HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Montreal Canadiens (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   HF Article: Habs placed 21st in HF organizational rankings. (May 2012) (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1198151)

QuebecPride 05-29-2012 01:17 AM

Habs placed 21st in HF organizational rankings. (May 2012)
 
http://www.hockeysfuture.com/article...ing-2012-21-30

21. Montreal Canadiens

Strengths: The organization has a deep and varied group of defensive prospects. Nathan Beaulieu, Jarred Tinordi, Morgan Ellis, and Greg Pateryn will all be playing in the AHL next season, with Darren Dietz, Mac Bennett, and Josiah Didier coming in the near future. The team has some offensively talented, potential top-six forwards including Brendan Gallagher, Louis Leblanc, Danny Kristo, Patrick Holland, and Michael Bournival. The organization continues to restock its cupboard at the lower levels and has been quite successful at developing their players for the NHL over the last four years.

Weaknesses: Though the Canadiens have a young NHL starter in Carey Price, there is not much in the way of goaltending talent behind him. The forward depth lacks a big, highly skilled center and still needs more size and grit on the wings.

Top 5 Prospects: 1. Nathan Beaulieu, D, 2. Louis Leblanc, C/RW, 3. Jarred Tinordi, D, 4. Brendan Gallagher, RW, 5. Danny Kristo, RW.
Lost to Graduation: David Desharnais, Alexei Emelin, Yannick Weber.
Lost to Trade: Brock Trotter.
Added: Blake Geoffrion, Patrick Holland, Robert Slaney.

Have at it lads.

Not sure I agree with that rank, but I'm probably too homer ;)

Jack Bourdain 05-29-2012 01:34 AM

Top 5 Prospects: 1. Nathan Beaulieu, D, 2. Louis Leblanc, C/RW, 3. Jarred Tinordi, D, 4. Brendan Gallagher, RW, 5. Danny Kristo, RW.

Quite happy with this. Add our 3rd overall this draft and it will only get nicer.

WhiskeySeven 05-29-2012 02:18 AM

Definitely 21st in the league. Hell, let's make them 30th for good measure - can you believe how VEGAN THEIR LAST GM WAS? Gross.

I don't care where we're ranked. We all know about our prospects and where we're strongest, what's it matter if a bunch of other teams' fans don't think that Tinordi, Beaulieu or Gallagher are worth mentioning?

Plante 05-29-2012 02:51 AM

kristo gets bumped off the list after the draft. I dig. (not that i don't like him mind you, like the depth).

MasterDecoy 05-29-2012 03:11 AM

meh, 21st sounds about right. martin's defensive system hid a lot of the flaws this team had up front. and when vegan-skeletor dismantled the defense, well.... :help:

we have two good drafts to looks forward to with lots of second rounders.

by the way, i don't put too much stock in those rankings, you can fill holes using free agency , good developing, or good coaching, there's much more to a winning team than "we gots da best ranked prospects yo!".

Gabe84 05-29-2012 05:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MasterDecoy (Post 50263271)
meh, 21st sounds about right. martin's defensive system hid a lot of the flaws this team had up front. and when vegan-skeletor dismantled the defense, well.... :help:

I don't get how that affects our prospect ranking though?

I'm fine with 21st. I think we have one high-end prospect in Beaulieu (on paper), but I believe a guy like Tinordi can become an impact player (among others). Overall, not a whole lot of impressive names if you don't follow the team, but as fans, we know better. In the end, these rankings are often wrong, and a lot of prospects go under the radar. We seem to have a very deep pool and I'm not worried that a bunch of these guys will make it to the big show.

I'm surprised Ellis isn't ahead of Kristo.

KawaYui 05-29-2012 06:48 AM

Let's prove them wrong by winning the Stanley Cup and the Calder Cup next year :yo:

Stjonnypopo 05-29-2012 07:34 AM

They obviously base a part of their rankings on the team's current play level, but it's true that we don't have the deepest pool of high-end talent. We have some exciting prospects but no one who's going to be scoring 100 points or winning the Norris.

