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

Rating the Habs' Drafts 2000-2005

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-13-2006, 11:22 AM
  #1
plafleur10
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 736
vCash: 500
Rating the Habs' Drafts 2000-2005

I thought the draft evaluation thread for 2000-2005 was such a good idea that I thought one ranking the Habs’ results so far would also be interesting.

The 2000-2005 draft period presented very good opportunities, as they twice had two picks in the first round (thank you Rejean Houle) and had very good picks early in the first round due to poor play the year before or luck of the draw (2005). In fact, the Habs had three top 10 picks in this period, which is unusual for them, as they had not drafted in the top 10 since 1995 (the Terry Ryan fiasco) and 1984 (certainly their best draft in the last 25 years, landing Svoboda, Corson, Richer and Patrick Roy and setting the atble for 2 Satnley Cups in 1986 and 1993).

So, with all these early picks, Habs’ fans had reason to set their expectations high and here how the results look now.

Yes, the draft is a crapshoot, but you have to hit a homerun when you get early picks to grow as an NHL team, this is how you win Stanley Cups, not just with trades and UFA signings, look at how great the Mighty Ducks are doing with their young stars leading them to the Final 4 this year.

That’s why a draft has to be evaluated both in terms of the players it landed, but in trms of the opportunities it presented.

2000: 2/10

Despite 2 first round picks relatively early at #13 and 16, a total disaster, on which Bob Gainey put the finishing touch this year...

Give it two points because Hossa landed us a good plumber in Garth Murray and because Balej AND a 2nd rounder landed soon-to-be-UFA-at-the-time Kovalev, who ended up resigning with Habs.

2001: 9/10

Without question our best draft in the period, landing a solid and big D in Komi, a small but speedy and shfty forward in Perezhoghin and a very effective 3rd center in Plekanec, although both forwards are in the small mold that has plagued Habs for some time now.

Andrew Archer might also provide an effective surprise from the last rounds.


2002: 8/10

Chris Higgins was definitely and clearly the best player available when Habs spoke at #14, a very clever move by Andre Savard to move up one spot to get him, a great mid-1st round pick.

The rest of the draft was however disappointing, 2nd rounder Linhart appears set to spend his career in Europe and Ferland and Lambert are very fringe prospects at best.

So the 8 points are for Higgins.

2003: 6/10

A very deep draft, a top 10 pick, two 2nd rounders, Habs’ fans were full of anticipation!

So far, while the Habs did not come up completely empty, it looks like the big opportunity was missed.

Kostsysnin will end up in the NHL, he has a great shot, but so far he has been outclassed by several players drafted after him, the sad part being that several of these players have the size AND skill package that the Habs have been so cruelly lacking for 25 years. Even Trevor Timmins has admitted that he is not the game breaker he was thought to be and that he will earn his shooting opportunities and goals not by stick handling through opponents, but by hard-working his way into scoring chances.

How about Jeff Carter (big center, 23 NHL goals this year), Steve Bernier (huge homegrown RW with 20 gaols in the AHL and then 14 in 39 NHL games this year) and Ryan Geztlaf (6’4” center looking soooo good with Ducks in playoffs after 8 goals in AHL and 14 in NHL this year) and Cory Perry, with 16 goals in AHL and 13 in NHL this year.

And let’s not forget Dustin Brown with 14 goals in LA, Zach Parise with 14 goals in NJ and evn late 1st rounder Patrick Eaves scoring 20 goals with ever opportunistic Ottawa hitting a homerun again late in the 1st round.

After missing their chance in the 1st round, Habs then went into that let’s save travelling costs and draft in our backyard funk by going after 2 Montreal Rockets player, Urquart early and Lapierre later.

Well, Urquart has been a big bust so far, not even able to make the AHL on a regular basis, while Lapierre will be a 3rd or 4th liner in the NHL, so the 2nd round is close to a total bust, when you add that one Patrice Bergeron slipped a couple of picks past Urquart.

The saving grace for that draft is that Habs might salvage something out of the later rounds, such as 2 goalies (Halak and heino-Lindbergh), 2 Defensemen (Korpikari and O’Byrne) and some depth forwards (Locke and Bonneau).

