HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Mathias Brunet article on Timmins

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-30-2009, 05:07 PM
  #76
Mathletic
Registered User
 
Mathletic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St-Augustin, Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by j c petit View Post
Perron would be 3rd or 4th pointer for the Canadiens right now and Brière said of Giroux that he has the best vision of any player he has played with. That's pretty good. Even though we just had a nice article on Fischer and how well he's doing at Minnesota, I'd take the NHL guy with proven level of play over any day of the week.

Btw, a true risk for me is PK Subban. The guy PROVED his offensive skills in the ohl. We all heard of his defensive problems but he seems to get over it very well. That's a risk. A risk to me isn't drafting high school players when they haven't proved much. I'd be all over an high school player who'd be at a high level already. For instance, I'll use a basketball case, everybody knew that Lebron James was already at NBA level when he was in high school, then I'm all over a guy like thise, otherwise, I'm not a fan. Timmins can be, he's a good scout, that's his choice, not mine.


Last edited by Mathletic: 03-30-2009 at 05:17 PM.
Mathletic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 05:08 PM
  #77
Habsterix*
@Habsterix
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FSU Seminoles View Post
Perron would be 3rd or 4th pointer for the Canadiens right now and Brière said of Giroux that he has the best vision of any player he has played with. That's pretty good. Even though we just had a nice article on Fischer and how well he's doing at Minnesota, I'd take the NHL guy with proven level of play over any day of the week.
It's the old mentality that our players and our prospects are better than other teams' prospects because we don't know those guys.

I agree with what you're saying for what it's worth.

Habsterix* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 05:12 PM
  #78
Mathletic
Registered User
 
Mathletic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St-Augustin, Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asterix View Post
It's the old mentality that our players and our prospects are better than other teams' prospects because we don't know those guys.

I agree with what you're saying for what it's worth.
it's worth a lot to me, I'm often against the grain around here hehe ... against Théodore, for quebec players on team canada, for perron and giroux ... I'll take those comments any day of the the week

Mathletic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 05:16 PM
  #79
Em Ancien
Sexy 2nd Rounder
 
Em Ancien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Mount Real Life
Posts: 8,881
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asterix View Post
It's the old mentality that our players and our prospects are better than other teams' prospects because we don't know those guys.

I agree with what you're saying for what it's worth.
I've seen Giroux play countless times (I'm from Gatineau) and I know how good Perron is.

However, in the Perron case, what would he bring this team other than depth? He's the same type of player we have playing on the top 2 lines.

Pacioretty brings a good mix of size, physical play and skill. And this is why, no matter what both amount to, I will always think Pacioretty was the better choice FOR THE HABS.

Em Ancien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 05:17 PM
  #80
Habsterix*
@Habsterix
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FSU Seminoles View Post
it's worth a lot to me, I'm often against the grain around here hehe ... against Théodore, for quebec players on team canada, for perron and giroux ... I'll take those comments any day of the the week
Against the grain is not a bad thing. While the sheep follow the herd, others think outside the box and that's what makes the world go 'round. Otherwise, everyone would agree on everything and it wouldn't allow for new, fresh ideas and points of view.

What I think you get and not everyone gets is an understanding of the market the Habs play in and that's worth a lot.

Habsterix* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 05:18 PM
  #81
Mathletic
Registered User
 
Mathletic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St-Augustin, Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTLHabsAK46 View Post
I've seen Giroux play countless times (I'm from Gatineau) and I know how good Perron is.

However, in the Perron case, what would he bring this team other than depth? He's the same type of player we have playing on the top 2 lines.

Pacioretty brings a good mix of size, physical play and skill. And this is why, no matter what both amount to, I will always think Pacioretty was the better choice FOR THE HABS.
he'd bring points on the board

Mathletic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 05:22 PM
  #82
Em Ancien
Sexy 2nd Rounder
 
Em Ancien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Mount Real Life
Posts: 8,881
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FSU Seminoles View Post
he'd bring points on the board
Which is what I said...depth.

He has not proven he's a game-breaker yet, so we'll wait on that one.

So you have to choose between a skilled top 6 player or a gritty, physical top 6 player...looking at our core and farm at the time, you tell me you like the skilled guy better for us in the long run?

