|
|
Post by blny on Jun 6, 2016 16:49:32 GMT -5
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. I think we have an equal need to address the left side of the defense. Sergachev's stock appears to have risen slightly. It may mean that he's no longer available when montreal comes up to pick at #9. He was slotted at #9. IMO, if he is there, he's got a higher ceiling and a better chance of reaching it. My concern with Gauthier is that he's another Stevenson, or worse a Vallis. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jun 6, 2016 17:17:17 GMT -5
I think we have an equal need to address the left side of the defense. Sergachev's stock appears to have risen slightly. It may mean that he's no longer available when montreal comes up to pick at #9. He was slotted at #9. IMO, if he is there, he's got a higher ceiling and a better chance of reaching it. ah, but does he play for a university in Minnesota? |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 6, 2016 17:26:40 GMT -5
I think we have an equal need to address the left side of the defense. Sergachev's stock appears to have risen slightly. It may mean that he's no longer available when montreal comes up to pick at #9. He was slotted at #9. IMO, if he is there, he's got a higher ceiling and a better chance of reaching it. ah, but does he play for a university in Minnesota? Juulsen doesn't.  |
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 6, 2016 19:24:29 GMT -5
Without subtracting elite core player from Habs, there is no way to select in top three.
For me from outside looking in the next 12-15 kids are good prospects but the probable value of one versus another is hard to distinguish with much certainty, so I would not worry if Montreal slides down a few places.
But to stay at #9 is likely and I think the safest philosophy there is simply pick whoever the organisation rates as the best prospect available. If you want to inject a little more instrumental calculation into this decision, you could say well the window to win is open now and there may likely be additional three seasons with the current elite core so perhaps management would say what kid could possibly be a real contributor in that time frame. If that is tiebreaker factor between some guys available at #9, I would say then you pick a kid with a man's body like Sergachev or Gautheir.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 6, 2016 20:50:40 GMT -5
I too think we'll just stick at 9. I have no idea whether Berg feels a dman is a more critical need right now than a scoring forward. I have a very strong suspicion that they LOVE Dubois and it's not inconceivable that they move up from 9 to 4 or 5. Both the Canucks and Oilers might trade down because both need defensemen, but Dubois and Tkatchuk will go 4 and 5, so either of them might be enticed to move down and select a dman. The Math should work. Juolevi, Sergachev and Chycrun are probably fairly even, so if Nylander is taken by anyone between 6 and 8, one of those 3 will be available at #9. After those 3 defensemen, there's a bit of a drop=off to Jake Bean and Charlie MacAvoy, so it's a bit of a gamble for Edmonton or Vancouver, but not a big one. I doubt very much that Nylander falls any further than 8.
So the question becomes, What's the Price? Both those teams need defensemen. Beaulieu seems a bit steep to me, but who knows how Berg values him? The only other guy who might make it work is Pateryn. Emelin is a long shot, though I'd move either. If it's Vancouver, they're short on draft choices period this year, so adding Minnesota's 2nd choice along with #9 and say Pateryn (or preferably Emelin) might make it work. Vancouver would get a young dman, a solid defenseman and a second round choice. Not too bad. Benning's scouting record is pretty good, so they might value a 2nd rounder to replace they one they've lost.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 7, 2016 7:07:54 GMT -5
If Matt Murray continues his strong play, Pittsburgh may have a decision to make WRT Marc-André Fleury ... if they do move Fleury I can see them moving up in the draft ... imagine winning the Cup and getting an elite prospect in the same year ... sigh ...
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 7, 2016 11:47:54 GMT -5
Won't happen. Fleury won't garner anything more than a 2nd round pick. Contract size and the fact they're close to winning a Stanley Cup because they're NOT playing him, will work against Rutherford.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tankdriver on Jun 7, 2016 14:24:22 GMT -5
I mentioned this in another thread, but I think Calgary would be a perfect fit. I can see the Flames dealing their second and/or the pick they acquired from Dallas (2nd rounder).
