Habs at the 2013 Entry Draft

[Willie Dog]

I think MB has the cache to do something drastic at the trade deadline and trade some vets for picks. Like others have stated, he wants to develop from within, so I can see him trying to give Timmins as many picks as possible. I can see Kabby being bought out because no one will take him. Markov would help any team as a pp specialist and a 3-4 dman (because of reduced mobility) and Pleky would be in big demand. He is Mr. Utility and can play in any situation as a second line centre on most teams.

[NWTHabsFan]

Where will we pick based on how the rest of the playoffs go, you ask?

You can see us on mock drafts at position 27th based on regular season points. That can all change quickly now.

If we bounce back and beat the Sens and also end up winning it all, we pick 30th.
If we lose in the Cup Finals, we pick 29th.
If we advance to the conference finals and lose in that round, we pick 27th or 28th based on who else loses in the western conference final (the team with the fewest regular season points gets 27th).

If we lose to the Sens or in the second round, then we pick 26th or perhaps better.
If ANA, CHI and PIT all advance to the conference final, then we will pick 26th.
If one gets eliminated in the first two rounds, then we pick 25th.
If two, 24th, and all three gets us at 23rd.

From a draft perspective, there is no benefit from being upset in the first round versus the second. The new draft seeding is not done after round one, only after the second round while heading into the conference finals.

Still lots to be decided to determine our actual draft position.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

Mar 8, 2013 20:04:22 GMT -5 Lord Bebop said:

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

Absolutely... Gauthier left Bergevin some options.

Believe it or not, Rejean Houle did the same for his successor (to a lesser extent).

Cheers.to

[BadCompany]

Following up on my discussion with Skilly here, as it seems to be a more appropriate place now.

The underlying question is "how valuable are draft picks?" Should we have traded picks at the deadline to acquire depth? Or, as I believe, is the reason why we have no depth because we traded picks in the past?

There is no real way to determine whether or not those picks would have panned out as Montreal Canadiens, or who those picks might have been, even. I flunked string theory and my alternate universe machine is on the fritz right now, so we can only speculate on who we might have taken. Which is rather pointless.

So instead I went and looked at Timmins' draft history, to see what the likelihood of a Timmins pick turning into a legitimate NHLer was. I've deliberately avoided the loaded topic of "quality" because that really isn't the point of this particular exercise. Instead, I wanted to know how likely his picks are to make the NHL (the high ones anyways) and whether or not that would have been a good indicator as to whether or not we would have had more depth available to us right now, had we of kept those picks.

Here is what I found.

I looked at the success rates of our first, second and third round picks under Timmins, from 2003 to 2011. I didn’t include 2012 as it’s too early to judge that one (at least for our second and third round picks anyways, our first has already made it). My definition of "success" loosely translates into "played a lot of games as an NHLer". Not very scientific, but the results were pretty clear cut anyways, so I don't think it's that big a deal.

1st round picks:

9 total picks
5 sure fire NHLers (Kostitsyin, Chipchura, Price, McDonagh, Pacioretty)
2 probable NHLers (Tinordi, Beaulieu)
1 iffy (Leblanc)
1 bust (Fischer)

55-88% success rate, depending on how Tinordi, Beaulieu and Leblanc pan out

2nd round picks:

6 total picks
3 sure fire NHLers (Lapierre, Latendresse, Subban)
1 iffy (Kristo)
2 busts (Urquart, Carle)

50-66% success rate, depending on how Kristo pans out

3rd round picks:

8 total picks
4 sure fire NHLers (O’Byrne, Emelin, White, Weber)
4 busts (Bennett, Nattinen, Quailer, Fortier)

50% success rate

Overall:

23 picks
12 sure fire NHLers
2 probable NHLers
2 iffy
7 busts

52-70% success rate, depending on how Leblanc, Kristo, Tinordi and Beaulieu pan out


Arbitrary Conclusion:

For every 2 picks we trade away from the first three rounds we lose out on at least one future NHLer. Since past performance ALWAYS predicts future results (my stock broker told me that) with our six picks in the top three rounds this summer we should nail 3-4 legitimate NHLers, quality ranging anywhere from Subban to Weber.