Please. Get real.

Em Ancien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 05:23 PM
  #83
Mathletic
Registered User
 
Mathletic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St-Augustin, Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTLHabsAK46 View Post
Which is what I said...depth.

He has not proven he's a game-breaker yet, so we'll wait on that one.

So you have to choose between a skilled top 6 player or a gritty, physical top 6 player...looking at our core and farm at the time, you tell me you like the skilled guy better for us in the long run?

Please. Get real.
3rd pointer (2nd for forwards) isn't depth for me

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asterix View Post
Against the grain is not a bad thing. While the sheep follow the herd, others think outside the box and that's what makes the world go 'round. Otherwise, everyone would agree on everything and it wouldn't allow for new, fresh ideas and points of view.

What I think you get and not everyone gets is an understanding of the market the Habs play in and that's worth a lot.
yeap, I think it is a proof of what Martin St Louis said ... some players have to prove they can play in the league while others have to prove they can't play in the league. That's how I feel it is for many quebec players.

I'm not here to impose my political agenda or anything or show that I'm anti-american. My favorite political figure is Thomas Jefferson by far ... altough you can argue that it's a biased choice again since he loved french people... and not Pauline Marois or whoever. I have family in Manitoba have several friends in Ontario and BC, so anyway. Everybody's entitled to their opinion.


Last edited by Habs10Habs: 03-31-2009 at 10:05 AM.
Mathletic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 05:25 PM
  #84
onice
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Montreal
Posts: 5,612
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
that you have a greater "feeling of belonging" for a team when you have an important number of guys from our own city, province etc....

Also feel that some players might give a greater effort for a team they've grown up watching and liking. For a guy who's dream was always to play for the Habs, you do think that once there, they'll do everything they can to make that team succeed.
Whitesnake,

I took two paragraphs from your post and we'll look at them.

The first. If you're gonna apply that to the Habs then it should be applied to all the other teams. Albertans will want an important amount of players from their area. The same with Vancouver and so on and so on. This sounds great in the abstract but what does it mean if you start to apply in practical matters. It means priorities start to switch. You start to bring in other factors aside from hockey skills: language, local boy. Now I can hear the Francophiles, yeah but we're not like the rest of those cities. We're unique. We're different. We need to be treated different. And this when you really look at it, comes down to exclusion. We'll never know the answer to this hypothetical situation but I'll bet if Montreal had won that lottery and picked Crosby, the same people screaming for local boys now, would still be screaming. Because this is not a question of the Q or OHL or NCAA. It's a question of ethnicity. Crosby's bloodline are not the right ones.

Now for the second. Let's put your "thesis" to the test. For most of the year the Habs had 8 local boys:

Begin
Tanguay
Dandenault
Lats
Lappy
Brisebois
Bouillon
Laraque

Of those 8 players, 5 played elsewhere. (Begin, Tanguay, Dandenault, Brisebois, Laraque) have they played with more commitment here than in their other teams? I don't think so, do you? The 8 as a group have they played with more dedication than 8 other players on the team? If you're honest, you know the answer to that. Begin asked to be traded. Dandenault had been rumoured to have asked for the same. Laraque, well, he probably spends more time on his hair then on his hockey skills. Lats is on and off. Brisebois,meh. Tanguay, plays the same here as he did in his other two cities. that leaves Lappy & Bouillon who leave it all on the ice. And they probably would play the same way no matter where they played.


Last edited by onice: 03-30-2009 at 05:31 PM.
onice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 05:28 PM
  #85
Freaky Habs Fan
Registered User
 
Freaky Habs Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: New-Brunswick
Posts: 9,505
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asterix View Post
At equal talent, the Habs MUST draft French Canadians in my humble opinion as that's their market. We've passed on many of them over the years as shown by the list I've posted in this thread earlier today.
But looking back, we can't say that X player was an equal player to the one we've picked. I don't get that equal talent thing. You always like a player better than another. And if, for some reasons, it really happens, well fine, take the Quebec player, but I can tell you, it's not happening often enough to take it as an argument.

