Who would Detroit take at 4?

[The Zetterberg Era]

I really hope we don't have to find the answer out to this question... top 3 pick would be huge IMO.

I can see them taking some of the guys we talk about for #4 at #3 anyway. I know because of Mo the entire board has a certainty that Stutzle would be the guy, I am not sure they will have that same board. Like I wouldn't be shocked if they picked Raymond or frankly if they were going to pull the trigger on Askarov if it didn't matter 3 or 4 in their mind.

 

[Voodoo Glow Skulls]

Depending on how the board goes...

Trade down.

 

[Frk It]

I can see them taking some of the guys we talk about for #4 at #3 anyway. I know because of Mo the entire board has a certainty that Stutzle would be the guy, I am not sure they will have that same board. Like I wouldn't be shocked if they picked Raymond or frankly if they were going to pull the trigger on Askarov if it didn't matter 3 or 4 in their mind.

When are we getting McKenzie’s final ranking? His top 3-4 is usually pretty reliable to what we see come draft time.

Even beyond Yzerman being bold and all, I thought I had read that Stutzle is not a foregone conclusion at #3.

After Lafreniere/Byfield it’s hard for me to decide what matters. Stutzle has good skill great athleticism. I think Raymond has the most gamebreaking ability. Drysdale has the mobility and all-around game. For me it really has to be me of those 3 at 3/4. Anyone else and I’m going to have a tough time with it.

 

[Hen Kolland]

Whatever school you went to... failed you.

Blush = BeTtER ThAN ROy!!!1!!!!!! ""dats, wha U sayd, bro...derp.derp.""

/facepalm.

Usually your posts are so incoherent that only other people can’t follow along. It’s a long fall to the bottom where even you don’t know what the words you are typing mean anymore, Dotter.

But sure, now that you have clarified that you meant the opposite of the words you chose the first time, welcome to correct side of the discussion.

 

[Hen Kolland]

When are we getting McKenzie’s final ranking? His top 3-4 is usually pretty reliable to what we see come draft time.

Even beyond Yzerman being bold and all, I thought I had read that Stutzle is not a foregone conclusion at #3.

After Lafreniere/Byfield it’s hard for me to decide what matters. Stutzle has good skill great athleticism. I think Raymond has the most gamebreaking ability. Drysdale has the mobility and all-around game. For me it really has to be me of those 3 at 3/4. Anyone else and I’m going to have a tough time with it.

Bob said that it’s going to air the same time as it would have in a normal season. Which is ultimately like 3 days before the lottery is scheduled to take place? He just tweeted within the past day about it though, so I would double check on that.

 

[Dotter]

Usually your posts are so incoherent that only other people can’t follow along. It’s a long fall to the bottom where even you don’t know what the words you are typing mean anymore, Dotter.

But sure, now that you have clarified that you meant the opposite of the words you chose the first time, welcome to correct side of the discussion.

Oh stop, now you're making me blush.

Also, I found this for you. I'll even pay for it and have it sent to you straight away. My treat, big guy. ;-)

I'm sorry for getting you all triggered. Allow me to buy this gift for you as a way to make peace between us.

 

[MBH]

When are we getting McKenzie’s final ranking? His top 3-4 is usually pretty reliable to what we see come draft time.

Even beyond Yzerman being bold and all, I thought I had read that Stutzle is not a foregone conclusion at #3.

After Lafreniere/Byfield it’s hard for me to decide what matters. Stutzle has good skill great athleticism. I think Raymond has the most gamebreaking ability. Drysdale has the mobility and all-around game. For me it really has to be me of those 3 at 3/4. Anyone else and I’m going to have a tough time with it.

For me, it's Lafreniere/Byfield at 1/2 - and not necessarily in that order.
Stutzle is my #3, but I'm not really firm on him there.
I could easily move Askarov or Sanderson up to 3.

From 3 and beyond, I've got a bunch of guys in the mix:
But it comes down to Stutzle, Sanderson, Askarov are my top 3.
I just can't support Raymond - another left-handed winger, or Drysdale, another right-handed D.
If I thought Perfetti or Rossi were really going to be Cs, I'd consider bumping them up into contention.
Holtz... intrigues me a bit because of the right-handed shot.
I don't believe Lundell has enough offense to be a legit top 4 pick.

