Timmbits

[turnbuckle]

Katic - was in Montreal's top 30. Was going to take him in the third but Islanders grabbed him just before they picked.

Hickey - ranked between 20-30. He was really happy to see him picked so early. was also happy to see Couture, Hamill and Ellerby picked before the 12th.



Trevor's top three - Turris, Kane, McDonagh

He had Pacioretty top ten.

Loves Subban - said he had best interviews at the draft ever. Said he's going to be huge when he fills out, and his old man is the biggest Habs fan there is. "I've never seen a bigger fan - they both knew everything about the Habs. At the draft he kept saying 'thank you...thank you' every five seconds."

"In the playoffs he showed that he can do less and be effective. If he keeps it simple he can be effective."

Torp - we were surprised to get him. We had him ranked in the 40's.


Fortier - may have stepped up a little too high to take him, but he was the French Canadian player we had targeted. He's got that twinkle in his eye. A competitive kid that plays well defensively...needs to add weight. A third or fourth liner if he makes it.


Subban - I'd say he'll be the fastest player at our NHL camp. He's got an unbelievable shot. In the playoffs he showed he could do less and be effective.

Conboy - talked to Pac...said he had many battles with him...tough player to play against.

when Esposito was slipping, Bob asked Trevor if he wanted to pick up another first rounder to grab him if he was still there at 22. They would have picked Pacioretty and grabbed another first round pick for Espo later if he was still there with the pick. Alas....Espo was finally picked at 20.

Perron - his foot speed and strength were concerning...weren't looking at him in the first.

Kishel - he's a five-year guy..one more year of HS and then Minnesota Duluth for 4 years. He's similar to Matt Niskanen.


McDonagh - Holmgren had a deal in place if he moved down to take McDonagh. Columbus would have taken him if Voracek had been off the board. Also heard that Anaheim was trying to move up to the second or third spot to take McDonagh.

Tried moving up to take McDonagh, but he fell in their laps. Hickey, Hamill, Couture and Ellerby being picked ahead of him "was a help." In other words, they weren't players in his top 15.

"McDonagh was our guy"

who does he think had good drafts...St. Louis and Chicago.


Lahti - he going to have to prove himself at camp..nothing will be handed to him.


The Habs were in the living rooms of every player they drafted. all good character kids.

[HFTO]

Just back from the draft and talked to a few different people about the Habs.Was talking at the bar with the president of USA Hockey and he said McDonagh should be a very very good player he also couldn't say enough good things about Paciorety said very tough and rugged player Montreal will be very happy.
Because Espo was falling the fans around us thought for sure the Habs were taking him and it was a little anti-climatic in our area when the Habs didn't move up to get him..actually more like shock when the pens got him.
Brian Kilrea though the Habs would have taken Couture if he was still there.
Anyways had fun tired from the long drive.
GO Habs
HFTO

[Disgruntled70sHab]

With thanks Turnbuckle and HFTO. Guys, this is, well ... excellent!

Keep hearing great things about Subban. Sounds like this kid is motivated enough to push a few veterans at training camp.

Good to hear they also considered Couture as well.

Good North American content over the past few years.

Thanks again for sharing.

Put your feet up, HFTO. Drop you a line soon.

Cheers.

[Willie Dog]

Thanks for the insight guys, all good things to hear. Nice to hear what Timmins had to say. Gives an idea as to why things happened that way.

[turnbuckle]

Killer was pimping his guy.

Trevor has major issues with Logan's skating, and said he wasn't considering him at 12. As he said he was glad to see him picked ahead of them. The Habs would have taken Shattenkirk or Pacioretty if McDonagh was gone. He fell into their laps.

I really liked the way Subban's game came on towards the end of the season. He won't be moved up to forward...that elite speed and booming shot will be major weapons on the blueline. His defensive game came quite a ways, and he's going to be very strong when it's all said and done. His old man is huge, and he's got the frame to be a big, thick kid in a couple more years.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

turnbuckle said:

Killer was pimping his guy.

Trevor has major issues with Logan's skating, and said he wasn't considering him at 12.

That was the tag on him for quite a while, TB. Still, he's a smart hockey player and very mature. A minor league coach buddy of mine even liked him over Taverese two years ago. However, I'm pretty sure he's changed his opinion since.