Freaky Habs Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 05:28 PM
  #86
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,068
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asterix View Post
At equal talent, the Habs MUST draft French Canadians in my humble opinion as that's their market. We've passed on many of them over the years as shown by the list I've posted in this thread earlier today.
Like you say, though, that's 20-20 hindsight drafting... and that makes it pretty pointless.

You can always note players a team "could" or "should" have drafted, regardless of language, but never mention the umpteen worse choices that could have been taken, such as the legions of French Canadian players that the Habs passed over and never made the NHL. Talent evaluation is a very inexact science. And for many years the Habs were quite terrible at it. Would it have been better if the Habs had picked local boys... but the ones that didn't make the NHL?

Then there's other considerations. As an example: someone could always say "oh my God we passed on MARTIN BRODEUR!" without context, but that context is very important: the Habs' goalie at the time was Patrick Roy, who already had a Conn Smythe at the time and was a better goaltender than Brodeur throughout his career, and so the Brodeur pick wouldn't have been particularly appropriate even if one could have told ahead of time he was going to become a very good goalie. (Besides, Martin Brodeur wouldn't be anywhere near the greatest-goalie-ever discussion if he'd been drafted by the Habs, but that's neither here nor there.)

Then there's the time they passed over a local to pick a local -- such as picking Gilbert Dionne over Gino Odjick.

I can make a terrific list of players that any given team has passed over at the draft, and conclude that all their scouting staffs are terrible. They're not -- it's just very difficult. It was not obvious at all at the time of the pick that the guys they picked were not superior players to the ones they didn't -- locals or not.

I can make a similar list for any team and use it to show that they badly discriminate against French Canadians and it's hurting them... but that's not the case at all, either.

When they picked Eric Chouinard over Simon Gagne, was that good?

You mentioned Marc-Edouard Vlasic, but should they have given up Carey Price for him?

Just making a list of locals the Habs might have picked is pretty meaningless. I don't think the amount of focus being put on locals is too low at all, and I don't think drafting after the fact is very productive.

Now, if you want to express concern about the success rate of Montreal first-round picks in the 90s, that is an horror story...

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 05:31 PM
  #87
Em Ancien
Sexy 2nd Rounder
 
Em Ancien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Mount Real Life
Posts: 8,881
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FSU Seminoles View Post
3rd pointer (2nd for forwards) isn't depth for me
The whole team has had a brutal year and injuries were a big problem.

What would indicate he'd be as prolific playing on this team this year?

2 very different situations. He'd probably be playing in Lewiston if he was drafted by the Habs.

Em Ancien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 05:33 PM
  #88
Mathletic
Registered User
 
Mathletic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St-Augustin, Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTLHabsAK46 View Post
The whole team has had a brutal year and injuries were a big problem.

What would indicate he'd be as prolific playing on this team this year?

2 very different situations. He'd probably be playing in Lewiston if he was drafted by the Habs.
fine, you have your opinion let me know if there's anything to could lead you to review your stance on that question. I don't think St. Louis is a loaded team anyway.

Mathletic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 05:35 PM
  #89
Habsterix*
@Habsterix
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by onice View Post
Of those 8 players, 5 played elsewhere. (Begin, Tanguay, Dandenault, Brisebois, Laraque) have they played with more commitment here than in their other teams? I don't think so, do you? The 8 as a group have they played with more dedication than 8 other players on the team? If you're honest, you know the answer to that.
I'd say that Begin, Tanguay and Brisebois all have and some will argue that Laraque has been hurt most of the season...

Begin was picked off waivers and yet, he stayed with this team for how many years?

Tanguay wanted out of Calgary and waived his NTC to play in Montreal, in front of his family. He's had a pretty good season and had it not been of injuries, he might even have led this team in points.

Brisebois, in spite of what he's been through in the past in Montreal, came back and played quite well for us. Some have said on this board that he would not have had a job elsewhere in the NHL, so I'd say that playing here was a motivation factor.

Laraque signed here as a UFA because he wanted to be here. I still believe that we haven't seen the best of Laraque but that's mostly due to the fact that in spite of signing him this summer, we have a GM and had a coach who don't believe in fighting in hockey.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MTLHabsAK46 View Post
The whole team has had a brutal year and injuries were a big problem.

