very start, and to say Yzerman had a top-10 prospect pool despite the fact it was only speculated by pundits that it was the case is incredibly dishonest. As I said, opinions don't magically equate to reality.

How much value do you think Zadina had in 2020 when he scored 15 points in 28 games? Or in 2021 when he scored 19 points in 49 games? Or in 2022 when he scored 24 points in 74 games? Do you think Yzerman could have gotten anything close to a 1:1 return for his initial value in any of those years? Do you think it would have been prudent to do so? How much of thse players had you even watched in the years following the rankings you keep bringing up?

 

[nbwingsfan]

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.

Do you consider Matt Rempe better than Edvisson because he played more games this season?

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

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.

I think he felt pressured into it. I don't have any evidence really to back this up, but it's a simple reality that Detroit was a market where people were used to playoff hockey and they basically opened a new arena in the middle of a new 'urban district' (in which I'm sure the owners of the Wings were a significant financial player) just in time for the team to suck.

I think ownership would like to win a Cup, but it may have been more financially important for them to generate some interest now rather than be really good 5-6 years down the line. Like most Northern cities that aren't dominated by transplants Detroit is a hell of a sports city with extremely loyal fans but obviously the amount of games people watch, merchandise they buy etc. is highly dependent on whether there's hope for the team or not. Most fans aren't looking at these rebuilds in an analytical way, they just want to see goals on the scoreboard and points in the standings.

I think these Wings make a nice knockoff version of a good up and coming team at face value. A mix of young players, players in their mid to late 20s, some veterans. You squint and you see Larkin as a superstar in his prime, DeBrincat as a seasoned star forward, Seider and Raymond as emerging young superstars about to enter elite territory, The truth is that they all might just fall a small but notable distance short of those designations, which changes the whole arithmetic of course, but if the team is driving for the playoffs and every game matters, your ordinary fans are engaged and want to win those games no matter what the mid- or long-term lookout is.

 

[Fatass]

Now for sure.

 

[WarriorofTime]

A 21 year old increased his shooting% compared to when he was a rookie or in a sophomore slump? That's some truly shocking stuff.

The reason you have to look at more than pure numbers is to avoid looking really dumb. Look at where he ranks among U23 or U25 skaters.

His shooting% was a bit high, sure. But he also played just ~17 minutes per game most of the season and wasn't on the top PP for large parts of it. You think he can't produce similar or better numbers with 2-3 minutes more per game even if his shooting% regresses? That's on you.

I look dumb for saying a player should improve to what Franchise Forwards produce and prove it wasn't a shooting % positive variance to be called a Franchise Forward? Don't know why you're making this so personal. Raymond is a talented young forward, no doubt. Words gotta have a bit more meaning to them before we start throwing out terms like 'Franchise Forward'

For U25 (which I'll call 1999 births or later, 24 or younger as of 12/31/2023), here are stats to date amongst a smattering of Forwards:

