|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Aug 22, 2023 17:58:18 GMT -5
don't get the panic to get Rein over to Laval... Guhle was drafted in 2020 as an 18 year old and played the next 2 years in the Dub... that's ok but Rein playing 1 year in Switzerland will ruin his career? The kid needs to mature physically and I think that habs player development team have given him the tools he needs to do that. I think we will see Rein in laval next year better prepared to play in the AHL. It's NOT panic, it's the right path for the quickest development. It would be the quickest if Houle gives him the minutes to develop... if not, then Kloten is the best place for him... we'll never know because he's in kloten |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Aug 22, 2023 18:00:02 GMT -5
Nyet et non. And is a 100 point scorer necessary ( I can't remember the last team who had one who won the cup and am too lazy to look, but did Vegas have one?). A 100 point player may not be necessary, but a 80 or 90 point player sure is .... |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Aug 22, 2023 18:07:53 GMT -5
The problem is, like Skilly has been saying for years is the lack of offense. We need to get players that can put the puck in the net and put up points. When was the last time we had a player with 100 point season? Answer: Lafleur 44 years ago. I don't know if he is the guy but Nylander and potentially Matthews both could be hitting the market in 10 months. Let's refine your question ... When was the last time we had an 80 point player? 2007-08 (Alex Kovalev) When was the last time we had a 90 point player? 1995-96 (Pierre Turgeon and Vincent Damphouse) Now, did Vegas has either. No. But over the past decade, most teams did. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Aug 22, 2023 18:23:12 GMT -5
Offense starts with defense and vice-versa (though a lot of people might disagree with me on that point). The Cup winning Habs teams all had D-men who could move the puck. Robinson, Lapointe, Harvey, JC Tremblay, Chelios, etc etc. If you can't transition well, teams with natural scorers won't do well. Yes, you need finishers, so a guy like Michkov (assuming he isn't a cancer, which seems to be the worry), would help. We have Caufield as an elite shooter already. Suzuki is a solid finisher as is Dach. Gally has a very underrated wrist shot. Monahan has always been a scorer. I wouldn't call us great up front, but definitely solid and I'm excluding guys who have pre pro history of scoring but have yet to graduate to prove it (Mesar, Kidney, Roy, Farrell, Beck). But who is going to spring them, or get them the puck? Can you imagine the weak scoring teams we had in the past without Andrei Markov or PK? How much worse would that have been? Michkov was clearly bypassed because of either rumours or hard information that he is a problem child. That's yet to be shown at the NHL level, of course, but the Habs weren't the only team that judged the risk too high. That left them in an awkward situation where there were no elite forwards left, other than small ones and they simply didn't want to add more to an already smallish roster and prospect group. A big RHD near the top on their list then became the choice. Between Guhle (who showed some flashes of excellent passing and vision), Reinbacher and Hutson, their transition game should be highly ranked. And let's hope Slafkovsky takes that huge jump this year and starts becoming a real problem for opposing defenses. He's the wild card. He has been pretty well completely ignored by pundits as a bust. If he is now stronger and quicker and can maintain that level through the 3rd period, that is a complete game changer. This is going to be a REALLY interesting year. The defense creates offense has never been true for the Habs since about 1998 If we are to believe that Vladimir Malakhov , Patrice Brisebois, Stephane Quintal, Lyle Odelein, Petr Popovic and Craig Rivet were the driving force behind Turgeon and Damphousse's offense in 1996, then why couldn't they help anybody accumulate more than 50 points from 1998-2001? If Markov drove the offense, then why was he on some teams with pretty poor scoring? You know what drives offense? Offensive players and players that can find the back of the net. How many times has a defenseman sprung a 2 on 1 that was clusterf**ked by this team? I know this board is sick and tired of me commenting on almost every chance, every time they didn't pass at the blueline, every time they didn't even get a shot off. Transition from the defence sometimes creates chances, you can't win on chances. You need to be able to score. Caufield was injured for almost half the year and he almost out scored the entire defense last year. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Aug 22, 2023 20:09:03 GMT -5