What would indicate he'd be as prolific playing on this team this year?

2 very different situations. He'd probably be playing in Lewiston if he was drafted by the Habs.
Here we go with that crystal ball again...

Maybe he'd be leading our team in points?


Last edited by Habs10Habs: 03-31-2009 at 10:08 AM.
Habsterix* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 05:40 PM
  #90
Em Ancien
Sexy 2nd Rounder
 
Em Ancien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Mount Real Life
Posts: 8,881
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asterix View Post
Here we go with that crystal ball again...

Maybe he'd be leading our team in points?
Oh my...you're saying he would've made the team LAST YEAR? Especially after the Lats experience?

Come on...

Em Ancien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 05:43 PM
  #91
Freaky Habs Fan
Registered User
 
Freaky Habs Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: New-Brunswick
Posts: 9,505
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FSU Seminoles View Post
You might think that I get it all wrong, but I think you get it all wrong too.

Perron played for a solid defensive team with little support on offense. He created most of Lewiston's offense. Production has to be factored in along side skills or abilities and attitude. He did great under pressure, be it Q playoffs and mem cup. IMO that's much more proven than an high school player. Is that as good as it gets, maybe not but to me it's about as good as it gets at the n'20 spot.

I think we're quick on cancer players from Quebec. Ribeiro was a cancer, Perron is a cancer. Calm down on cancer players, they're nowhere near that level.

No I don't know how good Fischer and Pacio will be. But I know how good Giroux and Perron are and I knew how good they were when they were drafted and right now the present is consitent with the past. Perron had a higher floor than Pacioretty and would be now the 3rd or 4th pointer on the Canadiens while Pacioretty hasn't score in 25 some games. Fischer is still very far off the NHL when we could have got Giroux and go after Kulikov at this year's draft and get a player who'd be as close as Fischer of the NHL.

I showed you in the stats that it's not true that high school players have higher ceilings. In fact, Q players have a higher ceiling. The Q is underscouted and they tend to get more points when they're in the NHL.

Gambles rarely pan out. I'd much rather have Giroux, Perron, and x "safer" pick on my team than get one player who's barely better than those guys and have 3 misses in the process.

In 1 quote he says he goes for best player available, in the other he says he goes for needs. So Giroux would be best player available and Kristo would be best player available and Fischer and Paquette would be need picks, so I don't see the consistency from year to year.
The point is still the same. Even if a player proved more in junior don't mean he'll be a better pro. One more time...the Locke exemple. he proved everything he had to prove in junior, and he's still in the AHL. Why did we picked Kostitsyn in the first round and not Locke? Kostitsyn hadn't proved much before the draft if you don't count the U18. They took Andrei because they knew he was gonna be a better pro player, which he is.

And you can't underestimate the importance of attitude in the game. IMO, a team full of Perron won't get you a Stanley Cup, but a team full of Pacioretty will. it's like the Rangers from the post cap era VS. the Flames in the past few years.

And I find it funny that you think Giroux and Perron were safe picks. Those players were gambles. One was small, and the other wasn't sure of translating everything to the NHL level, giving him bust potential...

And BTW, saying Perron would have been our 3rd leading scorer is irrelevant. Maybe he would have been in the AHL! Maybe on the 3rd line...you just don't know how he would have turned out in Montreal. Maybe he would have been our leading scorer too...but you just don't know.

Finaly, for the BPA VS. needs, I think 2006 was an exeption. We had to rebuild our farm, and we didn't had any D...from then, I think we're always going for BPA.

Freaky Habs Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 05:47 PM
  #92
Habsterix*
@Habsterix
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freaky Habs Fan View Post
The point is still the same. Even if a player proved more in junior don't mean he'll be a better pro. One more time...the Locke exemple. he proved everything he had to prove in junior, and he's still in the AHL. Why did we picked Kostitsyn in the first round and not Locke? Kostitsyn hadn't proved much before the draft if you don't count the U18. They took Andrei because they knew he was gonna be a better pro player, which he is.

And you can't underestimate the importance of attitude in the game. IMO, a team full of Perron won't get you a Stanley Cup, but a team full of Pacioretty will. it's like the Rangers from the post cap era VS. the Flames in the past few years.