[blny]

I don't trade those picks unless they're part of a package to get us a real upgrade with a player just entering the prime of his career. No deals for guys with a year left, or over 30.

[GNick99]

I think the only traded pick we gained on was James Wisniewski. The 2nd we gave up was compensation pick on Fischer not signing. Then we flipped Wiz for 5th round, Charles Hudon. Could make a few moves like that be alright.

[frozone]

I agree with what you said in the other thread, BC. We're a bit low on depth because of some of the past picks that we traded away. We definitely traded too many early picks for short term acquisitions. I like MB's approach of making "hockey trades", I just wish that he would make them.

Having Timmins on your team definitely increases the value of your picks though. The quality of your player development team affects their values somewhat too. Right now, it looks like our scouting staff and PD team are among the best, but that doesn't mean we should hang on or overvalue our picks. If we would have traded away the pick that got us Subban, who's to say that we couldn't have chosen him in the third round, just 22 picks later? IIRC he wasn't exactly on the radar or on scouting lists before round 5 or so. Maybe we could have traded the second rounder for a roster player AND drafted Subban... sign me up for that.

I think we have the luxury of expecting some useful players from later rounds. Maybe Berg shouldn't hold back so much on trading his earlier picks... maybe he should just make sure that when he trades early picks, he acquires late picks in return so that we keep the same number of lottery tickets. Or if he really doesn't want to trade his picks away, then trade prospects. Kristo, Beaulieu, Hudon, Bournival... they're great players but we won't have room for all our prospects. Trade them when their value is high as opposed to when its clear that there's no spot for them.

[Andrew]

A couple of thoughts. First, I'm wondering why we have 2 of these 2013 draft threads. Perhaps we can shut one of them down and keep discussion in one place?.

In terms of picks, Samuel Morin is intriguing. Admittedly I know little about him other than his draft ranking and stats. Draft ranking is close to where the Habs will have 3 picks, and a 6'7 defender could end up being the best player available and represent an organizational need. Wondering about his skating ability and toughness.

[NWTHabsFan]

May 10, 2013 14:07:38 GMT -5 Andrew said:

A couple of thoughts. First, I'm wondering why we have 2 of these 2013 draft threads. Perhaps we can shut one of them down and keep discussion in one place?.

In terms of picks, Samuel Morin is intriguing. Admittedly I know little about him other than his draft ranking and stats. Draft ranking is close to where the Habs will have 3 picks, and a 6'7 defender could end up being the best player available and represent an organizational need. Wondering about his skating ability and toughness.

Morin is likely very much on the Habs' radar screen considering when they pick in the first round and early (twice) in the second round. He is still a bit raw, which is not entirely surprising for a kid who is big and that age, but his size, skating and toughness should interest a lot of teams. He also held his own at the U18s this year, which likely did not hurt his draft stock one bit.

On the subject of the Habs' draft, with Detroit winning and knocking out Anaheim, the updated draft spots are as follows:

1st round - 25th
2nd round (from NSH) - 34th
2nd round (from CAL) - 36th
2nd round - 55th
3rd round (from DAL) - 71st
3rd round - 86th
4th round - no pick (traded to NYI in the Wiz deal)
5th round - no pick (traded to LAK in the Drewiske deal)
6th round - 176th
7th round - 206th

Note that Winnipeg gets a compensatory pick at 59th spot in the second round, so there will be 31 picks in the second round. That knocks all the picks after that back one spot (eg, Montreal's own third round pick moves from 85th to 86th).

Montreal can also move up one or two possible spots in the draft depending on what happens next round with PIT and CHI. If one of those teams get knocked out in the second round and don't make the conference finals, then the Habs will move up to 24th with their first pick. If both are knocked out next round, then the Habs can move up to 23rd. If both PIT and CHI advance to the third round (the most likely scenario), then the Habs will stay at picking in the 25th spot in the first round.

