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

2014 NHL Entry Draft Part 2

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-14-2014, 11:41 PM
  #101
Habsoil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Fort mac
Country: Canada
Posts: 391
vCash: 500
I'm liking Goldobin so far! Doubt he fits Timmins profile but here's to wishing!
GHG

Habsoil is offline  
Old
02-15-2014, 10:41 AM
  #102
Halifaxhab*
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuebecPride View Post
Eller was pretty small when he came in MTL. Some have to work harder to get stronger, but you can't write off a kid because he's small physically right now...

Giroux was pretty thin in 2006 too.
Size really isn't the only reason I would write him off fort our 1st pick this year. This is a weak draft, may as well use it to fill an organizational need. Skill with size (any position).

When Eller came to MTL he was about 195ish, and Giroux is still small (very skilled though). W

Halifaxhab* is offline  
Old
02-15-2014, 11:04 AM
  #103
QuebecPride
@Etienne_Pouliot
 
QuebecPride's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sherbrooke , Qc
Country: Martinique
Posts: 2,598
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halifaxhab View Post
Size really isn't the only reason I would write him off fort our 1st pick this year. This is a weak draft, may as well use it to fill an organizational need. Skill with size (any position).

When Eller came to MTL he was about 195ish, and Giroux is still small (very skilled though). W
I see you didn't get my point. Strenght can get worked on, not skill. Size is indeed important. Strength is too, but to a lesser extent because it can be improved over the years. Skill/hockey IQ cannot be improved as much if ever.

Look at a guy like Dauphin last year, he was frail as a baby deer. And he's still not very strong compared to other guys drafted before him, but he has outstanding understanding of the game. And I'd be willing to bet he will be a better player than a bunch of guys picked before him in 5 years.

QuebecPride is offline  
Old
02-15-2014, 11:52 AM
  #104
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 30,844
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by galchenyuktocollberg View Post
I bet money Vanier won't drop to the 4th
as of now I wouldn't be surprised if he is closer to late 3rd than early 2nd. Has wide swings in play, plus he is a late 1995.

Monctonscout is offline  
Old
02-15-2014, 12:03 PM
  #105
JAVO16
Registered User
 
JAVO16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Montréal
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,706
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halifaxhab View Post
Size really isn't the only reason I would write him off fort our 1st pick this year. This is a weak draft, may as well use it to fill an organizational need. Skill with size (any position).

When Eller came to MTL he was about 195ish, and Giroux is still small (very skilled though). W
The logic here doesn't work at all. This being a weak draft is more about the lack of depth beyond the second round than the lack of talent in the first round and a half.

JAVO16 is online now  
Old
02-15-2014, 12:41 PM
  #106
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 30,844
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAVO16 View Post
The logic here doesn't work at all. This being a weak draft is more about the lack of depth beyond the second round than the lack of talent in the first round and a half.
I don't buy the weak draft or strong draft logic. A team should still try and get good players wether it's a strong or weak draft. Obviously in weak years there is more work involved, but as we saw in 2007 with McDonagh Pacioretty and Subban, you can get excellent players in weaker years if you do it right. It won't always be like that but it's just to show that the "weak draft" thing is overblown.

Monctonscout is offline  
Old
02-15-2014, 01:05 PM
  #107
S Bah
Registered User
 
S Bah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: victoria bc
Country: Wales
Posts: 5,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monctonscout View Post
I don't buy the weak draft or strong draft logic. A team should still try and get good players wether it's a strong or weak draft. Obviously in weak years there is more work involved, but as we saw in 2007 with McDonagh Pacioretty and Subban, you can get excellent players in weaker years if you do it right. It won't always be like that but it's just to show that the "weak draft" thing is overblown.
When was the last time you looked at the players drafted in the 2007 draft? There were lots of NHL players drafted out of that year, 2006 perhaps is the year that was weak.

S Bah is offline  
Old
02-15-2014, 01:10 PM
  #108
Scriptor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 303
vCash: 500
Strong? Weak? It's all hindsight. Other than years with generational stars up for grabs, it's still just a lottery. Even then, you get years with players like Daigle who don't pan out, for whatever reason…

Some players are late bloomers and that can, quality-wise, transform a bad draft year down the line….

