|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jun 22, 2003 14:53:16 GMT -5
...who everyone seems satisfied with, who do you consider to be the second best prospect from the list above, and why?
I know it's at least a couple of years too early for this exercise, but what the heck.
Apologies to any Bonneau and/or Korpikari fanatics out there. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by The Edge on Jun 22, 2003 14:58:48 GMT -5
Can Locke play on the wing?
|
|
|
|
Post by mic on Jun 22, 2003 15:03:31 GMT -5
...who everyone seems satisfied with, who do you consider to be the second best prospect from the list above, and why? I know it's at least a couple of years too early for this exercise, but what the heck. Apologies to any Bonneau and/or Korpikari fanatics out there. ;D I really like what I heard about Lapierre. If he can be a player à la Madden, it would definitly be a good pick. A two way player with size, good work ethic is always useful in a team. The "shadow"players that do the dirty work, espessially during the play-offs. Now, his stats are quite low (50 pts out of 70 games ?) but I wouldn't put too much emphasis on that. Those players will score when the team need them, not empty netters in the first game of the season. Of course, Locke is a gamble which can turn out to be a steal for us. However, a not very good skater at 5'7'' is really a gamble. I won't regret that pick, but I prefer Lapierre who can provide some solid hockey. Michaël |
|
|
|
Post by Patty Roy on Jun 22, 2003 15:03:32 GMT -5
I think that at this point Lapierre is probably the 2nd best prospect we got this weekend.
Certainly Urquhart and Locke have more upside, but i think Lapierre is the more solid prospect at this stage.
|
|
|
|
Post by GoMtl on Jun 22, 2003 15:05:14 GMT -5
I like Locke, his numbers are just too good... If he's got the heart, then he'll make it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Habsolution on Jun 22, 2003 15:14:39 GMT -5
Urquhart for his clutchness in last playoffs.
|
|
|
|
Post by blaise on Jun 22, 2003 16:24:07 GMT -5
If Lapierre is the second best draftee, why was he taken so low? Was it because Savard felt comfortable that he would still be available whereas Urquhart was sure to be gone? Or is this just a hunch based on other people's perceptions? I think it's way premature to draw even preliminary conclusions until these players show up in training camp. Even then it would be rash to predict their ultimate position in the organization. For example, who would have thought that Michael Ryder merited a serious look until now?
|
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Jun 22, 2003 16:26:02 GMT -5
Big Ryan O'Byrne is my vote..followed closely by Lockster.
I really like what I am reading on Oby sounds like a hidden gem that will be exposed next year in USA college hockey
as for Lockster, such talent is too good to pass up on where we picked him...although I am not as optimistic about him as my friend Matt is ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by BillPickles on Jun 22, 2003 17:08:23 GMT -5
Locke rockes, but Urquhart may be something special after coming on very strong in the playoffs. I can't help but think of how Zednik dominated a few games against the Bruins in the playoffs, hmm...
|
|
|
|
Post by StickHandler on Jun 22, 2003 17:18:26 GMT -5
I choose Urquhart. Besides, why would they pick the 2nd best prospect anywhere but the second pick?
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jun 22, 2003 17:41:35 GMT -5
I choose Urquhart. Besides, why would they pick the 2nd best prospect anywhere but the second pick? I see you're a company man.  My hunch is that O'Byrne will have the longest, most fruitful NHL career. |
|
|
|
Post by Marvin on Jun 22, 2003 17:45:45 GMT -5
I'll ask again. On what are you basing your judgements? Have some of you actually seen these players play, or are you going by what the publications say about them?
|
|
|
|
Post by HABLORD on Jun 22, 2003 17:49:50 GMT -5
I picked Uquahands too.  HANDS HANDS HANDS!!! I just hope we are not looking back thinking we could have had O'Sullivan instead. (Like Gangne vs Chouinard) What was the saying?..."In Bob we trust!" |
|
|
|
Post by TheHabsfan on Jun 22, 2003 18:34:36 GMT -5
My choice is Urquhart...Any player who comes through in the clutch and raises their game to another level can be on my team anytime. I also really like what O'Byrne brings to the table. A huge man who can skate very well (Coburn) can develop into something special for this team.
THF
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 22, 2003 20:17:54 GMT -5
I think Bonneau will be the most important, because everyone else on the team will improve 20% when he's on the bench, and who cares how he himself plays, because he'll see little ice time.
|
|
|
|
Post by JFM on Jun 22, 2003 20:36:34 GMT -5
I've seen Lapierre play several times, since I went to a handful of Rocket games. I went in all honesty to keep an eye on M. Lambert. And each time I was impressed by Max Lapierrre. This guy can flat out fly! He was always on the 1st PK unit. We have our shut down 3rd line centre IMO. All this guy needs to do now is fill out his large frame. I think the comparison to John Madden is pretty accurate. I'll go out on a limb right now and say that Max Lapierre will be the best NHLer out of the 4 that the Habs drafted from the Rocket franchise.
|
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jun 23, 2003 10:39:03 GMT -5
I'm going to go with O'Bryne.
6'5, 210lbs, decent skater with a bit of a nasty streak? Sounds good to me. Plus, he fits a long term organizational need (right shooting defenseman).
Talking out of my posterior here, but considering he was playing Tier II hockey, I would suspect that while his coaching was good, it could have been better, and his access to fitness equipment/trainers/therapists was probably modest. A high profile NCAA school like Cornell will have the best. If O'Bryne has any dedication whatsoever, I would guess that he will top out next season at about 220lbs. Another year (lockout year) in University, maybe one year in the AHL, and I betcha O'Bryne starts showing up to training camps weighing about 230-235. If he doesn't lose any skating speed, and if his agility and lateral movement are at least decent, he should easily be a 6th-7th defenseman.
Unless of course, his hockey sense is no better than a trained iguana. In that case, all bets are off.
|
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jun 23, 2003 12:31:21 GMT -5
Locke is this year's Hudler. You don't score that many goals by being slow or by being lucky or by being lazy.
A conditioning camp that improves his power skating, another two inches of 19 year old growth, a couple of pounds and we have a Koivu who scores in bunches. On the other hand even if he doesn't make it, it's a great risk for a 113th pick.
This was the steal of the draft.
My first consideration is always talent (Kasty). My second is speed (Balej) and my third is size (Bernier).
When you accomplish as much as Corey did without speed and size, you know that you have something special.
Locke will allow me to cut way down on Hudler references.
|
|
HANDS HANDS HANDS!!! I just hope we are not looking back thinking we could have had O'Sullivan instead. (Like Gangne vs Chouinard) What was the saying?..."In Bob we trust!" 