So with that in mind, Go Detroit and Sens!!

[Skilly]

May 8, 2013 20:05:58 GMT -5 BadCompany said:

Following up on my discussion with Skilly here, as it seems to be a more appropriate place now.

The underlying question is "how valuable are draft picks?" Should we have traded picks at the deadline to acquire depth? Or, as I believe, is the reason why we have no depth because we traded picks in the past?

There is no real way to determine whether or not those picks would have panned out as Montreal Canadiens, or who those picks might have been, even. I flunked string theory and my alternate universe machine is on the fritz right now, so we can only speculate on who we might have taken. Which is rather pointless.

So instead I went and looked at Timmins' draft history, to see what the likelihood of a Timmins pick turning into a legitimate NHLer was. I've deliberately avoided the loaded topic of "quality" because that really isn't the point of this particular exercise. Instead, I wanted to know how likely his picks are to make the NHL (the high ones anyways) and whether or not that would have been a good indicator as to whether or not we would have had more depth available to us right now, had we of kept those picks.

Here is what I found.

I looked at the success rates of our first, second and third round picks under Timmins, from 2003 to 2011. I didn’t include 2012 as it’s too early to judge that one (at least for our second and third round picks anyways, our first has already made it). My definition of "success" loosely translates into "played a lot of games as an NHLer". Not very scientific, but the results were pretty clear cut anyways, so I don't think it's that big a deal.

1st round picks:

9 total picks
5 sure fire NHLers (Kostitsyin, Chipchura, Price, McDonagh, Pacioretty)
2 probable NHLers (Tinordi, Beaulieu)
1 iffy (Leblanc)
1 bust (Fischer)

55-88% success rate, depending on how Tinordi, Beaulieu and Leblanc pan out

2nd round picks:

6 total picks
3 sure fire NHLers (Lapierre, Latendresse, Subban)
1 iffy (Kristo)
2 busts (Urquart, Carle)

50-66% success rate, depending on how Kristo pans out

3rd round picks:

8 total picks
4 sure fire NHLers (O’Byrne, Emelin, White, Weber)
4 busts (Bennett, Nattinen, Quailer, Fortier)

50% success rate

Overall:

23 picks
12 sure fire NHLers
2 probable NHLers
2 iffy
7 busts

52-70% success rate, depending on how Leblanc, Kristo, Tinordi and Beaulieu pan out


Arbitrary Conclusion:

For every 2 picks we trade away from the first three rounds we lose out on at least one future NHLer. Since past performance ALWAYS predicts future results (my stock broker told me that) with our six picks in the top three rounds this summer we should nail 3-4 legitimate NHLers, quality ranging anywhere from Subban to Weber.

I hear what you are saying ... and respect the thought process.

But you can't have this discussion without talking about quality. It's one thing to say that there is a 50-60% likelihood a Timmins pick in the top three rounds will make the NHL; it's another thing to analyze if it was the best pick at that time, or what impact his picks have.

Looking at your above 23 picks, there is just as much liklihood that Timmins picks a bust (7) as there is he picks an impact player (4-7). I define an impact player as someone on the top two lines or top d pairing. (Subban, Pacioretty, Price, McDonnagh, ... and depending how they pan out Emelin, Tinordi and Beaulieu) As we hear on Sesame Street, which of these things don't belong here? I've never complained about Timmins first rounders (well during this debate anyway ) ... and really, you should pick an NHLer most of the time with your first rounder. But of those 14 second and third rounders, he hit on ONE (two depending on how Emeline pans out) .... thats a 7-14% success rate. That's my debate. How successful is a Timmins second or third round selection looking at his past selections ...

I'd love to analyze each team in depth in the timeframe you've selected. It would be alot of work, and it is my hypothesis, when you put quality into the equation, Timmins won't stack up as high as we think he does.

