|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Feb 28, 2013 12:41:49 GMT -5
Asking a little leeway from the mods for this one. It could go into the "prospects" board, but I'd like to generate some discussion from the main board. Pierre Gauthier may have parked his personality at the door, but he left the club with a solid core of players and plenty of draft options this year. Here's what the Habs have to work with in this year's draft (from Habsprospects). 2013 1st round pick - Montréal 2nd round pick - Montréal 2nd round pick - Montréal (from Calgary - Cammalleri trade) 2nd round pick - Montréal (from Nashville - Kostitsyn trade) 3rd round pick - Montréal 3rd round pick - Montréal (from Dallas - Cole trade) 4th round pick - NY Islanders (from Montréal - Wisniewski trade) 5th round pick - Montréal 6th round pick - Montréal 7th round pick - Montréal Six selections in the first three rounds thanks to Gauthier and co. Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Feb 28, 2013 13:28:19 GMT -5
Barring something unforeseen, the picks from Calgary and NYI should be high in their respective rounds. Be nice to have another first.
EDIT: I think this should be a sticky, wherever it ends up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on Feb 28, 2013 13:58:08 GMT -5
I could see us using a few of those picks come the trade deadline.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Feb 28, 2013 14:08:58 GMT -5
Barring something unforeseen, the picks from Calgary and NYI should be high in their respective rounds. Be nice to have another first. EDIT: I think this should be a sticky, wherever it ends up. We dont have the NYI's pick, they have ours .... I think. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Feb 28, 2013 14:12:31 GMT -5
As of today, assuming the seedings don't change (which means we'd have made it to the Stanley Cup finals) ... we'd have the 29th, 38th, and 50th selections.
|
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Feb 28, 2013 14:35:08 GMT -5
I would trade a lot of picks to move up to a single top 4 pick. Yes, there are a few guys chosen in later rounds, but we now have depth and could use another Galchenyuk or better in this years top 4 .
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Feb 28, 2013 14:36:37 GMT -5
Anyone of MacKinnon, Drouin, or Jones would be outstanding additions. Drouin has really taken the bull by the horns since Mac's been hurt. His stock continues to climb.
|
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Feb 28, 2013 18:40:24 GMT -5
Habs are not that deep with top projected forwards they need as many picks as possible and this is a very deep draft.Glad they have stockpiled picks especially in the top 90.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Feb 28, 2013 19:01:22 GMT -5
If we finish near the top of the conference, do you trade out of the first round for extra picks?
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Feb 28, 2013 20:37:44 GMT -5
If we finish near the top of the conference, do you trade out of the first round for extra picks? I wonder if the assets are there to possibly move up in the draft, if need be. Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Feb 28, 2013 21:15:10 GMT -5
If we finish near the top of the conference, do you trade out of the first round for extra picks? I wonder if the assets are there to possibly move up in the draft, if need be. Cheers. Hard to say. If we we finish with a pick between 25-30, I think it will be hard to make an appreciable leap. Timmins would really have to have is eyes on someone he thought would go earlier. In this draft, is it worth trading a pick that's 25-30 with all our seconds (ie) to move up a few spaces? |
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Feb 28, 2013 22:08:32 GMT -5
I wonder if the assets are there to possibly move up in the draft, if need be. Cheers. Hard to say. If we we finish with a pick between 25-30, I think it will be hard to make an appreciable leap. Timmins would really have to have is eyes on someone he thought would go earlier. In this draft, is it worth trading a pick that's 25-30 with all our seconds (ie) to move up a few spaces? I've always found the cost to move up is just too darn big.... Going from 20th to 16th can easily cost you a 2nd round pick.... In fact, if I were a GM, I'd tend to always try and trade down to just get a lot of 2nd and 3d rounders. Imagine going from 15th, to 19th (1 pick), 19th to 24th (another pick), and from 24th to 29th for a 3d second rounder. Drafting remains a bit of a lottery, and unless we're in the top handful of guys with clearly special talent, I'd rather have 4 picks in the top 60 that 1 top-15 pick... |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Mar 1, 2013 14:39:52 GMT -5
Drafting remains a bit of a lottery, and unless we're in the top handful of guys with clearly special talent, I'd rather have 4 picks in the top 60 that 1 top-15 pick... This makes a lot of sense for sure. On the other side of the coin, the draft may/may not be a good opportunity to dump some salary. But, then again, it takes two to tango. Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by stoat on Mar 1, 2013 18:09:11 GMT -5
Don't look now, but the Bruins seem to be reclaiming 1st place. My crystal ball tells me that the Habs will wind up as the 5th seed in the East, which suggests that it'd be a struggle to reach the Cup finals or even the ECF. Their 1st round pick will probably fall somewhere between 15th and 23rd overall. To trade up a significant number of places in the 1st round they'd probably have to cede the Calgary 2nd rounder as a minimum.
My crystal ball has a history of misleading me. Theoretically, the Habs might lose to Chicago in the finals, in which case their own picks in every round would drop significantly in value.
|
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Mar 1, 2013 19:54:25 GMT -5
It is impossible to know in February where we will be drafting and who will be available in June. If we are hypothetically picking 23rd and there is still someone Timmins really likes at 16 we may give up more than we anticipated. We couldn't have predicted moving up to draft Tinordi when we did. That was then and this is now or rather a couple of months in the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by stoat on Mar 1, 2013 20:32:30 GMT -5
Habs are not that deep with top projected forwards they need as many picks as possible and this is a very deep draft.Glad they have stockpiled picks especially in the top 90. How does Bergevin find takers (i.e., suckers) for the Habs' discards? How much more bait can the Habs dig up without sacrificing this season? |
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Mar 2, 2013 9:59:56 GMT -5
Collberg fell to 33th last year, like to see a Wennberg available around mid-20s?