But overall, a huge missed opportunity!

2004: 7/10

A conservative à la Gainey draft, nothing spectacular, but looks like it will prove effective.

Chipchura is a leader and competent guy, probably a 3rd liner however, the one that hurts is Wolski with Avs, he was expected to be in the top 5 or 10, then minor legal troubles scared teams away, including the Habs, and made him a steal at #20….would have been nice to see the Habs show some gamesmanship and go after this guy.

Ottawa AGAIN found a way to hit a late 1st round gem with Meszaros who already has 82 NHL games under his belt.

Yemelin looks like a very good 3rd round pick, Wyman has been slow to develop but improving each year, Grabovsky could be a small yet very talented late-round gem and Gleed and Greg Stewart (will be nice to see him in Memorial Cup) provide depth.



2005: 7/10


Count me in as one of those who hated and still hate the #5 overall pick of Carey Price, which is why I give this draft 7/10. While I hated this pick the second it was made, Price’s 05-06 season has done nothing to reassure Habs’ fans.

The Habs needed a big defenseman and two of them were right in their face, Bourdon and Staal. They could even have traded down five spots, received value in return, and still have picked one of these two guys at # 10 to 12, and filled a glaring need!

Fortunately, Habs made up in the 2nd round by maybe landing the steal of the draft with Latendresse. Let’s now hope they handle him properly, I was one of those thinking that they should have shown some gamesmanship again by keeping him, he had earned his spot in my view and added another dimension to the team with his size and sense for the dramatic, instead of taking the usual conservative approach. This is sport, not the corporate world, and you have to take some risk to get ahead!

The late rounds also look like the most promising of the 2000-2006 class. While 3rd pick Mikus seems to have stalled this year, Aubin, D’Agostini and younger Kostsysnin all have had breakthrough seasons and will be interesting to follow.

So, what’s your evaluation?

plafleur10 is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 11:33 AM
  #2
AH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Woodbridge, ON
Country: Pakistan
Posts: 4,878
vCash: 500
Dont' have one since half those years can't be evaluated yet...

What's the point anyways. You can't lob 2000 into the evaluation since a completely different management team was in charge come the 2001 draft. That's like blaming Houle for the mess that Serge Savard made.

You don't make sense.

AH is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 11:39 AM
  #3
sXe
Yuuuuuup!
 
sXe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 3,735
vCash: 500
Nice thread idea. It's still a bit early for the latter drafts though.

Also, do you really base how good a draft was by who we didn't pick?

sXe is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 11:41 AM
  #4
FrankMTL
Registered User
 
FrankMTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,794
vCash: 500
Very good work! i would have prefered Meszaros to Wolski when we Picked Chipchura as i think he will be a force in this league....

I agree with you, 2000 draft was a total disaster...

2001 was very good with three regular NHL players coming out of it

2002 was disapointing besides Higgins...Ferland might become a decent 3-4 liner

2003 I think had some decent talent, Kostitsyn, Lapierre, O`Byrne and Halak should all become NHL regulars. Locke and Heino-Lindberg have an outside shot.

2004 Was alright as well. Looked kinda iffy before this year with only Chipchura looking good. Now with Emelin and Grabovsky`s breakout years this draft looks MUCH BETTER. These two guys are dark horses and might be able to do some great things in this league. Streit and Stewart will be depth NHLers at best.

2005 I actually think 2005 has the best potential out of the bunch...time will tell. Price has the potential to be a star in this league. Latendresse was the power forward we were looking for. S. Kostitsyn and M. Aubin came out of nowhere and blew us away. D`Agostini was one of the scoring leaders in the OHL playoffs. Paquet was playing good for his university at the end of the year. Mikus had the potential to be a huge steal for us...but he disapointed me this year...he has a lot of time to rebound.

FrankMTL is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 11:49 AM
  #5
CareyClutch
Doing the job
 
CareyClutch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: North Korea
Posts: 4,943
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to CareyClutch
good read and good work

2000- totally agree.bust all the way

2001-look great so far( even im not sold on perezhogin)

2002-nothing to say

2003- very bad draft IMHO (specially when u see who was still available when we pick kots)

2004-we miss wolski..enough said

2005- too early..