It's NOT panic, it's the right path for the quickest development. It would be the quickest if Houle gives him the minutes to develop... if not, then Kloten is the best place for him... we'll never know because he's in klotenI wish you dind't write that, it triggered a line from Full Metal Jacket..."The only good thing that comes from Kloten"  |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Aug 22, 2023 23:04:17 GMT -5
[ If we are to believe that Vladimir Malakhov , Patrice Brisebois, Stephane Quintal, Lyle Odelein, Petr Popovic and Craig Rivet were the driving force behind Turgeon and Damphousse's offense in 1996, then why couldn't they help anybody accumulate more than 50 points from 1998-2001? Please, please, please don't bring up Malakhov and Quintal in my presence. The Keystone Cops pair. To your question, Turgeon and Damphousse were excellent centres who could create for themselves. Saku was on that team too, so they had damned good strength up the middle. You and I are never going to agree on this point, but I never said that good defensemen alone create offense. You need good centres, you need scorers. And maybe you can find the occasional outlier like that 96 team which had horrible offensive defensemen and yet scored, but if the Avs didn't have Makar and the Canuck's Hughes and the Lightning Hedman and the Stars Heiskanen and I could on and on, none of their forwards would score as much. They'd still score because Rantanen and Mackinnon are damned good as are Point and Kucherov and Pettersson and Miller and Roope Hintz and Jason Robertson and and I could go on and on. Good scorers will score, but they can be so much more with good transition Dmen. Habs need both. Suzuki and Caufield are a good start as are Dach and Monahan, but we need Slafkovsky to jump and Roy or Farrell to add something to the top 9. I think Gallagher will have a bounce back year, so the forward group is a work in process. The whole team is a work in process. Michkov would have been a sexier pick than Reinbacher, but it remains to be seen who adds more to a team. There will be much egg on the face if Michkov lights it up in the NHL, for sure. I wonder how it would feel if we picked Michkov and he killed the atmosphere on the team while Reinbacher turns into Lidstrom 2.0. Just as angry? |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Aug 23, 2023 5:12:58 GMT -5
I'm going to argue long and hard that now you don't need the 75 Habs to win a cup.
One of the great example was our team 3 years ago. Hard core through and through, we were maybe a sniper away from a cup.
This year Cup winner was also all about playing hard team hockey. Eichels 66 points was the top producer and 71st overall for points. Pietrangelo was 15th in scoring for defenseman.
I can't remember the Olympic team of nobodies that gave our super duper all star team fits. They played like their lives were on the line.
My hope is that we are building that kind of team because at this point, we certainly lack elite talent.
|
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Aug 23, 2023 7:52:35 GMT -5
It would be the quickest if Houle gives him the minutes to develop... if not, then Kloten is the best place for him... we'll never know because he's in klotenI wish you dind't write that, it triggered a line from Full Metal Jacket..."The only good thing that comes from Kloten" Daaaamn... I forgot about that lol |
|
|
|
Post by Tankdriver on Aug 23, 2023 9:17:59 GMT -5
I'm going to argue long and hard that now you don't need the 75 Habs to win a cup. One of the great example was our team 3 years ago. Hard core through and through, we were maybe a sniper away from a cup. This year Cup winner was also all about playing hard team hockey. Eichels 66 points was the top producer and 71st overall for points. Pietrangelo was 15th in scoring for defenseman. I can't remember the Olympic team of nobodies that gave our super duper all star team fits. They played like their lives were on the line. My hope is that we are building that kind of team because at this point, we certainly lack elite talent. Yes and no.... Eichel had 26 points in 22 games, so over a point per game basis. In the regular season he had 66 points in 67 games...pro rate that over 82 games and he is basically a point per game player (~82 points). Our best player Nick Suzuuki had 66 in 82 games..so he needs to up his totals by roughly 15 more points a game to reach Vegas standard. That growth has to make its way throught the whole Habs lineup. Another thing not to forget was if Edmonton had any goaltending in that series (I blame the coach for not going to Campbell) I don't think Vegas makes it to the final. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Aug 23, 2023 10:32:48 GMT -5