After this draft where we're getting the 3rd and 32nd overall picks we should be a bit better, as long as we don't continue the long tradition of trading away our picks. We need to make use of our good scouting department (Timmins) and keep our draft picks. If we're out of the playoffs by the trade deadline this season we need to stock up on picks again.

HabsSlappy 05-29-2012 08:11 AM

21st seems about right to me.
I think many overrate our prospects (as most teams do) and I really don't see any top line guys.
I see this team with a lot of depth players that can help a team win. A few fringe second liners and then a bunch of 3rd/4th line guys. Which is fine by me.

The way I see it we will eventually have Tinordi, Beaulieu, Ellis on the Habs blue line but none of these guys will be on the top pairing unless Beaulieu can get on a fast learning curve like Subban did, which is a longshot IMO.

On forward, we have Leblanc who an be a second/third line centre or winger and I expect him to reach that level due to his work ethic. Gallagher could be anything from a first/second line winger but has a higher bust potential than most of our other forwards. I think Bournival will be part of this club for a long time but as an energy 4th line centre. I think he will be great at this role and we will all love him for what he brings to the team.

The way I see our prospects.

1st Liners: None
2nd Liners: Leblanc, Gallagher
3rd Liners: Leblanc, MacMillan, Quailer, Kristo, Palushaj
4th Liners: Geoffrion, Bournival, Schultz, Dumont
Extra Fwds: Conboy, Dumont

1st Pairing: None/Maybe Beaulieu
2nd Pairing: Beaulieu, Tinordi, Bennett
3rd Pairing: Ellis, Bennett, Didier, Dietz
Extra Dmen: Bennett, Didier, Dietz, Sullivan, Pateryn

As you can see I don't believe we have any high end prospects but we do have a bunch of character guys who can fill up the bottom two lines.

The only guys I am banking on making the team at some point are Beaulieu, Tinordi, Ellis, Leblanc, Bournival, Kristo and Gallagher.

If anyone else steps up and can contribute, then I can be pleasantly surprised.

SeriousHabs 05-29-2012 08:31 AM

Kristo committed to another year in college, right? Am I the only one who thinks he will never see the NHL?

Habs 4 Life 05-29-2012 08:43 AM

I was sure we would have gone up a little considering the 4 prospects playing in the Memorial Cup tournament, we should be going up a couple of spots before next season with the 3 picks we have in the first 2 rounds including #3 overall. Next year should also be the same with 4 picks in the first 2 rounds, future is looking good :)

Paul Dipietro 05-29-2012 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeriousHabs (Post 50265773)
Kristo committed to another year in college, right? Am I the only one who thinks he will never see the NHL?

Unless he's planning on getting his Master's degree and PhD, his college days will come to an end eventually (at least I hope)

Watsatheo 05-29-2012 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeriousHabs (Post 50265773)
Kristo committed to another year in college, right? Am I the only one who thinks he will never see the NHL?

Not sure I see the correlation with never playing in the NHL and playing 4 years in college.

dcyhabs 05-29-2012 08:58 AM

The rating values proximity to the NHL and few of the habs serious prospects have hit the AHL yet. Those that have are generally low-end or near-graduates like Leblanc and Palushaj.

If only the habs GMs and coaches overvalued prospects. The GMs undervalued McDonagh pretty thoroughly, and have been impatient with others.

Stjonnypopo 05-29-2012 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Watsatheo (Post 50266167)
Not sure I see the correlation with never playing in the NHL and playing 4 years in college.

Numbers have shown (numbers that I can't look for right now) that players who spend their critical development age (18-22) in college playing 20 games a year will have a smaller chance of making the NHL. It's only natural that someone who develops by playing hockey part-time will not be as good as someone who develops full-time (CHL).

Crimson Skorpion 05-29-2012 09:03 AM

Have to agree with the fact that the goaltending depth is lacking. After Price, the drop-off is terrible. Pretty much everything is about right. Habs need that big centre in their depth, they need top wingers for sure and maybe even another bruising defenseman.

21st seems very accurate.

