|
|
Post by montreal on May 16, 2004 19:40:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by mic on May 17, 2004 4:39:39 GMT -5
Great job !
I like our depth at the goaltending position. While it was the Habs' weakness only one year ago, we have now a decent number of guys with potential. We heard a lot of nice things about Danis and the few games he played for the Dogs were promising. And putting up good numbers in international tournaments is usually a good sign (Halak).
The only thing that concerns me is the lack of quality defensmen. Hainsey, who has become a big question mark, and then ? Korneev ? O'Byrne ? Korpikari ? I hope some of them can be late round gem (even if O'Byrne ain't a late rounder). But here again, it seems that this year's draft could solve these problems (Valabik ? Green ? Thelen ?)
One more thin : I'm yet not sold on Urquhart. Every scout report mentions the lack of physical play. I'm not sure if he really can learn it suddenly in the AHL if he never played consequently a physical game in a junior league. I hope I'm wrong, as he seems to have every thing else to become a successful player.
However, a great read ! Thanks again.
|
|
|
|
Post by montreal on May 17, 2004 10:05:08 GMT -5
Great job ! I like our depth at the goaltending position. While it was the Habs' weakness only one year ago, we have now a decent number of guys with potential. We heard a lot of nice things about Danis and the few games he played for the Dogs were promising. And putting up good numbers in international tournaments is usually a good sign (Halak). The only thing that concerns me is the lack of quality defensmen. Hainsey, who has become a big question mark, and then ? Korneev ? O'Byrne ? Korpikari ? I hope some of them can be late round gem (even if O'Byrne ain't a late rounder). But here again, it seems that this year's draft could solve these problems (Valabik ? Green ? Thelen ?) One more thin : I'm yet not sold on Urquhart. Every scout report mentions the lack of physical play. I'm not sure if he really can learn it suddenly in the AHL if he never played consequently a physical game in a junior league. I hope I'm wrong, as he seems to have every thing else to become a successful player. However, a great read ! Thanks again. Thanks. I have high hopes for Danis, who put up numbers similar to David LeNeveu (46th overall in '02) and being named a Hobey Finalist plus we now have the '03 and '04 ECAC player of the Year in Higgins and Danis. A friend of mine got to interview Yann's coach at Brown, and she gave me the transcript (I guess I can post it here?) and he had a lot of good things to say about how good he was for them, and he's got the numbers to back it up. He took an average team to one of the best seasons in team history (or the last 10 + years that I've followed NCAA) while not having anything close to the defense that LeNeveu had. We'll see what he does next year in Hamilton, but so far his 3 appearances have gone well. As for Halak, I'm at a loss cause I dont know just how good the Slovak junior league is, but to me it's always a good sign when a player is at the top of the leagu stats wise. Not only was he the top goalie save % wise, but he put up very good numbers in both mens leagues. Hopefully he has another good year next season. We could get to see 2 of our young goalies at the WJC's next year, as Halak should be a lock and Lindberg stands a good shot at making the team as well. He plays in the tier-2 so info is harder to come by, but he should be on the top team in that league next year, along with another Hab prospect Johan Eneqvist. Our defense is a little thin, and I fully see us grabbing a few defensemen in this draft. There are some very big defensemen in this draft, so hopefully we land some good ones. I am very concerned about Hainsey's future with us, but we still have Beauchemin who could be a strong 6th-7th guy. Then we have Archer who should have a better year next season, O'Byrne who I like a lot, plays similar to Komo in that he's big, skates well, has good speed and hits often and hard. He's not at the skill level of Komo offensively or defensively yet, but hopefully he builds on his freshman year. Korneev is very small, but to make the Senior National team at 19 and to be captain of the Junior National team is a big feat and being a starter at 18 in the RSL is also a good sign. Don't know how his game will translate to the AHL/NHL but he's got skill. Korpikari I've only seen twice, so it's hard to really guage him. I like what I've seen, but it's hard to get info on him, as well as any tapes from Finland's sm-liiga (I've got 1 game from Karpat) He's one I think could be a big surprise to most fans, as he seems to have a good base of skills although offensively he's had a tough time so far. Linhart is still there although he's a long shot for sure. Glenn isnt talked about, but he's been impressive this year and hopefully is signed. Shasby I am a big fan of, hopefully he is in Hamilton next year. I agree on Urquhart. Lots of skill, great shot, passing and stickhandling, but is not physical at all. Doesn't bode well for him, but we'll see how he does in the AHL. For a big guy he'll need to get stronger and quicker but hopefully he's signed and in Hamilton next year. It's tough to say if he will adapt a physical game or if he can get by with limited contact, but it's a concern. I think he can, as his offensive game is very strong, but indeed it's a major concern. |
|
|
|
Post by rhabdo on May 17, 2004 13:52:50 GMT -5
If Urquhart isn't strong and physical, how is he different in that respect from Ribeiro?
