The Athletic Hockey Show - How To Fix: Detroit Red Wings

Episode Date: September 2, 2026

It’s been a tumultuous summer in hockeytown with the Red Wings moving on from long time General Manager Steve Yzerman, with a search for a new head of Hockey Operations still in process with training camp right around the corner. Sean Gentille and Max Bultman dissect team captain Dylan Larkin’s controversial demand for a trade, they take a look at the Red Wings roster construction, prospect pool and if the Red Wings 10 year playoff drought will extend to another season. Host: Sean GentilleWith: Max BultmanExecutive Producer: Chris FlanneryProducer: Jeff DometWatch full episodes on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@theathletichockeyshowJoin our Discord Server: https://discord.gg/VTm9VjkFSubscribe to The Athletic: https://theathletic.com/hockeyshow Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is the Athletic Hockey Show. Welcome, welcome to the Athletic Hockey Show. I'm Sean Jintilly. This is the final episode of our How to Fix series this summer, the 10th and final underachieving team. In a lot of ways, they may be the most underachieving team, the biggest underachiever. And Max Boltman covering the Detroit Red Wings.

We are recording this on August 25th, buddy, and there are still some outstanding questions. You think? Just a couple about the Detroit headwings. They're trying to get back in the playoff conversation. They've been there at various points over the last decade or so, I suppose. Last year, 92 points, 6 of the Atlantic Division, missed the playoffs for the 10th straight year, 22nd, the NHL with goals for, 19th, and goals against. That, Max, is obviously not the biggest discussion point around this team.

We'll start with the GM end of things, but it's tough to separate the Dylan Larkin conversation from the Steve Eiserman one. Where are they on the search for Steve Eiserman's replacement? As we sit here in late August, what has that search been like? Where are they at on it? My God, when is it going to be over? Yeah, as we speak today, I think there is still in the interview phase. So who knows what that means for when it will be over? Obviously, there are some looming big dates here, right?

Obviously, they started training camp September 17th. But I think maybe even more important than that would be a couple days before that, September 15th, the last day you can sign eight-year contracts. They have a couple of players that that's relevant for. I would say most of all Simon Edvenson. And obviously, the trend this summer, as you know, Sean, has been a lot of guys who are signing these five-year deals out of the ELC. So maybe it's irrelevant for him. Could be relevant for Alex to Brinkett, although he's going to be 29 in December. Maybe that's one where if you're the Red Wings, you go, oh, no, that deadline passed.

All we can give you is seven. Bummer. Yeah, but he's a really good player and they got to find a way to keep him. And if that would make a difference, maybe that's something that that you do try to make sure is done by September 15th to get that done. So those are, I think, kind of the key deadlines, obviously, though. Like, and the Edvinson deal, I don't think is going to take a long time. The Brinkett deal you have all year to get done. The Dillon Larkin one is the one that I think people will key in on and say, yeah, but if you make this higher on

September 8th or whatever, or you can have time to trade Dylan Larkin. I look at it and say probably not. I look at it and say, based on the magnitude of that deal, based on where we are on the calendar, seems like it's trending toward Dylan Larkin at least coming to training camp and maybe starting the season in Detroit and then having to work that out. Now, there's all kinds of stuff that comes with that. I do think there's the potential for it to become a distraction for the Red Wings. but I think that the big thing is going to be with the fans and how they'll respond to.

I don't expect the locker room is going to be an in hospitable place for Larkin. I don't know how that'll go obviously until it starts, but I tend to think players kind of understand where other players are coming from on stuff like this. They understand that it is a business and that there are elements to this. And they've certainly lived with Dylan Larkin, the ride of the last several years. and they're going to understand a lot better than any of us exactly what was behind all this. So there's a lot going into this, but I don't think the Red Wings, and they certainly, they're not rushing it. I don't think they're going to either just to hit a certain deadline.

How big a part should the Larkin situation play in their handling of the GM situation? Like should that be a, you know, is that an interview question? Is that something that, like if you're, I guess here's the way I'll phrase it, how big a difference? how big a deal should that be? Like, should a candidate's plan for how they handle this mess be a major factor in deciding whether or not they take over this job? Or is this something that you can almost just wash your hands of and be like, all right, we're going to have to, we've accepted that we're going to have to trade him.

Whatever happens with that happens, but like, let's move on. You know what I mean? Like, is this a future focus search? or how are they balancing that versus, you know, the mess they find themselves still in with Larkin? I would say, above all, it's important because it tells you how they approach a mess, a situation that's difficult to solve, right? I don't think that there's a right answer on what needs to happen with Larkin here, right? Like, there are some people who will say, just get it done.

It's over. You know, he said what he said, and now you got to move on from him. To me, that's thinking pretty emotionally. But I understand it. there's also people will say, yeah, obviously he's your number one center. You've got to reconcile. You got to do whatever you can. That's what's best for this year's hockey team.

I don't know that I necessarily think that's a totally fair way to view it either, because I think when you inherit this job, if you think you're inheriting a 2027 Stanley Cup contender, you're pretty optimistic about it, right? And that in a way that might even alarm me a bit. Not to say that I don't think the Redmings can be competitive. They are competitive. They've been competitive, right? I mean, they just haven't gotten in.