 

[Frk It]

For me, it's Lafreniere/Byfield at 1/2 - and not necessarily in that order.
Stutzle is my #3, but I'm not really firm on him there.
I could easily move Askarov or Sanderson up to 3.

From 3 and beyond, I've got a bunch of guys in the mix:
But it comes down to Stutzle, Sanderson, Askarov are my top 3.
I just can't support Raymond - another left-handed winger, or Drysdale, another right-handed D.
If I thought Perfetti or Rossi were really going to be Cs, I'd consider bumping them up into contention.
Holtz... intrigues me a bit because of the right-handed shot.
I don't believe Lundell has enough offense to be a legit top 4 pick.

Raymond. Is. Right. Handed.

 

[Henkka]

I don't believe Lundell has enough offense to be a legit top 4 pick.

This is funny when he could be Bergeron-level of "bad" offensive guy.

 

[odin1981]

I have a feeling our board's consensus top 3 won't materialize on draft day. So if we pick forth their is a good chance we get one of them. Granted though I expect Laf and Byfield to be #1 and #2 respectively.

 

[FMichael]

yea i'm banking on 4 so if by chance we get a top 3 it will be good news.

I forgot the chances but i believe its 51% to land a top 3 and 49% to get 4th

49.4 % to land in the top 3

50.6 % to get 4th

Like others here - I expect 3rd, or 4th.

 

[ArmChairGM89]

For me, it's Lafreniere/Byfield at 1/2 - and not necessarily in that order.
Stutzle is my #3, but I'm not really firm on him there.
I could easily move Askarov or Sanderson up to 3.

From 3 and beyond, I've got a bunch of guys in the mix:
But it comes down to Stutzle, Sanderson, Askarov are my top 3.
I just can't support Raymond - another left-handed winger, or Drysdale, another right-handed D.
If I thought Perfetti or Rossi were really going to be Cs, I'd consider bumping them up into contention.
Holtz... intrigues me a bit because of the right-handed shot.
I don't believe Lundell has enough offense to be a legit top 4 pick.

What is this nonsense about Raymond being left handed. I feel like this is the second time that I’ve seen you say that.

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

Depending on how the board goes...

Trade down.

Only trade down if Askarov or Sandeson are the targets, Even at #4 you still have your pick of Raymond/Rossi/Drysdale i'd be happy with anyone of those 3 possibly Stutzle as well depending on who picks 3rd.

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

What is this nonsense about Raymond being left handed. I feel like this is the second time that I’ve seen you say that.

Yeah Raymond is right handed but plays LW, Think people get that mixed up that he's left handed as well when he's not.

 

[Rzombo4 prez]

I am not against exploring trading down depending on the target, but it is kinda foolish to expect that opportunity to materialize. It is easy to talk about but hard to execute.

Four days out and my liver is already hurting.

 

[Hen Kolland]

I am not against exploring trading down depending on the target, but it is kinda foolish to expect that opportunity to materialize. It is easy to talk about but hard to execute.

Four days out and my liver is already hurting.

Hurting so much that you forgot we are 10 days away from the lottery?

 

[Rzombo4 prez]

Hurting so much that you forgot we are 10 days away from the lottery?

Ha ha, now we know why it is hurting....

 

[Retire91]

I feel like this needs to be said again. When you have a pick outside of the top 15 you can probably find a taker to trade you two seconds. A top 4 pick is a completely different story. The last time a top 4 pick was traded strait up for picks was 1996. 14 years ago. Its even less likely a GM shops a top 4 pick around. The last time the wings picked in the top 4 was 1990 20 years ago. It's not easy to find someone who is willing to send you the value a top 4 pick demands without involving roster players. For example a significant roster trade is made and the picks shore up the balance. We don't have any interest in trading around roster core players unless its a Christmas in July type of trade which is even less likely.

Think of the odds

• First Yzerman has to be interested in moving the pick (which I doubt he is)
• Second you need to find a team that is willing to deal only in picks and stop asking about Larkin
• Third its not likely you go down very far, Let's say farthest to pick 10
• That limits your trading partners to the teams that have 5,6,7,8,9,10. Only 6 teams
• forth your trading partner has to have a second asset that makes your trade worth while. Will you trade down only to add another second? So if you trade down to 10 and the team only had their own picks then you are trading for 10 and 42. Is trading the 4th overall pick worth it for the 10th best and the 42nd best 18 year old?
• If you will not settle for a second then of those 6 trading partners what are the odds one of the teams happens to have two first round picks?

