Daniel Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 (edited) Based on Jason MacIssac's assesment of Yakupov, he doesn't sound like Malkin to me. And I look at this way: would you trade Niklas Lidstrom in his prime for Malkin? I wouldn't. Larsson may never be as good as Lidstrom, but when that's considered your upside, I wouldn't trade that for anything. I would defer to Jason's assessment as well. (As I keep saying I'm not an expert by any means). The Larsson/Lidstrom comparison is one of those comparisons that gets made to virtually any top Swede defensive prospect (same thing was said about Hedman). And really, any top ten defensive prospect seems to get compared to either Lidstrom, Nieds, or Stevens. If he's big and smooth skating he's Lidstrom, if he's skinny and fast he's Nieds, if he's a big hitter, he's Stevens. Yet you rarely see any of them turn into that. Of course, it's just as lazy as comparing one Russian prospect to another, like I just did. Edited April 11, 2012 by Daniel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sundstrom Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 Based on Jason MacIssac's assesment of Yakupov, he doesn't sound like Malkin to me. And I look at this way: would you trade Niklas Lidstrom in his prime for Malkin? I wouldn't. Larsson may never be as good as Lidstrom, but when that's considered your upside, I wouldn't trade that for anything. i don't think it's fair to say lidstrom is ANYONE's upside. Lidstrom is one of the 3 best defensemen of all time. i'm not great at finding comparables and people have said he has a similar style to lidstrom (probably laziness because they're both swedes and have a good first pass and similar body type) or hedman (same thing). i'm not sure who an accurate upside comp would be, but jason said it right - his ceiling is top pairing, 5 on 5, PK, passable PP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog2020 Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 (edited) i don't think it's fair to say lidstrom is ANYONE's upside. Lidstrom is one of the 3 best defensemen of all time. i'm not great at finding comparables and people have said he has a similar style to lidstrom (probably laziness because they're both swedes and have a good first pass and similar body type) or hedman (same thing). i'm not sure who an accurate upside comp would be, but jason said it right - his ceiling is top pairing, 5 on 5, PK, passable PP. True. If he's half as good as Lidstrom, he'll be a HOF'er lol. How about Timonen as a comparable? Edited April 11, 2012 by MadDog2020 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayday Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 i hope the oilers suck for years to come. this is no way to build a team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sundstrom Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 True. If he's half as good as Lidstrom, he'll be a HOF'er lol. How about Timonen as a comparable? other than the fact that Larsson is considerably bigger, that's not bad. i think timonen is a bit swifter though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog2020 Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 other than the fact that Larsson is considerably bigger, that's not bad. i think timonen is a bit swifter though. Yeah, Timonen is definitely faster- one thing you can knock a bit about Larsson is that he's a little slow. I think most people here would be happy if Larsson turns out as good as Timonen though, myself included. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 (edited) Larsson is a new type of defenseman, I don't think there are many comparables over time. Maybe something like Teppo Numminen, but better? But his upside is bigger. With fewer and fewer power play goals being scored, points by defensemen should continue to go down relative to forwards. I wouldn't trade him for the 1st overall pick. Edited April 11, 2012 by Triumph Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mort4345 Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 I think the real question is: Do the Devils think that Larsson is too soft? And my guess is that the organization knows better than we do when it comes to evaluating his future projections. So, if the Devils were able and willing to trade with Edmonton for the first overall pick, then you have your answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msweet Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 Trade Larsson? wtf? I'll bet anyone $10,000 against that happening in the next 3 years. Devils would have taken him if they had the #1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onddeck Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 Hahaha Columbus is such a dead franchise. They are gonna lose Nash, maybe their city, and they just got shafted in a draft where there isn't greatness beyond the first pick lol I'm curious as to whether or not Edmonton will keep that pick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lateralous Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 Ugh what garbage, Columbus really needed that pick this year. They did need it badly but until they help themselves and actually put competent people in management, they don't deserve a thing. It boggles my mind that they are sticking with Priest/Howson. At least pretend like you care about winning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StormJosh Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 I remember reading about a proposed system a while back that worked something like this: Teams pick in order of most wins to least wins after they have been mathematically eliminated from the playoffs. This way, the worst teams have the most chances to accumulate some wins and management has extra incentive to play to win. There is no reason the worst team should automatically have the #1 pick. It's really not so bad to draft #5 overall, there is still some very serious talent to be had. