|
|
Draft '20
May 31, 2020 4:05:50 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by GNick99 on May 31, 2020 4:05:50 GMT -5
The "worry abut Price" angle is way overblown. This isn't the '93 team that had a hard working core to back up Roy's heroics. If "Price" is in their heads, that's their problem. Personally, I don't think Price is going is likely to be a factor. He could just as easily start to lay eggs as scare anyone with his goaltending. Historically, his legend comes from surprising people by winning games for a lousy team but he hasn't won anything from his pure heroics. The Olympic wins were not about him, but rather a stacked superstar team in front of him. If it was Roy or Hasek, the league players have a legitimate concern...Price, not so much. Although as Baby Yoda said... Wrong. I want to be.  Price isn't a playoff goalie. I can't see him being a factor. On another note, if we draw one of those 3 balls on June 26th? In theory, we could draft top 3 and advance deep into playoffs. |
|
|
|
Post by folatre on May 31, 2020 9:47:25 GMT -5
The way I understand it, the structure of lottery excludes any team that qualifies for the official Playoffs (16 teams).
On the 26th, there will be eight unidentified teams with the traditional odds that correspond to slots 8-15. However, a second lottery at some undetermined date in the future will decide which play-in round loser captures the prize if it turns out that there is any need for a second lottery.
For me it is unfair. Montreal and Chicago do the league a favour financially and get screwed. It would be just our luck that some Eastern Conference team with plenty of talent (Toronto, Rangers, etc.) ends up with Lafreniere, Byfield, or Stutzle thanks to this bogus design.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 31, 2020 13:42:17 GMT -5
The way I understand it, the structure of lottery excludes any team that qualifies for the official Playoffs (16 teams). On the 26th, there will be eight unidentified teams with the traditional odds that correspond to slots 8-15. However, a second lottery at some undetermined date in the future will decide which play-in round loser captures the prize if it turns out that there is any need for a second lottery. For me it is unfair. Montreal and Chicago do the league a favour financially and get screwed. It would be just our luck that some Eastern Conference team with plenty of talent (Toronto, Rangers, etc.) ends up with Lafreniere, Byfield, or Stutzle thanks to this bogus design. That actually makes sense to me. If Molson is lucky enough to beat Pittsburgh and make it to the "anything can happen' playoffs, he certainly doesn't deserve a shot at Lafreniere. If we deservedly lose to the Pens, as any cosmic Karma should prescribe, then fine we deserve to be in the lottery. But I do agree that if one of the obviously more talented teams which underperformed for a good chunk of the season and would have made the playoffs in a normal year, somehow lose in the play-in and then get a top 3 pick, that would sting. But it has before, right? NJ, Carolina, Chicago....none of whom deserved a top 3 pick, all got one....in a normal year. The Pens have been advantaged the most by far historically. Struggling as a franchise and they end up with Crosby. Curious, that. I recall a non-public raffle draw I was involved in and the ticket drawn belonged to a recognized jerk, On that occasion it ended up that there was a problem with the draw, and it had to be redone. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on May 31, 2020 14:26:36 GMT -5
If we end up going deep into the playoffs AND getting a high pick...we might as well learn to live with a lifetime contract for Bbinz...
And yes, IF WE WIN THE CUP...I will stop calling him Bbinz. For ONE year ONLY......or the next dumb move.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 31, 2020 17:09:54 GMT -5
If we end up going deep into the playoffs AND getting a high pick...we might as well learn to live with a lifetime contract for Bbinz... And yes, IF WE WIN THE CUP...I will stop calling him Bbinz. For ONE year ONLY......or the next dumb move. Can't go deep AND get a high pick. Mutually exclusive. It's the pick or $$. |
|
|
|
Post by folatre on May 31, 2020 18:16:46 GMT -5
But the money is not going to accrue directly to Molson/Canadiens.
