HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Montreal Canadiens (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Prospect Info: Ryan McDonagh (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=657228)

Boulette Cannon 06-30-2009 07:27 PM

Are we overrating McDonagh?
 
Some people thought we was a future 1st pairing D and some think he has already reached his full potential.

Discuss.

Le Tricolore 06-30-2009 07:29 PM

I think many people are overrating him, thinking he'd be a Chelios, or something like that. I don't doubt that he could become a future #2 or #3 defenseman, but from that I've read, I'd be kind of shocked if he turned into a number one guy.

Rgolt 06-30-2009 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HIGGINS! (Post 20167644)
Some people thought we was a future 1st pairing D and some think he has already reached his full potential.

Discuss.

no1 even reaches half there potential when there 20 years old...especially when they havnt even played a game in the ahl let alone the nhl

Bryzga lol* 06-30-2009 07:29 PM

There could very well be a reason why they traded him away. I can't imagine Bob pulling the trigger without consulting Timmons.

DaHabMan 06-30-2009 07:30 PM

i dont see anything wrong with him being a top 4 d-man instead of a top2. So what if his offense wasnt developing like they hoped, at least he was solid in his own zone and could skate the puck. He could've been a number 4 d-man who eats up minutes, ala hamrlik but just younger. I would have had no problems whatsoever with that.

Habs 06-30-2009 07:30 PM

No we are overrating Timmins, as usual.

Mathletic 06-30-2009 07:31 PM

hell yes we are overrating him

FlyingKostitsyn 06-30-2009 07:32 PM

Well, lets hope he's the next Balej...

Heaters not lazt* 06-30-2009 07:32 PM

I hope not. I just traded for him in the FA game ;)

DaHabMan 06-30-2009 07:33 PM

i dont have a problem with him being a top4 instead of a top 2. He seemed real solid in his own zone and so what if his offense wasnt developing like they hoped it would. I would take good defensive d-man who could skate with the puck anytime on my team. A number 4 who eats up minutes, like i read he was slated to do, can be valuable. He could have been hamrlik but younger and cheaper.

EDIT: oops double post

googlymoogly 06-30-2009 07:34 PM

I remember the 90's all too well when we would trade away our young players or prospects as add ins to get another player. We traded away Tucker, Conroy, LeClair as add ins and it put us back years and we are just reaching the point of being rebuilt only to toss away a possible 1-2 Dman in McDo as an ad in. It is not like Sather had multiple teams lined up ready to take Gomez's bloated contract. We should of at least gotten NY's 1st rounder in 2010.

What scares me is if Gainey tosses Subban in another trade. Our D corps will be depleted again.

crazyd 06-30-2009 07:36 PM

I sure hope that we are overrating him...

Schooner Guy 06-30-2009 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by googlymoogly (Post 20167825)
I remember the 90's all too well when we would trade away our young players or prospects as add ins to get another player. We traded away Tucker, Conroy, LeClair as add ins and it put us back years and we are just reaching the point of being rebuilt only to toss away a possible 1-2 Dman in McDo as an ad in. It is not like Sather had multiple teams lined up ready to take Gomez's bloated contract. We should of at least gotten NY's 1st rounder in 2010.

Great post. Houle would always throw in a prospect to complete a trade. The only difference is that our drafting was so terrible during the Houle era that we didn't replenish the cupboards and they got bare very quickly. At least Timmins has been drafting well especially in terms of quantity.

I have also commented in a few threads that Sather should have been compensating us with a prospect for taking that contract off his hands and freeing him to go after free agents he covets (who might be the same ones that we covet).

Souffle 06-30-2009 07:47 PM

I don't know if we're overrating him in terms of upside, but he was still one of our top prospects. In fact (or internet fiction), he was number 7 on Timmins' List for the 2007 draft.

Shabutie 06-30-2009 07:50 PM

We've read articles in the past saying that he hadn't progressed... maybe Timmins told Gainey to send McDonagh off before Fischer?

Garo 06-30-2009 07:56 PM

I think it's funny that we'd rather keep Weber and Subban.

Coldplay 06-30-2009 07:57 PM

HF says he's a #1A AT WORST.