Nico Hischier ('99): 353 points in 452 games
Brady Tkachuk ('99): 349 points in 440 games
Andrei Svechnikov ('00): 316 points in 406 games
Robert Thomas ('99): 315 points in 396 games
Jason Robertson ('99): 314 points in 292 games
Nick Suzuki ('99): 286 points in 373 games
Jack Hughes ('01): 281 points in 306 games
Tim Stutzle ('02): 247 points in 285 games
Martin Necas ('99): 243 points in 362 games
Joel Farabee ('00): 182 points in 334 games
Lucas Raymond ('02): 174 points in 238 games
Matt Boldy ('01): 171 points in 203 games
Dylan Cozens ('01): 166 games in 280 games
Jesper Kotkaniemi ('00): 161 points in 398 games
Trevor Zegras ('01): 154 points in 211 games
Cole Caufield ('01): 149 points in 205 games
Alexis Lafreniere ('01): 148 points in 298 games
Seth Jarvis ('02): 146 points in 231 games
Filip Chytil ('99): 144 points in 337 games
Owen Tippett ('99): 142 points in 270 games
Dawson Mercer ('01): 131 points in 246 games
Josh Norris ('99): 123 points in 183 games
Eeli Tolvanen ('99): 119 points in 264 games
Michael Rasmussen ('99): 119 points in 313 games
Kaapo Kakko ('01): 117 points in 300 games
Phillip Kurashev ('99): 116 points in 266 games
Gabriel Vilardi ('99): 114 points in 199 games
Mattis Maccelli ('00): 112 points in 169 games
Anton Lundell ('01): 112 points in 216 games
Morgan Frost ('99): 110 points in 229 games
Wyatt Johnston ('03); 106 games in 164 games
Matthew Beniers ('02): 103 points in 167 games
Alex Newhook ('01): 100 points in 214 games
Kirby Dach ('01): 99 points in 212 games
Filip Zadina ('99): 91 points in 262 games
Nils Hoglander ('00): 90 points in 221 games
Mason McTavis ('03): 88 points in 153 games
Quinton Byfield ('02): 88 points in 179 games
Maxime Comtois ('99): 87 points in 211 games
Barrett Hayton ('00): 84 points in 209 games
JJ Peterka ('02): 82 points in 161 games
Cole Perfetti ('02): 75 points in 140 games
Cole Sillinger ('03): 74 points in 220 games
Shane Pinto ('00): 70 points in 140 games
Arthur Kaliyev ('01): 71 points in 188 games
Phillip Tomasino ('00): 70 points in 148 games
Kirill Marchenko ('00): 67 points in 137 games
Oliver Wahlstrom ('00): 67 points in 193 games
Peyton Krebs ('01): 66 points in 215 games
Joe Veleno ('00): 64 points in 232 games
Connor Bedard ('05): 61 points in 68 games
Juraj Slafkovsky ('04): 60 points in 121 games
Kent Johnson ('02): 59 points in 130 games
Jack Quinn ('01): 58 points in 104 games
Yegor Chinakhov ('01): 56 points in 145 games
Jack McBain ('00): 55 points in 159 games
Luke Evangelisa ('02): 54 points in 104 games
Alexei Protas ('01): 53 points in 169 games
William Eklund ('02): 52 points in 97 games
Dylan Guenther ('03): 50 points in 78 games
Jake Neighbours ('02): 50 points in 129 games
Logan Cooley ('04): 44 points in 82 games
Tyson Foerster ('02): 40 points in 85 games
Matthew Knies ('02): 36 points in 83 games
Ridly Grieg ('02): 35 points in 92 games
Zachary Benson ('05): 30 points in 71 games
Leo Carlsson ('04): 29 points in 55 games
Adam Fantilli ('04): 27 points in 49 games
Matthew Poitras ('05): 15 points in 33 games
Logan Stankhoven ('03): 14 points in 24 games
Joshua Roy ('03): 9 points in 23 games
Zachary Bolduc ('03): 9 points in 25 games
Shane Wright ('04): 7 points in 16 games
Ivan Miroshnichenko ('04): 6 points in 21 games


Is Raymond amongst the best names on this list, now and moving forward? YES, OF COURSE. Does that mean he is firmly established over the players older than him and firmly likely to hold off some of the high-end players (and prospects that haven't gotten their shot yet) younger than him, to an extent to be called a "Franchise Forward"? I would say 'no'. I would say he's certainly in the mix and may get there but before tossing around terms like that, I'd take a more cautious approach.

 

[Uncle Scrooge]

I don't know if there really is an 'Yzerplan', at least if we're talking some special master plan.

He took over a team at their lowest point. First couple years they were supposed to suck and they did. Third year some of their young guys came in and raised their competitiveness up a notch. Last year they sort of took a small step forward that was hindered by Bertuzzi&Vrana, two of their supposedly better offensive forwards not being much of a factor and end season injuries, but there were positives like being in a playoff spot by thanksgiving. This year they missed the playoffs by tiebreaker.

I would say the organization is pretty much where you could've envisioned them to be. For Yzerman, I think it's been just taking it as it comes as far as how the roster is handled from year to year.

Going into this year when asked if his team was a playoff team, he said he has no idea. Until you know what you have, I don't think there is a big plan other than banking on the young players to develop and surrounding them with some veterans.

I guess in a way, now it really just starts.

 

[TKB]

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?

I have looked it up, that's why I bring up the point. It is easy say things like he had 6 second round picks and didn't hit any homeruns or they are all busts.

But if you are going to limit that to just 2019 and 2020, you need to look further and see why and what exactly happened in those years. Where and how did Yzerman fumble 2nd round and later in these drafts?

I asked about players that would have significantly helped this year, not because I care so much about this year, but because for some reason so many people's standard of success for Yzerman is to have made the playoffs this year.

What I am really worried about is the long term impact.

I'll start with Wallinder v Faber because it illustrates one of my points. Yzerman didn't pass on Faber 3 times in the second round. He passed once.

You know who else passed on Faber in the 2nd round? The team that drafted him. The Kings took Helge Grans at 35. Then they took Faber at 45. Then they traded him. Then they show up as a team that is doing the rebuild the "right way."