Assets are assets. Project well and pick the best you think you will have down the line….

Scriptor is offline  
Old
02-15-2014, 01:19 PM
  #109
Mathletic
Registered User
 
Mathletic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St-Augustin, Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,961
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scriptor View Post
Strong? Weak? It's all hindsight. Other than years with generational stars up for grabs, it's still just a lottery. Even then, you get years with players like Daigle who don't pan out, for whatever reason…

Some players are late bloomers and that can, quality-wise, transform a bad draft year down the line….

Assets are assets. Project well and pick the best you think you will have down the line….
that's what scouts are paid for

The idea is to assess the value of making that pick vs. what you can get for it otherwise (i.e. more picks or actual players). When saying this is a weak draft, this mean that the risk vs. reward of making that pick isn't worth the value of the pick IMO.

Mathletic is online now  
Old
02-15-2014, 01:35 PM
  #110
S Bah
Registered User
 
S Bah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: victoria bc
Country: Wales
Posts: 5,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathletic View Post
that's what scouts are paid for

The idea is to assess the value of making that pick vs. what you can get for it otherwise (i.e. more picks or actual players). When saying this is a weak draft, this mean that the risk vs. reward of making that pick isn't worth the value of the pick IMO.
That's called semantics, and doesn't change the fact it's a weak draft year. When draft choices are being traded like $20 bills instead of $1000's, it speaks to the quality of the players which for the sake of thousand word reports, people call them weak or strong drafts, simply put for briefness. Flogging a dead horse for the sweat isn't worth the wasted efforts, as is debating whether it's strong or weak, nothing is accomplished accept wasted effort.

S Bah is offline  
Old
02-15-2014, 04:26 PM
  #111
Halifaxhab*
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuebecPride View Post
I see you didn't get my point. Strenght can get worked on, not skill. Size is indeed important. Strength is too, but to a lesser extent because it can be improved over the years. Skill/hockey IQ cannot be improved as much if ever.

Look at a guy like Dauphin last year, he was frail as a baby deer. And he's still not very strong compared to other guys drafted before him, but he has outstanding understanding of the game. And I'd be willing to bet he will be a better player than a bunch of guys picked before him in 5 years.
I did get your point. I believe you missed mine. Being built like Leblanc is not good for strength. Yes Pastrnak will fill out but will be a player that can be easily outmuscled

And as with Dauphin, I am not arguing skill level, I am arguing the ability to put it into use as we would need. Granted, it would be better than many current wingers. But again, players like this take 4-5 years to become useful NHLers

Quote:
Originally Posted by JAVO16 View Post
The logic here doesn't work at all. This being a weak draft is more about the lack of depth beyond the second round than the lack of talent in the first round and a half.
The logic works just fine. Weak draft as in no real high end talent, even in the top 5 (they are sure NHLers but not possible perrenial Allstars). beyond that, no players are really stepping ahead of the others and it is more a year where teams draft based on organizational needs vs BPA necessarily.

Basically, a real lack of projectable top liners/pairing prospects. Just lots of 3rd linerf/pairing types some 2nd line/pairing. The top 5-7 are really the only ones with higher end potential.

Pretty weak class as projected.

Halifaxhab* is offline  
Old
02-15-2014, 04:30 PM
  #112
Kobe Armstrong
Registered User
 
Kobe Armstrong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 3,713
vCash: 300
The player I want the 4th/5th round is Kevin Laliberte. 6'2 defenseman from Quebec city

Kobe Armstrong is offline  
Old
02-15-2014, 06:08 PM
  #113
Frank JT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 145
vCash: 500
Let's face it. Barbashev, Pastrnak, and MCCann will probably won't be there when the Habs will choose with their first pick (probably between 16 to 26). I know, we can be suprised. The Habs can drop position, even not make the playoff this year. The evaluation of players can change too. And so many other factors.

Anyway, I would like the CH to try to find a player who fill a hole. We need so much help on the top 6, we need muscles and size, and we need talent to score on 5 on 5.
If we can get 3 choices between the 15th and the 50t choice, that would be good.