I am furious about this, I love Gomez, but WHY GIVE HIM UP.

Ross MacLochness 06-30-2009 07:59 PM

It's obvious Sather wanted one of the Big 3 (Subban, Weber, McDonagh) and out of those 3, in my opinion anyway, McDonagh is the least likely to become an NHLer, and probably has the lowest ceiling. I'm not saying he won't become a player, I actually think he will, but to me Weber and PK are just better bets, and have higher potential.

I'm not sure why Gainey couldn't get Sather off these guys though. Why not 2 of O'Bryne/Emelin/Valentenko/Carle. Surely that could've been enough to make this trade.

I've only seen McD at the WJC, and I wasn't impressed with his strength. Plus he didn't make it as an 18 year old.

DaHabMan 06-30-2009 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ross MacLochness (Post 20168868)
It's obvious Sather wanted one of the Big 3 (Subban, Weber, McDonagh) and out of those 3, in my opinion anyway, McDonagh is the least likely to become an NHLer, and probably has the lowest ceiling. I'm not saying he won't become a player, I actually think he will, but to me Weber and PK are just better bets, and have higher potential.

I'm not sure why Gainey couldn't get Sather off these guys though. Why not 2 of O'Bryne/Emelin/Valentenko/Carle. Surely that could've been enough to make this trade.

I've only seen McD at the WJC, and I wasn't impressed with his strength. Plus he didn't make it as an 18 year old.

the thing is we shouldnt have been the ones adding to the deal, the rangers should have been the ones to add a prospect or a 1st rounder to get rid of gomez

Shabutie 06-30-2009 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coldplay (Post 20168828)
HF says he's a #1A AT WORST.

I am furious about this, I love Gomez, but WHY GIVE HIM UP.

HF says.....So what?

Bob McKenzie could say that he's a #1A at worst (how is that even possible?), doesn't mean he will achieve that potential...

dcyhabs 06-30-2009 08:15 PM

McDonagh's ceiling is lower offensively but he is the habs prospect who is most certain to be an NHL regular. Weber has shown he can play, but he has size issues. Subban looks fantastic so far, and I'm glad to have him instead of McDonagh if we had to trade one of them, but his game may not translate to the AHL or the NHL (I think it will, but we will see).

McDonagh has size, speed, and defense going for him. He will be playing for the Rangers long after Gomez retires. The question is whether he will be on a steady third pairing or a dynamic first pairing. Have to hope the Rangers took the wrong prospect again.

Le Tricolore 06-30-2009 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garo (Post 20168763)
I think it's funny that we'd rather keep Weber and Subban.

Have you not followed Subban over the past two seasons?

eightyseven 06-30-2009 08:17 PM

I don't understand how he can be a #1 d-man. From his NCAA numbers, it looks like he's basically a defensive, stay-at-home d-man. I saw him at the World Juniors and I was not impressed. I thought Kevin Shattenkirk looked better. I think McDonagh is another Komisarek/Volchenkov kind of player. They are more suited to the 2nd pairing or lower.

TheCH* 06-30-2009 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eightyseven (Post 20169495)
I don't understand how he can be a #1 d-man. From his NCAA numbers, it looks like he's basically a defensive, stay-at-home d-man. I saw him at the World Juniors and I was not impressed. I thought Kevin Shattenkirk looked better. I think McDonagh is another Komisarek/Volchenkov kind of player. They are more suited to the 2nd pairing or lower.

Every team needs those kinds of players. Just asked Bob Gainey, who i am sure offered the moon to Komisarek..

Miller Time 06-30-2009 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shabutie (Post 20169352)
HF says.....So what?

Bob McKenzie could say that he's a #1A at worst (how is that even possible?), doesn't mean he will achieve that potential...

no, but it is a reflection on how people in the hockey know rate his potential.

would you have been happy for a busto-mcdo trade straight up? No... Why? Because Busto is a fringe prospect rated poorly by those who know.

wether McDo turns out good, great or a complete bust, right now he's still viewed as a top pairing blue chip prospect.

that's why its insane that he was included in a deal for Gomez, a guy that is very good, not great, and who is only a marginal upgrade on Koivu, at twice the price.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:20 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.