[ If we are to believe that Vladimir Malakhov , Patrice Brisebois, Stephane Quintal, Lyle Odelein, Petr Popovic and Craig Rivet were the driving force behind Turgeon and Damphousse's offense in 1996, then why couldn't they help anybody accumulate more than 50 points from 1998-2001? Please, please, please don't bring up Malakhov and Quintal in my presence. The Keystone Cops pair. To your question, Turgeon and Damphousse were excellent centres who could create for themselves. Saku was on that team too, so they had damned good strength up the middle. You and I are never going to agree on this point, but I never said that good defensemen alone create offense. You need good centres, you need scorers. And maybe you can find the occasional outlier like that 96 team which had horrible offensive defensemen and yet scored, but if the Avs didn't have Makar and the Canuck's Hughes and the Lightning Hedman and the Stars Heiskanen and I could on and on, none of their forwards would score as much. They'd still score because Rantanen and Mackinnon are damned good as are Point and Kucherov and Pettersson and Miller and Roope Hintz and Jason Robertson and and I could go on and on. Good scorers will score, but they can be so much more with good transition Dmen. Habs need both. Suzuki and Caufield are a good start as are Dach and Monahan, but we need Slafkovsky to jump and Roy or Farrell to add something to the top 9. I think Gallagher will have a bounce back year, so the forward group is a work in process. The whole team is a work in process. Michkov would have been a sexier pick than Reinbacher, but it remains to be seen who adds more to a team. There will be much egg on the face if Michkov lights it up in the NHL, for sure. I wonder how it would feel if we picked Michkov and he killed the atmosphere on the team while Reinbacher turns into Lidstrom 2.0. Just as angry? Agreed that we will never agree MacKinnon had seasons of 97 and 99 points BEFORE Makar arrived. Where we seem to disagree, and you can correct me if I’m wrong, is in our definition of offense. When I talk about offense, I’m referring to offensive production. It appears to me (through your various posts) you define it as the transition from defending to going on the offensive attack. This, to me, is actually “expected goals” (ie chances). I agree good puck moving transition defensemen improve the expected goals stats immensely. They do not improve the actual production (although some actually do, as they score quite frequently) Putting the puck in the net is the key ingredient to offense. That takes scorers. So do defensemen create offense or not … cause now you say they can’t do it alone. Which is kinda my whole point |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Aug 23, 2023 14:18:53 GMT -5
I'm going to argue long and hard that now you don't need the 75 Habs to win a cup. One of the great example was our team 3 years ago. Hard core through and through, we were maybe a sniper away from a cup. This year Cup winner was also all about playing hard team hockey. Eichels 66 points was the top producer and 71st overall for points. Pietrangelo was 15th in scoring for defenseman. I can't remember the Olympic team of nobodies that gave our super duper all star team fits. They played like their lives were on the line. My hope is that we are building that kind of team because at this point, we certainly lack elite talent. Yes and no.... Eichel had 26 points in 22 games, so over a point per game basis. In the regular season he had 66 points in 67 games...pro rate that over 82 games and he is basically a point per game player (~82 points). Our best player Nick Suzuuki had 66 in 82 games..so he needs to up his totals by roughly 15 more points a game to reach Vegas standard. That growth has to make its way throught the whole Habs lineup. Another thing not to forget was if Edmonton had any goaltending in that series (I blame the coach for not going to Campbell) I don't think Vegas makes it to the final. Going to end this real quick!  LEAFS |
|
|
|
Post by Tankdriver on Aug 23, 2023 21:08:17 GMT -5