Frank JT is offline  
Old
02-16-2014, 03:07 AM
  #114
S Bah
Registered User
 
S Bah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: victoria bc
Country: Wales
Posts: 5,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank JT View Post
Let's face it. Barbashev, Pastrnak, and MCCann will probably won't be there when the Habs will choose with their first pick (probably between 16 to 26). I know, we can be suprised. The Habs can drop position, even not make the playoff this year. The evaluation of players can change too. And so many other factors.

Anyway, I would like the CH to try to find a player who fill a hole. We need so much help on the top 6, we need muscles and size, and we need talent to score on 5 on 5.
If we can get 3 choices between the 15th and the 50t choice, that would be good.
The Habs really should be trying to draft a center replacement for Plekanec (4-5yrs) even if they need to package their 1st & 2nd and a prospect, to position themselves for McCann or Barbashev. Both are very similar two-way players to Tomas and he will not be easily replaced, certainly not by a trade, that's one reason the Habs should try to gain a couple of late 1st's or early 2nd's. Another being they may find themselves wanting by the time the draft comes and not be able to trade for picks then.

I would really be pleased to see them have a couple of 1st rd. picks for once, since the last time Gainey traded away McDonagh for peanuts and payback for Kovalev. Truly getting say McCann and Tuch would be great in the 1st and Chatham in the late 2nd, "Smokin Hot".

S Bah is offline  
Old
02-16-2014, 05:39 AM
  #115
DekeLikeYouMeanIt
Ohhhh you mad
 
DekeLikeYouMeanIt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: In space..with goats
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,434
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank JT View Post
Let's face it. Barbashev, Pastrnak, and MCCann will probably won't be there...
No guarantee except for McCann. Barba is Russian and Pastrnak isn't that big and he just got a concussion so we know how these factors play into sliding players.

DekeLikeYouMeanIt is online now  
Old
02-16-2014, 09:24 AM
  #116
Frank JT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 145
vCash: 500
I totally agree with you S Bah. I would love for more 1rst round picks too. The problem is that the team is in the series at this point. The period limit for trades is the 5th of march. The team have 7 points in advance from the 9th position, with 4 games to go. It's almost impossible that the Habs will be out of the series buy then.
In conclusion, Bergevin will not sacrifice this season in this position. In Montréal, Impossible.

The only thing i see, is if Markov doesn't collaborate enough for his next contract before the 5 march. Bergevin could decide to try to trade him for young players and/or future considerations. But it would be really suprising to see that. I hope so.

Frank JT is offline  
Old
02-16-2014, 09:38 AM
  #117
S Bah
Registered User
 
S Bah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: victoria bc
Country: Wales
Posts: 5,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank JT View Post
I totally agree with you S Bah. I would love for more 1rst round picks too. The problem is that the team is in the series at this point. The period limit for trades is the 5th of march. The team have 7 points in advance from the 9th position, with 4 games to go. It's almost impossible that the Habs will be out of the series buy then.
In conclusion, Bergevin will not sacrifice this season in this position. In Montréal, Impossible.

The only thing i see, is if Markov doesn't collaborate enough for his next contract before the 5 march. Bergevin could decide to try to trade him for young players and/or future considerations. But it would be really suprising to see that. I hope so.
Hard choices for Bergevin, but if he moves Markov, the return better be Connor McDavid or people will be calling for a beheading here. Even though everyone knows the Habs can't win the SC with the present team, if LA wins with Markov, fans will be saying if we had kept Markov............


Last edited by S Bah: 02-16-2014 at 09:49 AM.
S Bah is offline  
Old
02-16-2014, 09:40 AM
  #118
That
Registered User
 
That's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,965
vCash: 500
Andrew Mangiapane could be an interesting mid-round pick. Mangiapane co-leads all OHL rookies with 20 goals and is third in rookie points with 42. He's only listed 5'10" 160lbs, but he plays way bigger. He cuts wide and drives to the net all the time, and usually he makes it there. It doesn't matter where he is in the offensive zone, he's always trying to get close to the net. He made one play last night that epitomizes his style. He set up shop behind the net, and then waited a bit. As soon as he saw an opening he stickhandled and willed his way through two defenders and cut to the front of the net where he could shoot. He also doesn't pass up the opportunity to hit either.