|
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on May 17, 2004 14:47:37 GMT -5
Good read Dan, as always!!
I was surprised to see Danis and O'Byrne so high, but not getting much access to anything NCAA I have to rely on those who have much more exposure. I think it is great to have a young goalie prospect ranked so high within the organization, as I just can't see the big club being able to keep both Theo and Garon over the long run. Danis sure packs in some pretty impressive NCAA credentials, and his AHL debut was quite good, so the only debate will be whether he is the #1 or #2 in Hamilton next season.
As for big O'Byrne, I was surpised that he has developed so much this season. All the early season and mid season reports had this guy as being a huge guy, but really raw in talent. The jump from BC Junior A to NCAA hockey is a big one, and I remember reading earlier that the Cornell coaching staff were easing the big guy into the game. A big kid who can skate well and has a bit of a mean streak, kinda hope he works out as you just can't have enough of those type of players in front of your net.
With Lapierre, Lambert, Flood and Stewart all having career years in the CHL, with Uruqhart and Locke keeping pace from last year with another great season, Pleks having a great sophmore season in Hamilton, and with Higgins and Perezhogin having real good production in their AHL rookie seasons, lots of prospects are on the rise.
I don't know what it is going to take to light the proverbial fire under the butts of Hainsey and Hossa. This was their year to shine and get ready for the roster spots that are bound to be open next season. With Juneau already retired, Dacks off to Sweden, there are going to be roster spots up for grabs, and management is clearly looking inside the organization first. This should be the time to convince management that you are next in line, rather than just another enigmatic prospect.
|
|
|
|
Post by montreal on May 17, 2004 16:27:24 GMT -5
If Urquhart isn't strong and physical, how is he different in that respect from Ribeiro? He's faster, skates better, is better defensively, he's bigger, and has a much better shot then Ribeiro did at 19. He doesn't have Mike's vison or playmaking, but he's not that far behind either. Sadly I would say Ribeiro is more gritty then Urquhart. Ribeiro dominated the Q whereas Urquhart plays a more all round game. Both were 2nd round picks, but Urquhart doesn't have as many holes in his game as Ribs did. I don't know how strong he is cause I never see him take the body, but we'll see next year if he's signed and in Hamilton, how he stacks up to Ribs. |
|
|
|
Post by montreal on May 17, 2004 16:34:07 GMT -5
Good read Dan, as always!! I was surprised to see Danis and O'Byrne so high, but not getting much access to anything NCAA I have to rely on those who have much more exposure. I think it is great to have a young goalie prospect ranked so high within the organization, as I just can't see the big club being able to keep both Theo and Garon over the long run. Danis sure packs in some pretty impressive NCAA credentials, and his AHL debut was quite good, so the only debate will be whether he is the #1 or #2 in Hamilton next season. As for big O'Byrne, I was surpised that he has developed so much this season. All the early season and mid season reports had this guy as being a huge guy, but really raw in talent. The jump from BC Junior A to NCAA hockey is a big one, and I remember reading earlier that the Cornell coaching staff were easing the big guy into the game. A big kid who can skate well and has a bit of a mean streak, kinda hope he works out as you just can't have enough of those type of players in front of your net. With Lapierre, Lambert, Flood and Stewart all having career years in the CHL, with Uruqhart and Locke keeping pace from last year with another great season, Pleks having a great sophmore season in Hamilton, and with Higgins and Perezhogin having real good production in their AHL rookie seasons, lots of prospects are on the rise. I don't know what it is going to take to light the proverbial fire under the butts of Hainsey and Hossa. This was their year to shine and get ready for the roster spots that are bound to be open next season. With Juneau