It's just I look at the Atlantic. look at the east and like it's hard for me Sean to make a real case for them any higher than I mean yeah I can see a path to them being a wild card team but it's not what I would sure I mean there's a path for every team to be a wildcard team right and so I don't think they're like the worst team in the league or anything but I think that there is as good a chance that they are picking top eight as there is that they are seriously in a wild card chase in April basically is how I would put it and when you have a situation like that I don't think you can get too precious about, you know, especially like going into last offseason, it felt like where they were,

you're desperately trying to get. And you're in a franchise that's seven years into this with Eisenman. Sorry, not a franchise. A front office that's seven years into this. Like, it would have been a really hard sell for them to take a step back. It would have been a really hard situation to, you know, write that ship. Where the chips are today, like, it points toward taking it on the chin and having a little bit of a reset. not a five-year rebuild, not a full-scale, Vancouver, Chicago, Detroit situation.

But, okay, take a step back, reset this, and gear up toward trying to do this soon, but recognizing reality for this season. So that's a long way to get to your answer. But I think the Larkin situation is more important for, I think, telling the Red Wings how a candidate thinks about solving problems like this, maybe than it is that they have one right answer in mind necessarily. And as it stands, they're doing the first round interviews, like, as we record this, what kind of candidates are they looking at?

You don't have to go super far into detail there, but like, is there a common thread with the type of candidates to fill this role that you've been able to suss out? Yeah, and we think it's first round. I mean, they've been pretty quiet about exactly where they are in the process. But that's, it seems like it's early in the interview process is the sense I get. But the common threat, I think, Sean, is going to be forward thinkers. It's going to be people who they think can kind of bring an innovative, a modern approach to running a front office here. And those are somewhat buzzwords I get.

But I think, like, when you look at how the Red Wings currently operate, there are some things I think that, you know, it's not that they don't have an analytics department. I think people sometimes hear modern and they think that's the only thing that analytics means. The Reds have people working on data in the organization. I don't know if it has the weight that it has in other organizations or that it needs to have. And I don't know that some of the organizational processes are where they are for some other teams. And I think that those are all things that a new, a successful candidate is probably going to be able to sell them on. It's like, look, this is how I think we're going to do things on our player development. This is how I think we're going to approach scouting.

This is how I think we're going to approach pro scouting. That should be. This is how I think we're going to approach the draft and what I want to kind of wait into that. This is how I want all those things to interplay. This is how I want to approach sports science. And they have sports science. Like Mike Barwis, I remember when they hired him, he was seen as like a pretty, okay, this is a really good hire. They have some of these things.

I just think it's the integrating them, updating and kind of some of those things that I think are a common thread is the sense I've gotten so far. Do they need more of everything? that's like you could look at their staff directory you know in past years yeah they they have of course they have pro scouts and player development and an analytics department and in a well regarded sports science boss but um there weren't that many people working for the organization relative to you know a lot of other NHL teams is it is that part of the issue too it's just as simple as you know staffing up to a to a little bit more of a serious degree because was it was lean and mean and pretty heavy on, you know,

Iserman true believers, I think over the last few years. I think it's a great point. I think it's like a crucial point is that like they've had people leave the organization and they didn't replace them, right? Like Mark Howe and Pat Verbeek depart in 2022, I'm sure that in their mind like they updated things to make sure that they were set, but they never made a corresponding higher to replace them. And I'm not saying that more people is always better.

And I'm certainly not acting like the Redding's word. were dumb. I don't think they were dumb. I think, you know, a couple things go a little differently for them and they're still, the people in charge, Eisenman, like, still employed, right? Or, like, technically he is, but still in the GM chair. But what I think is, like, when the illich is who own the Red Wings also own the Detroit Tigers. And when they hired their most recent president of baseball ops, Scott Harris, it wasn't just that they hired like a modern decision maker and a smart data-driven decision maker. Like, they built out an organization in a huge, robust way. They invested in biomechanics. They invested a ton in player development. They just like I'm talking about,

they built out their infrastructure. They built out their processes. And I do think like hockey is like, we're seeing front offices expand constantly because you're just putting more people at it, more brains on it, more more of everything. And I think you're spot on to say that, that that's probably part of this is that whoever, whoever takes over this job, they're probably going to bring a lot that there's going to be a lot that follows them to right it kind of in service of that right because we've seen it you know in a couple different ways you know you have the let's call it the maple leafs approach especially from a few years ago where you just have a fleet of people in every department because because it's easy for teams especially money teams to step up in a

pretty serious way because it's not capped you're not like they they don't care if you have you know a 16 deep analytic department or a sports science staff that, you know, rivals, you know, an NFL team, right? Like, that doesn't, it doesn't count. So it, in some regards, it's easier to, you know, try to suss out advantages there. But also then you have like the Carolina Hurricanes approach where like they don't have a ton of people working for that org, but they have figured out under Eric Tolski, like, what areas it makes sense to get more hires in too. So, you know, you can try to be the exception

