HSJ reviews the Wings’ 2014 draft

The Free Press’s Helene St. James continues her examination of the Red Wings’ recent draft selections this morning, discussing the team’s 2014 draft, which included Dylan Larkin, Dominic Turgeon and Axel Holmstrom:

F Dylan Larkin

Drafted: 15th.

Draft year doings: 17 goals, 9 assists for 26 points in 26 games with the U.S. National U18 team.

Draft day scouting report: Terrific two-way player and excellent skater.

Post-draft doings: 15 goals, 32 assists for 47 points in 35 games with Michigan in 2014-15. Selected Big Ten’s Freshman of the Year. Turned pro and debuted with the Grand Rapids Griffins on May 24, during the AHL Western Conference final, recording three goals among five points in six playoff games.

Continued

Published by

George Malik

My name is George Malik, and I'm the Malik Report's editor/blogger/poster. I have been blogging about the Red Wings since 2006, when MLive hired me to work their SlapShots blog, and I joined Kukla's Korner in 2011 as The Malik Report. I'm starting The Malik Report as a stand-alone site, hoping that having my readers fund the website is indeed the way to go to build a better community and create better content.

15 thoughts on “HSJ reviews the Wings’ 2014 draft”

  1. There are so many errors and flawed logic in this article. Mind-blowing that this was published. For example…

    HSJ says Kevin Fiala didn’t play full-time until 2017-18. Haha. So the guy makes the opening roster in 2016-17…plays 54 games…was a key playoff performer before breaking his leg. But let’s make it sound like he just became a regular this year. Don’t mention the 23 goals he just scored either.

    Says nothing positive about Nick Ritchie, but points out that Larkin made the NHL a half-season before he did. Oh that’s huge.

    Can’t even spell Brendan Perlini so why would I believe she knows anything about him. Perhaps mention that in the last 2 seasons, Perlini has 31 goals to Larkin’s 33. He did that in 31 fewer games. Not saying he’s better than Larkin. But maybe be a little more neutral when comparing players.

    Then she reviews Ehn, Perry, Vahatalo, Holmstrom, Kadeykin. Her grades…1 miss, 4 still under deliberation. Bwahaha. Gimme a break. So Kadeykin is still up for debate?

    It’s OK to admit we had a great pick in Larkin, and Turgeon may make it as a 4th line forward, whereas the rest of the picks don’t appear to have an NHL future. Instead we learn that 4 out of these 5 guys are still intriguing possibilities. Sigh.

    1. Remember the good old days when Newspapers had editors and could afford men to do the job of women?

      Make America Great Again.

      Sorry, that was all sarcastic.

        1. “Sorry, that was all sarcastic.”

          I guess you missed that part. Sloppy work on your part and shallow analysis for sure. Thanks for giving us the second example of that today, acorn.

  2. Wings nailed it with the Larkin pick.

    Axel was a 6th round pick and Turgeon 3rd round getting to this point is good. It’ll be better if Turgeon can rise up and really become a 4th line center that helps us say bye to glenny.

    Otherwise, not all that good of a draft.

  3. The Larkin pick makes it a good draft.

    The problem is the Wings by this point needed to
    start hitting a little more often.

    Turgeon and possibly Holmstrom are solid, two-way
    depth players.

    Perry appears to be a miss? With Ehn, I guess we’ll see.

    I don’t know who was on the board among defensemen at
    the time of these picks. Takes a minute or two to check.
    But am noticing we do not appear to have picked even one defenseman.

    1. Who needs d-men when they already had Kindl, Smith, Sproul, Ouellet? Plus Dekeyser. Solid group!

      1. Sounds like a pretty low standard…hit on your 1st and miss on the rest. That’s like Edmonton. Oh we made the obvious choice in round 1 and then failed the rest of the day. But still a good draft overall. Haha.

        1. The rest of the day failure is your opinion. I disagree and think the jury is still out on some of them. I may be wrong I may be right but dont try to force your beliefs down others throats

          1. OK kewl. Didn’t think it was a game to see which opinion was most popular. So we picked zero d-men, and aside from the no-brainer in round 1, the only other thing we have is a fringe 4th line forward. Maybe. Yeah good job! But I guess if I’m in the minority then my opinion MUST be wrong.

          2. Because you said it Biv, you deserve to be criticized and mocked. But if someone else says it, well its OK.

            There’s no respect between commentors.

      2. I also wouldn’t call it “good” but I dont think anyone should be mocked for thinking so.

        Just respectfully disagree and can see why it may be seen as good.

Comments are closed.