Should the Red Wings fully rebuild?

[Mr.TaterSalad]

With Steve Yzerman out as GM of the Red Wings, should the new GM come in and fully rebuild the roster or should they continue with the current roster and try to win now?

[Cruzer1]

They don't have to. 

[buddha]

if they want to win a stanley cup they will.

[Cruzer1]

2 minutes ago, buddha said:

if they want to win a stanley cup they will.

They have a lot of cheap depth.  I am more concerned with the Edvinsson deal than the Larkin deal.

[buddha]

what does "fully rebuild" mean?  if they trade larkin, faulk, gibson this year for futures, then that's going to tank their season, but should set them up nicely assuming they find someone who actually knows how to draft.

[buddha]

Just now, Cruzer1 said:

They have a lot of cheap depth.  I am more concerned with the Edvinsson deal than the Larkin deal.

but that's ALL they have.

two top defensemen.  two top small wingers.  a bunch of third line guys.

you can win with good depth (i would dispute that the wings have GOOD depth, i think they have a lot of young depth players with potential), but you have to have some great players up top.  they dont have that.  its always been the criticism of yzerman.  well, one of the biggest criticisms.  you spend money on copp/compher and not on jason robertson.

[Mr.TaterSalad]

To me, fully rebuild means you are doing everything you can to get top lottery odds and ensure you have the #1 pick in next year's draft. We need to give ourselves the opportunity to draft the top player on our board. It means making an effort to get a true #1 center through the draft, capable of being a consistent 85-90+ point guy or at least getting a center who can anchor this franchise for years to come, even if they're only an 75-80 point guy. It means arming ourselves with as much draft capital as possible, being the OKC Thunder of the NHL, and going into a draft with 2-3-4 picks in a given year.

If I am fully rebuilding I am trading all of Larkin, DeBrinact, Faulk, Arvidsson, Gibson, and maybe Copp for as much draft capital or prospects as possible. Larkin, Cat, Faulk, and Gibson should be able to net you firsts or top prospects in an organizations pipeline. If we are so bad we only win 20-25 games next year and we position ourselves to have top lottery odds, that's a good thing IMO.

Edited July 15 by Mr.TaterSalad

[buddha]

dealing larkin, gibson, faulk, and not keeping kane puts you in the running for the #1 pick.

dealing debrincat along with them definitely does.

[1984Echoes]

57 minutes ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

... If I am fully rebuilding I am trading all of Larkin, DeBrincat, Faulk, Arvidsson, Gibson, and maybe Copp ...

They just signed Arvidsson so I don't think they can trade him until the deadline.

I agree with everyone else on your list.

As for Arvidsson... I will want to revisit at the deadline and make no decisions for or against until around that time... But probably/ most likely have him on the Trade To-Do list. Along with any other pending FA veterans that haven't already been sold off.

[Mr.TaterSalad]

4 minutes ago, buddha said:

dealing debrincat along with them definitely does.

If you could get more draft capital or an organization's top prospect/s, then why not deal Cat. What's the point in keeping him if you're tanking and rebuilding? I say, why pass up on the future assets you can get for a guy whose timeline doesn't fit yours.

[1984Echoes]

6 minutes ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

If you could get more draft capital or an organization's top prospect/s, then why not deal Cat. What's the point in keeping him if you're tanking and rebuilding? I say, why pass up on the future assets you can get for a guy whose timeline doesn't fit yours.

I say trade Cat first.

That will wake Larkin the **** up.

Excuse my language.

[Mr.TaterSalad]

For me, when it comes to the question of whether or not to rebuild, I have the same answer for any of the four major sports in North America. You have three good places you can be and one bad spot you can be in.

The first good place a team can be in is win now mode. Win now mode is when a team is firmly committed to doing everything they can to try and win their league's championship right now. They are constantly looking to improve their roster through free agency and trades, making upgrades where necessary. Examples of teams in this category are Carolina, Colorado, Florida, Minnesota, and Vegas.

The second good place a team can be in is up-and-coming mode or on the cusp of win now mode. This is a team with a ton of young talent that is maturing as a collective unit and ready to take that next step. They are ready to start adding more NHL-ready talent and pro players to add to their young core. They could surprise you with a deep run in the playoffs, but will be ready to win now within the next year. Examples of teams in this category are the San Jose Sharks and Montreal Canadians.

