clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

2020 NHL Draft: Grading the Red Wings picks

New, comments
2020 NHL Draft - Round One Photo by Mike Stobe/Getty Images

Steve Yzerman officially has his second draft under his belt as leader of the Red Wings organization. After a somewhat exciting presentation Friday night, the NHL rolled out a marathon snoozefest.

Yzerman and his team racked up a ton of prospects in this draft, a ton of prospects that address certain needs. Steve Yzerman got to during day two. Here’s your 2020 Red Wings Draft class:

1st (4): Lucas Raymond, LW
2nd (32): William Wallinder. D
2nd (45): Traded to LAK for picks 51 and 197
2nd (51): Theodor Niederbach, C
2nd (55): Cross Hanas, LW
3rd (63): Donovan Sebrango, D
3rd (65): Traded to MIN for picks 70 and 132
3rd (70): Eemil Viro, D
4th (97): Sam Stange, RW
4th (107): Jan Bednar, G
5th (125): Traded to VGK for 4th rd pick in 2022
5th (132): Alex Cotton, D
6th (156): Kyle Aucoin, D
7th (187): Kienan Draper, RW
7th (203): Chase Bradley, LW (This pick acquired from STL for a 7th rd pick in 2021)

Here’s how the WIIM team is individually grading this years haul:

Kyle: A

Anytime you can add a dozen prospects to your cupboard, you’re going to get a good grade from me. They got their home-run pick with Raymond, they got a real exciting center, and project defenseman in William Wallinder that I think could pay off real big. Like all of the trades Yzerman, too.

JJ: B

I don’t think they made any big misses and were able to get volume. However, all the smart people I follow on Twitter aren’t talking about what an amazing draft the Red Wings had so I can’t say they exceeded expectations enough to warrant an A.

Prashanth: B

  • Home run with Lucas Raymond
  • Good job drafting for skill sets in 2nd round with Wallinder (skating), Niederbach (hockey IQ), and Hanas (passing)
  • Rounds 3 - 7 were a little below market value in my opinion and think the Wings could have done better swinging for higher ceiling guys

Peter: B+

I really like the 4th overall pick, and I like their pattern of going for high upside players. The thing that keeps it from an A for me is that I think there were opportunities where they could have taken another player and selected the player they drafted with a later pick.

Jeff: *thumbs up emoj*

  • Raymond is good
  • Lots of fun names
  • A kid that literally hits home runs
  • Draper’s kid... cool.

Edubbnaz: B

Raymond is a very good pick and they took some prospects with really high ceilings but while there is no real swing and miss I do not see any true steals that would be needed for it to be an A at this point.

Jamie: B

They made a couple moves back and collected the extra pick (11 prospects in a deep supposed deep draft is a haul), but I’m not hearing a lot of buzz about their later-round picks. Yzerman wants to rebuild this team through the draft and he certainly should be happy with stocking the cupboard once again.

Josh: B+

They look to have made the right choice at #4 given the 6-7 realistic possibilities going in. From there it seemed there was a common trend of taking big swings and words like mobile, skilled, and the like on their picks which is what you want to hear. The only thing keeping this from an A for me is I didn’t see the word steal tied to their picks. But all in all quite pleased with the Swedish dominant haul.

Mike: B

I don’t think there’s the same level of buzz as there was in 2018 when Detroit drafted Zadina and Veleno, but there is a lot to be excited about with Lucas Raymond and William Wallinder. Detroit may end up rebuilding their Swedish identity with these picks (plus Theodor Niederbach.)

Paul: B+

I think the Wings took a ton of highly skilled high ceiling prospects that are unrefined so it seems like they’ll take a little longer to develop. Though knowing Detroit’s history of not rushing their prospects to the NHL, I think this draft class will end up with, at the very least, 2-3 full time NHLers when it’s all said and done.


As always, we want our readers to get involved. Drop your grade, and explanation into the comments. If it’s good, we will make you green. If it’s bad, well, no green for you.