I'd also one day like to go back and play the "What if" game with Timmins selections (I realize you can do this with every team as well), and look at the success of players drafted after a Timmins pick. Cause it seems to be a frequent occurance that we just miss out on elite talents ...and yes, who even knows if they would have became elite with the Habs.

As an example, let's look at the Price selection. If I recall, Price wasn't ranked that high ... and it felt like the Habs went off the board to select him. I know Gainey wanted Pouiliot, so I'm not sure if it was Timmins or Gainey that had Price next on their chart. I've also heard it rumoured, that the Habs felt Toronto was going to select him and thats why he went so high. Who knows? But was Price even the best goalie in that draft? Other goalies selected in that draft inculde Rask, Quick, Pavelec, Bishop .... would we have been any worse off selecting Anze Kopitar or Marc Staal in the first round, and getting Jonathan Quick in the second or third round??

So I guess what I am saying is, having a body that plays in the NHL isn't good enough ... and history has shown us Timmins is more apt to find third liners in the second and third rounds. We don't need quantity, we need quality.

[Habs_fan_in_LA]

May 14, 2013 9:46:06 GMT -5 Skilly said:

May 8, 2013 20:05:58 GMT -5 BadCompany said:

Following up on my discussion with Skilly here, as it seems to be a more appropriate place now.

The underlying question is "how valuable are draft picks?" Should we have traded picks at the deadline to acquire depth? Or, as I believe, is the reason why we have no depth because we traded picks in the past?

There is no real way to determine whether or not those picks would have panned out as Montreal Canadiens, or who those picks might have been, even. I flunked string theory and my alternate universe machine is on the fritz right now, so we can only speculate on who we might have taken. Which is rather pointless.

So instead I went and looked at Timmins' draft history, to see what the likelihood of a Timmins pick turning into a legitimate NHLer was. I've deliberately avoided the loaded topic of "quality" because that really isn't the point of this particular exercise. Instead, I wanted to know how likely his picks are to make the NHL (the high ones anyways) and whether or not that would have been a good indicator as to whether or not we would have had more depth available to us right now, had we of kept those picks.

Here is what I found.

I looked at the success rates of our first, second and third round picks under Timmins, from 2003 to 2011. I didn’t include 2012 as it’s too early to judge that one (at least for our second and third round picks anyways, our first has already made it). My definition of "success" loosely translates into "played a lot of games as an NHLer". Not very scientific, but the results were pretty clear cut anyways, so I don't think it's that big a deal.

1st round picks:

9 total picks
5 sure fire NHLers (Kostitsyin, Chipchura, Price, McDonagh, Pacioretty)
2 probable NHLers (Tinordi, Beaulieu)
1 iffy (Leblanc)
1 bust (Fischer)

55-88% success rate, depending on how Tinordi, Beaulieu and Leblanc pan out

2nd round picks:

6 total picks
3 sure fire NHLers (Lapierre, Latendresse, Subban)
1 iffy (Kristo)
2 busts (Urquart, Carle)

50-66% success rate, depending on how Kristo pans out

3rd round picks:

8 total picks
4 sure fire NHLers (O’Byrne, Emelin, White, Weber)
4 busts (Bennett, Nattinen, Quailer, Fortier)

50% success rate

Overall:

23 picks
12 sure fire NHLers
2 probable NHLers
2 iffy
7 busts

52-70% success rate, depending on how Leblanc, Kristo, Tinordi and Beaulieu pan out


Arbitrary Conclusion:

For every 2 picks we trade away from the first three rounds we lose out on at least one future NHLer. Since past performance ALWAYS predicts future results (my stock broker told me that) with our six picks in the top three rounds this summer we should nail 3-4 legitimate NHLers, quality ranging anywhere from Subban to Weber.

I hear what you are saying ... and respect the thought process.

But you can't have this discussion without talking about quality. It's one thing to say that there is a 50-60% likelihood a Timmins pick in the top three rounds will make the NHL; it's another thing to analyze if it was the best pick at that time, or what impact his picks have.