As I mentioned before Peterka is a good pick, but he doesn't do anything we didn't have for this year, and longer term Wallinder still has a good chance to contrbute.

I don't consider Wallinder to be a fumble.

For 2020, Tuomisto over Kochetkov is a miss. The other opportunity would be Vlassic, who I don't know a lot about, but does seem to be the type of player Yzerman likes.

After that, Mastrosimone is a bust. Johansson, may make the team some day. But are these guys "misses?" You can always go back and reorder any draft. The "real question" to use your words, is: were there any late round homeruns that Yzerman was so succesful with in Tampa that were available at 54 in 2019?

If not, then all we are left with as Yzerman's draft "sins" at this point is

1) Toumisto
2) Wallinder

Which is a ridiculous standard. But for some odd reason Yzerman triggers people.

 

[Pavels Dog]

I look dumb for saying a player should improve to what Franchise Forwards produce and prove it wasn't a shooting % positive variance to be called a Franchise Forward? Don't know why you're making this so personal. Raymond is a talented young forward, no doubt. Words gotta have a bit more meaning to them before we start throwing out terms like 'Franchise Forward'

For U25 (which I'll call 1999 births or later, 24 or younger as of 12/31/2023), here are stats to date amongst a smattering of Forwards:

Super, super weird list. But to play along, you realize if Raymond averages just 60 point a season for the next 3 years he'd be on the top of that list?

Here's the facts though. Lucas Raymond this season was:

6th highest scoring U25 forward
2nd highest scoring U23 forward
Highest scoring U22 forward

I don't think anyone has to call him a franchise forward already. I would agree it's early to say that.
But if your analysis of why he's not on that track is "his shooting% was a bit high" and "Jordan Eberle once had a really good season" than you're certainly not making a strong case.

 

[Frobbo]

After five years you are able to see the direction of the rebuild. What I see as a comp at this time is the...Wild. You have Boldy/Raymond, Kaprisov/Larkin and Faber/Seider as the important pieces on the big club. Wallstedt/Cossa, Yurov/Danielson etc on the farm. MN doesn't have a comp for Ed but they have a lot of pending cap space, much more than RWS.
If Yzerman defenders think this is an accomplishment, who is to argue. To me it looks kinda meh like the Wild.

I think there are other teams one could substitute for the Wild here too to further illustrate the status of the rebuild.

 

[Pavels Dog]

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.

If the expectation out of Yzerman is to nail every single draft pick, what are we even doing here? Of course Yzerman will fail. As will every GM. Name a team that you think drafts well and I'll name you 20 terrible draft picks they made in the last couple of years.

Realistically, would Evangelista have made them a playoff team? Pretty unlikely I'd say. 39 points would have been 10th on Detroit and scoring wasn't their problem.
Kochetkov? Maybe. But we can play this game every season for goalies. Is Kochetkov a long-term #1? Would have the same numbers in Detroit facing much more difficult useage than on the NHLs most dominant possession team? Who knows.

If these picks are what you're all hanging your hats on as Yzerman's failures it feels like reaching.

After five years you are able to see the direction of the rebuild. What I see as a comp at this time is the...Wild. You have Boldy/Raymond, Kaprisov/Larkin and Faber/Seider as the important pieces on the big club. Wallstedt/Cossa, Yurov/Danielson etc on the farm. MN doesn't have a comp for Ed but they have a lot of pending cap space, much more than RWS.
If Yzerman defenders think this is an accomplishment, who is to argue. To me it looks kinda meh like the Wild.

I think there are other teams one could substitute for the Wild here too to further illustrate the status of the rebuild.

Looking for 1:1 comparisons tends to miss the forest for the trees. Minnesota was a 100+ point team last season and a team with a similar build but a few tweaks for the better is a legitimately good team. For example, Minnesota's always had weak centers as one of their problems. Larkin is obviously far and away the best center between the two teams, and though I'm not completely familiar with the Wild prospect pool I'd wager Danielson and Kasper are the best two center prospects between the two pools. That's one key area where Detroit looks stronger built.

And, as you mention, Edvinsson. Sandin Pellikka. Wallinder. Buium. Augustine on top of Cossa. Etc.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Super, super weird list.

Super weird? It's literally a list of U25 NHL Forwards. Did you think I was expressing a value judgement? Lol

 

[Ezekial]

I once saw an interaction on the internet with someone who didn't know the facepalm emoji.

He thought the person agreed with him and it was an emoji of someone handing him an orange due to the good point. I think of it every time someone uses it. You've made me think of it a couple times now.