I really liked the way Subban's game came on towards the end of the season. He won't be moved up to forward...that elite speed and booming shot will be major weapons on the blueline. His defensive game came quite a ways, and he's going to be very strong when it's all said and done. His old man is huge, and he's got the frame to be a big, thick kid in a couple more years.

Will be making the odd trip to Belleville to see this kid. CV are you in?

Cheers.

[Skilly]

turnbuckle said:

when Esposito was slipping, Bob asked Trevor if he wanted to pick up another first rounder to grab him if he was still there at 22. They would have picked Pacioretty and grabbed another first round pick for Espo later if he was still there with the pick. Alas....Espo was finally picked at 20.

I was raised to question things .... and this makes me shake my head.

Let's grab a guy who we think is likely a third or fourth liner, instead of the potential first liner??

IMO, it would have been way easier for them to trade up to select Esposito and get that other first rounder (they obviously felt it was possible), to select Pacioretty. If we got the 19th selection and took Esposito, and assuming the other first round pick that Gainey could acquire was 21st (Edmonton traded up to get Nash who was completely off the board), well Pittsburgh wasn't taking Pacioretty.

In fact, I'd go so far as to say Pacioretty would have been there until 24 or 25 ... Calgary or Van would have been the first interested in him.

Bob's favourite french Canadian was a fourth liner? We hired 5 Q scouts to comb the league for fourth liners??

[turnbuckle]

skilly said:

turnbuckle said:

when Esposito was slipping, Bob asked Trevor if he wanted to pick up another first rounder to grab him if he was still there at 22. They would have picked Pacioretty and grabbed another first round pick for Espo later if he was still there with the pick. Alas....Espo was finally picked at 20.

I was raised to question things .... and this makes me shake my head.

Let's grab a guy who we think is likely a third or fourth liner, instead of the potential first liner??

IMO, it would have been way easier for them to trade up to select Esposito and get that other first rounder (they obviously felt it was possible), to select Pacioretty. If we got the 19th selection and took Esposito, and assuming the other first round pick that Gainey could acquire was 21st (Edmonton traded up to get Nash who was completely off the board), well Pittsburgh wasn't taking Pacioretty.

In fact, I'd go so far as to say Pacioretty would have been there until 24 or 25 ... Calgary or Van would have been the first interested in him.

Bob's favourite french Canadian was a fourth liner? We hired 5 Q scouts to comb the league for fourth liners??

Espo a potential first liner? In the AHL perhaps.

You figure he'll supplant Crosby as Pittsburgh's number one center someday...let me guess...once he gets a little stronger? Or Staal?


Espo's upside with the Pens is as a risky second line winger - good chance he's a fourth line center with some power play duties for at least five years.

Pacioretty has second line upside, but most likely will be a tough, rugged third liner.



I really get a kick out of how the Espo hype has gone crazy - a first-line center is not something he's got in him unless that team is looking to set some sort of record for futility. I've met slugs with more fight in them.

[Skilly]

turnbuckle said:

skilly said:

I was raised to question things .... and this makes me shake my head.

Let's grab a guy who we think is likely a third or fourth liner, instead of the potential first liner??

IMO, it would have been way easier for them to trade up to select Esposito and get that other first rounder (they obviously felt it was possible), to select Pacioretty. If we got the 19th selection and took Esposito, and assuming the other first round pick that Gainey could acquire was 21st (Edmonton traded up to get Nash who was completely off the board), well Pittsburgh wasn't taking Pacioretty.

In fact, I'd go so far as to say Pacioretty would have been there until 24 or 25 ... Calgary or Van would have been the first interested in him.

Bob's favourite french Canadian was a fourth liner? We hired 5 Q scouts to comb the league for fourth liners??

Espo a potential first liner? In the AHL perhaps.

You figure he'll supplant Crosby as Pittsburgh's number one center someday...let me guess...once he gets a little stronger? Or Staal?


Espo's upside with the Pens is as a risky second line winger - good chance he's a fourth line center with some power play duties for at least five years.

Pacioretty has second line upside, but most likely will be a tough, rugged third liner.



