HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Notices

Canadiens 2003 draft evaluation

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-01-2008, 10:12 PM
  #26
Guillemin
Registered User
 
Guillemin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by preston View Post
Totally, he should definitely know the future, shame on him.
Actually... if you want to get technical about it, that is his job.

Guillemin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2008, 10:55 PM
  #27
Lucius
Registered User
 
Lucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeThreeKings View Post
Heino and Korpikari are no longer with us..
Are you sure?

I thought the new CBA rules only apply to guys drafted since that CBA came into effect, thus players drafted under the old CBA are under its old rules. As a result, we keep Euro picks indefinitely from the 2003 draft, as per the old rules.

I could be wrong though.

Lucius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2008, 10:58 PM
  #28
Oryxo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 18
vCash: 500
But there's no garantee that if we took any of those players instead of Kostitsyn they would still be the players they are today since their development would've been different. They could've turned into busts if we drafted them or they might be even better, we'll never know. It's not like Andrei is a bad player and if we're lucky in a few years he might turn out to be the best player we could pick at 10th. Now I'll never understand that 2nd round pick tho...

Oryxo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2008, 11:07 PM
  #29
Corey
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,300
vCash: 500
2003 wasn't a bad draft in the sense of being a Houle-type disaster but let's not praise Timmins to the skies for it. There were enough decent players overall for him to pick a few good ones. A number of other teams came out of that draft looking good and we don't keep hearing lavish praise heaped upon them by their fans. Let's not deify Timmins. He doesn't walk on water or bring the dead back to life.

Corey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2008, 11:08 PM
  #30
WeThreeKings
Registered User
 
WeThreeKings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 30,743
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to WeThreeKings
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corey View Post
2003 wasn't a bad draft in the sense of being a Houle-type disaster but let's not praise Timmins to the skies for it. There were enough decent players overall for him to pick a few good ones. A number of other teams came out of that draft looking good and we don't keep hearing lavish praise heaped upon them by their fans. Let's not deify Timmins. He doesn't walk on water or bring the dead back to life.
No one else has done that either.

WeThreeKings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2008, 11:13 PM
  #31
Chris Cutter
BELIEVE IN DOUGLAS
 
Chris Cutter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Beauce
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,686
vCash: 500
Come on, how can people still argue about this draft...


Timmins did a great job. Not an amazing job, not a crappy job, just a good one.



He took a gamble by drafting Andrei Kostitsyn and it payed to take the risk.
We got Lapierre who can be a good 4th liner. He got Halak who has a great value and O'Byrne that will be in our top 4.

Chris Cutter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 06:42 AM
  #32
Crusher20
Registered User
 
Crusher20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montreal
Country: Ecuador
Posts: 4,645
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Crusher20 Send a message via Yahoo to Crusher20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corey View Post
2003 wasn't a bad draft in the sense of being a Houle-type disaster but let's not praise Timmins to the skies for it. There were enough decent players overall for him to pick a few good ones. A number of other teams came out of that draft looking good and we don't keep hearing lavish praise heaped upon them by their fans. Let's not deify Timmins. He doesn't walk on water or bring the dead back to life.
I think you should ask yourself a simpler question, wich team had a better draft than the canadiens overall?

Crusher20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 07:57 AM
  #33
Whitesnake
Year of the Snake
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine
Country: Canada
Posts: 43,800
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freaky Habs Fan View Post
Why do we always say that Carter would have been a better pick than Kostitsyn? I can understand for Getzalf, Richards and Parise, but Carter?!?! It's not like he's a beast out there. He's a tall lanky center with skills, but that's about it. I think Kostitsyn will end up to be the best player between the two.

And why are people so negative about the Kostitsyn choice? He's one of the best player of the first round, so we should just be happy. And Richards wasn't really supposed to become an offensive player at the NHL level, and like someone said, Getzalf was lazy. And it's funny, because those two players went way after our pick...
In the end, drafting, as tough a job it is, is not picking the best guy out there at the present moment. It's evaluating who might develop better in the future.

As far as Getzlaf being lazy, being a reason to not pick him, we should not have drafted Urquhart either for that specific reason as well. Not even taking into effect that he lacked passion, lacked grit, didn't have the greatest skating, there was way too many question marks to chose him that soon.