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 They did need it badly but until they help themselves and actually put competent people in management, they don't deserve a thing. It boggles my mind that they are sticking with Priest/Howson. At least pretend like you care about winning. Very true and some of their past drafting have blown up in their faces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucifer91 Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 I remember reading about a proposed system a while back that worked something like this: Teams pick in order of most wins to least wins after they have been mathematically eliminated from the playoffs. This way, the worst teams have the most chances to accumulate some wins and management has extra incentive to play to win. There is no reason the worst team should automatically have the #1 pick. It's really not so bad to draft #5 overall, there is still some very serious talent to be had. So lose a lot in the beginning, to be the first one eliminated from playoffs, then start winning! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin226 Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 Trade Larsson? wtf? I'll bet anyone $10,000 against that happening in the next 3 years. Devils would have taken him if they had the #1 This.. We'd have taken Larsson no matter what and should feel fortunate he fell to #4.. Our D will be sick in a year or 2 when Merrill is on the team Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 (edited) I remember reading about a proposed system a while back that worked something like this: Teams pick in order of most wins to least wins after they have been mathematically eliminated from the playoffs. This way, the worst teams have the most chances to accumulate some wins and management has extra incentive to play to win. There is no reason the worst team should automatically have the #1 pick. It's really not so bad to draft #5 overall, there is still some very serious talent to be had. This would severely damage parity in the long-term. Parity is built on the worst teams getting a top pick and being able to improve that way, especially since FA's won't be as likely to go to bad teams who won't be able to overspend to pay them if they're not getting any profit at the gate. Plus the top non-playoff teams are already trying to win since they're actually trying to make the playoffs. And short-term I don't see why there needs to be a 'fix' at all, the NHL Draft Lottery is infinitely more fair than the NBA one and gives the worst team about a 50% chance of the top pick which is fine. And many years the worst team hasn't goten the top pick. EDIT: Okay I misread your post, I thought you were givig the top pick to Buffalo/Colorado. Ironically that probably increases the chances the worst team gets the top pick (and I don't think the NHL wants teams to tank games 40-60 to get to elimination faster any more than they would have them lose games 60-80 and 'maybe' get a top pick) but it's probably not feasible because of different schedules. When one team has 24 games left, another team has 21. It's not as fair to teams that play a lot of games early in the season. Edited April 11, 2012 by NJDevs4978 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justdo3043 Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 what does edm do with gagner...omark now i wonder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halfsharkalligatorhalfman Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 I'm not sure it's fair to say Larsson is soft since he's 19 years old. It's too early to say who he'll be since he's still just a project who's shown flashes of greatness but really just flashes. I wouldn't trade him either for just Yakupov (I merely threw his name out to promote discussion), but let's not kid ourselves. He has a long way to go before he's even as good as Sami Salo (who we all ripped tsn for listing as a comparable). And don't forget the Devils only have him with RFA protection for the next 6 years. On top of this, year 1 of his Devils career has been near the low end of expectations wouldn't you say? I would hope Lou would have put him in the AHL and signed Stralman if he had expected this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 (edited) I'm not sure it's fair to say Larsson is soft since he's 19 years old. It's too early to say who he'll be since he's still just a project who's shown flashes of greatness but really just flashes. I wouldn't trade him either for just Yakupov (I merely threw his name out to promote discussion), but let's not kid ourselves. He has a long way to go before he's even as good as Sami Salo (who we all ripped tsn for listing as a comparable). And don't forget the Devils only have him with RFA protection for the next 6 years. On top of this, year 1 of his Devils career has been near the low end of expectations wouldn't you say? I would hope Lou would have put him in the AHL and signed Stralman if he had expected this. Whoa, sorry, this is nuts. Larsson's game fell off sharply after his injury, but the kid still makes a breakout pass every game that I don't think anyone else on the team could make. After coming back from Sweden in December until his injury he was probably New Jersey's best defenseman, or certainly in the discussion. He ends the season basically break-even with some offensive zone sheltering but not much sheltering from difficult competition. Breaking even as a 19 year old defenseman is really impressive. Next year I expect him to become a 22-23 minute defender. I also expect him to be better than Sami Salo next year. Edited April 11, 2012 by Triumph Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halfsharkalligatorhalfman Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 (edited) I hope you're right. I missed a lot of games during that stretch you're speaking of and didn't look at his fenwick/corsi etc. I still think the team would have been better off with Stralman and keeping Larsson in Albany. I can't really say if Larsson will have been better served next year with NHL over AHL experience (probably), but I'm slightly peeved we're going into round 1 with Peter Harrold instead of Larsson. At the beginning of the year Larsson was getting first unit PP time and over 20 minutes of ice time. The path from there to playoff healthy scratch (though I suppose I understand it for round 1 at least) seems disappointing to me. Edit: Especially considering his failure at the PP meant the Devils were forced to trade for Foster and then Zidlicky. Didn't mean to hijack the thread. Edited April 11, 2012 by halfsharkalligatorhalfman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.