I really get a kick out of how the Espo hype has gone crazy - a first-line center is not something he's got in him unless that team is looking to set some sort of record for futility. I've met slugs with more fight in them.

*ahem* ... Espo can play the ahhhhh ummmm errrrr wing!

I was saying that MONTREAL passed on a guy who would have been a first liner on THEIR team one day. We have no Crosby, no Malkin. If Colby Armstrong can play on Crosby's wing I am sure Esposito can.

However .... it isn't the hype. It is the thinking from the Habs management that they would pick a player who was at best a third liner and then try to trade up for a potential first liner ..... like I said, I think it would have worked if they did it the other way.

I am comfortable and happy they rated McDonagh over Espostio. I am not happy they had Pacioretty rated above Cherapanov. Some on here are saying why should we pick a player just because of where he is from .... well you can't have it both ways ... why do you not draft a guy just because of where he is from. Last I checked Pittsburgh got Malkin over here ..... Gainey not as smart as Pittsburgh's GM?

[Cranky]

turnbuckle said:

Pacioretty has second line upside, but most likely will be a tough, rugged third liner.

It sounds that he MAY develop to be the next...Chad Kilger.

Not impressed.

[NWTHabsFan]

turnbuckle said:

Killer was pimping his guy.

Trevor has major issues with Logan's skating, and said he wasn't considering him at 12. As he said he was glad to see him picked ahead of them. The Habs would have taken Shattenkirk or Pacioretty if McDonagh was gone. He fell into their laps.

I really liked the way Subban's game came on towards the end of the season. He won't be moved up to forward...that elite speed and booming shot will be major weapons on the blueline. His defensive game came quite a ways, and he's going to be very strong when it's all said and done. His old man is huge, and he's got the frame to be a big, thick kid in a couple more years.

Couture is slow, not the kind of guy to spend a top first round pick on. I too was glad he was picked, and the Hickey pick made me really happy as it used up another top spot.

I figured Shattenkirk had to be pretty high on their list. He is so composed on the PP out there for the U-18 team and has good skating, the knock being his size. We ended up with the kid with more size and much bigger upside. Good move IMO.

Subban's dad is 6'4" 280 lbs from what I read on the Globe. He may have some more growing in him yet. The kid already has cult following on another certain board.

[NWTHabsFan]

turnbuckle said:

Katic - was in Montreal's top 30. Was going to take him in the third but Islanders grabbed him just before they picked.

I liked him too, just figured he would fall in between our picks.

Hickey - ranked between 20-30. He was really happy to see him picked so early. was also happy to see Couture, Hamill and Ellerby picked before the 12th.

Agreed. Figured we were getting a better chance at McDonagh with each of those names picked. McLean on TSN said he was fifth on their list, so that explains why they were trying to move up and get Coliumbus' pick.

Trevor's top three - Turris, Kane, McDonagh

Long term, I like Turris as the best forward in this draft as well. I can understand Chi-town picking Kane as I guessed at them picking him, but Turris playing in a good Junior A league still is not that big a discount when you look at this kid overall and what he could become.

He had Pacioretty top ten.

That's pretty high. I mocked them getting him 22nd, but he would not have been much higher for me. Sight unseen though!!

Loves Subban - said he had best interviews at the draft ever. Said he's going to be huge when he fills out, and his old man is the biggest Habs fan there is. "I've never seen a bigger fan - they both knew everything about the Habs. At the draft he kept saying 'thank you...thank you' every five seconds."

"In the playoffs he showed that he can do less and be effective. If he keeps it simple he can be effective."

This kid is quite the character. Apparently his dad's basement is quite the shrine to the Habs. Nothing wrong with that!

Torp - we were surprised to get him. We had him ranked in the 40's.

Top ranked Euro defender who held his own at the U-18 and had an injury hold him back for part of the season. Good late round pick that could be seen as a steal a year or two from now. Don't mind his occassional nasty streak label, as both Emelin and Valentenko seem to have that at times.

Fortier - may have stepped up a little too high to take him, but he was the French Canadian player we had targeted. He's got that twinkle in his eye. A competitive kid that plays well defensively...needs to add weight. A third or fourth liner if he makes it.

