Hockeybuzz’s Bob Duff took note of Red Wings director of player development Shawn Horcoff’s comments as relating to the play of Michael Rasmussen during the WHL playoffs, where Rasmussen racked up 33 points over the course of 17 games played for the Tri-City Americans:
“He’s a guy that got better as the year’s gone on,” Wings director of player development Shawn Horcoff told Mlive.com. “This is the best hockey he played all year, obviously, and it couldn’t come at a better time.”
Of even more intrigue to the Detroit brass was the fact that Rasmussen skated on the wing in the playoffs, a position he’s most likely to occupy if he cracks the Red Wings lineup for the 2018-19 NHL season.
“He’s learning how to do that,” Horcoff said. “He never has, he’s normally been a center. We know him to be that and view him as that. But at the same time it’s always good to learn how to play wing, which makes him more of a complete player.”
The Wings liked how quickly Rasmussen adapted to his new role, and how well it suited his game.
“Once the playoffs started he found his groove,” Horcoff said. “He was more comfortable. He was hard on the puck. With his size and strength in that league he was really hard to knock off the puck down low. He was making some great offensive plays, some great passes, showing some really good vision from below the top of the circles, which is a nice asset to go along with his good hands and scoring touch out front.”
Duff and Horcoff continue, discussing the play of Sault Ste. Marie Greyhounds defenseman Jordan Sambrook…
Yup, sounds like the plan is Center. Just gotta give time for that wrist to heal.
Still feels like the Wings are waffling. They don’t want to declare him a winger, since that looks bad on them. But they also don’t want to acknowledge that his play at center was good, but not great. So suddenly the solution is for every center to first break in on the wing.
Some teams do this. Galchenyuk was sheltered at wing. So was Sam Bennett. Charlie Coyle. Hertl. Learn the ropes on the wing and then move to center. In some cases it worked well. In other cases I think it just messed up the player, or they just remained at wing. So this philosophy should not be immune from criticism.
Other teams take my approach. You’ve been a center all your life, then go play center and take your lumps. McDavid, Eichel, Matthews, MacKinnon. None of them played wing.
Oh but they are elite, generational talents.
OK. What about Sean Monahan, Barkov, Horvat, and an endless list of guys who come in and play in a sheltered 3C/4C role from day 1. Add Datsyuk to that list too.
Personally, I would use Rasmussen as a 3C with a steady veteran to learn from. Put Nielsen on his wing who can take the load on faceoffs when on a bad matchup.
Nielsen-Rasmussen-AA might be a sneaky 3rd line that can score some goals.
“Still feels like the Wings are waffling. They don’t want to declare him a winger, since that looks bad on them.”
This is your judgement. Nowhere in the article and nowhere has anything like that been said.
“So suddenly the solution is for every center to first break in on the wing.”
Hellow Larkin. Hello Zetterberg.
“Other teams take my approach. You’ve been a center all your life, then go play center and take your lumps. McDavid, Eichel, Matthews, MacKinnon.”
Ahhh okay……so all non top 1 and 2 picks are equivalent to generational talent? ahhh…nope…no GM would agree with you there. You handle different players differently, not as generational talent. Please fine more equivalent comparisons.
“What about ….” yes there are exceptions to every rule. Thank you for pointing that out. For every guy who starts at his natural position there are probably 10 who do not.
I really do not understand why people think you have a lot of hockey knowledge. You either only play exceptions, make vague generalization or state obvious facts in ways that make you sound like you came up with the idea.
“Other teams take my approach.”
Laughable. Just laughable.
Haha. I don’t even think you are following. I listed 4 superstars that started at centre. I anticipated that they would be exceptions, you know, being drafted 1st and 2nd overall. Then I listed guys like Monohan, Horvat, etc…who like Rasmussen, we’re never considered superstars. They also started at centre from day 1. Shall I name 100 more like them? Oh wait, if I name 100 you said the ratio is 10 to 1. So you’ll name 1000 examples of centremen that broke into the NHL as wingers. Haha. Can’t wait. This strategy of easing a centre into the NHL by first using them as a winger is not…the…proven…way. It’s worked for some. Failed for others. Simple statement really. I’m just suggesting that it’s not some proven method to success. And that if it was me, I’d start Rasmussen at centre, beside a guy like Nielsen, and let him learn on the fly.
“Shall I name 100 more like them? ”
Sure. I don’t mind if you waste your day even more.
“This strategy of easing a centre into the NHL by first using them as a winger is not…the…proven…way.”
ahhhh……
“It’s worked for some.”
Thank you. Proven.
Guys, I really don’t know where Rasmussen will end up playing but as long as he contributes some decent offence, I will be fine with it. Maybe the Wings whiffed on this selection, especially if they want him to be a centre, but he seems to have found a groove at wing.
Easing into the role of a centre can take time.