Leafs issue was allocation of dollars. They dropped about 6 million into their top 4 that they shouldn't have. Put that into 1 or 2 players and subtract Brodie 5 million and they have a real shot. I actually think they hVe a really good team this year. Domi, Bertuzzi and Klingberg were nice adds plus they have Knies for a full season. Also was hoping Matthews would of gone for 14 million when he resigned today. In 2 or 3 years that difference won't be noticeable because the cap will go up 6 or 7 million.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Aug 24, 2023 1:58:58 GMT -5
MacKinnon had seasons of 97 and 99 points BEFORE Makar arrived. Where we seem to disagree, and you can correct me if I’m wrong, is in our definition of offense. When I talk about offense, I’m referring to offensive production. It appears to me (through your various posts) you define it as the transition from defending to going on the offensive attack. This, to me, is actually “expected goals” (ie chances). I agree good puck moving transition defensemen improve the expected goals stats immensely. They do not improve the actual production (although some actually do, as they score quite frequently) Putting the puck in the net is the key ingredient to offense. That takes scorers. So do defensemen create offense or not … cause now you say they can’t do it alone. Which is kinda my whole point Because of variance in games played, I'll use ppg. Mackinnon 2017/18 1.31 2018/19 1.21 Good scorers will always score After Makar arrives 2021/22 1.35 2022/23 1.56 Good scorers will score more with help from the defence. I don't think we disagree on the main points...you need finishers because no matter how good your Corsi is, if you can't put the puck in the net when you have all that possession, it's useless. And good scorers will never score as much as they should if they're playing in their own end most of the game. I guess where we differ (perhaps) is that if I were building a team, I'd build my defense first and then get the scoring. It always depends on where you're drafting and who is available. This past year, with Michkov at the centre of difficult choice, it might give us some evidence. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Aug 24, 2023 5:43:42 GMT -5
MacKinnon had seasons of 97 and 99 points BEFORE Makar arrived. Where we seem to disagree, and you can correct me if I’m wrong, is in our definition of offense. When I talk about offense, I’m referring to offensive production. It appears to me (through your various posts) you define it as the transition from defending to going on the offensive attack. This, to me, is actually “expected goals” (ie chances). I agree good puck moving transition defensemen improve the expected goals stats immensely. They do not improve the actual production (although some actually do, as they score quite frequently) Putting the puck in the net is the key ingredient to offense. That takes scorers. So do defensemen create offense or not … cause now you say they can’t do it alone. Which is kinda my whole point Because of variance in games played, I'll use ppg. Mackinnon 2017/18 1.31 2018/19 1.21 Good scorers will always score After Makar arrives 2021/22 1.35 2022/23 1.56 Good scorers will score more with help from the defence. I don't think we disagree on the main points...you need finishers because no matter how good your Corsi is, if you can't put the puck in the net when you have all that possession, it's useless. And good scorers will never score as much as they should if they're playing in their own end most of the game. I guess where we differ (perhaps) is that if I were building a team, I'd build my defense first and then get the scoring. It always depends on where you're drafting and who is available. This past year, with Michkov at the centre of difficult choice, it might give us some evidence. As much as I want players with offensive production, this year, I am not that upset over the Reinbacher selection. I wanted Carlsson but there was no path for us to get him. We were left deciding between Michkov, Reinbacher, Leonard, and Dvorsky. Each one had issues. All 4 came from what I would term questionable development streams (ie - not the CHL). I'm not sure I would have drafted Michkov. If he turns into a scoring stud, then I'll be in the "got burned" camp also. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Aug 24, 2023 19:53:28 GMT -5
The only huge upside if we picked Michkov is that we would have two yesrs to trade him.
He's a unicorn that could of brought us a couple of high potential players. I can see a team giving up a Laffy and Kakko equivilant on his perceived value. Or a stud defenseman like D'Andre.
Extra value can be extracted in creative ways...