Seventeen, the main thing that irks me about the lottery is not if Montreal beats Pittsburgh the best the Habs can do is the #16 pick. Yes, that irks me a bit because unless Montreal at least makes it to the conference semis it seems like dropping all the way to #16 is not a tradeoff that I would relish given the talent issues on this roster.
But the main thing that irks me is that if Montreal loses to Pittsburgh (and because Bettman reduced Montreal's lottery odds by more than half), the Habs will be sitting there in the lottery and some other club that also lost the play-in such as say Toronto or the Rangers wins the lottery because they got improved odds in this convoluted ad hoc mess Bettman designed.
|
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Jun 2, 2020 6:28:20 GMT -5
The way I understand it, the structure of lottery excludes any team that qualifies for the official Playoffs (16 teams). On the 26th, there will be eight unidentified teams with the traditional odds that correspond to slots 8-15. However, a second lottery at some undetermined date in the future will decide which play-in round loser captures the prize if it turns out that there is any need for a second lottery. For me it is unfair. Montreal and Chicago do the league a favour financially and get screwed. It would be just our luck that some Eastern Conference team with plenty of talent (Toronto, Rangers, etc.) ends up with Lafreniere, Byfield, or Stutzle thanks to this bogus design. So, if we beat Pitt do they inherit our odds? Or drop to 1% |
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 2, 2020 8:04:18 GMT -5
If Montreal beats Pittsburgh, Montreal will not be in the lottery and will pick 16th.
However, let's say Montreal loses to Pittsburgh; the Rangers lose to Carolina; Toronto is upset by Columbus; Florida loses to the Islanders; Chicago loses to Edmonton; Minnesota loses to the Canucks; the Predators lose to Arizona; and Calgary loses to Winnipeg.
In this scenario, the following teams are included in the second lottery should it be necessary: Montreal, New York Rangers, Toronto, Florida, Chicago, Minnesota, Nashville, and Calgary. What strikes me as unfair to clubs like Montreal and Chicago is that all eight of these clubs would share equal odds.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 2, 2020 17:15:53 GMT -5
But the money is not going to accrue directly to Molson/Canadiens. Seventeen, the main thing that irks me about the lottery is not if Montreal beats Pittsburgh the best the Habs can do is the #16 pick. Yes, that irks me a bit because unless Montreal at least makes it to the conference semis it seems like dropping all the way to #16 is not a tradeoff that I would relish given the talent issues on this roster. But the main thing that irks me is that if Montreal loses to Pittsburgh (and because Bettman reduced Montreal's lottery odds by more than half), the Habs will be sitting there in the lottery and some other club that also lost the play-in such as say Toronto or the Rangers wins the lottery because they got improved odds in this convoluted ad hoc mess Bettman designed. The main thing is to not beat Pittsburgh (assuming play-ins go ahead). The more draft stuff I read the more I hear that that top end (8) would have gone top 5 in pretty well any other draft. So there's a surplus of difference makers (aren't we always desiring top 5 picks?) in this particular draft. No generational talent so missing out on Lafreniere is not the worst thing. Could be one or a couple of the guys below him could be almost as good. But we have to retain a top 8 pick. Lafreniere and Byfield will be gone but any of Stutzle, Perfetti, Rossi, Drysdale, Raymond, and Holz could do wonders for the Habs for the next decade. You simply can't pass up that opportunity. |
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jun 2, 2020 17:26:47 GMT -5