Wouldn't mind packaging two second round picks for another first round. If somebody Timmins has high like Teravainen last year is available.
|
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Mar 2, 2013 13:48:54 GMT -5
Collberg fell to 33th last year, like to see a Wennberg available around mid-20s? Wouldn't mind packaging two second round picks for another first round. If somebody Timmins has high like Teravainen last year is available. I would be all over Wennberg if he slipped. Looks like a good one. |
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Mar 2, 2013 13:55:12 GMT -5
Habs are not that deep with top projected forwards they need as many picks as possible and this is a very deep draft.Glad they have stockpiled picks especially in the top 90. They added some skilled forwards last draft (Gally, Collberg, Bozon, Hudon) and I expect they hope to do the same this year in a good deep draft. 6 picks in the top 80 or so picks will be lots of fun for Timmins and his team to work with. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Mar 2, 2013 14:06:08 GMT -5
But size needs to be considered as well. Last year some of the guys who had 'fallen' were skilled enough it was hard to pass them up. Need to get bigger, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by stoat on Mar 2, 2013 16:02:59 GMT -5
Sometimes trading down can explode in your face, especially when it means passing up a future star. It works if the BPA is not that wonderful. Looking at the archives I saw that Sam Pollock traded away the 1972 #2 overall pick because he couldn't persuade the Islanders to forgo Denis Potvin. He traded the #2 for #4 plus another pick in the top 10. With that #4 he selected a dark horse, a defensive LW by the name of Bob Gainey. IMO that was a more brilliant feat than his maneuvering in 1971 to get Guy Lafleur because if that failed he could still get Marcel Dionne. Please don't cringe at the thought. Dionne may not have been as flashy as Lafleur but he ended up with better career stats.
|
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Mar 2, 2013 16:59:58 GMT -5
Sometimes trading down can explode in your face, especially when it means passing up a future star. It works if the BPA is not that wonderful. Looking at the archives I saw that Sam Pollock traded away the 1972 #2 overall pick because he couldn't persuade the Islanders to forgo Denis Potvin. He traded the #2 for #4 plus another pick in the top 10. With that #4 he selected a dark horse, a defensive LW by the name of Bob Gainey. IMO that was a more brilliant feat than his maneuvering in 1971 to get Guy Lafleur because if that failed he could still get Marcel Dionne. Please don't cringe at the thought. Dionne may not have been as flashy as Lafleur but he ended up with better career stats. That as '73. Pollock traded down twice to get Gainey around 8th. In '72 he took Shutt. Let me see if I can remember it right. don't know if this is exact or not. After losing out on Potvin, Pollock wanted Lysiak but he refused to play in Quebec. So he traded #2 to Atlanta, then flipped Atlanta's #4 to St.Louis for 8th. He got a first in 1977. But forget who we drafted. |
|
|
|
Post by stoat on Mar 3, 2013 16:31:40 GMT -5
Thanks for reminding me. I should have looked it up. Pollock had another motive besides landing Potvin: preventing the Bruins from acquiring John Davidson, so he traded the #4 pick down to to St. Louis, who drafted Davidson. He took Gainey with the #8 pick and John van Boxmeer with #10.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Habitual Fan on Mar 3, 2013 18:23:27 GMT -5
As great as a player Gainey was he was a great disappointment as GM. The year that he let all the free agents walk and signed Cammi, Gio and traded for Gomez he could have traded many of those pending UFA for quality picks and prospects that would have been paying off today. It wouldnt have changed signing the players he did except we would have had no chance going into the playoffs, which we really never did anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Mar 3, 2013 22:39:06 GMT -5
Gainey started out good here; the Kovalev trade, stole Huet, dumping Theodore's big contract everybody said was untradeable. Seemed like we were on our way...then around 2006 everything when the other way. I don't know if it was because Gauthier became assistant GM, his daughter passing, but it was never the same.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Mar 4, 2013 8:27:12 GMT -5
Gainey started out good here; the Kovalev trade, stole Huet, dumping Theodore's big contract everybody said was untradeable. Seemed like we were on our way...then around 2006 everything when the other way. I don't know if it was because Gauthier became assistant GM, his daughter passing, but it was never the same. Which is why we shouldn't heap all sorts of praises on Bergevin so quickly .... |
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Mar 4, 2013 15:02:43 GMT -5
I like Petan in first round. Could be another Giroux. Great offense but dropping in draft due to size
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Mar 4, 2013 20:28:52 GMT -5
If Bergevin learned anything in Chicago, the importance of building through the draft has to be near the top of the list. I expect that he'll hold on to all of the Habs' picks given that it's a deep draft. We might end up with 4 picks in the 20-60 range, and could very well snag a player that develops into one of the top players of his draft class.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Bebop on Mar 8, 2013 20:04:22 GMT -5
Lots of picks..... Have to think we may trade some away.... We have lots of depth and a fairly young big club... This maybe the year we roll the dice
Need to give Gauthier some credit.... He he's given Bergeron some goods to work with
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Mar 8, 2013 21:32:29 GMT -5
Or we could just use the picks. We have a young group coming up, so these extra players would fit in well age wise. Lots of guys maturing at the right time. The more picks, the better the odds of doing well.
|
|