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Aug 25, 2023 5:34:03 GMT -5
The only huge upside if we picked Michkov is that we would have two yesrs to trade him. He's a unicorn that could of brought us a couple of high potential players. I can see a team giving up a Laffy and Kakko equivilant on his perceived value. Or a stud defenseman like D'Andre. Extra value can be extracted in creative ways... That's kinda where my head was too ... |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Aug 25, 2023 12:20:54 GMT -5
As much as I want players with offensive production, this year, I am not that upset over the Reinbacher selection. I wanted Carlsson but there was no path for us to get him. We were left deciding between Michkov, Reinbacher, Leonard, and Dvorsky. Each one had issues. All 4 came from what I would term questionable development streams (ie - not the CHL). I'm not sure I would have drafted Michkov. If he turns into a scoring stud, then I'll be in the "got burned" camp also. I wanted Carlsson too (since Bedard was clearly not available), but as you say, no chance Anaheim was giving him up. |
|
|
|
Post by Dschens on Aug 25, 2023 13:52:23 GMT -5
We were left deciding between Michkov, Reinbacher, Leonard, and Dvorsky. Each one had issues. All 4 came from what I would term questionable development streams (ie - not the CHL). Really, you too, Skilly? Sometimes I think you Canadians are living on a historic island smoking something really bad. Wake up folks, nowadays hockey is a world wide game and calling leagues in the Top 12 of the hockey world "questionable development streams" is just ignorant. The sustained success of Canadian national hockey teams is not the result of the brilliance of the methods in the CHL but a consequence of many young Canadians playing the game of hockey. Therefore it's just a matter of statistics that you get a lot of 1,90m tall guys to choose from. Every country has its own sports landscape shaped by different factors, for example history, the climate, GDP and some other things. In Germany, for example, hockey teams are vying for talents with other team sports, mainly with football, handball, basketball and even field hockey. Why is the US women's football national team far more successful than the men's national team? Because of the the pool of talents they can choose from. It's just that simple. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Aug 25, 2023 15:28:37 GMT -5
I was reading some comments on Laffy and one of the things that stood out were the comments that he's good at everything but not outstanding on anything. Thus you don't know where his career is headed simply because you can't say that if he improved on something, it would unlock his potential.
The same thing when I read that Rein has no holes in his game. Great. Sounds really great. But no one said he has exceptional skating or shooting so if he improved on one, it unlocks the other.
Example is Guhle. Always known to be a beast to play against. As he matures that beast mode goes with him. Physically maturing is a given and that is going to "unlock" his potential.
I honestly don't know where Rein is headed. At this point, top 6 "looks" like a lock. Top 4 and top 2 are his "potential". OBVIOUSLY we ALL want to see him as a league level out number 1.
Beyond Rein, the worst part is that we have no one claiming we have "stars" despite a 1st OA and a 5th OA. Of course we all hope they turn into one....
|
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Aug 25, 2023 15:47:24 GMT -5
We were left deciding between Michkov, Reinbacher, Leonard, and Dvorsky. Each one had issues. All 4 came from what I would term questionable development streams (ie - not the CHL). Really, you too, Skilly? Sometimes I think you Canadians are living on a historic island smoking something really bad. Wake up folks, nowadays hockey is a world wide game and calling leagues in the Top 12 of the hockey world "questionable development streams" is just ignorant. The sustained success of Canadian national hockey teams is not the result of the brilliance of the methods in the CHL but a consequence of many young Canadians playing the game of hockey. Therefore it's just a matter of statistics that you get a lot of 1,90m tall guys to choose from. Every country has its own sports landscape shaped by different factors, for example history, the climate, GDP and some other things. In Germany, for example, hockey teams are vying for talents with other team sports, mainly with football, handball, basketball and even field hockey. Why is the US women's football national team far more successful than the men's national team? Because of the the pool of talents they can choose from. It's just that simple. There is a hierarchy in how these leagues develop players. I don't know how much of a difference the KHL is to the Swiss league. I suspect it's a bit tougher. However there in no question that the AHL is the development league of the NHL. It has all the same physical/skill requirement but at a lower level. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Aug 25, 2023 17:07:35 GMT -5