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 7, 2016 14:52:56 GMT -5
I mentioned this in another thread, but I think Calgary would be a perfect fit. I can see the Flames dealing their second and/or the pick they acquired from Dallas (2nd rounder). Yes, Calgary would be a good fit, at that price. Anyone with two decent goalies is going to have some decisions to make once the NHL greedy guts settle on their expansion plans. A team risks losing one of their decent goalies in an expansion draft. The Habs don't have that problem.  |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 8, 2016 12:43:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Tankdriver on Jun 8, 2016 13:44:21 GMT -5
I wouldn't take Button's list to heart. If anyone thinks Julien Gauthier drops to 43 they are kidding themselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 8, 2016 13:48:15 GMT -5
I wouldn't take Button's list to heart. If anyone thinks Julien Gauthier drops to 43 they are kidding themselves. It's definitely a list about who he'd pick and where. He's done lists where he picks who he thinks the team in that spot should pick in the past. It will be interesting to see where Gauthier lands. He's a physical specimen, but there are question marks as big as he is about his mental agility. He had a terrible WJC. Can he up his game against the best of his peers, or is he only good on paper? I suspect he'll go in the first, but he could drop closer to the last ten pretty easily. |
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 8, 2016 13:58:16 GMT -5
It is hard to say. Gauthier possess the great physical measureables and by all accounts he is a good kid who works hard. I continue to see him be selected in the middle third of first round.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 8, 2016 16:22:22 GMT -5
It is hard to say. Gauthier possess the great physical measureables and by all accounts he is a good kid who works hard. I continue to see him be selected in the middle third of first round. I don't question the work ethic. When he was drafted into the Q, his prerequisite for reporting to the club was that the town had a proper gym. His father was a competitive body builder. Gauthier is a gym rat. I just question whether he's got the game to produce offensively at the pro level, and I think that's the big thing that looms over him. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 9, 2016 16:18:26 GMT -5
I'd be very leery of taking him. While he can likely keep anyone from letting him get from A to B it sounds like he may not know where B is. If he's still there at 45 that might be an ok gamble. Nah. Third round.
|
|
|
|
Post by frozone on Jun 9, 2016 16:38:58 GMT -5
I'd be very leery of taking him. While he can likely keep anyone from letting him get from A to B it sounds like he may not know where B is. If he's still there at 45 that might be an ok gamble. Nah. Third round. I think Gauthier could do well under an old school type NHL coach like MT. He won`t even have to think, he`ll just need to know how to carry out orders. It`s the creative wizards that I worry about under MT. |
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jun 9, 2016 17:37:39 GMT -5
I'd be very leery of taking him. While he can likely keep anyone from letting him get from A to B it sounds like he may not know where B is. If he's still there at 45 that might be an ok gamble. Nah. Third round. High risk, high reward. Off all the players likely to be available at 9, he is most likely to not make it. On the other side of the coin he is the most likely for us to say in three years, "why the HeLLL didn't we draft him when we had a chance". If there was someone else in this draft that we really really want go ahead and pick them, but after the top 3 er maybe top 5 there is no one I'm in love with. We have a ton of players in the system fighting to impress in camp, some have already had a cup of tea, some still in juniors, all will be serviceable nhl players but no real stars. Big, strong, fast, sniper, good skater, good defensively, good work ethic and athletic. Questionable hockey smarts and vision but teachable. We don't need another bottom 6 forward or third line "D". I would take a chance on a possible star instead of picking a third line sure thing. Not to say he wouldn't end up a third line sure thing or situational tough guy checker. My opinion is based on what I've read, not observational from the cold seats in Rouyen and Val d'Or. |
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Jun 12, 2016 3:27:36 GMT -5