You guys keep mentioning trading down like its going to 7/11 and picking up a Slurpee, think again. I think people are grossly undervaluing and underappreciating the enormity and rarity of a top 5 pick.

I'm sorry but I didn't go through this season to pick outside the top 5.

 

[ArmChairGM89]

I feel like this needs to be said again. When you have a pick outside of the top 15 you can probably find a taker to trade you two seconds. A top 4 pick is a completely different story. The last time a top 4 pick was traded strait up for picks was 1996. 14 years ago. Its even less likely a GM shops a top 4 pick around. The last time the wings picked in the top 4 was 1990 20 years ago. It's not easy to find someone who is willing to send you the value a top 4 pick demands without involving roster players. For example a significant roster trade is made and the picks shore up the balance. We don't have any interest in trading around roster core players unless its a Christmas in July type of trade which is even less likely.

Think of the odds

• First Yzerman has to be interested in moving the pick (which I doubt he is)
• Second you need to find a team that is willing to deal only in picks and stop asking about Larkin
• Third its not likely you go down very far, Let's say farthest to pick 10
• That limits your trading partners to the teams that have 5,6,7,8,9,10. Only 6 teams
• forth your trading partner has to have a second asset that makes your trade worth while. Will you trade down only to add another second? So if you trade down to 10 and the team only had their own picks then you are trading for 10 and 42. Is trading the 4th overall pick worth it for the 10th best and the 42nd best 18 year old?
• If you will not settle for a second then of those 6 trading partners what are the odds one of the teams happens to have two first round picks?

You guys keep mentioning trading down like its going to 7/11 and picking up a Slurpee, think again. I think people are grossly undervaluing and underappreciating the enormity and rarity of a top 5 pick.

I'm sorry but I didn't go through this season to pick outside the top 5.

I don’t think anyone is acting like none of this is true. All very good points but the narrative that everyone is overlooking these points isn’t true.

a very accurate and fair assessment about trading down. I just don’t like that you framed it as if everyone here is stupid lol

 

[Retire91]

I didn't mean for it to be offense, but the trade down comment is just being thrown out there so nonchalantly. Like see if Bay, Laf, and Stuz are taken and if so just trade down. The 'just' part is what I am taking exception to.

If you mention trading down, what are you trading down to, who are you taking, who are your trading partners? Fill in the gaps in mentioning something that needs like 9 pieces to fall line up for it to happen.

 

[simonedvinsson]

The last time the wings picked in the top 4 was 1990 20 years ago.

2020 - 1990 = 20

TIL.

You guys keep mentioning trading down like its going to 7/11 and picking up a Slurpee, think again. I think people are grossly undervaluing and underappreciating the enormity and rarity of a top 5 pick.

All maths aside, this is a great quote and summarizes my frustration with the "I'd trade down" sayers quite well.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

I think the only reason we would be dealing down is Askarov or Sanderson. But you would need a team chasing Drysdale.

It is always easy to say trade down, but somebody has to want to come up. Basically exactly what happened to the Lions, you need two to tango.

 

[ArmChairGM89]

I think I’ve said this but I would consider trading down from four. If laf/byfield/stutzle are gone in an attempt to acquire more 2nd round capital to trade back up for a falling askarov. All a lot of what ifs.

 

[Bench]

I think the only reason we would be dealing down is Askarov or Sanderson. But you would need a team chasing Drysdale.

It is always easy to say trade down, but somebody has to want to come up. Basically exactly what happened to the Lions, you need two to tango.

Didn't Yzerman allude they looked to move back last year, but couldn't find a deal so they just took Seider at 6?

 

[Hen Kolland]

I swear like two weeks ago not a single person would have remotely considered Askarov under any circumstance. The trade back conversation was only to acquire capital and take the skater that was left on the board, be it Rossi, Holtz, Perfetti, Sanderson, whoever.

I don't appreciate what Bench has done to this forum, and I would like him punished to the full extent of the virtual law.