to the rule, and I guess to some extent the hurricanes are, but they've also, you know, found more money and made more hires in areas that they, that they deemed necessary, and it was, and it was pretty successful. So yeah, when I look at, you know, when I look at their org chart, maybe from last season, it's just, it's thin in a, in a potentially problematic way. So that's an easy, that's an easy pressure point, I think. I think too, one of the things you highlighted is a good point. You made a comment about a lot of true believers. And I think, like, I think in terms of collaboration, we think of like working together,

we think of kind of everyone pulling the rope in the same way. And I think for good reason and having like kind of a vision. And I get that. And I think that there was a vision. And I think there was kind of a pull in the rope in the same direction for how they've done things. I also wonder if there was enough dissent, though. And I wonder, like, are there enough people from different enough?

A lot of the Red Wings front office has been staffed by, for lack of a better word, the 97 Red Wings, right? And that's okay. Like those are really successful guys. Those aren't people that I'm saying, like, don't know what they're doing. Of course they do. But you should also have more people from different backgrounds, different schools of thought, maybe come at this a different way.

And you have those people kind of, hey, on the merits of the ideas, like, what wins out, right? And if it's, if you have healthy disagreement, I think it generally leads you to a really good place. And I, like, I'm not in those meetings. I can't tell you that nobody ever disagreed with anybody. I'm sure they did. They're competitors, too. They have their own ideas and their own thoughts. But I think like more differentiated perspective, differentiated background.

And again, that goes back to a bigger staff, a bigger front office that has all these things. I think that's a pretty healthy thing for front offices. And it's something I've wondered about with them. Especially in the case of a team like the Red Wings, and you've written about this extensively, like especially over the last two or three years. like there needs to be dissent because there is a lack of overall direction. Yes. Like something, a question is simple as like,

when is this team supposed to be good? I don't think that was easily answerable for them last year or two years ago or three years ago. The stuff has really gotten muddy by the end of the Eisenman area where you're like, okay, 24, 25. And I don't think those were questions that were easily answerable from the outside. Now, they could have had ideas on their own, but they certainly weren't being shared with people, people like you or certain me, right? So there is a lack of, there was a lack of overall, you know, at least publicly, like a lack of direction that you could publicly suss out. And I think

part of, and I think part of that speaks to the stuff that you've talked about, right? Yeah, you could look at their moves and question how much that direction was even clear. clear to themselves, right? And so when I talk about like, I think there was a shared vision. I think I'm talking about kind of what they value, right? I think what they valued has been hockey sense, has been competitiveness, has been two-way guys who they think when the games are hardest, you're going to be able to count on, right? And you can question that vision. I know that people feel like they have not enough skill. They have not enough XYZ. I think those are fair criticisms just to some degree. But I what I would say that they lacked a shared, or maybe not

share it, maybe just lacked a direction to your point is, okay, so you wind it back, right? So 2020, I think it was 23, that offseason is when they trade Bertuzi and Horonik out. And if any rational observer looks at that and they say, okay, they're saying it's not our time yet, right? And then that 2023 off season, they're bringing in long-term contracts like JT, and you can bring an Alex to brick it anytime you want. Any NHL team, any state, it's a good idea. he had a trade for like a 26 year old Alex to brink it, 25 year old Alex to break it. So I'll exempt that one and, you know, that's whatever. But then you're going and trading for Jeff Petrie and Justin Hall and signing J.T. Comfer,

okay, so now they're beefing up and they're ready to go for it. But then you get to the next year and they're fighting for a playoff spot at the deadline and they're trading away, Clim Koston, right? And then you get, I mean, not that Klim Koston really matters, but they didn't really add. All they did was, I think, trade him away. And then, okay, so they're not sure what they are. And then you let Shane Gosses-Spaer walk and David, Peron walk.

And I think that's the summer that they traded Jake Walman away too and attached a second round pick for that. Just by saying that, I think 10,000 Redvings fans shot through their car roofs. But, and then you go and you, okay, so those guys are out and then you're going to bring in Vladimir Terrace. It's just like, which way is this going? Are you beefing up or are you pushing forward? Are you collecting assets?

Are you collecting players? And I'm not here to say that running an HL team, you only ever just do one thing. It's always a little push and pull. I understand that. But I don't think there was a cohesive direction of, in a cohesive window, I think is what you're getting at is like, is this team trying? And I think that like based on the personnel they had,

they needed to be more aggressive at trying to compete in the last two or three years when Dylan Larkin was in his late 20s and Moritz Lider was coming into his own as one of the top defensemen in the league and Lucas Raymond's beginning to become a point per game player and all those things. But there's just as good an argument the other way that like they just, they stepped on the gas pedal too early, and they should have been collecting more top 10 picks so that right now they would be sitting here,

and yeah, they got a deep system, but they don't have studs atop the pipeline, right? You can make either case, and the problem is not that they picked one or the other, it's that they picked neither. They didn't pick, and that's where you get to where they are.