The third good place a team can be in is rebuild mode. This is a team who is actively or has recently torn apart their roster with the explicit attempt to add more draft capital, add high end talent through high draft picks, and get younger overall. Teams in this mode aren't looking to sign NHL-ready players or pay big for veteran free agents. Examples of teams in this category are Chicago and Vancouver.

Then there is the fourth category, the worst one you can be in. This one is purgatory. In any major sport, purgatory means you aren't bad enough to get high draft capital and top end talent. It means you're a middling team, signing free agents and making trades, but never in the conversation for the top players. You might make the playoffs once in a while, but usually you are the odd man out, sitting at the 9th or 10th seed. Examples of this team include Detroit. Us. That's where we are, in purgatory. We aren't bad enough to tank and compete for top draft capital. We aren't good enough to make the playoffs. We're still actively pursuing NHL players and overpaying for mediocre talent as a result. Top talent never wants to go to a team in purgatory. No team wins consistently here. No fan enjoys their team being here (at least they shouldn't). Our next GM, whoever it is, needs to commit fully to get us out of purgatory and do a full rebuild.

[Shinzaki]

I would def look to move Larkin, Cat, Faulk, Gibson, Chiarot, Copp, Ras, Compher.  Go all in for futures and start over

[buddha]

if youre going full rebuild, you deal cat.  does he have an nmc too?

i wouldnt mind if they re-signed him though.  he's a good player and wants to be here.  that counts for something.  also, if they do this right, he could still be good when they get better.

they do have a few solid pieces to build around.  the cupboard isnt as empty as it was when yzerman got here.  seider/raymond/edvinsson is better with higher upside than larkin/bertuzzi/mantha/hronek.

and they are still held back by larkin's limited trade request.

[Mr.TaterSalad]

25 minutes ago, buddha said:

and they are still held back by larkin's limited trade request.

That's why you put the squeeze on Larkin as a new GM. You go in and tell him that he can stay around and not expand his list of teams, but that you're going to be tanking to be as bad as possible. You essentially tell him that he hopes he enjoys spending the next 2-3 seasons on a 25 win team. Force him into expanding his list of trade partners or make him miserable on a losing team.

Edited July 15 by Mr.TaterSalad

[Shinzaki]

Does a new GM lead to a new coach?  If it's Draper or Horcoff..probably not.

[Mr.TaterSalad]

A new GM should get full autonomy to bring in anyone they want and make any personnel changes they want. new coach, new assistant GMs, new scouts, new scouting directors. I would hope if a new GM comes in from outside the organization (ie not Draper) they would keep Hakan Andersson and his Europeans scouting staff. They've largely done a great job. I would hope they would make big changes to our North American scouting staff and to our pro-side scouting staff. Our drafting of North American players has been piss poor for a while now and changed need to be made.

[lordstanley]

1 hour ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

 I would hope they would make big changes to our North American scouting staff and to our pro-side scouting staff. Our drafting of North American players has been piss poor for a while now and changed need to be made.

Yep, no use tearing down by selling your assets for draft capital if the draft capital is squandered. The Wings in the five drafts between 2018-2022 had 18 picks in the 1st two rounds. Got 3 studs and a few maybes out of it.

[Jason_R]

Obviously nobody is making any decisions about anything until a new GM is hired, and that GM is going to have to come in and handle Larkin. Next, he'll have to sign Edvinsson to a long term contract. The key decision will be Debrincat, which doesn't have to get made before the season starts. From a timing standpoint, it seems unlikely that a new GM would come in and make any other significant decisions before the season starts.

I could see the new GM come in and tell Larkin, "I'd like honor your trade request, but the way things have shaken out, it might not happen before the trade deadline. So go out there and bust your *** until then." I don't think it was just the losing that wore on Larkin, I think it became personal between him and Yzerman. Ilitch may not have been trying to rescue the relationship with Larkin by firing Yzerman, but if the relationship was going to be saved, firing Yzerman was the precondition. With Steve's firing, I would not at all be surprised to see Larkin start the season in a Red Wings jersey.

A new GM will also give Debrincat a chance to beg out, but I have a hard time thinking anyone would willingly let Debrincat walk. And I get the sense he wants to be in Detroit for personal reasons. Size notwithstanding, he is exactly the kind of guy Detroit should build around, a local kid with world-class skill and grit. If you can re-sign him, re-sign him.