And I find it funny that you think Giroux and Perron were safe picks. Those players were gambles. One was small, and the other wasn't sure of translating everything to the NHL level, giving him bust potential...

And BTW, saying Perron would have been our 3rd leading scorer is irrelevant. Maybe he would have been in the AHL! Maybe on the 3rd line...you just don't know how he would have turned out in Montreal. Maybe he would have been our leading scorer too...but you just don't know.

Finaly, for the BPA VS. needs, I think 2006 was an exeption. We had to rebuild our farm, and we didn't had any D...from then, I think we're always going for BPA.
I think that the point that FSU Seminoles was trying to make is how many prospects are "sure picks"? Very few. Sometimes, at similar talent, the Habs have the mandate to draft local players, more of a balance, that's all.

Habsterix* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 05:50 PM
  #93
Mathletic
Registered User
 
Mathletic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St-Augustin, Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freaky Habs Fan View Post
The point is still the same. Even if a player proved more in junior don't mean he'll be a better pro. One more time...the Locke exemple. he proved everything he had to prove in junior, and he's still in the AHL. Why did we picked Kostitsyn in the first round and not Locke? Kostitsyn hadn't proved much before the draft if you don't count the U18. They took Andrei because they knew he was gonna be a better pro player, which he is.

And you can't underestimate the importance of attitude in the game. IMO, a team full of Perron won't get you a Stanley Cup, but a team full of Pacioretty will. it's like the Rangers from the post cap era VS. the Flames in the past few years.

And I find it funny that you think Giroux and Perron were safe picks. Those players were gambles. One was small, and the other wasn't sure of translating everything to the NHL level, giving him bust potential...

And BTW, saying Perron would have been our 3rd leading scorer is irrelevant. Maybe he would have been in the AHL! Maybe on the 3rd line...you just don't know how he would have turned out in Montreal. Maybe he would have been our leading scorer too...but you just don't know.

Finaly, for the BPA VS. needs, I think 2006 was an exeption. We had to rebuild our farm, and we didn't had any D...from then, I think we're always going for BPA.
Locke didn't have the skills Perron had and most definetaly wasn't as responsible defensively. Perron had Jodoin as a coach and I would think is any scout's dream to have a player grow up in a defensive system like Jodoin's. If you wanted a comparable to Lock you could give me Gamache who was all offense, little of the rest, then I would have told you, no don't pick Gamache in the 1st round that's quite obvious. If you can get him late great, just like the Canadiens did with locke, take a shot, if it doesn't work too bad, but to compare Perron to Locke doesn't make sense to me.

Andrei had the skills and body that Locke didn't have.

Again, you can look for the perfect player at n'20 but you wont find him. Gosh, there were knocks on Mario Lemieux and a lot of people prefered Muller over him, so great if you want the perfect prospect but I doubt you'll find him, much less at n'20.

Maybe Fischer will have HIV next year and die the year after; of all probabilities, let's make sure we pick the worst of the bunch

Mathletic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 05:55 PM
  #94
Freaky Habs Fan
Registered User
 
Freaky Habs Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: New-Brunswick
Posts: 9,505
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asterix View Post
I think that the point that FSU Seminoles was trying to make is how many prospects are "sure picks"? Very few. Sometimes, at similar talent, the Habs have the mandate to draft local players, more of a balance, that's all.
But how can you know when the talent of two players are equal? You always like someone better than the other. For exemple, maybe Perron was close from Pacioretty on the Habs list, but one was a cocky player, and the other is a hard worker with good attitude. One can't be succesfull in a physical game and the other is made for it. There are always a few aspects that will make you take a player over the other...

Quote:
Originally Posted by FSU Seminoles View Post
Locke didn't have the skills Perron had and most definetaly wasn't as responsible defensively. Perron had Jodoin as a coach and I would think is any scout's dream to have a player grow up in a defensive system like Jodoin's. If you wanted a comparable to Lock you could give me Gamache who was all offense, little of the rest, then I would have told you, no don't pick Gamache in the 1st round that's quite obvious. If you can get him late great, just like the Canadiens did with locke, take a shot, if it doesn't work too bad, but to compare Perron to Locke doesn't make sense to me.

