|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Apr 29, 2016 21:33:07 GMT -5
Those earlier years, Dis, it's hard to know how much say Timmins himself had in the selections. For example, it seems to be well 'known' that Gainey made the call on Price. If so, did he do that from seeing him play himself, or from a strong recommendation from the entire scouting staff or one scout he really trusted? Who knows, other than Gainey himself. That would be a great question to ask him. I had to look it up, but Trevor Timmins made the decision to draft Carey Price and he had the support of organization ... I don't know about subsequent years ... I would suspect it might be the same ... I remember hearing just how miffed he was when the organization traded Ryan McDonagh ... I tried to find out this one, too, and all I could come up with was this story here ... it's too bad about Jarred Tinordi ... I didn't think he'd be a bust ... Mike Komisarek is out of hockey now ... man ... I'm very interested in seeing the impact these two have at training camp ... I guess Lehkonen has had a very good year ... it would be good to see one of them on the roster next year ... Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Apr 29, 2016 22:34:59 GMT -5
It's worth repeating that while Gainey was in Montreal he had final say on first round picks. From 2003 to 2009 it was Gainey who made the pick.
I'm not sure what rules Gauthier had in place. I believe Bergevin is inclined to go with the recommendation of his scouting staff.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on May 1, 2016 12:32:39 GMT -5
It's worth repeating that while Gainey was in Montreal he had final say on first round picks. From 2003 to 2009 it was Gainey who made the pick. Edit: Thanks BLNY ... I suspect the final say would apply to all GMs ... can't see this being unique to Montreal ... I suspect many NHL clubs do the same ... why have a scouting department if you don't take their advise ... a reference from a 2012 Pat Hickey column suggests that this was the way under Bob Gainey and as well: Timmins has been responsible for drafting many of the players who now make up the core of the Canadiens. That group is led by Carey Price, Max Pacioretty and P.K. Subban, and also includes Alexei Emelin, Yannick Weber, Ryan White, Louis Leblanc and this year’s first-rounder, Alex Galchenyuk.I couldn't remember the last time Trevor Timmins didn't announce the club's first-round pick, himself, so while I'm watching the Blue Jays lose play ... please note that those players with (unavailable) beside their names denotes no YouTube vid of the event ... Noah Juulsen, 2015, Nikita Scherbak, 2014, Michael McCarron, 2013, Alex Galchenyuk, 2012, Nathan Beaulieu, 2011, Jarred Tinordi, 2010, Louis Leblanc, 2009, Danny Kristo (unavailable), 2008, Ryan McDonagh, 2007, David Fisher (unavailable), 2006, Carey Price, 2005, Kyle Chipchura (unavailable), 2004, Andre Kostitsyn (unavailable), 2003 and Chris Higgins (unavailable), 2002 ...
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on May 1, 2016 18:05:31 GMT -5
... this could have gone on the "Trades and Rumours" board but it's draft related ...
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 1, 2016 18:13:51 GMT -5
... this could have gone on the "Trades and Rumours" board but it's draft related ...
The most I'd offer would be our 9th and one of the rhd prospects we have. They need defense, they would likely be looking at one of Chychrun or Sergachev and they'd get a rhd from us. Still, it's a steep price for a guy that isn't assured to make an impact right away and will have enormous pressure to play for his home team. No way they get Beaulieu from me. Nathan is an established player, top 4, and only just 23. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on May 1, 2016 20:03:48 GMT -5
It's worth repeating that while Gainey was in Montreal he had final say on first round picks. From 2003 to 2009 it was Gainey who made the pick. I'm not sure what rules Gauthier had in place. I believe Bergevin is inclined to go with the recommendation of his scouting staff. Timmins made the Carey Price selection though. After that draft, sometime in August 2005, Gainey was here in St. John's for a intimate presentation to promote a friend's book and speak to 50 people about the state of the team. I managed to be one of those people. After the presentation he opened the floor to questions and he was asked why did he select a goaltender when they had Theodore (a Vezina and Hart in his pocket) and a player like Kopitar was there for the taking. His response astounded me. He practically admitted his first choice (after Crosby) was off the board, so he consulted Timmins for the next player they had ranked ... Which was Price. The player Gainey wanted was the player Minnesota selected - Benoit Pouliot. When we acquired Pouliot I was not surprised since he was "Gainey's player" that draft year. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 1, 2016 22:34:45 GMT -5
Nice to hear that. I thought it was Gainey's choice. Good move Trevor.
|
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on May 2, 2016 14:56:36 GMT -5
I know there are some discussions in other threads about who to pick and whether to move up or not, and I know that it will cost to move up from 9th into the "top eight". It likely is too big a cost for our risk averse management to make, but they will likely ask at least.