We were left deciding between Michkov, Reinbacher, Leonard, and Dvorsky. Each one had issues. All 4 came from what I would term questionable development streams (ie - not the CHL). Really, you too, Skilly? Sometimes I think you Canadians are living on a historic island smoking something really bad. Wake up folks, nowadays hockey is a world wide game and calling leagues in the Top 12 of the hockey world "questionable development streams" is just ignorant. The sustained success of Canadian national hockey teams is not the result of the brilliance of the methods in the CHL but a consequence of many young Canadians playing the game of hockey. Therefore it's just a matter of statistics that you get a lot of 1,90m tall guys to choose from. Every country has its own sports landscape shaped by different factors, for example history, the climate, GDP and some other things. In Germany, for example, hockey teams are vying for talents with other team sports, mainly with football, handball, basketball and even field hockey. Why is the US women's football national team far more successful than the men's national team? Because of the the pool of talents they can choose from. It's just that simple. I apologize if my post came across as insulting, but your response is basically is the evidence A bigger, taller, larger pool, playing on similar ice surface to the NHL .... equates to a better chance at finding someone who is closer to NHL ready. Now, I may be high on weed, but I'm certainly not trying to be ignorant. So let me recant my "questionable development streams" phrase and let me try to explain what I meant. Slafkovsky - played 31 games in Liiga. How does this compare to 68 CHL games, and a playoff grind? Dvorsky - 38 games in Swedish Division 1 Michkov - 27 games in KHL Leonard - 17 games in USHL Reinbacher - 46 games in EHC Kloten Dvorsky, Leonard and Michkov had very small sample sizes and none really tore it up in these leagues. Reinbacher, in my opinion, showed he could play in that league. Is the league comparable to the CHL? I have no idea, but I do know these players are not used to the grind of 70+ games. Not sure I did a better job explaining. But I'd expect first round prospects to tear up these league, and they didn't. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Aug 26, 2023 1:49:23 GMT -5
We were left deciding between Michkov, Reinbacher, Leonard, and Dvorsky. Each one had issues. All 4 came from what I would term questionable development streams (ie - not the CHL). Really, you too, Skilly? Sometimes I think you Canadians are living on a historic island smoking something really bad. Wake up folks, nowadays hockey is a world wide game and calling leagues in the Top 12 of the hockey world "questionable development streams" is just ignorant. The sustained success of Canadian national hockey teams is not the result of the brilliance of the methods in the CHL but a consequence of many young Canadians playing the game of hockey. Therefore it's just a matter of statistics that you get a lot of 1,90m tall guys to choose from. Every country has its own sports landscape shaped by different factors, for example history, the climate, GDP and some other things. In Germany, for example, hockey teams are vying for talents with other team sports, mainly with football, handball, basketball and even field hockey. Why is the US women's football national team far more successful than the men's national team? Because of the the pool of talents they can choose from. It's just that simple. Agree. The DEL is an improving league and which hockey fan hasn't heard of Leon Draisaitl or Moritz Seider? Just looking at the drafts from 40 years ago to today is enlightening. Back then the picks were almost all Canadian and some US players. As the league expanded the pool of players needed to grow as well and it has. The draft rounds now are much more balanced in terms of country source. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Aug 26, 2023 2:00:41 GMT -5