CareyClutch is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 12:21 PM
  #6
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason allison'fans
good read and good work

2000- totally agree.bust all the way

2001-look great so far( even im not sold on perezhogin)

2002-nothing to say

2003- very bad draft IMHO (specially when u see who was still available when we pick kots)

2004-we miss wolski..enough said

2005- too early..
Perezhogin has made it to the NHL and it's much too early to say he won't be a regular (and by that I don't mean a fourth-liner). He looked good initially on a line with Koivu and Kovalev, looked like a fish out of water with Ribeiro (toxic to his left wings all season long) and Kovalev, and formed an impressive up-tempo line with Plekanec and Zednik in the playoffs.

Let's see what happens with Kotsitsyn. Despite his disappointing seasons in the AHL he didn't look bad in his cameo appearance with the Habs. He seems to be a slow developer but he hasn't peaked yet.

I don't see a tremendous upside in Chipchura, who IMO doesn't seem to be suitable for the first or second line because he's neither a sniper nor a great skater. I, too, would have gone with Meszaros on draft day, and I didn't have to wait until this season to make up my mind about him.

I'll go against the grain and say I'm more optimistic about Price than I am about Latendresse. There's something fishy about his still being available with the 45th pick. I hope he acknowledges his shortcomings and works hard at honing his assets.

Teufelsdreck is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 12:24 PM
  #7
katodelder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 653
vCash: 500
The Habs drafts from 2000-2005 have been mediocre at best, a step up from the 90's which were horrible.

mediocre draft = mediocre team, which is what the Habs are right now

katodelder is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 12:24 PM
  #8
Freaky Habs Fan
Registered User
 
Freaky Habs Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: New-Brunswick
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by plafleur10
Even Trevor Timmins has admitted that he is not the game breaker he was thought to be and that he will earn his shooting opportunities and goals not by stick handling through opponents, but by hard-working his way into scoring chances.
The fist part of that statement isn't true from what I remember...I know where you took that Timmins's quote and from what I remember, he was only saying that Kostitsyn is strong as a horse and he can go in front of the net. But just look at him, he DO has the skills to beat a defenceman one on one. I still like that pick because when he was in Montreal, he was really one of our best player. And on draft day, many teams, like the Rangers, were saying that we made a great pick...

And IMO, if we can get one good player in each draft, we will be able to say that those draft were a success!

2000 - 0 good player (but the draft was held by Houle)
2001 - 3 good players
2002 - 1 good player
2003 - 6 potential good player...we will at least have one good player of them
2004 - 3 potential good players
2005 - every pick were good

Bottom line, every draft under Savard and Timmins look good right now. Do we made some mistakes? Yeah, of course. Are we the only team? Hell no...each years, every team will pass on a star, but what can they do? That why I have so say shut up with the: we should have took Bergeron, or Carter, or Getzlaf or him..............

Freaky Habs Fan is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 12:39 PM
  #9
sXe
Yuuuuuup!
 
sXe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 3,735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by katodelder
The Habs drafts from 2000-2005 have been mediocre at best, a step up from the 90's which were horrible.

mediocre draft = mediocre team, which is what the Habs are right now

Strangely our prospects pool is ranked among the top 5 of all NHL team. You obviouskly don't know what you are talking about.

sXe is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 12:41 PM
  #10
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,874
vCash: 500
The outright flops of first or second rounders in the period 2001-2003 seem to be Urquhart, Linhart, and Milroy. Komisarek, Perezhogin, Higgins, Kostitsyn, and Lapierre have each played at least one game with the Habs and can be expected to be seen in the future. It's premature to judge the 2004 and 2005 drafts.


Last edited by Teufelsdreck: 05-13-2006 at 12:47 PM.
Teufelsdreck is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 12:47 PM
  #11
CH Wizard
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: preparin for 09 cup
Country: Afghanistan
Posts: 11,690
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to CH Wizard
well, habs 2003 draft doesn't look as good as before

2000 was crap, 2001 was good, 2002 was ok, 2003 was so so, 2004 looks ok. Too early to judge 2005

If habs can't rebuild by drafting, they should sigh a rfa...