Yeah, and I think it would have been great whenever it's at 23, whenever they signed Andrew Copp and... That's 22, yeah. Like the Andrew Copp, J.T. Comfer, You know, those are, you mentioned those, but those are win now moves, right? And those are decent size, you know, that's a decent amount of assets or a decent amount of resources to allocate to those guys. And then it's like, what are you, okay, so we're going our center depth, our center death chart and is Dillamarkin and then to some degree J.T. Comfer and Andrew Coff.

And it's like, that's not, that's not a contenders down the middle group. It's not. And so like, and I get the, I get the desire, and I think this is where they went wrong. I get the desired, maybe not to accelerate things, but to recognize like, okay, we have Dylan Larkin and Mort Sider, you know, who are pretty high-end win now players. I know, I know Siders, not to discredit Sider because I think he's turned into something more than that. But like, we can win relevant guys with these guys right now. There are relevant games with these guys right now. if the best you can do to augment that group with, you know, maybe further along got 30-year-old guys is J.T. Comfer and Andrew Cops

and Vladimir Teresenko's of the world, like if that's the best you can do, then you, then you should just hold serve. Like, just don't, like, don't do it. Because if you fill out your lineup and you fill out your cap sheet with those sorts of players and rely on them to, you know, lead you to, you know, and expect those guys to be the bones of a team that wins playoff rounds, like it's not going to happen. Like, you should just wait.

And the fact that they didn't wait, ultimately, if that was the best they could have done, is why we're sitting here in late August of 2026 and talking about them not having a general manager. Like, that to me is, you know, it takes a, it took a lot of missteps and a lot of bad luck. But I think that set of decisions, man,

And that just seems like that seems like the primary error. I think I see cop a little differently than you do. And I think differently than a lot of the fans. I think most of the fans kind of see it how you do. Like I see him as like, I think he's been a successful signing. And I think that like you need guys like that. I just don't think you needed two. And I see Comfer and Cop is basically the same.

You're buying the same piece twice. And you only have one spot for it. And so you're inherently relegating at any given time. Like Comfer's had his years where he looked like the right one. Cop's had his years where he looked like the right one. Cop's had his years where he. he looked like the right one. I think cops had more of them. But at any given time, one of them is playing in your top six, maybe top nine, whatever,

as like that two or three center and doing a really good job. And the other one's relegated to a role that's like, then why are you paying him $5 million? Right. Lately, that's been comp for. And I think cop, you know, cop had his run with the brinket and cane. Like, I challenged someone to watch the Red Wings the second half of last year and tell me that that wasn't the Red Wings best line, the Brinket Cop Kane, right? My issue is like, again, like I think like in 23, I think it was, I guess it was 24, they tied for the last wildcard spot, right? Like, you can't tell me that there was no case to be aggressive. Like, it was there.

And they did virtually nothing. In fact, they let guys go and they replaced with like, you know, Teresenko and Eric Gustafsson was just like kind of like Shane Gossis-Bere, but not as impacted. A worst version of Shane Gosses- And I'm not trying to do revisionist history. There was plenty of frustration with Shane Gosses-Ber that year because there were long stretches of that season.

season where the defense was a problem. And part of that is because they asked him to do things that Carolina doesn't ask him to do, right? Carolina is a more robust operation. They have better depth. They can have him hone in on what he does really, really well. Yeah, they can play him on a, they can play them on low end third pair of minutes and be like, go run, go run the power play. And just move the puck and move around. We got someone back here who cover for you.

I don't think the Red Wings always did. But like, it's, it was the, the hem and haw and the. the duplication and like, you know, again, it could probably also slowed down some of the prospect progression in a way. And, and maybe this is most relevant, maybe in goal. I don't know if we're going to talk about COSA today or not. But like, you didn't see quick enough what some of these prospects even necessarily had. Um, so yeah, like, there's a lot of things we can kind of go go down the rabbit hole of what the last group kind of did wrong. Like, I'm not saying that I have what the answer was. It's just that it clear to me that they didn't either. And I think they eventually

lost control of the process and that's why they sit where they sit. Okay. Yeah, we don't, we don't want, and we don't want to do more, like more post-mortems. Yeah. Yeah, like I don't, I don't want this to turn entirely into that. But I do think that, you know, it is relevant to understand. Like, this roster doesn't make a ton of sense right now still. And I, and I think, I think you need to look at the mistakes, you know, as as a prelude and as

some kind of explanation for, you know, what we're about to talk about here. in some regards. The forward group, we can close a book on Larkin after this, but is there, I hate this game, but I'm going to play it anyways. Can you put like a percentage chance on him,

on him returning? Like, is it fair to just be like this? When you say return, like is he's in the lineup on October 2nd? Or you mean like he's finished the contract? No, that they, is there a door to walk through with how, whoever the hire might be where they,

where they sell him on stick. Yes, I think there is. And I know that a lot of fans do not want to hear that and don't really want that to be the outcome because they see it as a captain who basically doesn't want to be there, doesn't want to stick around through it any longer. But I think that there's more to it. There's more to the request than simply like, oh, like I don't believe in this team. I don't think that that's the crux of it, right? I think that there was, there's been a lot of losing and that's hard. And I think, you know, Dylan Narcan's 30.