I too think we'll just stick at 9. I have no idea whether Berg feels a dman is a more critical need right now than a scoring forward. I have a very strong suspicion that they LOVE Dubois and it's not inconceivable that they move up from 9 to 4 or 5. Both the Canucks and Oilers might trade down because both need defensemen, but Dubois and Tkatchuk will go 4 and 5, so either of them might be enticed to move down and select a dman. The Math should work. Juolevi, Sergachev and Chycrun are probably fairly even, so if Nylander is taken by anyone between 6 and 8, one of those 3 will be available at #9. After those 3 defensemen, there's a bit of a drop=off to Jake Bean and Charlie MacAvoy, so it's a bit of a gamble for Edmonton or Vancouver, but not a big one. I doubt very much that Nylander falls any further than 8. So the question becomes, What's the Price? Both those teams need defensemen. Beaulieu seems a bit steep to me, but who knows how Berg values him? The only other guy who might make it work is Pateryn. Emelin is a long shot, though I'd move either. If it's Vancouver, they're short on draft choices period this year, so adding Minnesota's 2nd choice along with #9 and say Pateryn (or preferably Emelin) might make it work. Vancouver would get a young dman, a solid defenseman and a second round choice. Not too bad. Benning's scouting record is pretty good, so they might value a 2nd rounder to replace they one they've lost. I am against trading up...feel there is good talent there at 9th. Unless price is much cheaper than past years. I guy like Keller at 9 is a good pick |
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Jun 12, 2016 3:29:12 GMT -5
It is hard to say. Gauthier possess the great physical measureables and by all accounts he is a good kid who works hard. I continue to see him be selected in the middle third of first round. Gauthier disappeared in playoffs with zero hits. Not a guy I would build around |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 12, 2016 12:53:49 GMT -5
FWIW, there are a lot of grumblings that Columbus isn't sold on Jesse Puljujarvi at #3. They want to draft a center, and the buzz is they're looking to move down to get it. The hype around Laine, and his play at the WHC to back up his WJC, has separated the two Finns. "Pu" is still the consensus #3, and an extremely good prospect. I have no idea what we'd have to add to #9. It would be a lot. Still, I'd be asking.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 12, 2016 13:28:58 GMT -5
Yes, it's interesting how Laine has pulled away from Puljujarvi. I'd take Laine ahead, but I don't think there's that much difference. Laine 'improved' a bit more late in the season, then was picked for the Finn WC team while Puljujarvi wasn't. Add in the fact that Tkachuk looked really good at the Mem Cup and you can see why Puljujarvi's stock has fallen even though he isn't any worse a prospect than he was 2 months ago. He's shown as a right winger, but I think he's played centre before too. If Columbus is considering trading the pick, that makes 3 teams that Berg should be talking to. Hopefully he can work something out with one of them, but if not, I'm quite happy taking Jost or Keller at #9. It's a pretty strong group, right through to 11 or 12.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 12, 2016 15:22:54 GMT -5
I too think we'll just stick at 9. I have no idea whether Berg feels a dman is a more critical need right now than a scoring forward. I have a very strong suspicion that they LOVE Dubois and it's not inconceivable that they move up from 9 to 4 or 5. Both the Canucks and Oilers might trade down because both need defensemen, but Dubois and Tkatchuk will go 4 and 5, so either of them might be enticed to move down and select a dman. The Math should work. Juolevi, Sergachev and Chycrun are probably fairly even, so if Nylander is taken by anyone between 6 and 8, one of those 3 will be available at #9. After those 3 defensemen, there's a bit of a drop=off to Jake Bean and Charlie MacAvoy, so it's a bit of a gamble for Edmonton or Vancouver, but not a big one. I doubt very much that Nylander falls any further than 8. I'm with you. I'd make a substantial offer to move up to 3, but otherwise standing pat makes the most sense. It's not inconceivable that Dubois could slide either. I could see Tkachuk and Nylander being drafted ahead of him due to bloodlines, and could also see a couple of D men going ahead of him, cause every team ahead of us needs quality young D. And who knows, maybe there's a different forward that some team is in love with. Ok, that's a lot of 'ifs', but you never know. |
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Jun 19, 2016 5:44:09 GMT -5
Bob McKenzie's draft list will be out on Monday.
Around the web, others are saying Keller may go to Arizona at 7th. I feel Dubois may slide a couple, go around 5-7th. Oilers should trade down 2-5 slots(just my opinion). They need defense and could acquire an asset and still end up with top d-man in draft. Sounds like Bean has jumped over Jost in Habs rankings.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 19, 2016 12:58:26 GMT -5
Bob McKenzie's draft list will be out on Monday. Around the web, others are saying Keller may go to Arizona at 7th. I feel Dubois may slide a couple, go around 5-7th. Oilers should trade down 2-5 slots(just my opinion). They need defense and could acquire an asset and still end up with top d-man in draft. Sounds like Bean has jumped over Jost in Habs rankings. Yes, I suspect Keller will go earlier than all the 'ratings' suggest. Gnick, what info do you have that leads you to believe Bean has moved ahead of Jost? |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 19, 2016 14:24:09 GMT -5
I saw a list or two today that had Juolevi dropping and Chychrun and Sergachev in the top 5. I'd say things are pretty fluid outside the top 3. Should make for an interesting draft to watch as teams may well go off the board, trades may happen, and there will be general uncertainty from the pundits.