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 08:08 AM
  #34
Whitesnake
Year of the Snake
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine
Country: Canada
Posts: 43,800
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crusher20 View Post
I think you should ask yourself a simpler question, wich team had a better draft than the canadiens overall?
- Philly. With Richards, future and already great 2-way player, future captain, heart and soul of this team. With Carter, as much some people think he's not that great, you actually forget something. That kind of guy, even if you don't want him in your team, will fetch a great return. A tall offensive centerman who already proved himself, will get you some serious return. Just because of those first rounders, Philly comes on top. And I'm not even talking about how Ruzicka and Potulny might develop into, especially Ruzicka

- Anaheim: Getzlaf and Perry. But then both of those teams had the privilege in having 2 first rounders. Like we did with McDo and MaxPac probably making us one of the best teams in 2007

- Atlanta: If the Thrashers would not have been stupid, they would have had in the backend Coburn and Enstrom.

And there might be some others, didn't do them all. But I also know that there's a lot of teams who done much worst.

We're not comparing Timmins to the rest, we were comparing Timmins to himself and nobody in their right mind can say that it's his best draft or even one of his best drafts.

But again, it all depends of what you want in a great draft. Number of NHL'ers or quality of them. My take it's that it's a combination of both. Still, I think it's more important to get your gamebreakers our of the draft, 'cause chances are nobody will send you theirs free. Or if they do, it will cost you big. If you draft them, the only cost is to wait till they're ready.

But as far as the number of NHL'ers are concerned, sure it proves that they achieve their goals. The goal is to make them NHL'ers and then see them progressed. But then, it's much easier to get the Lapierre's of this world in a trade.

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 08:41 AM
  #35
SOLR
Registered User
 
SOLR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto / North York
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,675
vCash: 500
I still think the 2003 draft had the halo of André Savard on it, Timmins wasnt in full control yet imo.

Gainey to Savard: "Let Timmins pick the first rounder and well let you pick your player with the first 2nd rounder."

Urquart is just so not in the mold of anything Timmins would select it's flagrant.

SOLR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 09:07 AM
  #36
montreal
Time to Get Down
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Hungary
Posts: 23,272
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucius View Post
Are you sure?

I thought the new CBA rules only apply to guys drafted since that CBA came into effect, thus players drafted under the old CBA are under its old rules. As a result, we keep Euro picks indefinitely from the 2003 draft, as per the old rules.

I could be wrong though.
We no longer hold their rights. Last year we had to sign Euro picks from '03, this year it's from '04 and that's the last of the Euro picks that need to be signed prior to the new cba, excluding Russian picks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beakermania View Post
Here you go guys.
I'm surprised no one picked up on the Lapierre trade, it says we traded with the Kings when it was philly, thanks Bobby Clarke a 2nd rounder for Eric Chouinard was a nice move by Gainey. Although theif picked it up as he sent me a pm about it.

montreal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 09:08 AM
  #37
Lucius
Registered User
 
Lucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
We no longer hold their rights. Last year we had to sign Euro picks from '03, this year it's from '04 and that's the last of the Euro picks that need to be signed prior to the new cba, excluding Russian picks.
Fair enough.

So we could theoretically sign them if we wanted, but so could Boston, basically?

Lucius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 09:11 AM
  #38
WeThreeKings
Registered User
 
WeThreeKings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 30,743
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to WeThreeKings
I think we'll see in the upcoming seasons that Andrei Kostitsyn will be one of the top players selected in that draft.

In his first full season he put up 50+ points. He showed glimpses of controlling and dominating the game. It will only get stronger with experience.

WeThreeKings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 09:13 AM
  #39
montreal
Time to Get Down
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Hungary
Posts: 23,272
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOLR View Post
I still think the 2003 draft had the halo of André Savard on it, Timmins wasnt in full control yet imo.

Gainey to Savard: "Let Timmins pick the first rounder and well let you pick your player with the first 2nd rounder."

Urquart is just so not in the mold of anything Timmins would select it's flagrant.
Could be right in that, I do recall Savard being high on Urquhart at the draft. I don't blame him though, he did had a great playoff run in the Q that year.

As for the draft, I hope Kostitsyn just gets better and better. He has shown flashes of high skills but it will be interesting to see how it all pans out for him. Lappy should be a solid role player for us, I have been high on O'Byrne for a long time and think that was a smart pick. Halak I remember a scout from McKeens telling me we got a major steal in Halak the day of the draft. So not a great draft, not a bad one by any means. That Urquhart picks hurts for sure, you win some you lose some.

montreal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 09:53 AM
  #40
Fozz
Registered User
 
Fozz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 6,090
vCash: 500
Savard did indeed have his fingerprints all over the 2003 draft. He even made the announcement on the podium.