CH Wizard is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 12:50 PM
  #12
Freaky Habs Fan
Registered User
 
Freaky Habs Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: New-Brunswick
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Great One
well, habs 2003 draft doesn't look as good as before

2000 was crap, 2001 was good, 2002 was ok, 2003 was so so, 2004 looks ok. Too early to judge 2005

If habs can't rebuild by drafting, they should sigh a rfa...
I have to agree on that, but it's still far from a bad draft...the thing with the 2003 draft is that we have so many project that we will not be able to know if it was a good draft for another 5 years...

Freaky Habs Fan is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 01:05 PM
  #13
HabsBaby18*
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Brossard
Posts: 1,132
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by katodelder
The Habs drafts from 2000-2005 have been mediocre at best, a step up from the 90's which were horrible.

mediocre draft = mediocre team, which is what the Habs are right now
bat try at trying to piss people off, it's so obvious thats your attempt ... lolll

HabsBaby18* is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 01:36 PM
  #14
toshiro
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Western Canuckland
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,951
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to toshiro
The habs showed gamemanship in choosing Kots. Give him some time.


Last edited by montreal: 05-13-2006 at 07:44 PM.
toshiro is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 01:40 PM
  #15
toshiro
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Western Canuckland
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,951
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to toshiro
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freaky Habs Fan
The fist part of that statement isn't true from what I remember...I know where you took that Timmins's quote and from what I remember, he was only saying that Kostitsyn is strong as a horse and he can go in front of the net. But just look at him, he DO has the skills to beat a defenceman one on one. I still like that pick because when he was in Montreal, he was really one of our best player. And on draft day, many teams, like the Rangers, were saying that we made a great pick...

And IMO, if we can get one good player in each draft, we will be able to say that those draft were a success!

2000 - 0 good player (but the draft was held by Houle)
2001 - 3 good players
2002 - 1 good player
2003 - 6 potential good player...we will at least have one good player of them
2004 - 3 potential good players
2005 - every pick were good

Bottom line, every draft under Savard and Timmins look good right now. Do we made some mistakes? Yeah, of course. Are we the only team? Hell no...each years, every team will pass on a star, but what can they do? That why I have so say shut up with the: we should have took Bergeron, or Carter, or Getzlaf or him..............
Kots is a shooter with skills

toshiro is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 01:53 PM
  #16
Freaky Habs Fan
Registered User
 
Freaky Habs Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: New-Brunswick
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by toshiro
Kots is a shooter with skills
Yeah...if he can become a more constant player, he will be a star...he's really looking like Kovalev in some ways:

Great shot
Big and strong
Good speed
Good vision
Great set of skills

Now he will not become another Kovalev because even if they are similar, Kovalev is more skilled. But if we considere that Kovy is top 5 in the league skillwise, Kostitsyn can become a pretty valuable player for us...

And if Ryder can score 30 goals without doing anything, I see no reason for Kost to not at least be able to score 20 goals by doing something...

Freaky Habs Fan is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 02:28 PM
  #17
toshiro
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Western Canuckland
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,951
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to toshiro
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freaky Habs Fan
Yeah...if he can become a more constant player, he will be a star...he's really looking like Kovalev in some ways:

Great shot
Big and strong
Good speed
Good vision
Great set of skills

Now he will not become another Kovalev because even if they are similar, Kovalev is more skilled. But if we considere that Kovy is top 5 in the league skillwise, Kostitsyn can become a pretty valuable player for us...