The top three are pretty well set: Matthews, Laine, Puljujarvi.
The next five (4-8) should go top eight barring somewhat of a surprise pick being made before the Habs (not impossible though, as it happens enough): Tkachuk, Dubois, Nylander, Chychrun, Juolevi.
The Habs should have one of the following to pick and possibly someone from that 4-8 range that drops: Tyson Jost (if someone does not pounce earlier based on his great U18s), Clayton Keller, Mikhail Sergachev, Logan Brown (the biggest riser of late it would seem). Any of those picks will be a very good prospect, but none will make an immediate impact this fall.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 4, 2016 19:14:52 GMT -5
Found a good looking youtube channel that has compiled highlight videos of a number of this year's draft eligible players. www.youtube.com/user/bigwhite06/videosHere's a look at who has a chance of being available when Montreal picks at #9. Chychrun Thoughts: very mobile. Has a very hard point shot and gets his one-timer off quickly and accurately. Has a very good wrist shot as well. Can rush the puck well. Distributes well. He takes a penalty shot in the clip and dekes the goalie out of his gear. There's no hits in the above package. I don't know about his physical game. Brown Very big body. Skates quite well. Doesn't have what I'd call an NHL shot. I'm not sure he projects as as scorer. Good passer and vision. I think he projects as a Boyle type - with perhaps a little more offense. He's been a late season riser, so he could be gone by the time Habs go up. Jost Lots of skill. 3rd in points in BCHL. Committed to North Dakota, which is a strong program. It means you're waiting though. Not a big player, but not small. Equally capable of scoring as he is setting up for others. BCHL is a good league, but it's not the CHL. That concerns me. He had a fantastic U18. McLeod Short stride, but man he covers some ice quick. You're gonna have to be Ehlers fast to beat him in a race I think. Slick stick handler. Good shot. Kills penalties. He's listed as 6'2 on a number of sites. He'll need to fill out. Honestly, he looks like a bigger Plekanec with more moves and speed. If it were between him and Jost, it would be a tough call. He plays with Alex Nylander, but I wouldn't say that he lives off that. Sergachev My inside favorite, full disclosure. He's got the offensive game and skating. He can shoot and dangle. Chychrun likely has the better one-timer. He's apparently got the Emelin physical element too. Left side player. I like that he's not just an offensive player. Gauthier If Brown is a riser, Gauthier is a faller. He did not have a good WJC. He's a 1997 birth year player. He had 41 goals, but only 16 assists. He's a big body right winger. |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on May 8, 2016 9:10:39 GMT -5
So does anybody else think we should pull a Ditka and offer every single one of our picks for one of those top two picks? I don't think Toronto would do it, but Columbus? Shamelessly appeal to Jarmo Kekäläinen's past as a scouting director? How better to make a scouting director drool than to offer him a boat-load of picks? Sure, you tick off your own scouting team, who basically spent all year working to make one, no-brainer pick, but oh well. Give them all big raises. The chance to get Laine, an NHL-ready, winger with size and scoring ability, and superstar potential? With only a modest cap hit that is entirely performance related? Isn''t that what we need?
If you go back and look at our draft history (and I suspect this is probably true of most teams) how many years would we not subsequently trade every single player that we drafted for one of the top two picks? I'm not counting the Galchenyuk year, or the Price year, as top 5 doesn't really count for the purposes of this exercise, but every other year? I think only the Subban year would end up being a mistake, and even then we could have ended up with Patrick Kane (or James Van Riemsdyke, if we didn't get to #1 - that would have been bad). But every other year I think it would have been a clear win for us. Even the "bad" draft years still would have been at worst a push. I'm thinking 2011, where the top two picks were Nugent-Hopkins and Landeskog. Not super-stars, but all it would have cost us would have been Beaulieu, and maybe Dietz, and it's unknown whether the latter will really make it. Otherwise, it seems like a pretty smart strategy. Kills your prospect depth perhaps, but I think we could get away with doing it this year.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 8, 2016 12:01:23 GMT -5
You'd have to get Cheveldayoff to bite to land Laine but the strategy makes sense this year. Puljujarvi would still be good. Honestly though I don't think you'd find any takers in the top 3 spots. The 4th pick you may get for less.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 8, 2016 12:02:51 GMT -5
It would certainly be a bold strike, but I think 9th (as the primary piece) is a little too far down.