On top of his intensity, Mangiapane also brings terrific hockey sense. Plays a very smart game and has an incredibly ability to pick off passes. Not the most flashy player, but he's got great hands and good shooting ability. Skating is probably the weak link in his skill set. Not the fastest skater and his first few steps need work.

Mangiapane wasn't drafted into the OHL and made the Colts out of training camp this past season. After a slow start, he's become a consistent contributor and one the biggest reasons for the Colts success. His tenacity and skill have landed him time on the Colts top line, where he's elevated his play even further.

That is offline  
Old
02-16-2014, 10:11 AM
  #119
JAVO16
Registered User
 
JAVO16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Montréal
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,706
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halifaxhab View Post
I did get your point. I believe you missed mine. Being built like Leblanc is not good for strength. Yes Pastrnak will fill out but will be a player that can be easily outmuscled

And as with Dauphin, I am not arguing skill level, I am arguing the ability to put it into use as we would need. Granted, it would be better than many current wingers. But again, players like this take 4-5 years to become useful NHLers
How do you know he's built like Leblanc though ? Have you seen a picture of him at the beach ? Do you know about other people in his family remaining skinny throughout their lives ? Some guys mature later and don't have the ability to put on a lot of muscle when they are 17 years old.

Also, I value hockey sense above size 10 times out of 10. A small guy with good hockey sense won't put himself in situations where he needs to outmuscle the guy he's battling to make plays whereas a big guy with bad hockey sense might be able to outmuscle the previous dude but won't be able to put himself in a situation to do so consistently.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Halifaxhab View Post
The logic works just fine. Weak draft as in no real high end talent, even in the top 5 (they are sure NHLers but not possible perrenial Allstars). beyond that, no players are really stepping ahead of the others and it is more a year where teams draft based on organizational needs vs BPA necessarily.

Basically, a real lack of projectable top liners/pairing prospects. Just lots of 3rd linerf/pairing types some 2nd line/pairing. The top 5-7 are really the only ones with higher end potential.

Pretty weak class as projected.
It's the scout's work to be able to evaluate and separate the players based on their talent and projectability. A hockey team with bad scouting department would have your reasoning: "Based on our sub-par scouting work, none of them is much better than the other guys, let's take the defenseman or the powerfoward !!"

Personally, I like this draft and I think there's a lot of interesting talent.


Also, can someone please explain to me why people still talk about drafting for needs when most guys drafted won't make the team for 3+ years (if they make it) and nobody knows how the team will look like in 3 years (go look at the roster prediction threads we've had). I get that it's possible to draft for need when you have a top pick in a year like 2013 where you've got the chance to add a MacKinnon/Jones/Barkov that can have an immediate impact on your roster and fill a hole immediately. But drafting for need with a lower pick makes no sense IMO. You take the guy that has the best chance of reaching the NHL. Now, if a potential powerforward has close to the same chance of reaching the NHL, I get that it makes sense to roll the dice on that guy. But there's always a slew of other factors in play and I guess that it's pretty rare that the choice ever comes down to size between two guys. Drafting a guy with size like McCarron to me isn't about filling a hole in the future, but rolling the dice on a possible powerforward which are always in need on every team in the same way that drafting a highly skilled winger or center that makes an impact at the NHL level is always a need no matter where you draft.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DekeLikeYouMeanIt View Post
No guarantee except for McCann. Barba is Russian and Pastrnak isn't that big and he just got a concussion so we know how these factors play into sliding players.
Isn't he out because of a back injury (not a concussion as previously thought because of that hit) ?