I think you and I can both understand that these are finite windows of when a player can seriously impact winning at a high level. And I also think there's the Eisenman of it. And so I don't know what the weighting of those factors are. But what I do know is that one of those two key factors is gone. And that inherently changes the equation. Right. Now, the other one is still there. And I don't particularly, and it sounds like you agree with me, you don't particularly, we don't particularly see the Red Bank's competing this year.

and then it's another year. Not in a meaningful way. Like we need to hedge these bets and say like, okay, maybe they get crazy goaltending and maybe they get hot for a while and whatever, the lightning fall apart or something. Like there's a world where that happens. So we're not saying that this is like 0% chance.

But yeah, as it stands, this is the 11th best team in the Eastern Conference or whatever. Right. Yeah, and I think it could be more like, 12th. It could be 13. Like, I look at, I'm trying to count the teams that I know they're better than. And the list might just be the Rangers. I think they're in, I think they're in a group with, with a lot of others similarly situated

teams where you can say like, maybe something happens for them, like happened for Pittsburgh last year, where it's just like, okay, like, they're, they're the, they're the fourth best team in the division and then they make, then they make the postseason. Yeah. You know, whatever. I don't think that's impossible. I don't think that's impossible because I don't think that I, I don't think that's impossible, I think that's impossible for very, very few NHL teams, period, in a given year.

Yeah, I think they might be better in the penguins. They might be better in the flyers. Maybe. Maybe. Maybe not. I can get you. I can get you to a place where they're the eighth team in the east. I can.

And I think there's probably a 25, 30% chance of that. But that means there's like a 70 to 75% chance that they're not a playoff team here. And it just becomes a question of like, so if you're going to sell Dylan Larkin on staying is where I'm going with this, I think part of the sale has to be, this is what I'm going to do to raise that odds that that that this is a playoff team because the clock is ticking and it's ticking for both parties. It's ticking for Larkin on how soon he can win and how soon he can be. He hasn't been in the playoffs since his rookie year in the NHL. And it's ticking on the Red Wings as the people who have Dylan Larkin signed and expected to be their number one center. It's ticking on how,

how much longer can you expect that to be the case? Because you don't have an in-house air apparent to him. Right. Like you hope Marco Casper is going to be that. You hope that Nate Danielson you know, rises. But the odds of that are not great that they're going to be true number one era parents, right? You're hoping... And part of that's because I think Dylan Larkin, especially the dialogue around Dylan Larkin, this is aside from the trade discussion stuff. Well, let's limit this to on ice, you know, on ice

discussions. I think we figured out what he is. He's a he's a 1C on a mediocre team. Like if he's your, if he's your first line center, you're probably not winning relevant hockey games. And that's just like, there might be a world where if you're built like the Carolina Hurricanes or, you know, a true, like, crazy deep, you know, championship level players across the board where you could get away with it. But the margin of error, if Dylan Larkin is your best forward, is small. And it's clear, clear, clear that whether it's because of prospects stagnating or not quite having the chance or whatever,

that they're not going to get there. There is no world where the Detroit Red Wing. you know, even if they keep Dylan Larkin, you know, have a, have players around him to, to turn themselves into a relevant team, like on his timeline. Totally. It ain't happening. And that's, and that's why that more than anything is why the fans that are like, you know what, whether they're, whether they're reacting emotionally to it, understandably, whether they're

pissed off about it, understandable, you know, you say, you say see you later because there's, there's just no point in having them around anymore. Hey, Carolina is one of the ones I pointed to. There are several playoff teams from last year right now that Dill and Rarko would be the number one center on. He'd get them one center on Minnesota, Boston, Philly. I think he probably would have been the number one center on Utah last year. And I don't think, I think him and Aho are of a tier. But Aho's in that Carolina system that, like you said, can surround him and can support that.

I think Aho's probably proven that he's ahead. But I don't think it's by like leaps and bounds. And I think if you put Dillan Larkin in that situation, I think Carolina still wins the Stanley Cup last year. So, yeah. And I think you're talking about a guy who's like the eighth. best center in the league versus someone who's like the 14th and that's or whatever like that's yeah or 12th and 18 that's relevant that's that's that's that's close but not close enough yeah and so like like where i'm going i guess with it is like it's not about how good is dylan larkin it's about okay

sebastian i'll won the stand the cup as a one c because of what they surrounded him do you have time and the appetite to to to do that for him and i just increasingly think the answer is no the answer the answer to the first part of the question is no and the answer to the second part part of the question is is you probably shouldn't like you don't have time and you probably shouldn't have the appetite so that's where i look at it and like i can see larkin starting the season in detroit but i think like at some point this we now see where this is probably going and the job of the new gm is to get it there in the way that best benefits the red wings big picture because if if if the last front office's priority was like we're seven years into this we got to get into the

playoffs we need now player. I don't think the new front office has to approach it like that. I think the new front office can approach it with a lens of like, well, we just got here. And our goal is to is the same goal as the last front office had. I'm not saying that Izerman's front office just wanted to get in. But I am saying that Izerman's front office had to get in really soon. And I think the new front office is going to have some urgency behind them. But it's a different priority, right? It's a, and it's a different leeway. Wanting something in in being able to execute to a level that allows you to get it. or two different things.