For someone with some facepalm worthy takes in this thread you sure like to make a display of dismissing people's opinions.

 

[Ezekial]

Super weird? It's literally a list of U25 NHL Forwards. Did you think I was expressing a value judgement? Lol

Thank the maker WarriorofTime is here to aggregate a list of all the players in the league under 25 years old. Very nice. Now what was the point of it, other than giving me something I had to scroll 6 times to get past?

 

[cvaicunas]

?

NHL farm system rankings: Best, worst prospect pipelines for 2019-20, from 1 to 31 | Sporting News Canada

www.sportingnews.com

Try again lol

Hindsight is not a concept you seem to understand.

There isn't an NHL GM or scouting expert that hadn't been wrong about a top prospect... Guess everyone but you & your crystal ball are idiots, right

Ok, so the prospect pool was RATED top 10 at that time. Let's all accept that fact for a moment. Now as you rightly say, everyone has been wrong about prospects before, and will continue to do so. Now, with hindsight, everyone and their mother can see that the Red Wings DID NOT have a top ten prospect pool. So what's the point of continuing to say that Yzerman inherited a top 10 prospect pool, and use that as a negative mark on his tenure as GM. When everyone and their mother f**king knows that WAS NOT a top 10 prospect pool. And as I'm finishing this, you may not be the poster I intended to respond to, but I'm rolling with it anyways...... Let's call it, general food for thought.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Thank the maker WarriorofTime is here to aggregate a list of all the players in the league under 25 years old. Very nice. Now what was the point of it, other than giving me something I had to scroll 6 times to get past?

Why do you make everything weirdly personal? It's bizarre. You and a few others have a bad habit of asking for information which requires a bit of legwork and then making simple reductivist statements to reach an incoherent conclusion. The guys doing the thing with the draft picks is another great example, "oh, no later picks that have made the NHL? Ok list every draft pick that is a high impact player, oh look only 3 players I define as clear impact players, and so in conclusion, Yzerman only made 1 bad pick, you're so weird for even bringing up"..... "oh you think 2019 and 2020 draft picks should be far enough along to be cracking a roster? Well you must think Matt Rempe is better than Simon Edvinsson because he played 1 more game this season, CHECKMATE"

Like what, debate in good faith, please instead of these endless "gotcha" traps and shifting goalposts that don't do anything to support a real point.

 

[norrisnick]

Like what, debate in good faith, please instead of these endless "gotcha" traps and shifting goalposts that don't do anything to support a real point.

Exactly. The Red Wings roster and prospect pool has dramatically improved from where it was in 2019. Anything else is just noise and disingenuous BS from people that haven't paid any attention to what Yzerman has said his plan is and subsequently what he's done with what was made available to him.

 

[FriendlyGhost92]

Y'all are really still arguing over this?

Started with Mantha as his #2 player and Zadina/Veleno as his Top 2 prospects. Really can't put it much more bluntly than that.

 

[RedHawkDown]

Why do you make everything weirdly personal? It's bizarre. You and a few others have a bad habit of asking for information which requires a bit of legwork and then making simple reductivist statements to reach an incoherent conclusion. The guys doing the thing with the draft picks is another great example, "oh, no later picks that have made the NHL? Ok list every draft pick that is a high impact player, oh look only 3 players I define as clear impact players, and so in conclusion, Yzerman only made 1 bad pick, you're so weird for even bringing up"..... "oh you think 2019 and 2020 draft picks should be far enough along to be cracking a roster? Well you must think Matt Rempe is better than Simon Edvinsson because he played 1 more game this season, CHECKMATE"

Like what, debate in good faith, please instead of these endless "gotcha" traps and shifting goalposts that don't do anything to support a real point.

This is such a weird way to look at the discussion. You know it doesn't really help a discussion to just categorize every response to you as "incoherent conclusions" and "gotcha traps". Nobody is trying to do that.

The point was really simple. You already said that you think any player that has made the NHL is better than a player that hasn't, which is fine to have as an opinion, and if that's your bar, then yes, Yzerman could definitely have drafted much better in 2019/2020 as there are some NHL players from the 2nd+ round in those years, while we don't have any so far.

All I said was that that's not my judgement of "good" drafting - to just get passable NHL players. I would want top 6 players or top 4 dmen, or at least elite 3rd liners, because bottom 6 players and bottom 2 dmen are a dime a dozen in free agency. I don't see how any of the guys apart from the 3 I listed (and Evangelista/Kotchetkov as were fairly brought up) are any better than guys like Fischer/Copp/Veleno/Sprong or Maatta/Holl/Petry. This year, Wallinder could have played the exact same role Holl did, or Soderblom the role that Fischer did. I just don't see how that's any better for the rebuild than having these guys in the AHL.