already retired, Dacks off to Sweden, there are going to be roster spots up for grabs, and management is clearly looking inside the organization first. This should be the time to convince management that you are next in line, rather than just another enigmatic prospect. Danis should be the #1 at some point next year, but since we don't even know who the other goalie will be yet, we'll have to wait and see. I assume Michaud is ECHL bound (assuming he's resigned) so it will be down to Damphousse/Fichaud and they have an option on Damphousse. Either way Danis should be the go to guy once he finds his way in the AHL. O'Byrne didn't look all that great this year, but he's so big, skates well, has good speed, and hits everything. He's more physical then Komisarek, with less offesive game and defensviely he's still got a ways to go. Next year I'll get to see a few games of his, so hopefully he has a nice progression. It's hard not to like a 6'5 210 good skating blueliner that drives players hard into the boards. The more I see him the more I like him. I don't know what it will take to get Hainsey and Hossa going either, as they have the skill to be in the NHL now. The last game I was at, Hossa played the worst game I've ever seen from him. Hainsey wasn't much better. If not for Archer, he would have made a major turnover in a close game right in front of Michaud (who has having his own troubles, and didn't need Hainsey turning over the puck in the slot) |
|
|
|
Post by PTH on May 17, 2004 17:20:57 GMT -5
I wonder where this Danis love-in is coming from - as much as he seems like a nice prospect, I've heard the exact same story about Michaud not all that long ago, and these days Michaud is dogfood....
|
|
|
|
Post by montreal on May 17, 2004 19:13:49 GMT -5
I wonder where this Danis love-in is coming from - as much as he seems like a nice prospect, I've heard the exact same story about Michaud not all that long ago, and these days Michaud is dogfood.... Danis had the 3rd highest career save % ever in the NCAA, Michaud has done nothing close to that feat alone. He holds several Brown and ECAC records, including career shutouts (13), shutouts in a season (5), goals against average in a season (1.81), save percentage in a season (.942), career wins (43), career save percentage (.930), and career goals against average (2.20). In the ECAC, Danis holds the record for career shutouts (13), save percentage in a season for league games only (.948), and career shutouts for league games only (11). Michaud got benched for Danis, and was watching the playoffs from the seats, not a good sign for his career. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 18, 2004 1:19:49 GMT -5
I wonder where this Danis love-in is coming from - as much as he seems like a nice prospect, I've heard the exact same story about Michaud not all that long ago, and these days Michaud is dogfood.... I had the Kibbles label on Michaud ages ago. He had the good luck to be called up for a cup of coffee at 18 and that made him seem so much better than he was. I was ok with him until his WJC appearance when he was singularly invisible. Add to that the fact his stats are mediocre at best, often on a good team, and he starts to look like a statistically bad possibility to make the NHL. I've always like Puurula much better. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 18, 2004 1:21:43 GMT -5
A friend of mine got to interview Yann's coach at Brown, and she gave me the transcript (I guess I can post it here?) Go ahead and post, Dan. We love inside stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on May 18, 2004 7:21:32 GMT -5
I’m not a big fan of Beauchemin’s, to be honest with you. He reminds me a lot of Mathieu Descoteaux, who I had very high hopes for – good size, skates well, hits, seems like he should be better, but somehow just isn’t. I’m not sure if he is still progressing, or if this is his max. He played good this year, as he did last year, as he did the year before. When I look at him, I don’t see any “oh if he can just improve thats” – he’s not going to get bigger, or faster, or more naturally skilled, and his “head game” if you will, already seems to be pretty good. I’m not sure there is any more room for improvement, given the skills package.