Looking at your above 23 picks, there is just as much liklihood that Timmins picks a bust (7) as there is he picks an impact player (4-7). I define an impact player as someone on the top two lines or top d pairing. (Subban, Pacioretty, Price, McDonnagh, ... and depending how they pan out Emelin, Tinordi and Beaulieu) As we hear on Sesame Street, which of these things don't belong here? I've never complained about Timmins first rounders (well during this debate anyway ) ... and really, you should pick an NHLer most of the time with your first rounder. But of those 14 second and third rounders, he hit on ONE (two depending on how Emeline pans out) .... thats a 7-14% success rate. That's my debate. How successful is a Timmins second or third round selection looking at his past selections ...

I'd love to analyze each team in depth in the timeframe you've selected. It would be alot of work, and it is my hypothesis, when you put quality into the equation, Timmins won't stack up as high as we think he does.

I'd also one day like to go back and play the "What if" game with Timmins selections (I realize you can do this with every team as well), and look at the success of players drafted after a Timmins pick. Cause it seems to be a frequent occurance that we just miss out on elite talents ...and yes, who even knows if they would have became elite with the Habs.

As an example, let's look at the Price selection. If I recall, Price wasn't ranked that high ... and it felt like the Habs went off the board to select him. I know Gainey wanted Pouiliot, so I'm not sure if it was Timmins or Gainey that had Price next on their chart. I've also heard it rumoured, that the Habs felt Toronto was going to select him and thats why he went so high. Who knows? But was Price even the best goalie in that draft? Other goalies selected in that draft inculde Rask, Quick, Pavelec, Bishop .... would we have been any worse off selecting Anze Kopitar or Marc Staal in the first round, and getting Jonathan Quick in the second or third round??

So I guess what I am saying is, having a body that plays in the NHL isn't good enough ... and history has shown us Timmins is more apt to find third liners in the second and third rounds. We don't need quantity, we need quality.

I agree with the quality vs quantity and would give up ALL our picks this year to get Mackinnon or Drouin. Filling up the third and fourth lines is not a problem.

[BadCompany]

May 14, 2013 9:46:06 GMT -5 Skilly said:

As an example, let's look at the Price selection. If I recall, Price wasn't ranked that high ... and it felt like the Habs went off the board to select him. I know Gainey wanted Pouiliot, so I'm not sure if it was Timmins or Gainey that had Price next on their chart. I've also heard it rumoured, that the Habs felt Toronto was going to select him and thats why he went so high. Who knows? But was Price even the best goalie in that draft? Other goalies selected in that draft inculde Rask, Quick, Pavelec, Bishop .... would we have been any worse off selecting Anze Kopitar or Marc Staal in the first round, and getting Jonathan Quick in the second or third round??

With regards to Price, it wasn't so much where he was picked that was the shocker, it was that Montreal picked him, what with the goalies they already had in the system. For whatever reason the braintrust felt he was the best player and they didn't want to risk losing out on him because somebody else may think the same way. They thought he was going to be an impact player, and that was the debate then, as it still is now. Being a draft junkie I have the pre-draft rankings going back some time, and Bob McKenzie had him 7th overall that year (Crosby, Johnson, Pouliot, Ryan, Kopitar, Brule, Price). Here is what he had to say about him:

The Tri-City Americans goaltender is widely heralded as the top netminder available in this year's draft, but it's not necessarily unanimous. Odds are Price will be the first goalie selected, but depending upon the order of selection, it's tough to say how early a goalie might go in this draft. Team preference aside, though, scouts generally agree Price is a top-10 talent who has what it takes to be a No. 1 stopper in the NHL. His performance at the U-18 championships in April was only fair, but the WHL workhorse showed his worth game in and game out for Tri-Cities.