|
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on May 8, 2016 12:30:59 GMT -5
You'd have to get Cheveldayoff to bite to land Laine but the strategy makes sense this year. Puljujarvi would still be good. Honestly though I don't think you'd find any takers in the top 3 spots. The 4th pick you may get for less. Whoops, my mistake. For some reason I thought Columbus had the second overall. Still, same idea. |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on May 8, 2016 14:17:52 GMT -5
It's worth repeating that while Gainey was in Montreal he had final say on first round picks. From 2003 to 2009 it was Gainey who made the pick. I'm not sure what rules Gauthier had in place. I believe Bergevin is inclined to go with the recommendation of his scouting staff. Timmins made the Carey Price selection though. After that draft, sometime in August 2005, Gainey was here in St. John's for a intimate presentation to promote a friend's book and speak to 50 people about the state of the team. I managed to be one of those people. After the presentation he opened the floor to questions and he was asked why did he select a goaltender when they had Theodore (a Vezina and Hart in his pocket) and a player like Kopitar was there for the taking. His response astounded me. He practically admitted his first choice (after Crosby) was off the board, so he consulted Timmins for the next player they had ranked ... Which was Price. The player Gainey wanted was the player Minnesota selected - Benoit Pouliot. When we acquired Pouliot I was not surprised since he was "Gainey's player" that draft year. That's scary. Where would this team be if Gainey had drafted Pouliot instead of Price? |
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on May 9, 2016 4:59:59 GMT -5
So does anybody else think we should pull a Ditka and offer every single one of our picks for one of those top two picks? I don't think Toronto would do it, but Columbus? Shamelessly appeal to Jarmo Kekäläinen's past as a scouting director? How better to make a scouting director drool than to offer him a boat-load of picks? Sure, you tick off your own scouting team, who basically spent all year working to make one, no-brainer pick, but oh well. Give them all big raises. The chance to get Laine, an NHL-ready, winger with size and scoring ability, and superstar potential? With only a modest cap hit that is entirely performance related? Isn''t that what we need? If you go back and look at our draft history (and I suspect this is probably true of most teams) how many years would we not subsequently trade every single player that we drafted for one of the top two picks? I'm not counting the Galchenyuk year, or the Price year, as top 5 doesn't really count for the purposes of this exercise, but every other year? I think only the Subban year would end up being a mistake, and even then we could have ended up with Patrick Kane (or James Van Riemsdyke, if we didn't get to #1 - that would have been bad). But every other year I think it would have been a clear win for us. Even the "bad" draft years still would have been at worst a push. I'm thinking 2011, where the top two picks were Nugent-Hopkins and Landeskog. Not super-stars, but all it would have cost us would have been Beaulieu, and maybe Dietz, and it's unknown whether the latter will really make it. Otherwise, it seems like a pretty smart strategy. Kills your prospect depth perhaps, but I think we could get away with doing it this year. At first I said no as Timmins usually finds a good player in late rounds. But this ideas has a lot of merit. You need high picks to win a cup ie. Kings, Hawks, Pens, etc... I would even consider in top 5 if Dubois is still available. |
|
|
|
Post by Anardil1 on May 11, 2016 8:16:10 GMT -5
I just received my copy of THN Draft preview yesterday. On the cover is a picture of Auston Matthews in a Leafs jersey, with the header proclaiming: Finally, the Maple Leafs get their superstar.  I wonder what the header would have been if another team won the 1st pick? Also, I would love the irony if the Leafs decide to go with Laine instead. Anyways, with their rankings, at #9 they have Jacob Chychrun (D). I personally hope that they go with a different player. Not a big fan. |
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on May 11, 2016 9:47:31 GMT -5
I just received my copy of THN Draft preview yesterday. On the cover is a picture of Auston Matthews in a Leafs jersey, with the header proclaiming: Finally, the Maple Leafs get their superstar. I wonder what the header would have been if another team won the 1st pick? Also, I would love the irony if the Leafs decide to go with Laine instead. Anyways, with their rankings, at #9 they have Jacob Chychrun (D). I personally hope that they go with a different player. Not a big fan. The Leafs Hype Machine is full speed ahead now, with no slowing down in sight. It will be a long summer methinks. Maybe by Christmas fans will realize that the NHL lineup still is not remotely good. We can only hope. I am really torn on our pick, as I expect that the Berg has a soft spot for any of the top three defenders if they are available with our pick. There are a few interesting forwards that I would much rather we pick, but Berg really likes his Dmen. |
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on May 11, 2016 10:03:59 GMT -5
Sour grapes alert:
Matthews with that goofy haircut looks like a pretty boy. And I still find his chosen path a bit weird. He turned down Canadian juniors to play in the US Development League, which isn't that unusual for Americans, but then turned down both junior and the NCAA to play in Switzerland. We'll see next year. Jack Eichel is probably a good comparison, and he had a very strong year in Buffalo (24-32-56 pts). The Leafs would be thrilled with that.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 11, 2016 13:14:54 GMT -5
Gotta remember that Matthews is a full year older than many of the kids in this draft. He really should have gone last year, but for 2 days. At that age a year's development is huge. He's still an excellent prospect, but age always is a factor. How good will Laine be in a year?