Really, you too, Skilly? Sometimes I think you Canadians are living on a historic island smoking something really bad. Wake up folks, nowadays hockey is a world wide game and calling leagues in the Top 12 of the hockey world "questionable development streams" is just ignorant. The sustained success of Canadian national hockey teams is not the result of the brilliance of the methods in the CHL but a consequence of many young Canadians playing the game of hockey. Therefore it's just a matter of statistics that you get a lot of 1,90m tall guys to choose from. Every country has its own sports landscape shaped by different factors, for example history, the climate, GDP and some other things. In Germany, for example, hockey teams are vying for talents with other team sports, mainly with football, handball, basketball and even field hockey. Why is the US women's football national team far more successful than the men's national team? Because of the the pool of talents they can choose from. It's just that simple. I apologize if my post came across as insulting, but your response is basically is the evidence A bigger, taller, larger pool, playing on similar ice surface to the NHL .... equates to a better chance at finding someone who is closer to NHL ready. Now, I may be high on weed, but I'm certainly not trying to be ignorant. So let me recant my "questionable development streams" phrase and let me try to explain what I meant. Slafkovsky - played 31 games in Liiga. How does this compare to 68 CHL games, and a playoff grind? Dvorsky - 38 games in Swedish Division 1 Michkov - 27 games in KHL Leonard - 17 games in USHL Reinbacher - 46 games in EHC Kloten Dvorsky, Leonard and Michkov had very small sample sizes and none really tore it up in these leagues. Reinbacher, in my opinion, showed he could play in that league. Is the league comparable to the CHL? I have no idea, but I do know these players are not used to the grind of 70+ games. Not sure I did a better job explaining. But I'd expect first round prospects to tear up these league, and they didn't. The CHL does a good job of preparing players for the grind, but it isn't the quality of the KHL or Swiss National League or DEL or SEL. Those leagues have 17 to 39 year olds as regular players. They're full grown men. A CHL team would have a tough time against even an NCAA team, if for no other reason that those teams have players 18 to 25 years of age. More mature, bigger, stronger, etc. Also more experienced and less prone to mistakes. The generally accepted ranking of leagues is 1)NHL, 2) KHL, but close or tied to 3) SEL. After that it's likely the Swiss National League and then the German DEL, but I'm not sure on those last two. The Czech and Slovak pro leagues and Finnish LIGA are bunched in there with DEL, I'd say. They have fallen off a bit as a lot of their guys (like Dvorsky) are migrating to the SEL instead. NCAA and the CHL would come after all those leagues, which are professional and not limited to ages. The USHL and BCHL would come after the CHL teams, but both are improving. The BCHL pulled out of Hockey Canada because their rules precluded them for signing certain players from other places. The BCHL has to compete with the USHL for players and this limitation was preventing them from recruiting the quality of players who could go to the USHL, which is getting better and better. The landscape is changing. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Aug 26, 2023 3:32:50 GMT -5
The AHL say hello. None of those leagues match it.
One can argue that a 17 year old can't play in the AHL, but after 18, there is no logic in playing anywhere else before stepping into the NHL.
If you look at the Swiss league, maybe 5-8% of their players were good enough to be drafted by NHL teams.
|
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on Aug 26, 2023 11:43:35 GMT -5
The KHL ain't what it used to be - thank Vlad. They are having a hard time recruiting players from outside the mother land . They have the odd home grown stud, but how many players from the KHL have played in the NHL and were not from Russia?
And now Galchy has signed a 2 year deal there. Was a borderline player in the NHL the last few years but KHL wants some washed up substance abuser with an attitude on a 2 year contract. For a guy who was so repentant announcing he was entering the NHL rehab program he sure bailed on that plan after 2 weeks. Rehab takes a lot more than 2 weeks. Guy always was immature. Let's see how he does n the KHL.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Aug 26, 2023 17:25:10 GMT -5
I apologize if my post came across as insulting, but your response is basically is the evidence A bigger, taller, larger pool, playing on similar ice surface to the NHL .... equates to a better chance at finding someone who is closer to NHL ready. Now, I may be high on weed, but I'm certainly not trying to be ignorant. So let me recant my "questionable development streams" phrase and let me try to explain what I meant. Slafkovsky - played 31 games in Liiga. How does this compare to 68 CHL games, and a playoff grind? Dvorsky - 38 games in Swedish Division 1 Michkov - 27 games in KHL Leonard - 17 games in USHL Reinbacher - 46 games in EHC Kloten Dvorsky, Leonard and Michkov had very small sample sizes and none really tore it up in these leagues. Reinbacher, in my opinion, showed he could play in that league. Is the league comparable