[Skilly]

May 15, 2013 7:15:29 GMT -5 BadCompany said:

May 14, 2013 9:46:06 GMT -5 Skilly said:

As an example, let's look at the Price selection. If I recall, Price wasn't ranked that high ... and it felt like the Habs went off the board to select him. I know Gainey wanted Pouiliot, so I'm not sure if it was Timmins or Gainey that had Price next on their chart. I've also heard it rumoured, that the Habs felt Toronto was going to select him and thats why he went so high. Who knows? But was Price even the best goalie in that draft? Other goalies selected in that draft inculde Rask, Quick, Pavelec, Bishop .... would we have been any worse off selecting Anze Kopitar or Marc Staal in the first round, and getting Jonathan Quick in the second or third round??

With regards to Price, it wasn't so much where he was picked that was the shocker, it was that Montreal picked him, what with the goalies they already had in the system. For whatever reason the braintrust felt he was the best player and they didn't want to risk losing out on him because somebody else may think the same way. They thought he was going to be an impact player, and that was the debate then, as it still is now. Being a draft junkie I have the pre-draft rankings going back some time, and Bob McKenzie had him 7th overall that year (Crosby, Johnson, Pouliot, Ryan, Kopitar, Brule, Price). Here is what he had to say about him:

The Tri-City Americans goaltender is widely heralded as the top netminder available in this year's draft, but it's not necessarily unanimous. Odds are Price will be the first goalie selected, but depending upon the order of selection, it's tough to say how early a goalie might go in this draft. Team preference aside, though, scouts generally agree Price is a top-10 talent who has what it takes to be a No. 1 stopper in the NHL. His performance at the U-18 championships in April was only fair, but the WHL workhorse showed his worth game in and game out for Tri-Cities.

Thanks BC.

Wouldn't mind seeing those rankings. Would make for interesting reading.

[Skilly]

May 13, 2013 13:50:55 GMT -5 NWTHabsFan said:

1st round - 25th
2nd round (from NSH) - 34th
2nd round (from CAL) - 36th
2nd round - 55th
3rd round (from DAL) - 71st
3rd round - 86th
4th round - no pick (traded to NYI in the Wiz deal)
5th round - no pick (traded to LAK in the Drewiske deal)
6th round - 176th
7th round - 206th

!!

Be nice to compile all the so called experts mock drafts and rankings to see who they have ranked/ slotted in our first three rounds.

I saw one today that had us picking a goalie I never heard of in the third round .. Austin Lotz.

This mock draft had us selecting Mirco Mueller, Frederick Gauthier, William Carrier, Brett Pesce, Austin Lotz and Ross Olsson in the first three rounds in that order.


Now I don't put much faith in that mock draft, they even have a 2014 mock already done (assuming the standings stay the same). But only two of those above are on Craig Button's top top 75 list.

These are the players Button has ranked where we are picking:

25. D Ryan Pulock. .... Gauthier , all 6'5 of him is ranked 22 by Craig Button
34. LW Anthony Duclair .... He has Mueller 33rd
36. D Robert Hagg
55. G. Phillips Derosiers
71. D. Jan Kostalek

[seventeen]

I don't think I've seen any of those guys play, except for Desrosiers. The limited amount I saw of Desrosier, in the U-18 WJC, I liked quite a bit. He seemed composed, and positionally sound, with quickness. And, of course, we won, so I always love that pedigree.

[NWTHabsFan]

May 15, 2013 20:00:47 GMT -5 Skilly said:

May 13, 2013 13:50:55 GMT -5 NWTHabsFan said:

1st round - 25th
2nd round (from NSH) - 34th
2nd round (from CAL) - 36th
2nd round - 55th
3rd round (from DAL) - 71st
3rd round - 86th
4th round - no pick (traded to NYI in the Wiz deal)
5th round - no pick (traded to LAK in the Drewiske deal)
6th round - 176th
7th round - 206th

!!

Be nice to compile all the so called experts mock drafts and rankings to see who they have ranked/ slotted in our first three rounds.

I saw one today that had us picking a goalie I never heard of in the third round .. Austin Lotz.