Last edited by JAVO16: 02-16-2014 at 10:29 AM.
JAVO16 is online now  
Old
02-16-2014, 10:35 AM
  #120
Halifaxhab*
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAVO16 View Post
Can someone please explain to me why people still talk about drafting for needs when most guys drafted won't make the team for 3+ years (if they make it) and nobody knows how the team will look like in 3 years (go look at the roster prediction threads we've had). I get that it's possible to draft for need when you have a top pick in a year like 2013 where you've got the chance to add a MacKinnon/Jones/Barkov that can have an immediate impact on your roster and fill a hole immediately. But drafting for need with a lower pick makes no sense IMO. You take the guy that has the best chance of reaching the NHL. Now, if a potential powerforward has close to the same chance of reaching the NHL, I get that it makes sense to roll the dice on that guy. But there's always a slew of other factors in play and I guess that it's pretty rare that the choice evper comes down to size between two guys. Drafting a guy with size like McCarron to me isn't about filling a hole in the future, but rolling the dice on a possible powerforward which are always in need on every team in the same way that drafting a highly skilled winger or center that makes an impact at the NHL level is always a need no matter where you draft.



Isn't he out because of a back injury (not a concussion as previously thought because of that hit) ?
Draft for organizational need. The system has lots of 2-way D....draft get a shutdown D. Got lots of C? Try and get some wingers. Got tons of small talented fwds, add a big possible pwf.

McCarron's selection (and DLR's) was about adding some players with aggressive styles that have the size to back it up. Why pick that type? Well, because even 3-4 years from now, getting players like that via trade or UFA would be crazy expensive. So, draft some and devellop them. Even Fucale's selection was about system need. We had no real quality G prospects in our system, now we do. Timmins has a knack at getting quality players a little later in the draft by selecting players overlooked due to their size, Gallagher,Lehkonen and Andrighetto are good examples of that. But players like that need big bodies that can keep up to support them. Those types are the hardest to get, and the Draft is really the best place to find them.

And if the kind of players drafted, devellop well, and are redundant, they can be used as trade bait to fill other holes.



And to your edit....how do you know he isn't the same build as Leblanc? I am simply comparing based on my opinion....same as you. But he is 6ft and very underweight....just as Leblanc was....hense the comparison. But you caught me, I've been in the bushes watching his family at night.

And now my opinion is that of a bad scout huh? Show me your credentials that makes your opinion so much better than my own?

You see it differently than I do, great. If your opinion works out giving Mtl a better team....awesome. but I disagree with you.


Last edited by Halifaxhab*: 02-16-2014 at 11:11 AM.
Halifaxhab* is offline  
Old
02-16-2014, 12:31 PM
  #121
Mathletic
Registered User
 
Mathletic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St-Augustin, Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,961
vCash: 500
ISS' rankings for February

http://www.isshockey.com/

Mathletic is online now  
Old
02-16-2014, 01:01 PM
  #122
Draft
Registered User
 
Draft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,019
vCash: 500
Kapanen
Ehlers
Ho-Sang
Dal Colle
Nylander
Scherbak
Goldobin

That's a lot of purely skill-based players.

Draft is offline  
Old
02-16-2014, 06:27 PM
  #123
Frank JT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 145
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by S Bah View Post
Hard choices for Bergevin, but if he moves Markov, the return better be Connor McDavid or people will be calling for a beheading here. Even though everyone knows the Habs can't win the SC with the present team, if LA wins with Markov, fans will be saying if we had kept Markov............
Yes, that would be a difficult move to do for Bergevin. That need a lot of balls. But taking the chance of losing Markov for nothing, or paying too much to keep him, are two really bad scenarios for the GM too. We cannot afford to lose a player like Markov for nothing.

I agree, he need to receive something in return (ex.: a young player who fill a hole, and some draft choices). I would hate a bad contract. Markov is good, but won't be good for long. We need to rebuilt. I think that a lot of fans would understand.

Frank JT is offline  
Old
02-16-2014, 09:42 PM
  #124
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 30,844
vCash: 500
http://www.lhjmq.qc.ca/roster/show/id/8607

This guy would be a nice pick up in the mid to late rounds. Smart, well rounded player.

Monctonscout is offline  
Old
02-16-2014, 11:50 PM
  #125
Scoremore
Registered User
 
Scoremore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Country: Canada
Posts: 18
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monctonscout View Post
http://www.lhjmq.qc.ca/roster/show/id/8607

This guy would be a nice pick up in the mid to late rounds. Smart, well rounded player.
Interesting. I'm intrigued by Cameron Darcy's stats. Is he skilled player? Does he have an NHL comparable?

Scoremore is offline  
Closed Thread

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 10:45 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.