Protest the Hero 05-29-2012 09:12 AM

Can't disagree on their reasoning, and I haven't seen the list to weigh in on the placing, but it doesn't really matter. The team should make a big jump after the draft I imagine because they'll have at least one "sexy" pick to add. Chances are we draft that "big, highly skilled centre", or at least a big scoring winger.

le_sean 05-29-2012 09:16 AM

Really disappointing since this team was the envy of the league prospect-wise about 5-7 years ago.

It's sad the top 3 prospects are an offensive defenceman, a two way forward and a defensive defenceman. While these guys can be impact players, they have limited all around potential. They simply have their niche.

habs03 05-29-2012 09:25 AM

With 7 picks in the first 60 picks in this and next year draft should see MTL go on in those ranking. I actually like our prospect pool, and the only thing lacking is depth, which the next two draft should shore up.

Watsatheo 05-29-2012 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stjonnypopo (Post 50266301)
Numbers have shown (numbers that I can't look for right now) that players who spend their critical development age (18-22) in college playing 20 games a year will have a smaller chance of making the NHL. It's only natural that someone who develops by playing hockey part-time will not be as good as someone who develops full-time (CHL).

Maybe I read this wrong but are you really suggesting that players who play in college have a less chance to make the NHL? Can't wait to see these numbers because there are numerous players among the NHL top scorers last season alone who spent their 18-22 years in college.

JohnnyReb 05-29-2012 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Watsatheo (Post 50267765)
Maybe I read this wrong but are you really suggesting that players who play in college have a less chance to make the NHL? Can't wait to see these numbers because there are numerous players among the NHL top scorers last season alone who spent their 18-22 years in college.

I'd be very interested in seeing these numbers as well, especially if they control for number of players, league-level and so on.

Personally I think there is a huge problem in Canada with regards to the practice-to-game mindset. There is this belief - which is not shared anywhere else in the world - that you need to play games to get better. Being involved in coaching at various levels I see it all the time; parents think that "we need to play games so the kids can get better." We see it on this board too, where people want kids yanked out of their college/European leagues to play in the CHL or AHL, where they "will get more games and get better." I believe this is a false premise, and one that is hurting hockey Canada. The average Novice or Peewee hockey player will handle the puck for about 8 seconds a game. Which is nothing really. Even at the elite levels, the best players in the game will only handle the puck for about one minute. See the charts about half-way down this page: http://www.smarthockey.com/philosoph...73726630022074

The same thing can be said about skating. Top players average what? 22-25 minutes of ice time? Compared to say a practice, which if well-run will have the players skating for upwards of 45-60 minutes, depending on the length of the practice? With a puck on their stick for about half of that? Which do you think is better for development?

* Skating for 22 minutes, handling the puck for 1 minute
* Skating for 45 minutes, handling the puck for say, 20 minutes?

And this says nothing about gym work, which is virtually impossible to do in an 82 game schedule that involves significant bus travel.

Of course games have their place. But in my opinion developing players should be practicing at 2-3 practices per game ratio. Unfortunately, in Canada at least, it's often the reverse, with kids playing 2-3 games for every practice. So I would be very interested in seeing these numbers that state that college kids are less likely to make the NHL, IF all other factors are taken into consideration.

DekeLikeYouMeanIt 05-29-2012 10:51 AM

Too high actually.

ChoseLa 05-29-2012 11:21 AM

With our two first picks we should reach the top-15. 1st overral if we pick up Shultz (not that we will).

Stjonnypopo 05-29-2012 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Watsatheo (Post 50267765)
Maybe I read this wrong but are you really suggesting that players who play in college have a less chance to make the NHL? Can't wait to see these numbers because there are numerous players among the NHL top scorers last season alone who spent their 18-22 years in college.

Do you really think that two identical players, one going to college and the other going into a full time development program would come out the same player? Do you think the hockey development would be equal in these two scenarios?

WeThreeKings 05-29-2012 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by le_sean (Post 50266665)
Really disappointing since this team was the envy of the league prospect-wise about 5-7 years ago.

It's sad the top 3 prospects are an offensive defenceman, a two way forward and a defensive defenceman. While these guys can be impact players, they have limited all around potential. They simply have their niche.

And people want us to draft Murray :shakehead


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:50 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.