I contrast that then, with Hainsey, who has an elite skill level package, but whose head game is still a huge unknown. Hainsey has “upside” in other words, in a way that I just don’t see with Beauchemin. But that’s just me.
Korpikari I liked, in the two games I saw of him at the World Juniors, but two games does not an NHL career make. He seemed solid, and a real “shut-down” kind of guy, but like Beauchemin, I wonder if he has the skill package to take him to the next level. He kind of reminded me of Linhart, to be honest with you.
I liked the O’Byrne pick too, and even watched him when Cornell was on TV. Big, tries to be physical, but definitely a project. I have high hopes for him, but I think he is on the 5 year plan – as in don’t expect him for another 5 years, minimum…
As for the defensemen in general, I think its imperative that we draft one, though I’m not sure if we will. Have to see how the draft plays out, and who is available when we pick. Barker will go high, and I think Valabik will go higher than he should because of his size + speed (to Anaheim?). That sort of leaves the 2nd tier of defensemen possibly available to us, in Smid, Green, Thelen, Mezjaraos (or however his name is spelt) and so on. Thelen might be good, but he’ll probably go before we pick. Is it worth passing up on a home-run pick at forward (and Savard and company have hit a few before, in this draft spot), to get a solid though unspectacular defenseman? Or do they ignore the organizational need, and go for the proverbial “best player available?”
Goalies, I heard nothing but good things about Halak, and he was pretty good at the WJ (though I think he got shelled later in the tournament? can’t remember). How much is him though, and how much is the team? Puurula seemed like a steal too, but… Danis also seems promising, but we have to see how he does in the AHL first. Some undrafted players can surprise (Curtis Joseph) but in many cases there are reasons they were undrafted (Olivier Michaud?). He does come with some weighty credentials though…
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on May 18, 2004 9:52:21 GMT -5
I agree on Urquhart. Lots of skill, great shot, passing and stickhandling, but is not physical at all. Doesn't bode well for him, but we'll see how he does in the AHL. For a big guy he'll need to get stronger and quicker but hopefully he's signed and in Hamilton next year. It's tough to say if he will adapt a physical game or if he can get by with limited contact, but it's a concern. I think he can, as his offensive game is very strong, but indeed it's a major concern. Sounds like Eric Chouinard. |
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on May 18, 2004 10:13:52 GMT -5
As for the defensemen in general, I think its imperative that we draft one, though I’m not sure if we will. Have to see how the draft plays out, and who is available when we pick. Barker will go high, and I think Valabik will go higher than he should because of his size + speed (to Anaheim?). That sort of leaves the 2nd tier of defensemen possibly available to us, in Smid, Green, Thelen, Mezjaraos (or however his name is spelt) and so on. Thelen might be good, but he’ll probably go before we pick. Is it worth passing up on a home-run pick at forward (and Savard and company have hit a few before, in this draft spot), to get a solid though unspectacular defenseman? Or do they ignore the organizational need, and go for the proverbial “best player available?” I think you can add Fransson from Sweden to that list. As for the "BPA" approach, it is likely that several of those defencemen will be available at the 18th spot, and one or two of them will also likely be on AS's short list of Best Players Still Available when the Habs get to pick. I don't think we would compromise anything by getting one of those good Dmen with our first pick. This is where not having that second round pick makes you wonder if they may take an approach to draft the BPA with a condition that it is a Dman!! With some of our depth on the blueline being players like Korneev, Linhart, Korpikari, who are likely not coming over to NA this year or even next, and with O'Byrne a ways off, I really hope guys in the system like Archer and Shasby really step it up next season. Shasby seemed to have a really good year in Columbus and hopefully can step it up to the AHL level, and Archer saw very little ice time. The latter reminds me of a very young Komo, and not just because they look so much alike. Their style of play is very similar and Archer is still raw and needs lots of development at the next level, not unlike how management has eased big Mike into the Habs lineup. Archer has the size, it's just a matter of time to see if he has the whole package. Let's hope so!! |