This mock draft had us selecting Mirco Mueller, Frederick Gauthier, William Carrier, Brett Pesce, Austin Lotz and Ross Olsson in the first three rounds in that order.


Now I don't put much faith in that mock draft, they even have a 2014 mock already done (assuming the standings stay the same). But only two of those above are on Craig Button's top top 75 list.

These are the players Button has ranked where we are picking:

25. D Ryan Pulock. .... Gauthier , all 6'5 of him is ranked 22 by Craig Button
34. LW Anthony Duclair .... He has Mueller 33rd
36. D Robert Hagg
55. G. Phillips Derosiers
71. D. Jan Kostalek

The first four picks are reasonable considering who could be available this year, but we will likely end up with a better quartet is my guess. I would argue we can do better than their third round picks. I have done my first mock draft, but am still researching more and will post one closer to the draft, including my list of possible picks with our picks.

Lots of big forwards and defenders this year, and the batch from about pick #15 to about #40 have some pretty decent and interchangeable names. Those three picks between 25 and 36 will be very interesting.

[BadCompany]

It will be interesting to see what happens this draft. Timmins has a vision of what the best player available means, and while his reputation is that of someone who prefers the small, speedy, skill guys, he did draft both Tinordi and Chipchura in the first round, and McDonagh, who as great as he is, was never viewed as small, speedy, or skilled in the offensive way we tend to think of. So maybe that "drafts small" reputation is slightly unwarranted.

With the NHL sliding (slid?) back to the power-game, and the whistles disappearing in the playoffs (more so than usual, in my opinion) we had better get back on the bandwagon and start building our organization with that in mind. As I have recently said you never want to pass up the better player for the bigger player, but bigger has to be part of the equation now, and with more "weight" than before, no pun intended. If we draft shrimp Nic Petan and he goes on to become a 40 goal scorer for us, then I won't complain. If we draft Nic Petan and he goes on to become a 20 goal, 45 point player for us... then I will complain. We don't want to go back to the days of boeuf de l'ouest but we also can't ignore reality. This is a big boys league.

And there are enough big boys in this draft, and we have enough picks, that we should be able to come out of it with at least a couple of 6'3 + sized players. And by players I mean NHL players. We need to start hitting with our big boy picks, so that later on these big boys can start hitting themselves.

[Patty Roy]

There are a number of big body's who should be available in the 25-40 range, no reason why the Habs shouldn't able to get a crack at at least a few of the following:

Kerby Rychel (6'1" 200lbs two time 40 goals in OHL)
Anthony Mantha (6'4" winger from Q - might have to trade up a bit)
Mirco Mueller (6'3" d-man from WHL)
Jacob De La Rose (6'2" two way C from Sweden)
Frederick Gauthier (6'5" C from Q - rankings all over the map in 1st round)
Samuel Morin (6'7" D from the Q - rankings also all over the map)
Ian McCoshen (Big D from USHL)
Mike McCarron (6'5" 225 winger - limited but tough)
Justin Bailey (Big C from OHL, somewhat limited)

And then there's Jordan Subban...all 5'9" of him projected to go 2nd/3rd round.

[seventeen]

Watching the Mem cup final. 3-0 halifax. Portland is not that much worse of a team, but they're not playing at the same compete level as Halifax, almost as if they're out of gas, or at least more tired than Halifax. If Carruth wasn't playing as well as he is, it could be 5 or 6 to nothing.

[blny]

If you've watched this tournament, I don't know how you can think Jones is the best player. MacKinnon's compete level is far superior. From the opening game, he's taken it to the other teams and been the best player.

I watch Jones, and I see Bouwmeester. That's nice, but it's not MacKinnon. Who here would make that trade?

If you're looking for BPA, it's Nathan. If you're looking for the most dynamic player, it's Nathan. If you're looking for a true game changer who can get the puck on his stick and control a game, it's Nathan.

The only reason Colorado would pick Seth #1 is because they feel thinnest on D.