|
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on May 11, 2016 13:44:38 GMT -5
Gotta remember that Matthews is a full year older than many of the kids in this draft. He really should have gone last year, but for 2 days. At that age a year's development is huge. He's still an excellent prospect, but age always is a factor. How good will Laine be in a year? How good will Laine be in a year? Well let's just say I was not greedy enough to wish for the first pick overall win in the lottery for the Habs, I was quite looking forward to the second overall consolation prize. He is exactly the type of dynamic scorer that we need. Alas, we pick ninth. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 24, 2016 12:11:11 GMT -5
I read an article a while ago about the cost of moving up (or down) in the draft. There have been some statistical analyses done to try and determine just how much a 1st overall pick is worth in comparison to the 2nd or 3rd pick, etc. Habs Eye on the Prize re-posted it and its a worthwhile read. One analysis had the first pick worth twice as much as pick #2. Another had one without quite that much difference. One consensus is that on average there's quite a drop after the top 3 picks. Now that's an average since some years, there's just one clear choice for #1 (Patrick Kane). In other years there are two (Taveres and Hedman) Other years there can be 4 or 5 (2013 with McKinnon, Barkov, Drouin and Jones, or 1990 with Owen Nolan, Peter Nedved, Keith Primeau, Mike Ricci and Jaromir Jagr). This year, there's a definite drop off after #3, so trying to get into the top 3 will be realistically impossible. Number 4, however might be available, especially if one team values one guy much more than other teams ahead of them. Here's the article. www.habseyesontheprize.com/nhl-entry-draft-picks/2016/5/24/11696842/2016-nhl-entry-draft-picks-cost-value-moving-trading-up-ninth-overall-patrik-laine-piere-luc-dubois |
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on May 25, 2016 8:43:59 GMT -5
Very hard to move up. The Bruins had the #13, 14, and 15 picks in the 1st round last year and offered ALL 3 to Carolina just to move up to #5 to draft Noah Hanifin. No dice. The NHL is very similar to the NBA. Once you get past the top 5 picks, sometimes just the top 2-3, the talent and confidence level drops like a stone to the point where the 10-15 pick in the 1st round is closer in talent to a 2nd round pick than it is to an early 1st round pick.
That said, this year doesn't feel all that special even at the top, so there may be scope to move up a few spots.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 25, 2016 8:59:42 GMT -5
Very hard to move up. The Bruins had the #13, 14, and 15 picks in the 1st round last year and offered ALL 3 to Carolina just to move up to #5 to draft Noah Hanifin. No dice. The NHL is very similar to the NBA. Once you get past the top 5 picks, sometimes just the top 2-3, the talent and confidence level drops like a stone to the point where the 10-15 pick in the 1st round is closer in talent to a 2nd round pick than it is to an early 1st round pick. That said, this year doesn't feel all that special even at the top, so there may be scope to move up a few spots. If I thought I could make a compelling offer for #2, without completely depleting our group, I would. Laine is the real deal. He lead the WHC in goals as an 18 year old (for only a month). I think he's the second coming of Selanne, with more size. |
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on May 25, 2016 10:39:18 GMT -5
Very hard to move up. The Bruins had the #13, 14, and 15 picks in the 1st round last year and offered ALL 3 to Carolina just to move up to #5 to draft Noah Hanifin. No dice. The NHL is very similar to the NBA. Once you get past the top 5 picks, sometimes just the top 2-3, the talent and confidence level drops like a stone to the point where the 10-15 pick in the 1st round is closer in talent to a 2nd round pick than it is to an early 1st round pick. That said, this year doesn't feel all that special even at the top, so there may be scope to move up a few spots. If I thought I could make a compelling offer for #2, without completely depleting our group, I would. Laine is the real deal. He lead the WHC in goals as an 18 year old (for only a month). I think he's the second coming of Selanne, with more size. To get the 2nd overall pick, it would cost us a player like Subban. |
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 25, 2016 11:02:05 GMT -5
If I thought I could make a compelling offer for #2, without completely depleting our group, I would. Laine is the real deal. He lead the WHC in goals as an 18 year old (for only a month). I think he's the second coming of Selanne, with more size. To get the 2nd overall pick, it would cost us a player like Subban. Or Galchenyuk and a later pick. Neither I'd do. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 25, 2016 13:01:58 GMT -5
Yup. The only realistic options are past the first 3 guys, who are if not franchise players, then very good ones. Columbus gave up Johansen last year for Jones, so they're looking to replace a top line forward and Puljujaarvi is that guy. You might have a chance at #'s 4 or 5, but we'd have to give up some good prospects (mcCarron) or blossoming youngsters (Beaulieu) along with our #9 pick to get there. I still might do it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jun 6, 2016 2:25:17 GMT -5
We are not getting one of the top three or even top eight. If we could benefit from dropping a few places Gauthier could still be available at 14. Big body, strong, athletic, explosive, scorer, a better Guillaume Latendresse. Stronger than Big Mac, more athletic, better scorer and almost as tall.