We all want things. And being able to go out and find a way to make it happen is something else. Yeah. So I ask entirely. I think eventually it's going to have to probably end in a trade. And I just don't know when exactly the time for that is going to be. Is it going to be on September 16th, avoiding all the awkwardness in camp? Probably not, in my opinion.

Is it going to be on October 1st avoiding the awkwardness of booze on opening night? Maybe. But I'd still think probably not. I think it probably happens sometime during this season is my guess. But again, like it's, it's. a guess because we don't even know who's making the decision and what they're going to try to sell to Larkin and how he's going to respond to it. Let's talk about Lucas Raymond for a minute. Statistically, pretty similar year to what he had

previously, which is not meant as a demerit. That's not meant as a slag. He's been really, really good for a few years now. Is this his ceiling? Is there more meat left on the bone with him? you know, I look at him, you know, this isn't, this isn't any kind of leap or any kind of bold take, but I mean, he's, he's a really, really, really good player. And I'm wondering if there's, if there's even more for him to find. There is. And Tom McClellan talks about wanting to see him shoot more. I think he thinks he's got 40 goal potential in him.

I see that. I see. I think he can be a 90-point winger in the National Hockey League. I thought he would be this year. And one thing that I think gets lost about his season outside of Detroit. people in Detroit are well aware of this. Early in the season, five, six games in, maybe even less than that. He took a big hit from Kristanaev in Toronto and hurt his shoulder and he missed a couple

games and then he came back. And I think when we don't see a player out of the lineup, we just assume, well, he's in. He's better. And look, I get that. Like, if you're going to play, give it everything you got. I don't think he was right for long stretches of last season. And I think that that's part of why the production, actually, I think it did take a slight step back last year.

But I think it's also why the production didn't start to really explode. And I think especially when you talk about, oh, you're not shooting the puck much and you had a shoulder injury. Like I start to do the addition in my head, right? I think you're going to come out and see Lucas Raymond take another step next year. You've got to stay healthy. Like it's not like that's not like that. It's not like that injury risk is gone or anything like that. But I do think that that's something.

And there's not going to be that international like both years. I think he's come back from the international hockey, both of the four nations and the Olympics. A little worse for the wear. That's not going to be a factor this year. So there's a question in like if he doesn't have Dylan Larkin as his center for some or all of the year, does that affect his production? It would have to, in my opinion. But I think you're going to see the best version of Lucas Raymond you've seen in terms of his individual quality this season. Alex Brinkett, 28 years old.

I mean, he's scoring goals less. Goodness gracious, three out of his last five seasons had 40 goals, basically. We can just pencil him in there. I think we can say that this guy's going to score at a 40 goal pace. Is he, boy, does he get, if it were, what should they do with him? Like if you were a GM of the Detroit Red Wings and you can say, okay, you can sign him at a market level, eight-year deal, you know, once the new GM is in position. Is that something you do?

Like, does he seem like he's a long-term foundational piece? on this particular team? In my eyes, yes. I know that there's debate about this mainly surrounding the age. Again, I think if you view this as a, it's a five-year rebuild again, then no, but I don't view it that way.

I think you're trying to win fairly soon, even if you're taking a step back, taking it on the chin for a year, you got cider in his prime, you got Raymond entering his prime, you got Edwinson entering his prime. I think Alex DeBringk was their best forward last year.

I actually don't think it was even really that close. And I was doing some research about this for a story that we'll have run by the time this airs. Since 2018, Alex DeBrinke has the 12th most goals in the National Hockey League. Not a single one of the 11 players ahead of him is younger than him. Not a single one of the 13 behind him is younger than him. Like, yeah, there's guys who have scored more. Austin Matthews is three months younger and he's like 130 goals ahead of him.

I'm not saying he's the best score for his age or anything like that in the league. But there's a lot of tread on the tire still for a guy who has done what he's done. You don't find this mix of proven and under 30 that often. And by the way, like goal scoring doesn't seem like a. trait, especially when you do it the way Alex DeBrinket does, that just flies out the window when you get to 30 years old, right? Like, yeah, he's a speedy player, but it's not the only way he creates. And, and the role he plays on the power play, a lot of it is because he's pretty gritty and he can play down low as well. It's not just one timers from the slot, although that's

also a pretty age-friendly role to play, as we've seen. So I think out of who could you be talking about? Could be anybody, you know? I do think we're going to see Alex DeBringit without Patrick Kane now. And I think that chemistry, that's a loss. And I'm curious how that affects him, I would strongly consider playing him opposite Lucas Raymond to try to account for that for both guys. I think they'd be great together. I think you're counting on Alex to Brinkett for at least the next six, seven years to be a 30 plus goal scorer. And as long as that's the case, this guy's got leadership makeup. He's gritty. He's tenacious. I had no problem paying him 12 plus million dollars a year. Is there anybody else from the forward group that you think is