to the CHL? I have no idea, but I do know these players are not used to the grind of 70+ games. Not sure I did a better job explaining. But I'd expect first round prospects to tear up these league, and they didn't. The CHL does a good job of preparing players for the grind, but it isn't the quality of the KHL or Swiss National League or DEL or SEL. Those leagues have 17 to 39 year olds as regular players. They're full grown men. A CHL team would have a tough time against even an NCAA team, if for no other reason that those teams have players 18 to 25 years of age. More mature, bigger, stronger, etc. Also more experienced and less prone to mistakes. The generally accepted ranking of leagues is 1)NHL, 2) KHL, but close or tied to 3) SEL. After that it's likely the Swiss National League and then the German DEL, but I'm not sure on those last two. The Czech and Slovak pro leagues and Finnish LIGA are bunched in there with DEL, I'd say. They have fallen off a bit as a lot of their guys (like Dvorsky) are migrating to the SEL instead. NCAA and the CHL would come after all those leagues, which are professional and not limited to ages. The USHL and BCHL would come after the CHL teams, but both are improving. The BCHL pulled out of Hockey Canada because their rules precluded them for signing certain players from other places. The BCHL has to compete with the USHL for players and this limitation was preventing them from recruiting the quality of players who could go to the USHL, which is getting better and better. The landscape is changing. Age doesn’t equate to quality. And 17-18 yr old in the leagues of players who’ll never be in the NHL (these older players) and not producing is a lot harder to predict how they’ll be at the next level than the traditional streams. I’m not saying these leagues are not worth scouting or they don’t have talent. Just you’d better be darn well sure, or you wind up drafting Kotkaniemi instead of Tkachuk or a potential project at #1 overall. |
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Aug 26, 2023 18:30:22 GMT -5
I believe if we are talking about where really talented 18 or 19 year old kids would be more challenged, then no question most of the top division leagues in Europe would be more challenging than the CHL because the players are men.
I wish Reinbacher was playing this season in Laval, but that was his choice and Montreal accepted it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Aug 26, 2023 19:35:51 GMT -5
I believe if we are talking about where really talented 18 or 19 year old kids would be more challenged, then no question most of the top division leagues in Europe would be more challenging than the CHL because the players are men. I wish Reinbacher was playing this season in Laval, but that was his choice and Montreal accepted it. If it’s a matter of challenging them, then we should put really talented 18-19 yr olds in the NHL right away. |
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Aug 26, 2023 20:50:43 GMT -5
The only huge upside if we picked Michkov is that we would have two yesrs to trade him. He's a unicorn that could of brought us a couple of high potential players. I can see a team giving up a Laffy and Kakko equivilant on his perceived value. Or a stud defenseman like D'Andre. Extra value can be extracted in creative ways... Wright had attitude issues. Michkov had attitude issues. Lafleur smoked and drank in the locker room. I would still pick them. Lafleur took longer to produce than Dionne. If I had their talent I would have an attitude too. |
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Aug 26, 2023 21:01:26 GMT -5
Well, there are a limited number of roster spots in the NHL (excluding goalies, it is basically 32 x 20, so that's 640 guys), thus almost all really talented 18 or 19 year old kids could not even sniff making an NHL team.
Look, I love the respective leagues of the CHL. They are a great training ground for hard working kids who love hockey and have the pro dream. My whole point is simply that the competition for a young kid is tougher in the first division Euro leagues, not that is necessarily the better development path. And for us Habs fans, we should probably take heart in the fact that Reinbacher, in his draft year, played quite well in a men's league.
The other issue of how comparable kids in the Euro leagues are to kids in the CHL or USNTDP/USHL/NCAA is not going to settled by trying to definitively judge the quality of the leagues. Picking the right kids requires good amateur scouts and astute talent evaluators heading up the department of amateur scouting, as well as upper management being forward-looking enough to not succumb to the temptation to pick for positional need in the early rounds.
|
|
:quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/6F6VF25GCFF2HFJCOITRJSGNPE.jpg)