Andrei had the skills and body that Locke didn't have.

Again, you can look for the perfect player at n'20 but you wont find him. Gosh, there were knocks on Mario Lemieux and a lot of people prefered Muller over him, so great if you want the perfect prospect but I doubt you'll find him, much less at n'20.

Maybe Fischer will have HIV next year and die the year after; of all probabilities, let's make sure we pick the worst of the bunch
I was refering to what you said about proving yourself in junior...and I don't know if you are aware of this, but the Blues scouting staff did had many question marks about Perron. Their point was that they had 3 first round pick, and with his skill level, and in their situation, they couldn't pass over him. It was on Sportsnet in the draft all access or something like that...


Last edited by Habs10Habs: 03-31-2009 at 10:12 AM.
Freaky Habs Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 06:03 PM
  #95
WeThreeKings
DJ Nikita
 
WeThreeKings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,487
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to WeThreeKings
Anyone who would choose Perron over Pacioretty for this team is simple a francophone homer. If we had a team like Calgary's or Anaheim's, I'd consider Perron more, but since we're a team filled with under-performing small skilled players.. Max Pacioretty is an absolute stud.

WeThreeKings is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 06:13 PM
  #96
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 19,620
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asterix View Post
At equal talent, the Habs MUST draft French Canadians in my humble opinion as that's their market. We've passed on many of them over the years as shown by the list I've posted in this thread earlier today.
That's incorrect...French Canadians are a part of the Habs market, they do not represent their market as a whole.

417 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 06:16 PM
  #97
Mathletic
Registered User
 
Mathletic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St-Augustin, Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeThreeKings View Post
Anyone who would choose Perron over Pacioretty for this team is simple a francophone homer. If we had a team like Calgary's or Anaheim's, I'd consider Perron more, but since we're a team filled with under-performing small skilled players.. Max Pacioretty is an absolute stud.
again we're talking needs here. We select high school players for needs, don't you find that a bit incoherent? Everybody is acknowledging that high school players are farther from the NHL, yet we pick Fischer and Pacioretty for needs. Everybody tells me, best player on the board, yet I'm reading draft for needs lately to curve the drafting philosophy to the picks the Habs made.

Mathletic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 06:21 PM
  #98
Em Ancien
Sexy 2nd Rounder
 
Em Ancien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Mount Real Life
Posts: 8,881
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FSU Seminoles View Post
again we're talking needs here. We select high school players for needs, don't you find that a bit incoherent? Everybody is acknowledging that high school players are farther from the NHL, yet we pick Fischer and Pacioretty for needs. Everybody tells me, best player on the board, yet I'm reading draft for needs lately to curve the drafting philosophy to the picks the Habs made.
Pacman wasn't drafted for need.

He was the best player available. Doesn't mean the list is somewhat influenced by other factors than raw talent that we draft based on need.

Em Ancien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 06:25 PM
  #99
Mathletic
Registered User
 
Mathletic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St-Augustin, Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTLHabsAK46 View Post
Pacman wasn't drafted for need.

He was the best player available. Doesn't mean the list is somewhat influenced by other factors than raw talent that we draft based on need.
if it's not based on raw talent nor production what is it based on? I love players with great attitude like Chichura, but I'd rather have players who'll be on my team.

Btw, I'm all for Pacioretty and hope the best and I know I can't win since Perron is in St Louis to stay and we can't remake history, so it's worth what it's worth.

Mathletic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2009, 06:29 PM
  #100
Em Ancien
Sexy 2nd Rounder
 
Em Ancien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Mount Real Life
Posts: 8,881
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FSU Seminoles View Post
if it's not based on raw talent nor production what is it based on? I love players with great attitude like Chichura, but I'd rather have players who'll be on my team.

Btw, I'm all for Pacioretty and hope the best and I know I can't win since Perron is in St Louis to stay and we can't remake history, so it's worth what it's worth.
Attitude, style of play (how it will translate), physical attributes, work ethic, intangibles are all factors that should be considered in evluating a prospect.

Em Ancien 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 09:52 PM.

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.