worth mentioning? I know, I know, I know, I know Emmett. Casper. Yeah, and Fini, Fini, too, is a good name, but like, Casper had a tough year last year. There's no way around it. And if you go look at some of the shooting percentage, the on-ice shooting percentage, Sean, his expected goal share was identical to his rookie year that we all loved so much. His on-ice expected goals for it was higher than his rookie year that we all loved so much. And the shooting percentages told you that he cut his production in half. And he did cut his production in half. But I think that that was the driving force of that. I think you're going to see Marco Casper come back this year

and be a top six caliber player. I think depending on where Larkin is and what happens with that, it's not going to shock me if Casper is playing with De Brinket or Raymond or both for a good chunk of the season and ends up with like 50-ish points this year, which I think gets him right back to what you need them to be. If they trade Larkin, what's their first line on opening night? It's probably like Debrinket, cop, And I don't know who.

That could be Raymond. It could also be Arvids and Casper Raymond. And you keep DeBrican and Cop on kind of their own second line with someone like Finney, who I think is a really good retriever and could suit them very well with his speed. But there's not going to be a true first line, I think, is what we're getting, unless it's like to Brinkett cop Raymond. But, you know, even that, like you're still looking at that and saying, where does that stack up among first lines?

They're going to have to kind of do more with less if Larkin is gone. And we'll see what they get for him. My guess is that now tends toward maybe futures. All right, we're going to move on to the defense. I feel like this past season, to some extent, was about people finally agreeing on Moritz Cider. I think the season that he just had, it felt correct for him in a lot of different ways, and it felt correct, I think, in the term, in the way he was discussed publicly.

when you talk about his usage, when you talk about the point production, which he amped up a little bit, it seemed like water found its level for him, both on the ice, I think, in terms of public perception of him. And I'm interested in whether you think that that's correct. Agreed. I mean, the public data had always, I think, not compensated quite enough. And Dom certainly was one of the first ones really trying to factor in, like, just how significant his usage was and how difficult it was. it actually, ironically, took a slight great step toward the easier usage last year. Like, it was no longer one of the, like, five hardest deployments in the NHL. And I think that is part of why he popped in the way that he did.

But this guy still takes extremely tough minutes, massive minutes. And I think everything finally kind of coalesce into the player that people in Detroit see every night, you know, imposing his will on the game, being a force. And finally, the analytics that would tell you, oh, this is one of the five best defensemen in the NHL. And he ends up, you know, finishing there in the Norris. I mean, I think like him, Jake Sanderson, Miro Haskinen, that's like a type at this point of players who you're expecting elite level, top five defensive defensemen in the league, but also are going to give you 50 plus points. And that's really good company to be in. And I think all three of those guys kind of belong in that class that kind of becomes a this or that with your McCar, Hughes, Blaine Hudson kind of style guys. Is Simon Edvinson a long-term partner for him?

It's a good question. I would split them, but they've definitely used them as a pair. I think I like them better when they each have their own pair, and you can have one of them on the ice at all times for 50 minutes of a game right now. Like, I think it would be interesting to see someone like Albert Johansson get a shot with cider. And I think some of the, when I look at like, when I remember how like peak Victor Headman, it didn't seem like Victor Headman was really ever paired with the Lightning's second best defenseman. It seemed like he was often asked to play with like their fourth best defenseman.

And your Victor Headman, make it make sure it's a top pair anyway. And I would like to see them try something like that. And then you could play. Go get a nit, Terbix. New GM. Come on. Yeah, that's right. Yeah, and I would like to see someone like Edvinson with the Justin Falk.

And then you have that kind of your Sherat and Sandine Pelaggar, Sharrat and Bernard Docker as your third pair, much, much more favorable deployment for Ben Chirot, who I think, you know, like the guy is a warrior. Like, I think he's, he's been good for the Red Wings in a couple specific ways. But just on net, they've asked a lot of them. And I think more than he can.

can really be asked going forward. So that's how I'd like to see them do it. But if you can give Edmondson his own pair, then everything else makes a little bit more sense. I think so. Like if you can say you are, you lead the second pair, then everyone slots in a little bit,

a little bit more sensibly there. Yeah. And you're asking a lot of cider to kind of, you know, bring someone up and have that. But I think, I think he's proven that you can ask that of him at this point. Move on to the goalies.

It's, it's Gibson. It's, it's to Nilt Tirasov now, but that you mentioned COSA earlier. He was a first round pick. He was a guy we'd track pretty closely and heard a good bit about. They sent him to Utah over the summer. What's the short-term and long-term outlook there?