I hoped we might pick him with one of our picks. I like character buzz bombs that have played in the program of excellence and have worn that maple leaf internationally. Skating and grit compensate for a slightly smaller frame in my books.

Subban - I'd say he'll be the fastest player at our NHL camp. He's got an unbelievable shot. In the playoffs he showed he could do less and be effective.

Conboy - talked to Pac...said he had many battles with him...tough player to play against.

This Conboy/Cowboy kid could be really interesting. A big LW kid with a booming shot and huge frame. Another potential sleeper down the road as well, if not, an intelligent late round swing for the fences.

when Esposito was slipping, Bob asked Trevor if he wanted to pick up another first rounder to grab him if he was still there at 22. They would have picked Pacioretty and grabbed another first round pick for Espo later if he was still there with the pick. Alas....Espo was finally picked at 20.

Perron - his foot speed and strength were concerning...weren't looking at him in the first.

Kishel - he's a five-year guy..one more year of HS and then Minnesota Duluth for 4 years. He's similar to Matt Niskanen.


McDonagh - Holmgren had a deal in place if he moved down to take McDonagh. Columbus would have taken him if Voracek had been off the board. Also heard that Anaheim was trying to move up to the second or third spot to take McDonagh.

Tried moving up to take McDonagh, but he fell in their laps. Hickey, Hamill, Couture and Ellerby being picked ahead of him "was a help." In other words, they weren't players in his top 15.

"McDonagh was our guy"

CBJ, according to MacLean, had McDonagh fifth. The Hickey pick made this all possible since Voracek was still available.

who does he think had good drafts...St. Louis and Chicago.

Agreed. Five years will tell for sure.

Lahti - he going to have to prove himself at camp..nothing will be handed to him.


The Habs were in the living rooms of every player they drafted. all good character kids.

Thanks for the insights, good to hear first hand.

Pass on some appreciation to TT for the amount of time spent watching these kids. It does show!!

NWT

[turnbuckle]

One more thing - third liners are an highly important part of any successful team, and most scouts figure he's a can't miss third liner.

You figure anaheim would spend a pick in the early 20's on a rob Neidermayer of Sammy Pahlsson? I guess so.



Chipchura Pacioretty and White/Lapierre - I could see that being one of the league's top two-way lines some day playing 18 minutes a night and shutting down the other team's top line.

You can't pick potential top six forwards in the first round draft after draft after draft only - quite a few of those guys aren't going to play in your top six (see Urquhart, Milroy, Perezhogin). If the best scoring forwards are gone...why draft one just for the sake of drafting one? I find it hard to believe Perron for instance will be better than either Kostitsyn, Higgins or Lats...and he'll never be a third or fourth liner.

So Timmins took a player he thinks will be an outstanding, rugged, two-way player that might have second line upside. i like the pick.

[HFTO]

Regardless of anyones opinions today it's now up to the kids and their desire to work as hard as possible to reach their potential.
Time will tell so lets hope the Habs got it right and they've put a few more thoroughbreds in the stable.
Here's hoping on the picks.......now Bob get too business and get us a D-man and another centre this time for sure.
Go Habs

HFTO

[SchoonerGuy]

skilly said:

turnbuckle said:

Espo a potential first liner? In the AHL perhaps.

You figure he'll supplant Crosby as Pittsburgh's number one center someday...let me guess...once he gets a little stronger? Or Staal?


Espo's upside with the Pens is as a risky second line winger - good chance he's a fourth line center with some power play duties for at least five years.

Pacioretty has second line upside, but most likely will be a tough, rugged third liner.



I really get a kick out of how the Espo hype has gone crazy - a first-line center is not something he's got in him unless that team is looking to set some sort of record for futility. I've met slugs with more fight in them.

*ahem* ... Espo can play the ahhhhh ummmm errrrr wing!

I was saying that MONTREAL passed on a guy who would have been a first liner on THEIR team one day. We have no Crosby, no Malkin. If Colby Armstrong can play on Crosby's wing I am sure Esposito can.

However .... it isn't the hype. It is the thinking from the Habs management that they would pick a player who was at best a third liner and then try to trade up for a potential first liner ..... like I said, I think it would have worked if they did it the other way.