And if Ryder can score 30 goals without doing anything, I see no reason for Kost to not at least be able to score 20 goals by doing something...
Kovalev plays like a creative center with a wicked shot. There are few like him. Kots will be more of a shooter with good skills eg Bondra

toshiro is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 02:59 PM
  #18
tinyzombies
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Calif via Montreal
Posts: 11,586
vCash: 500
Great read. I'm also a little disappointed in all the Andre Savard midget clones. I hope some of them turn out at least. Now we get the Gainey third liners and muckers. And a GOALIE at #5, good god. Seems like GMs always draft in their own likeness. Maybe we should make Guy Lafleur the GM in that case.

tinyzombies is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 03:28 PM
  #19
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by raketheleaves
Great read. I'm also a little disappointed in all the Andre Savard midget clones. I hope some of them turn out at least. Now we get the Gainey third liners and muckers. And a GOALIE at #5, good god. Seems like GMs always draft in their own likeness. Maybe we should make Guy Lafleur the GM in that case.
Komisarek and Kostitsyn are midget clones? Higgins, Perezhogin, and Plekanec didn't make the team despite being midget clones? And Price is neither a mucker, a midget, or a clone. (I suppose you would also have complained that Brulé was a midget clone.)

Teufelsdreck is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 03:31 PM
  #20
tinyzombies
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Calif via Montreal
Posts: 11,586
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck
Komisarek and Kostitsyn are midget clones? Higgins, Perezhogin, and Plekanec didn't make the team despite being midget clones? And Price is neither a mucker, a midget, or a clone. (I suppose you would also have complained that Brulé was a midget clone.)
They are figurative midgets. Small in stature or in frame who don't like the physical stuff. That's EXACTLY the type of player Andre Savard was. Coincidence?

Komisarek is like drafting Larry Robinson to protect you. It's a symptom of the same malady. Ironically, he passed up on a couple more talented Euros.

It's almost Freudian.

If we ever do win a Cup again, you can bet it won't be with all these little guys in the lineup.

tinyzombies is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 03:36 PM
  #21
sXe
Yuuuuuup!
 
sXe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 3,735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by raketheleaves
Komisarek is like drafting Larry Robinson to protect you. It's a symptom of the same malady. Ironically, he passed up on a couple more talented Euros.

I don't think you fully grasp the irony of this statement.
Maybe you could explain the Komi comment also, not sure I get it.

sXe is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 03:38 PM
  #22
tinyzombies
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Calif via Montreal
Posts: 11,586
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sXe
I don't think you fully grasp the irony of this statement.
Maybe you could explain the Komi comment also, not sure I get it.
Well, it comes down empathizing with the midget. What does the midget want? He wants a BIG friend who can protect him so they don't start throwing him around the bar.

tinyzombies is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 03:38 PM
  #23
Habsaku
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 5,554
vCash: 500
I like the recent habs drafts, they are some of the best in the league. All of our 1st rounders are making progress every year and we have some late round guys who look like they'll be gems: Lapierre, O'Byrne, Plekanec, Latendresse Halak(dominating to say the least), Grabovsky(havent seen him, but posters from other teams say we have a gem) and my personal favorite Emelin. All in all, I think that in five years, most people will come back and admit we didnt nearly do as bad as some might think. In fact, I'm willing to bet most will say we did great.

Habsaku is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 03:48 PM
  #24
tinyzombies
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Calif via Montreal
Posts: 11,586
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sXe
I don't think you fully grasp the irony of this statement.
Maybe you could explain the Komi comment also, not sure I get it.
You're a pretty selective reader. I'll sum it up my belief for you: old, wimpy, passive Euros (NO), younger, more North American oriented Euros, prefereably with size (YES). To be Euro is not to be a race. To be Euro is to be trained on large European rinks to play a passive containment game with zero physicality. North American hockey is played along the boards and in front of the net.

To win in North America, you have to win one-on-one battles against big, strong players.

To win in Europe, you have to play a disciplined, conservative soccer-style containment defense and wait for a mistake. I usually fall asleep, so I don't know what happens when that mistake happens. Probably a triple-sow-cow and a "10" from the judge.

tinyzombies is offline  
Old
05-13-2006, 03:50 PM
  #25
sXe
Yuuuuuup!
 
sXe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 3,735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by raketheleaves
Well, it comes down empathizing with the midget. What does the midget want? He wants a BIG friend who can protect him so they don't start throwing him around the bar.
I bet you miss the Houle era. « Let's draft Chouinard, that Gagné kid is a midget»
I'm sure you applauded the Bonk trade also because he's "big" and that's all that matters right?
Typical Rejean Houle thinking.

sXe 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 12:00 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.