And I guess we'll start, though, with this, is like, why is Sebastian Cosa not part of the long-term plan anymore? Yeah, I think it's a great question, multiple reasons. I don't know that they ever really gave him the look that I think they probably should have, but I can understand why. Like, you know, they were trying to make the playoffs and trying to give a rookie goalie a look does not really correspond with trying to snap a 10-year playoff drought, especially when John Gibson was playing as well as he was for long stretches last year. I still think late in the year, it would have been worth a shot somewhere in there,

even if it's just April when it's already kind of out the door just to see. But COSA had a really tough finish to last year, and it was the second straight year that he had a rocky late season. stretch. And so when the playoffs started, they went to another goaltending prospect we had in Grand Rapids, Michael Postava, who was excellent late in the year and was excellent in the playoffs and is really only like six months or nine months or something younger than Sebastian COSA. And so at that point, you start counting and you go, well, we got COSA here and he's going to need waivers. And you got Postava and he doesn't need waivers. And he's basically

the same age and had a better season. It was a big offer from Utah too. They get a first round pick. It's the 20 to 23rd pick. And I even wonder like with COSA like, you know, know, would, would he kind of welcome that after that situation? I don't know. I mean, I read a quote in a report that said, like, when his agent called, like, there was like celebration. And so that, that perked my ears up a little bit, right? Interesting. But, like, they have other goal at Prospects in Postava and Augustine. The Kosa thing could backfire spectacularly. It really could. Like, he could be a stud. And it's like, you had this guy and you let him go. And it's Matt Murray or whatever, you know? And you know how that goes. So it could happen. But I also think

that they felt like they were dealing in from position of strength. And we'll see how J.P. Herbert pans out. That's the player they chose with the first round pick. In terms of like the goaltending overall, like I'm very curious how this plays out because by January last year, I was pretty much like, all right, well, looks like they found a goalie for at least the next year or four years and John Gibson. They only have them signed for one more. Do you extend John Gibson?

Do you not do that because you're really eager to see Postava and Trey Augustine kind of have an opportunity to win the net? I think Terasov just kind of facilitates the combo of post. D'A at Augustine in Grand Rapids. Augustine's used to play in 30 to 40 games in the NCAA, I think asking him to play 60 in the American League, especially with how many back-to-backs there are in that league, would have been crazy. So having Postava and Augustine in GR, Gibson's your clear starter in Detroit.

Tereslov's capable of giving you some games when you need them. Gibson always a little bit of an injury risk. But I think it does look like, I know people are very kind of confused by how many goalies are in the Red Wing system. I just think this is what you kind of have to do when you don't have. It can be a volume. You got to be volume shooters when it comes to that and just hope the one of them works out. Yeah, for sure.

Or some combination of them, right? Because you don't have Igor Shostorkin. Yeah. I should not say one. I should say two. Yeah, you're looking to do it in the aggregate. Tell me about the prospect group. Corey's got them.

Corey Prama's got him ranked 15 out of 32. Who on that list should we pay particular attention to this season? We talked about Casper. We talk a little bit about Finney. Brantzic Neegard, I think, is the guy coming up that I'm the most interested to see. He was awesome in the playoffs for Grand Rapids. The Red Wings are not a physical enough team, have not been enough, physical enough team. He was the most physical player on the ice in every playoff game.

I watched and I watched all of them. He was awesome. He was also a point per game player. He's got a bomb of a shot. No, he did not score at all in the NHL in his, I think it was like 14 games last year. That's something to see. Is there something that's not translating? Or was it just he was playing in the bottom line off in the fourth line.

He wasn't really in a position to score. or underlying numbers were pretty good. I expect Brantzick-Neigard to be a relevant and notable piece of the attack this year. My only question is kind of the pace and how long does it take him to adjust to that? But in the playoff for Grand Rapids, he looked like he was absolutely ready. Let's zoom out here. And that's how we're going to finish. We talked about this earlier, man.

There's such a range for where I feel like they could finish in terms of points and in terms of, you know, the overall spot in the east. conference could be 9th, could be 15th. I hate to do this to you, but let's let's give us a number. Where are they on the standings, you know, when we're doing this again next season? I think it's like 12th, 11th or 12th. Like, again, a lot of variables, but I just, I think that there's a distraction factor. I think especially if Larkin does get traded as my hunch is where it ends, just do they have the horses in what I think is a low. I can see it as high up as like seventh or eighth, but I think I think realistically

you're going to settle into more like 11, 12, 13 in the east. Oh, you've got another fun few months ahead of you, my boy. The life, the life of the Detroit Red Wings beat writer. Oh, brother. Thank you for the time, dude. Is there, is there anything big you're working on over the next couple weeks that you want to tell people to look out for? Yes, but I'm not sure.

enough if I'm going to get it pulled off to plug it so okay whatever just just just just just just just just just pay attention there they really are they're that whole situation fascinates me for obvious reasons so we'll we'll be watching we'll be watching out for your work and we will be uh feeling feeling bad for you whenever opening night rolls around and don't feel bad hey it's not boring Sean the worst thing is boring this is not boring you can't you're you're like you're you're 30 and have never covered a playoff front. I'm a lot of feel bad for you.

All right, brother. Thank you. And thank you to producer Jeff. Thanks to you fine folks for watching and listening to this episode of the athletic hockey show. And is it for me? I will talk to you again along with Frankie Garado and Sean McIndoo on September 16th. The show is taking the week off, the upcoming week off. So enjoy that.

And we will see you next time.