|
|
|
Post by rhabdo on May 18, 2004 16:09:18 GMT -5
He's faster, skates better, is better defensively, he's bigger, and has a much better shot then Ribeiro did at 19. He doesn't have Mike's vison or playmaking, but he's not that far behind either. Sadly I would say Ribeiro is more gritty then Urquhart. Ribeiro dominated the Q whereas Urquhart plays a more all round game. Both were 2nd round picks, but Urquhart doesn't have as many holes in his game as Ribs did. I don't know how strong he is cause I never see him take the body, but we'll see next year if he's signed and in Hamilton, how he stacks up to Ribs. From what you say he sounds like another Dagenais. Is this a valid read? |
|
|
|
Post by montreal on May 18, 2004 16:23:05 GMT -5
Go ahead and post, Dan. We love inside stuff. Transcript of Yann Danis by Brown Head Coach Roger Grillo “Yann is a special player. The numbers he put up aren’t false. They’re legitimate and he is a legitimate goaltender. He’s certainly a kid that has a really bright future. He’s talented. He’s competitive. He’s a super, super human being. He’s a great character kid. He’s passsionate. His work ethic is phenomenal. There really isn’t a flaw in the four years that I’ve been with Yann. I’ve never seen a flaw in his game or in his approach to the game whatsoever. I’d say his top three attributes are: 1) His ability to make things look easy. You don’t see him make spectacular saves because he makes the tough saves look easy. He’s always in the right spot. 2) His quickness. He is extremely quick and that allows him to be able to make the tough saves look easy. 3) His demeanor and approach to the game. He’s very calm. He’s very under control. A calm, cool and collected individual, no question. His approach to the daily practices and the way he goes about it, the professionalism to which he approaches every day as a goaltender is phenomenal. I see him only getting better. I certainly see him as a kid who is going to have a bright future in the NHL." This came from Oilers Chick who is the HF writer for the NCAA. |
|
|
|
Post by montreal on May 18, 2004 16:27:09 GMT -5
From what you say he sounds like another Dagenais. Is this a valid read? No way, not even close, nothing alike except both have a good shot. Dags is taller, but Urquhart can skate, is much faster, is very good setup guy, decent shot but needs to shoot more, seemed like he was always passing it (saw them twice and listened to a bunch of Rocekt games on the net) He's solid in his own end, but not great will need to improve. His skating and speed aren't very strong but much better then Dags. Also he's not really like Chouinard, who I found played more like Hossa, in that his intensity and desire should be questioned. Urquhart is like Chouinard in that neither take the body or it's rare. |
|
|
|
Post by JFM on May 18, 2004 22:15:59 GMT -5
I've liked Lapierre most out of the Hab Line. I used to go to the Molson\Bell Centre mainly to see how Lambert looked to my own eyes. And I ALWAYS left the game being impressed with Lapierre. He always made plays that made him noticeable. I honestly didn't like Lambert from what I saw of him. And frankly, Urquhart was invisible. Now I readily admit that since the Rocket have left town, couldn't follow their progress. Their stats seem to show progress, however, Lapierre is still my favourite of the 3, eventhough his offensive upside probably is the lowest of the 3.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on May 19, 2004 20:01:55 GMT -5
If Urquhart isn't strong and physical, how is he different in that respect from Ribeiro? I thought you knew the story. Even Smeagol feared the Uruk-hai, that's the difference!! |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on May 19, 2004 20:05:21 GMT -5
Danis had the 3rd highest career save % ever in the NCAA, Michaud has done nothing close to that feat alone. He holds several Brown and ECAC records, including career shutouts (13), shutouts in a season (5), goals against average in a season (1.81), save percentage in a season (.942), career wins (43), career save percentage (.930), and career goals against average (2.20). In the ECAC, Danis holds the record for career shutouts (13), save percentage in a season for league games only (.948), and career shutouts for league games only (11). Michaud got benched for Danis, and was watching the playoffs from the seats, not a good sign for his career. Yeah for Danis! Now, kindly print the names of the goalies that held these records before Danis came along. I am not going to get giddy over a bunch of NCAA records. Dryden may have played at Cornell, but there aren't many NCAA goalies playingin the NHL for a reason. |
|
