The Athletic’s Dom Luszczyszyn and Scott Wheeler posted a “contention cycle” for all 32 NHL teams on Wednesday, and the Red Wings’ “window” to contend for the playoffs, if not more, is supposedly opening (under their criteria).
Not surprisingly, The Athletic’s Max Bultman questions that assertion this morning, and Luszczyszyn and Wheeler (and Shayna Goldman) then hedge their bets and suggest that, just maybe, the Wings aren’t going to contend for anything any time soon:
Bultman: As much as the depth let the Red Wings down the last couple years, I can buy a depth-based approach working for them down the line, when their farm system matures — although, full disclosure, I’ve been sort of expecting that for a few years now, with no real signs of it materializing. But even if it happens — which takes some optimism — Larkin’s seemingly inevitable departure means they’ll still need to find a true No. 1 center to actually become contenders.
I have a hunch Kasper will bounce back this season, and that would help. But even then, his ceiling is still probably more of a No. 2 than a top-line center. Danielson looks like he may end up as a bottom-six pivot. If that’s the case, I just wonder where they’d actually obtain a true top-line center in a post-Larkin world. The answer is usually the draft, but if the rest of the core — led by Seider, Edvinsson, Raymond and DeBrincat — stays solid, they may not be picking as high as those centers tend to go.
So I guess my questions are: For Dom, would subtracting Larkin be enough to get the Red Wings into top-five pick territory in the next year or two? And for Scott, are the centers in the next two draft classes real answers to their lack of star power down the middle?
Here comes the “womp-womp”:
Continue reading Hedging bets on the Red Wings’ ‘contention window’