I am comfortable and happy they rated McDonagh over Espostio. I am not happy they had Pacioretty rated above Cherapanov. Some on here are saying why should we pick a player just because of where he is from .... well you can't have it both ways ... why do you not draft a guy just because of where he is from. Last I checked Pittsburgh got Malkin over here ..... Gainey not as smart as Pittsburgh's GM?

Skilly,

I think you're way off the mark here in many ways. First of all, you're using Pacioretty's and Fortiers's downsides against Esposito's upside in your arguments. Totally inconsistent and unfair. Pacioretty has been compared in some scouting reports to Eric Cole and I've seen Fortier compared to Guy Carbonneau.

You also go on about 5 scouts combing the Q and the best they can come up with is Fortier. If any of these 5 scouts were high on Espo, we would have likely found a way to get him but it appears as though Espo was below Pacioretty on the Habs list. Also, Espo was passed up 19 times by other teams. Cherepanov had the lack of a transfer agreement working against him but Espo had disappointing production in an offensive league, one dimensional, questionable hockey sense, laziness, and selfishness all working against him.

I saw Espo play in person this year and I wasn't one bit impressed. Back to the 5 scouts, only 10 Quebec born players were selected in this year's draft. Do you want our Quebec scouts to lie and say there's a bunch of can't miss players out there just to make it LOOK LIKE they're doing their jobs?

Lastly, I can't believe people still question Trevor Timmins and the Habs scouting staff after their thorough performances at the draft table in the last few years. However, I'd bet the farm you were complaining about the Price pick two years ago.

[SchoonerGuy]

turnbuckle said:

One more thing - third liners are an highly important part of any successful team, and most scouts figure he's a can't miss third liner.

You figure anaheim would spend a pick in the early 20's on a rob Neidermayer of Sammy Pahlsson? I guess so.

Also, the top regular season team in the NHL, the Buffalo Sabres, had a 3rd line that was just as dangerous offensively as almost any line in the league.

I really like the Habs 2007 draft. I was very high on McDonagh, Pacioretty, and Fortier before the draft. I knew a little bit about Subban but not as much as I do now since I've focused on more reports on him since the draft. I also like what I've read on Torp and Stejskal since the draft.

I think Fortier's going to be a good one. I was impressed with his speed, smarts and defensive play in both the Q and at the WU-18. He should develop into a nice checking centre who does all the little things (i.e.- faceoffs, pk, etc).

[halihab]

habsaddict said:

turnbuckle said:

Pacioretty has second line upside, but most likely will be a tough, rugged third liner.

It sounds that he MAY develop to be the next...Chad Kilger.

Not impressed.

Or Cam Neely, look at it whichever way you want.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

schoonerguy said:

Lastly, I can't believe people still question Trevor Timmins and the Habs scouting staff after their thorough performances at the draft table in the last few years.

I can. It has to do with a winning tradition and a team that has been unable to win in years. People are frustrated with the club marking time and going absolutely nowhere.

I guess one could argue that making the playoffs is the sign of a moderately successful season. But, it's Montreal we're talking about and not, oh I don't know, the Predators, the Hurricanes or even the Ducks. If any of those teams were to miss the playoffs their fan base would probably wait for the next season by watching baseball, or even women's varsity volleyball. However, you know the implications of missing the post-season in Montreal. In Montreal it's always been "second place is for losers." It was changing slightly until Gainey and crew came on board. Now expectations can't come fast enough and even if so much as one of those expectations fails to materialize then it turns into a mud-slinging competition.

It has to do about winning ... or, in this case ... a lack of it.

However, I'd bet the farm you were complaining about the Price pick two years ago.

Great teams are built from the goal, out. The Habs goaltending is secure for years to come, or until either Halak and/or Price become too expensive for them to take on.

Now, Timmins and Gainey have been building the future blueline corps, which might just end up one of the best in the league in a few years.

However, a few years may be too long in some cases and I don't blame people one way or the other for feeling the way they do. We may not have the talent Pittsburgh has and it's hard not to compare teams nowadays ... heck, we've been doing it for years. This is a team being built for the future and the youngsters in the organization seem to be in it for the long haul.