|
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Jun 19, 2016 14:33:34 GMT -5
Bob McKenzie's draft list will be out on Monday. Around the web, others are saying Keller may go to Arizona at 7th. I feel Dubois may slide a couple, go around 5-7th. Oilers should trade down 2-5 slots(just my opinion). They need defense and could acquire an asset and still end up with top d-man in draft. Sounds like Bean has jumped over Jost in Habs rankings. Yes, I suspect Keller will go earlier than all the 'ratings' suggest. Gnick, what info do you have that leads you to believe Bean has moved ahead of Jost? Grabt McCagg on another board says some scouts cooled on Jost saying his U18 tourny he ran up points against weak clubs, put weaker showing against better clubs. Grant will be a guest on 690 all week, he may comment on this not sure. They don't have him as non-draft, but not as high as we think. P.S. Just went back to check...he will be on with Tony Marinaro each weekday at 11:05, except Thursday at 8:05 |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 19, 2016 14:49:39 GMT -5
The Ivan Hlinka is the true U18 world championship where every country's best kids attend. Still the U18 is not chump change. Keller was in that tourney
|
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Jun 20, 2016 13:18:28 GMT -5
The Ivan Hlinka is the true U18 world championship where every country's best kids attend. Still the U18 is not chump change. Keller was in that tourney Was able to get a little more on Jost and others from McCagg. He said Jost is the most overrated in draft. racked up points in blowout wins versus the chumps at the U18's..when they played the bigger, better teams, he had troubles battling though his checks and keeping up. He lacks a top gear..and for a 5-11 guy that's a concern at the next level. He's smart. competitive, good puck skills, he'll be a good NHLer...but when you project his upside, there are concerns about his ability to be a top 2 center...on a good team at least. Jost will go 11-15. I'm expecting Keller to go in the top ten now..just too much buzz around him....might be the next Kane. McLeod could be a sensational two-way center that helps you in games. Most scouts have doubts about him and that's fine..we'll see in five years if I'm wrong. McLeod is 6-2 and has a non stop engine, I expect him to go 13-15 now..I also expect that in a few years it will be like with Larkin..some teams will be kicking themselves for passing on him. Trust me.. there is no consensus this year. From slots 6th-13th its a wildcard. Some scouts ranked a guy 6th, next scout he'll be 13. Lot depends on what happens with Sergachev, some say he'll be first dman taken..others have him ranked fifth or sixth dman. Fabbro is another wildcard, he is high on some team's lists. Next scout said don't think he'll be anything more than a 4th dman. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 20, 2016 14:07:25 GMT -5
Thanks Gnick. All this uncertainty is why Berg gets paid the big bucks, if he is able to see through the noise. I've always believed there are some qualities in a player that lead to a high likelihood of success and it usually isn't talent, which is a requirement in any case. I've noticed that if a guy is driven and almost obsessed with the game (typically a rink rat), they're more likely to achieve their goals. I still recall the comments about Joe Sakic as a juniour...that the puck followed him around and if he didn't have it, he was like a man possessed to get it back. Yet he was only the 15th pick in the 887 draft. The only centre picked ahead of him was Pierre Turgeon, while Brendan Shanahan went 2nd. When you see the list of guys picked ahead of Sakic, it makes you cry. Even some guys who were fine NHLr's should never have gone before Sakic (in hindsight). These include Glen Wesley, Wayne McBean, Chris Joseph, Dave Archibald, LUke Richardson, Jimmy Waite, Bryan Fogarty, Jayson More, Yves Racine, Keith Osborne, Dean Chynoweth and Stephane Quintal. Our pick came two choices after Sakic with Andrew Cassels. It was one of the most disappointing drafts for me. I was so hopeful Sakic would drop two more spots.
Anyway, Sakic isn't the only guy you hear those terms about. Guys whose whole life revolves around hockey, while not having the most balanced life, often become very good or great players (Gallagher ring a bell?). I'd have that characteristic of being driven right up there with skating and hockey IQ. You can improve skating a bit with coaching, but you can't make someone smarter or more aware or more focused on getting better.
Yes, this year has some real question marks after the first 3 picks. It's hard to figure out the next level and team preferences will really skew the order of picks. I suspect Keller, as you say, is going to go higher than 10th and I also suspect Jost will fall a bit. While the BCHL is a decent league, it's not the CHL so Jost's competition isn't as tough as some other guys. Having said that, both Brett Hull and Paul Kariya came out of Penticton in the BCHL (guess where Jost played?) and they turned out ok.
Can't wait till this weekend.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tankdriver on Jun 20, 2016 23:06:45 GMT -5
It seems every mock draft has us drafting Logan Brown a 6-6 center. I am not sure how I feel about it. Is he another McCarran? Third line potential. Interested to hear your thoughts. I'm holding out hope that we trade with Columbus or Edmonton and draft Puj or Dubois
|
|