But the money is not going to accrue directly to Molson/Canadiens. Seventeen, the main thing that irks me about the lottery is not if Montreal beats Pittsburgh the best the Habs can do is the #16 pick. Yes, that irks me a bit because unless Montreal at least makes it to the conference semis it seems like dropping all the way to #16 is not a tradeoff that I would relish given the talent issues on this roster. But the main thing that irks me is that if Montreal loses to Pittsburgh (and because Bettman reduced Montreal's lottery odds by more than half), the Habs will be sitting there in the lottery and some other club that also lost the play-in such as say Toronto or the Rangers wins the lottery because they got improved odds in this convoluted ad hoc mess Bettman designed. The main thing is to not beat Pittsburgh (assuming play-ins go ahead). The more draft stuff I read the more I hear that that top end (8) would have gone top 5 in pretty well any other draft. So there's a surplus of difference makers (aren't we always desiring top 5 picks?) in this particular draft. No generational talent so missing out on Lafreniere is not the worst thing. Could be one or a couple of the guys below him could be almost as good. But we have to retain a top 8 pick. Lafreniere and Byfield will be gone but any of Stutzle, Perfetti, Rossi, Drysdale, Raymond, and Holz could do wonders for the Habs for the next decade. You simply can't pass up that opportunity. Fully agree! |
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 2, 2020 19:03:19 GMT -5
For sure, in this draft the cutoff that worries me is right around #9-10 (maybe eleven depending how badly some club may covet Askarov), falling to #16 would be tough. I understand the thinking that Montreal already possesses a top five prospect pool, however when I look at it I estimate that is driven to an extent by depth rather than near-lock studs. Kotkaniemi, Caufield, and Romanov are nice talents but I am not entirely sure they are can't miss kids. For me adding another high-ceiling talent into the mix is precisely what a mediocre roster needs.
|
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jun 3, 2020 7:14:48 GMT -5
For sure, in this draft the cutoff that worries me is right around #9-10 (maybe eleven depending how badly some club may covet Askarov), falling to #16 would be tough. I understand the thinking that Montreal already possesses a top five prospect pool, however when I look at it I estimate that is driven to an extent by depth rather than near-lock studs. Kotkaniemi, Caufield, and Romanov are nice talents but I am not entirely sure they are can't miss kids. For me adding another high-ceiling talent into the mix is precisely what a mediocre roster needs. I think that if they were to end up with the 16th the temptation might be there to go for Hendrix Lapierre. He was considered a potential top 5 pick coming into the season, but a series of injuries, thought to be concussions but later diagnosed as a neck problem, derailed his year. He only played 19 games, but then again we drafted Alex Galchenyuk at #3, and he had only played 2 games that year, so... Lapierre was on the verge of returning when everything was shut down, so he never got the chance to prove, one way or the other, whether or not he was really worthy of being in that elite top 10 discussion. It's not a lot to go on, and obviously you don't want to read too much into one tournament, but at the U18 Hlinka Gretzky Cup Lapierre was the 2nd leading scorer with 11 points in 5 games, behind only Cole Perfetti's 12 points in 5 games. Quinton Byfield checked in with 5 points, as did Jamie Drysdale. Those three other guys may all go top 5 this year. Again, one tournament, but still. If we could snag a Top 5 talent at 16, who happens to be a local kid to boot, AND he actually lives up to that talent... A lot of people are always saying we need to swing for the fences instead of slapping multiple singles, and this kid would be a real swing... Still, the best thing would be for this to all just shut down, we win the lottery, and take Lafreniere. Much simpler that way. |
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 3, 2020 10:21:19 GMT -5
Yeah, you are right BC, Lapierre is a very talented kid. Craig Button had him ranked #10 in his final rankings, though Button is admittedly not producing a mock draft or actual predictions on where a particular may come off the board. I figure, given the injury concerns, that Lapierre will in fact be there at #16 and, assuming Montreal's doctors had a chance to look over the kid and his medical files, I would have no problem selecting him there.