[seventeen]

The NHL strikes again. Ty Rattie knocks the puck down is about to shoot it in and Fucale kicks it in first. NHL rules no goal. Amazing, huh? You can kick the puck into your own net and it doesn't count. If that isn't one of the dumbest rules around. Why can't refs just use their judgment and watch the replays themselves instead of some twit in the 5th dimension doing so.

[seventeen]

May 26, 2013 19:42:17 GMT -5 blny said:

If you've watched this tournament, I don't know how you can think Jones is the best player. MacKinnon's compete level is far superior. From the opening game, he's taken it to the other teams and been the best player.

I watch Jones, and I see Bouwmeester. That's nice, but it's not MacKinnon. Who here would make that trade?

If you're looking for BPA, it's Nathan. If you're looking for the most dynamic player, it's Nathan. If you're looking for a true game changer who can get the puck on his stick and control a game, it's Nathan.

The only reason Colorado would pick Seth #1 is because they feel thinnest on D.

That's why one tournament doesn't decide who goes where. It could be argued that Jones outplayed McKinnon at the WJC, but McKinnon wasn't used very well, there.

I agree that McKinnon has been much more noticeable and productive than Jones in this tourney. Jones looks more jittery than McKinnon and hasn't adjusted as well. He's still pretty good (He'll be a lot better than Bouwmeester who has little offense to his game). I think Colorado will pick Jones, precisely because they need D more than O. There's isn't enough of a clear difference to warrant them taking McKinnon. If it was the Habs, I'd take McKinnon. Wouldn't that be a one-two punch, huh?

[blny]

They have some nice forwards, but they don't have anyone on a par with Nathan imo.

[NWTHabsFan]

MacKinnon looks like a #1 to me.

[blny]

I would agree Nate had a poor WJC. Poorly used, and he was unable to work his way up the lineup. He got hurt upon returning to Halifax.

Meanwhile, fatigue may be showing on Abeltshauser. He's looked horrible. Been on for 3 against. Failed to take his man a number of times. He plays A LOT. He and Lewis. He's got to gut it out for 5 more mins.

[blny]

Hat trick in the final. 5 points. Huge empty netter to ice it, when Portland had the empty net for 2 plus minutes. Nathan made a big statement in the tournament, and in the final game. Big players have big games. Nate have a huge game.

Hard to say what the Avs will do, but I'm the Panthers I'm hoping they pick Jones.

[seventeen]

It's not just their play, either. Even before the Mem Cup, I would have chose Nathan, because he's nearly a year younger. Give him a year of development and then compare him to Jones as of today. Great combination of drive, hands, speed and strength. He's a lot like Crosby, but uses the body a bit more.

[blny]

Valid point re age. Re the inevitable Crosby comparo's by all the experts, Nate may not have the top end that Crosby has, but he's more mature physically than Sid was. Nate's playing weight is listed at 179lb, but if he isn't closer to 200lbs I'd be very surprised. He's a very cut 179.

He attacked Jones at every opportunity and won the battle between them all night.

About the WJC, I partly blame Hockey Canada for his lack of success this year. Don't pick a thoroughbred if you plan to use him as a trotter. Nate was pigeon-holed from the start. He needs ice time to get his legs going. He can't play 5 minutes a game and be effective. HC is so preoccupied with systems and filling roles. If a 17 year old high end player has no hope of playing to his skill set, leave him home. Pick a player better suited to the role you intend.

[seventeen]

They fired their head scout, Kevin Pendergrast (formerly with the Oilers years ago, I believe). That's probably a good start, but usually it's a management issue higher up. I hadn't heard if there were any changes higher up the food chain that would auger well.

[sergejean]

I was impressed by Drouin as well... That saucer pass on Mackinnon's second goal was a play not a lot of players can even dream of making or even attempting.

While there's not doubt in my mind Drouin is the top pure talent in this draft, the way NHL games are officiated would make me think twice about picking him ahead of MacKinnon.