As such, I fail to see how drafting these guys and having them on the roster instead of the older vets playing the same 4th line role would improve Detroit or make their rebuild any better. None of these guys have shown exceptional potential.

Once again...if the list of guys in round 2+ that Yzerman should have drafted instead of the guys he did draft is like...5 to 10 players... I'm not sure how this is an indictment of Yzerman. That's 10 guys out of like 350. Could he have done better? Sure. Did he do horribly? Not really...when the fraction of NHL players is already so low to begin with.

 

[WarriorofTime]

All I said was that that's not my judgement of "good" drafting - to just get passable NHL players. I would want top 6 players or top 4 dmen, or at least elite 3rd liners, because bottom 6 players and bottom 2 dmen are a dime a dozen in free agency. I don't see how any of the guys apart from the 3 I listed (and Evangelista/Kotchetkov as were fairly brought up) are any better than guys like Fischer/Copp/Veleno/Sprong or Maatta/Holl/Petry. This year, Wallinder could have played the exact same role Holl did, or Soderblom the role that Fischer did. I just don't see how that's any better for the rebuild than having these guys in the AHL.

But it's not like the Wings non-1st round picks from those years project as anything more than "dime a dozen" players as you refer to it. To the extent they make the NHL at all, it will likely be in such a capacity based on everything they have all shown to date.

As such, I fail to see how drafting these guys and having them on the roster instead of the older vets playing the same 4th line role would improve Detroit or make their rebuild any better. None of these guys have shown exceptional potential.

Every player's journey is unique... I think you may be dismissing all these other players too quickly while giving the Wings guys a much longer leash and benefit of the doubt. Many players start as depth players and earn bigger opportunities. You rarely go from AHL to 1st liner.

Once again...if the list of guys in round 2+ that Yzerman should have drafted instead of the guys he did draft is like...5 to 10 players...

The indictment is no NHL players to date, nobody that projects highly. I don't see how you can look at the drafts and say they were rated highly in general, flip what you said, instead of proving a negative, prove the positive that the drafts were good.

I'm not sure how this is an indictment of Yzerman. That's 10 guys out of like 350. Could he have done better? Sure. Did he do horribly? Not really...when the fraction of NHL players is already so low to begin with.

I don't see how the Red Wings guys are number 11 through whatever. There is no basis for that.

 

[Czechboy]

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?

Fun sidenote ... Jack Campbell was also higher.

 

[cvaicunas]

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.

I should have read your post before I posted mine. Completely agree with this.

 

[RedHawkDown]

But it's not like the Wings non-1st round picks from those years project as anything more than "dime a dozen" players as you refer to it. To the extent they make the NHL at all, it will likely be in such a capacity based on everything they have all shown to date.

Every player's journey is unique... I think you may be dismissing all these other players too quickly while giving the Wings guys a much longer leash and benefit of the doubt. Many players start as depth players and earn bigger opportunities. You rarely go from AHL to 1st liner.

The indictment is no NHL players to date, nobody that projects highly. I don't see how you can look at the drafts and say they were rated highly in general, flip what you said, instead of proving a negative, prove the positive that the drafts were good.

I don't see how the Red Wings guys are number 11 through whatever. There is no basis for that.

You still are not getting what I'm saying. I'm not saying any of the Detroit guys are projected to be good or that our draft projects as good. I never even said that the drafts were good. I just said they weren't "bad". I also never said the Detroit guys are number 11 through whatever.

If every single one of the Detroit players beyond the 1st round in 2019/2020 bust and never make the NHL, the only way that's considered a "bad" draft is if many impact players could have been picked instead. Again, if your threshold is "NHL player", then I agree with you - if none of our guys make the NHL and there are 20-30 guys that played 100-200 games, even if at the 4th liner level, then yes, that's a failed draft.

But if your threshold is "impact player" - i.e. a player that actually changes the course of the rebuild in any meaningful way - then the argument is different. If there are only 10-15 "impact players" beyond the first round (i.e. top 6 or top 4) between the 2019/2020 drafts, then I don't see how you can say that Yzerman has been drafting poorly. He just drafted "average". He did well with the 1st round picks, and couldn't hit the 10-15/350 home runs. You can certainly say the drafts were not "great". But I don't seeh ow you can see they were 'bad' just because they didn't get one of the 15 players that the vast, vast majority of teams also failed to get.