|
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Jun 4, 2020 6:34:47 GMT -5
But the money is not going to accrue directly to Molson/Canadiens. Seventeen, the main thing that irks me about the lottery is not if Montreal beats Pittsburgh the best the Habs can do is the #16 pick. Yes, that irks me a bit because unless Montreal at least makes it to the conference semis it seems like dropping all the way to #16 is not a tradeoff that I would relish given the talent issues on this roster. But the main thing that irks me is that if Montreal loses to Pittsburgh (and because Bettman reduced Montreal's lottery odds by more than half), the Habs will be sitting there in the lottery and some other club that also lost the play-in such as say Toronto or the Rangers wins the lottery because they got improved odds in this convoluted ad hoc mess Bettman designed. The main thing is to not beat Pittsburgh (assuming play-ins go ahead). The more draft stuff I read the more I hear that that top end (8) would have gone top 5 in pretty well any other draft. So there's a surplus of difference makers (aren't we always desiring top 5 picks?) in this particular draft. No generational talent so missing out on Lafreniere is not the worst thing. Could be one or a couple of the guys below him could be almost as good. But we have to retain a top 8 pick. Lafreniere and Byfield will be gone but any of Stutzle, Perfetti, Rossi, Drysdale, Raymond, and Holz could do wonders for the Habs for the next decade. You simply can't pass up that opportunity. Drafting high it is imperative to hit on the pick. As major deterrent to success of team if a miss. We have not done this in the past. With 7 straight first round misses. Drafting a Giroux instead of a Fisher nothing kills a team faster. |
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Jun 4, 2020 9:17:29 GMT -5
The main thing is to not beat Pittsburgh (assuming play-ins go ahead). The more draft stuff I read the more I hear that that top end (8) would have gone top 5 in pretty well any other draft. So there's a surplus of difference makers (aren't we always desiring top 5 picks?) in this particular draft. No generational talent so missing out on Lafreniere is not the worst thing. Could be one or a couple of the guys below him could be almost as good. But we have to retain a top 8 pick. Lafreniere and Byfield will be gone but any of Stutzle, Perfetti, Rossi, Drysdale, Raymond, and Holz could do wonders for the Habs for the next decade. You simply can't pass up that opportunity. That seems to be as close to a consensus top eight from most sources. Of course, one of the likes of Askarov, Sanderson or Quinn could sneak in there too. Draft day is never fully predictable. A shot at one of those kids would be just reward for what was a rather poor season. There is a drop off in the tier that would be available at pick 16. There is always a chance that five years down the road, a 16th pick is better than the 8th pick. But, I would still like a shot at one of those top eight guys. |
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 4, 2020 12:43:54 GMT -5
Sanderson seems the most likely to break into that top eight. The NHL Central Scouting Bureau has Sanderson at #4 among North American skaters, ahead of Perfetti and Rossi.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 4, 2020 17:26:14 GMT -5
Sanderson seems the most likely to break into that top eight. The NHL Central Scouting Bureau has Sanderson at #4 among North American skaters, ahead of Perfetti and Rossi. Hmmm. But Central Scouting has historically been 'wrong' more often than most. Some rankings I've seen lately have Sanderson around the 15 mark which says something else entirely. If only we had that working crystal ball. |
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 4, 2020 21:45:05 GMT -5
Agreed, Central Scouting is generally not the most accurate. But the fact they have Sanderson somewhere around the #7 overall position seems to be tapping into this impression that he is rising fast (I read something on espn similar).
I would pick any of the forwards (Rossi, Raymond, Holtz, Perfetti) that could be there at #8 or #9 before I would pick Sanderson. And there is no way Sanderson is there at #16, zero chance.
I could see the Kings or the Devils potentially picking Sanderson at #6 or #7.
|
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Jun 4, 2020 23:04:50 GMT -5
Sanderson has a few things going for him. He is rising. He is a good defender in a weak draft for top end defenders. And he had a very good Five Nations U18 in February, the last major international age-group tournament. I watched his games from that tourney. He was the USA’s best player. He made a difference in games. He is a very good skater. He plays a very solid defensive game. I see many reports that his offence is not up to snuff. I actually watched a guy who jumps into the play, makes good decisions, and ran a decent PP. Not a pure offensive D who abandons his own zone and makes poor decisions (Poirier), but a guy who takes care of his own end, and who can help at the other end. A very solid two-way defender.