Speed is the common denominator this season and he has it.
Tinordi showed that size without speed doesn't work.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 6, 2016 4:44:49 GMT -5
We are not getting one of the top three or even top eight. If we could benefit from dropping a few places Gauthier could still be available at 14. Big body, strong, athletic, explosive, scorer, a better Guillaume Latendresse. Stronger than Big Mac, more athletic, better scorer and almost as tall. Speed is the common denominator this season and he has it. Tinordi showed that size without speed doesn't work. If all you're looking for is to round out a bang and crash line, sure. There's a reason his stock has dropped. He had a border line horrible WJC. Drafting kids who drop in their draft year is a big risk. www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/10-takeaways-2016-nhl-scouting-combine/I think that the first part of that sums him up. Strong as an ox, but there are serious questions about his hockey sense. I don't think there's any question he'll be a hard worker, but I'd rather spend the pick on a riser than a faller. If the team thought they could turn their two seconds into a late first, and he was still on the board ... |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 6, 2016 16:09:42 GMT -5
Dubois making a case of his own to be
drafted in the top 3DAMIEN COX JUNE 6, 2016, 4:32 PMSAN JOSE — Patrik Laine thinks he’s better than Auston Matthews and Jesse Puljujarvi. Puljujarvi thinks he’s better than Laine. Matthews just chuckles at it all, particularly Laine’s boisterous claims. “Everybody has a right to their opinions,” said the Arizona-born Matthews. “That’s his.” Beyond this Group of Three at the top of the NHL draft, however, you should know there are other players who also feel they might be the best prospect. Pierre-Luc Dubois of the Cape Breton Screaming Eagles would be such a player. He just states it in a different way, a more measured way. “I think I’m working in the right direction,” he said today at a Stanley Cup Final media availability. “The way my game’s going up, the way I’ve matured in the last couple of years or so. I gained more than 40 pounds the last two years. I went from 160 to 205. “I think if I keep working I could be at the top of this draft class, too.” So there you have it. Dubois, who ended the year jumping past Matthew Tkachuk to be the No. 1 North American prospect on NHL Central Scouting’s list, believes the body of work he put together after Christmas combined with his hockey pedigree should have NHL clubs looking very closely at what he could bring to them if drafted. More
|
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jun 6, 2016 16:12:08 GMT -5
We are not getting one of the top three or even top eight. If we could benefit from dropping a few places Gauthier could still be available at 14. Big body, strong, athletic, explosive, scorer, a better Guillaume Latendresse. Stronger than Big Mac, more athletic, better scorer and almost as tall. Speed is the common denominator this season and he has it. Tinordi showed that size without speed doesn't work. If all you're looking for is to round out a bang and crash line, sure. There's a reason his stock has dropped. He had a border line horrible WJC. Drafting kids who drop in their draft year is a big risk. www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/10-takeaways-2016-nhl-scouting-combine/I think that the first part of that sums him up. Strong as an ox, but there are serious questions about his hockey sense. I don't think there's any question he'll be a hard worker, but I'd rather spend the pick on a riser than a faller. If the team thought they could turn their two seconds into a late first, and he was still on the board ... I agree with you 100%. Normally players who drop is like catching a sharp knife. Worse, we have a lot of mediocre players but are missing high first round picks. This draft drops sharply after the first three and again after 8. Gauthier is what we NEED, big, good skater and sniper. He's not a Mathews, Laine or Puljujarvi, not close but that's the way it is this year. Skating is most important, scoring goals with a nose for the net is important too. We need a big wide body along the boards and in the slot. If I thought there was a great player at nine I would say go for it but the POSSIBLE upside for Goat is as hi as anyone who is left. Grown up near Montreal is a bonus although I'm not an advocate of selection by race. |
|
