A Twitter/X harbinger of a doomed relationship, or another overblown reaction to the Dylan Larkin situation?

More than a few Red Wings partisans and pundits alike are reacting very strongly to the fact that Dylan Larkin was not included in this Tweet announcing Detroit’s top player rankings in EA Sports’ NHL 27 game:

.@easportsnhl ratings just dropped 👀

Pre-order #NHL27 for early access!
🎮 » https://t.co/LTx5ZpPwyx pic.twitter.com/s0nGrFjNgc

— Detroit Red Wings (@DetroitRedWings) August 21, 2026

Sports Illustrated’s Nathan Smith certainly bit on the narrative…

We’ve heard very little from official channels on the relationship, but some Detroit insiders have suggested in recent times that if a deal isn’t made with Minnesota (as the other three likely don’t have too much interest anymore), the relationship in Detroit will need to be repaired.

Unfortunately, Detroit’s latest social media post shows that it may not be saving at this point, as the team celebrated their NHL27 ratings, showing Lucas Raymond (89), Moritz Seider (89), Alex DeBrincat (89) and John Gibson (85).

The problem? Dylan Larkin was also rated an 89 overall, and with the team placing Gibson at 85 on the list, this may have been intentional, with many fans in the comments on social media suggesting this may show what is happening with their relationship behind the scenes.

Um, okay?

I try not to tell Red Wings fans how to think or what to think. My goal here is to share my opinion and then turn the discussion over to you. Sometimes I f*** up and suggest that there’s a right reaction and a wrong reaction to a news item or a social media argument, like anybody else, and I’m sorry for that.

But in this case, I just don’t see the snub as an indication that the Red Wings are suddenly disowning their disgruntled captain. In my opinion, they’re listing the players who are actually going to be on the team in a month, and aren’t listing Larkin simply because it would be equally awkward to include him in the rankings.

Maybe that was the wrong decision. Maybe it wasn’t. But that’s what this was–an editorial decision, probably by somebody averse to conflict, not a damning slap in Dylan Larkin’s face.