I would pick Holtz or Perfetti before him because I see more value to the Habs in a natural scorer, but I truly get why he is a player on the cusp of that top 8 list. If a team really wants a solid D, he could go.
|
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Jun 4, 2020 23:14:06 GMT -5
Sanderson seems the most likely to break into that top eight. The NHL Central Scouting Bureau has Sanderson at #4 among North American skaters, ahead of Perfetti and Rossi. I tend to agree. Quinn did put up great numbers on Ottawa’s second line 5 on 5, not benefiting from playing on the same line with Rossi. Askarov is often called the next generational goalie, but he struggled at the WJC and yet played very well in league play in Russia. But good scouts will pick on projections. Three very different players playing three different positions, in three different leagues. Who said this was easy? |
|
|
|
Post by The Habitual Fan on Jun 5, 2020 11:21:09 GMT -5
Ottawa has good young depth at forward and defense already in the system. If they decided to trade their 2nd pick and drop down a few spots or pick the Russian goalie that could change how other teams plan on picking.
|
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 5, 2020 19:13:42 GMT -5
I like Ottawa's prospect pool too. It is a nice group and most of them have already excelled in the AHL. I still think they could use a kid with elite offensive dynamism and maybe another with high end sniping.
Don't get me wrong, White, Norris, Batherson, Brown, and Formenton look like they are going to be solid NHL forwards but none of them scream point a game type talent. For that matter, I am not convinced that Tkachuk will put up better offensive numbers than a guy like Pacioretty, which is not a huge slight since Pacioretty has had a quite a career and big bodied 30-30 guys do not exactly grow on trees. Granted, Tkachuk also brings physicality and fire.
|
|
|
|
Draft '20
Jun 6, 2020 10:02:24 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by GNick99 on Jun 6, 2020 10:02:24 GMT -5
Sanderson has a few things going for him. He is rising. He is a good defender in a weak draft for top end defenders. And he had a very good Five Nations U18 in February, the last major international age-group tournament. I watched his games from that tourney. He was the USA’s best player. He made a difference in games. He is a very good skater. He plays a very solid defensive game. I see many reports that his offence is not up to snuff. I actually watched a guy who jumps into the play, makes good decisions, and ran a decent PP. Not a pure offensive D who abandons his own zone and makes poor decisions (Poirier), but a guy who takes care of his own end, and who can help at the other end. A very solid two-way defender. I would pick Holtz or Perfetti before him because I see more value to the Habs in a natural scorer, but I truly get why he is a player on the cusp of that top 8 list. If a team really wants a solid D, he could go. I think only way I would pick Sanderson is if team behind us wins lottery and moves up. The scary part is he is what we need. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 6, 2020 12:23:56 GMT -5
I like Ottawa's prospect pool too. It is a nice group and most of them have already excelled in the AHL. I still think they could use a kid with elite offensive dynamism and maybe another with high end sniping. Don't get me wrong, White, Norris, Batherson, Brown, and Formenton look like they are going to be solid NHL forwards but none of them scream point a game type talent. For that matter, I am not convinced that Tkachuk will put up better offensive numbers than a guy like Pacioretty, which is not a huge slight since Pacioretty has had a quite a career and big bodied 30-30 guys do not exactly grow on trees. Granted, Tkachuk also brings physicality and fire. It's a deep pool but not much in the way of difference makers. Brannstrom is a possibility (23 points in 27 AHL games on defence is pretty good). They already have their stud dman in Chabot, so they could really use an elite centre and a scorer. with those 2 high picks they might fill those gaps. Can you imagine them with either Byfield or Rossi at centre and Perfetti as a winger? Ouch. |
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 6, 2020 17:49:49 GMT -5
Brannstrom should be very good but he may not blossom into the big star they thought they were getting in Stone deal. He has a way to go to catch up to kids his age like Hughes and Makar. And if I recall correctly, Chabot was already an NHL regular at age 19 and putting up huge numbers at age 20.