Fozz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 05:03 PM
  #41
xduckiex
Registered User
 
xduckiex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: PEI
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,031
vCash: 500
Urquhart was my favorite player when he played for the PEI Rocket. I couldn't wait to see him play for the Habs....still waiting haha.

xduckiex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 06:26 PM
  #42
Tusk
Registered User
 
Tusk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 3,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
I'm surprised no one picked up on the Lapierre trade, it says we traded with the Kings when it was philly, thanks Bobby Clarke a 2nd rounder for Eric Chouinard was a nice move by Gainey.
I picked it up, I just didn't want to point out how the new writer isn't as good as his predecessor, again. He always makes little, unnecessary mistakes.

Tusk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 06:27 PM
  #43
redmachine54
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 677
vCash: 500
Good article. I was afraid it was going to sound like Timmins' appraisals of the prospects, saying they're all good; nice to see a level-headed evaluation.

redmachine54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 06:33 PM
  #44
Fido22
Registered User
 
Fido22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,690
vCash: 500
Could of, would of, should ofs aside, we have a top 6 winger (potential top line), potential No.1 goalie (maybe a very good one), a solid nhl dman and a talented, speedy fourth line agitator out of the draft. That is a good draft.

Fido22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2008, 10:03 AM
  #45
montreal
Time to Get Down
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Hungary
Posts: 23,272
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucius View Post
Fair enough.

So we could theoretically sign them if we wanted, but so could Boston, basically?
They are now Free Agents, no team holds their NHL rights so any team can sign them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by preston View Post
I picked it up, I just didn't want to point out how the new writer isn't as good as his predecessor, again. He always makes little, unnecessary mistakes.
I see. I can add that it's not an easy job covering the Habs, as you have a rabid fanbase and they know their stuff so you better have your facts right or your going to get called out on it. Or that's how it was and before me, it was much worse. I was just coming to this board back around '00 or '01 when they used to let people put comments after the articles, so you could read the article and then the comments under it. Yikes! I had never read such racists drivel, good thing HF got rid of it cause it was usually full of comments from stupid immature kids just spewing hate.

montreal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2008, 10:21 AM
  #46
Habnot
 
Habnot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GNick42 View Post
My beef with this draft is Timmins missed on his tops picks...Gretlak, Bergeron...overall, considering the talent available I think this was Timmins worse draft
I can live with the AKost pick but passing on bergeron for Urquhart is probably Timmins biggest mistake, especially since bith played in the Q. This should of been a no brainer. But drafting is not a science.

Habnot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2008, 12:11 PM
  #47
montreal
Time to Get Down
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Hungary
Posts: 23,272
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habnot View Post
I can live with the AKost pick but passing on bergeron for Urquhart is probably Timmins biggest mistake, especially since bith played in the Q. This should of been a no brainer. But drafting is not a science.
I can't agree, as I saw Bergeron as he was a teammates of Ferland's, and while I only saw him once, I did follow the team and don't recall there being much of a buzz around him. I just don't see it as a no brainer back then.

montreal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2008, 12:28 PM
  #48
Habnot
 
Habnot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
I can't agree, as I saw Bergeron as he was a teammates of Ferland's, and while I only saw him once, I did follow the team and don't recall there being much of a buzz around him. I just don't see it as a no brainer back then.
Fair enough, I know when not to argue :-)

That being said, Urquhart was still a poor selection.

Habnot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2008, 12:32 PM
  #49
montreal
Time to Get Down
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Hungary
Posts: 23,272
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habnot View Post
Fair enough, I know when not to argue :-)

That being said, Urquhart was still a poor selection.
Also don't agree, yes now it was a brutal pick but back then, if you saw the Q playoffs, he had a very good playoff run from what I recall. Plus he's a big center with some slick offensive skills. I am not saying it was a good pick at the time, but at least it made some sense at the time.

montreal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2008, 12:38 PM
  #50
Habnot
 
Habnot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
Also don't agree, yes now it was a brutal pick but back then, if you saw the Q playoffs, he had a very good playoff run from what I recall. Plus he's a big center with some slick offensive skills. I am not saying it was a good pick at the time, but at least it made some sense at the time.
OK! I surrender

Habnot is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:36 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.