I could also see the new GM come in and agree with Todd's initial opinion that the team has been playing scared. I suspect they'll turn some of the kids loose and see what they have before the trade deadline -- especially Postava. Even if the kids do better than expected, I would not at all be surprised to see Gibson and Faulk traded at the deadline, along with Larkin. But I don't think a new GM will (or should) get hired and conduct a fire sale right away.  

 

[gehringer_2]

23 minutes ago, Jason_R said:

A new GM will also give Debrincat a chance to beg out, but I have a hard time thinking anyone would willingly let Debrincat walk. And I get the sense he wants to be in Detroit for personal reasons. Size notwithstanding, he is exactly the kind of guy Detroit should build around, a local kid with world-class skill and grit. If you can re-sign him, re-sign him.

DeBrincat plays as far above his size as Rasmussen plays below his. 🤔

Quote

I could also see the new GM agree with Todd's initial opinion that the team has been playing scared

It is funny, the last two times the new Coach came in the team seemed to loosen up, then eventually recede back into their shell. Maybe it was a long term vibe from the FO.🤷‍♂️

Edited July 15 by gehringer_2

[Jason_R]

38 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

It is funny, the last two times the new Coach came in the team seemed to loosen up, then eventually recede back into their shell. Maybe it was a long term vibe from the FO.🤷‍♂️

At this point, I think it is clear that Yzerman was a big part, and maybe the biggest part, of the negative culture in the organization.

I hate to say it, and it even seems counterintuitive, since he was The Captain™️. But it seems like he was somehow unable to give the players, maybe even Larkin, space to be themselves. And he was unable to do the thing that made him great as a captain, which was to hold himself accountable to learning and changing his game.  

[buddha]

i dont think yzerman's personality had anything to do with larkin wanting to leave.  the one thing yzerman could have done to make larkin stay was trade for quinn hughes.

larkin wants to play with his friends from the usmnt.  he also doesnt like getting criticized by his gm when he fails, like he has the last 3 seasons.  you dont want that?  play better.

larkin's situation is on larkin and his character, not on steve yzerman.

[gehringer_2]

56 minutes ago, buddha said:

i dont think yzerman's personality had anything to do with larkin wanting to leave.  the one thing yzerman could have done to make larkin stay was trade for quinn hughes.

larkin wants to play with his friends from the usmnt.  he also doesnt like getting criticized by his gm when he fails, like he has the last 3 seasons.  you dont want that?  play better.

larkin's situation is on larkin and his character, not on steve yzerman.

this is all true to some degree, But we also don't know what kind of promises Yzerman made to Larkin about team building when he signed his deal. There is room to believe Yzerman made representations to Larkin that Larkin feels he failed to deliver on, and sure, Hughes being a prime example. When Hughes announced he was available, the fit was a slam dunk for Det and as far as we know (and Larkin, because he is close to Hughes probably does know) Yzerman didn't budge. The Olympics weren't the first time Larkin played in all star tourney and he didn't come back from previous ones demanding out. I tend to think something in his perception shifted in Detroit. Maybe just seeing his career get a year closer to its end, but maybe something more. 

In any case it's all just speculation - all that really matters now is can Ilitch put the toothpaste back in the tube. They either need to patch it up with Larkin under a new GM or the new GM has to find a way to make some deals to move forward, or both!

Edited July 15 by gehringer_2

[Jason_R]

2 hours ago, buddha said:

i dont think yzerman's personality had anything to do with larkin wanting to leave.  the one thing yzerman could have done to make larkin stay was trade for quinn hughes.

larkin wants to play with his friends from the usmnt.  he also doesnt like getting criticized by his gm when he fails, like he has the last 3 seasons.  you dont want that?  play better.

larkin's situation is on larkin and his character, not on steve yzerman.

There is a culture problem in the organization. Yzerman is responsible for the culture. Yes, Larkin is soft and got petulant at the end, but as soon as he made the trade request everyone in the NHL came out and said, oh they haven’t talked in a long time. If that was the case well before the Olympics, and I believe it was, that was on Yzerman. It wouldn’t surprise me if he was as dismissive of Larkin as he was of the press. 

[Motor City Sonics]

So Yzerman is not the GM, but does that actually mean anything?   Will he still be calling the shots behind the scenes?