However, most young d-men need time to develop so there is no reason for Ottawa to rush him when he isn't ready. But the over the moon reviews that Dorion showered on the Swede when the Stone trade was announced may have to be tempered now. And the reality is that if Ottawa gets bumped down into the #4 slot in this draft, it may be quite logical for Dorion to call Drysdale's name.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 6, 2020 18:13:14 GMT -5
You can get by as a SC contender with one stud defenseman, especially if the supporting cast is solid. The Sens have Chabot as their stud and (depending on development of course) a supporting group of Max Lajoie, Brunnstrom, Bernard-Docker, Lassi Thomsson and perhaps Jonny Tychonick. I've seen worse.
|
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 7, 2020 16:11:59 GMT -5
The 2021 draft is by all accounts heavy at the top on d-men. Clarke, Lambos, Hughes and Hreschuk are all good bets to go in the top eight. So even if Dorion focuses on procuring the needed elite offensive help this draft, for me the Sens are a lock to be relatively brutal in the standings next season and thus he can shift toward getting more high end defensive answers next summer.
|
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Jun 8, 2020 6:26:37 GMT -5
The 2021 draft is by all accounts heavy at the top on d-men. Clarke, Lambos, Hughes and Hreschuk are all good bets to go in the top eight. So even if Dorion focuses on procuring the needed elite offensive help this draft, for me the Sens are a lock to be relatively brutal in the standings next season and thus he can shift toward getting more high end defensive answers next summer. I think best D-prospect you never mentioned. But forget his name now. |
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Jun 8, 2020 6:28:53 GMT -5
I see where Cole Perfetti won Scholastic of the year in OHL. Looking at him in interview, he has small shoulders. Don't know what to think?
|
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jun 8, 2020 7:58:58 GMT -5
It's a deep pool but not much in the way of difference makers. Brannstrom is a possibility (23 points in 27 AHL games on defence is pretty good). They already have their stud dman in Chabot, so they could really use an elite centre and a scorer. with those 2 high picks they might fill those gaps. Can you imagine them with either Byfield or Rossi at centre and Perfetti as a winger? Ouch. With two top 5 picks they figure to be in pretty good shape to get both an elite centre and a scorer, for sure. I wonder though, if they don't win the lottery themselves, if they would be willing to move up to #2, to get Byfield? There seems to be a consensus that he is head and shoulders (literally and figuratively) above the next group of players, so it might behoove Ottawa to make a play for him. Lord knows they have the draft capital, and a thick prospect base already. Hypothetically, let's say we win the lottery and move up to #2, and Ottawa falls to #4 and #5. With Danault, Domi, Suzuki, Kotkaniemi, Poehling, and Evans already down the middle would we be interested in offering up the 2nd for both of Ottawa's top five picks? It could end up being something like Byfield for Raymond and Drysdale. Would either team do that? Byfield-Tkachuk would be a load to play against... but Byfield-Kotkaniemi-Suzuki down the middle would be pretty sweet too, while giving us the luxury of trading Danault/Domi/Poehling. As usual, while there will be lots of chatter, I suspect that there will be no movement within the top 5. But still, fun to speculate. EDIT: Man, I’m going down a real rabbit hole with this. Let’s say we win 2, and Ottawa gets 3 and 4. I don’t think they would give up both for Byfield, but what about the 3rd and their Islanders pick, 21 or so? Byfield for Stutzle and Lapierre? Or what if they win #1, we win #2. What would they give up to get BOTH Lafreniere and Byfield in the same draft?? Imagine having a line of Lafreniere – Byfield – Tkachuk? Would we even consider letting them get away with that? Does Batherson come into play then? Batherson, #3, and #21? Would that be enough? Brannstrom? How about we add a third team? We win #2, which we trade to Ottawa for #4 and 5… we trade the #4 to New Jersey, for #10 and #17. The final tally would be #2 for #5, 10, 17. Or how about… say maybe… and if this happens… I need to get to work. |
|