I'm not saying I'm happy with the team's lack of winning over the years. But, Gainey inhierited a team that was basically rubble. But, unlike his predecessors, he's not patching up holes here and there. He's rebuilding it from the foundation, up. And those building blocks are solid.

It takes time to properly build a house. And Gainey and Timmins are the right guys to be doing it.

Cheers.

[turnbuckle]

I scouted the Quebec league this season, and believe me, I'm thrilled that the Habs found prospects from other leagues because it was a mediocre crop at best.

I'm glad he didn't like Veilleux and had reservations about Perron and in particular Tanguay.

Timmins said his Quebec league scouts didn't like Tanguay, and that to me is a good sign.

look at the sixth round for an example. If Timmins had passed over Torp for Stich, Carrier, Garnier or Desnoyers, I would have been pretty pissed.

Mind you I think they overlooked Simon Lacroix, but that would be the only beef. I still would have drafted Torp ahead of Lacroix, so if they like Conboy, Stejskal et al more than Torp then I'm trusting that they're good prospects.

[Forum Ghost]

skilly said:

We hired 5 Q scouts to comb the league for fourth liners??

Habs have two scouts based in Quebec, not five.

[Anardil1]

habsaddict said:

turnbuckle said:

Pacioretty has second line upside, but most likely will be a tough, rugged third liner.

It sounds that he MAY develop to be the next...Chad Kilger.

Not impressed.

Some scouts also compared his game favourably to Eric Cole. A little less Cranky?

[skunk]

skilly said:

turnbuckle said:

I am comfortable and happy they rated McDonagh over Espostio. I am not happy they had Pacioretty rated above Cherapanov. Some on here are saying why should we pick a player just because of where he is from .... well you can't have it both ways ... why do you not draft a guy just because of where he is from. Last I checked Pittsburgh got Malkin over here ..... Gainey not as smart as Pittsburgh's GM?

You have to consider the individual situations. Montreal has a crapload of offensively skilled right wingers in their system. Latendresse, the Kostitsyn brothers, Milroy, D'Agostini, plus Aubin, Urquhart, Grabovski, White if they move to the wing. None of them have the skill level of Cherepanov, but if they brought Alexei in, it would be at the expense of one of the other good young prospects at the position. Cherepanov seems like he marches to his own drummer as well, he could easily get caught up in the Kovalev/Samsonov/Perezhogin politics in Montreal.

On the other hand, they are pretty much bereft of solid prospects on the left wing, to the extent that they have brought in three from outside the organization within the past month or so. Lahti, Russell, and Salmalainen. Outside of those three you're looking at the likes of Michael Lambert and Jimmy Bonneau. So Pacioretty was an obvious choice. Esposito will likely end up at left wing, but he figures to be a one dimensional player there, whereas Max can adjust to the role required.

[turnbuckle]

I heard an Anaheim scout describe Cherepanov perfectly the other day.

"In games where the going is easy he's a star. When the game gets tough he disappears."

Bear in mind the Ducks had a shot at Cherpy at 16, but decided to trade down to 19 as they were pretty sure Cherpy would be picked and the player they coveted (MacMillan) would still be on the board at 19. That scout had MacMillan 11th (same as me as it turned out), Cole 12th and Hickey 13th. I also had Cole in my top 15 (which differed a bit from our McKeen's ranking), Pacioretty right after and Subban in my top 25.

Burke was apparently considering taking Cherepanov at 16 but his scouts talked him out of it, and rather easily.

BTW the Anaheim scout said "Tell Trevor he did well for a change."

He was kidding, but he liked the Habs' draft. Likes McDonagh a lot...thinks Pacioretty is a players as well, and has a soft spot for Subban. He's also a fan of Weber. All three of Montreal's top defence picks have power play potential, addressing a big need.

As for Torp...he really wanted the Ducks to take him in the 5th or 6th but Burke wanted to add some goalies. He thought he was a great pick at 163.

[Skilly]

skunk said:

You have to consider the individual situations. Montreal has a crapload of offensively skilled right wingers in their system. Latendresse, the Kostitsyn brothers, Milroy, D'Agostini, plus Aubin, Urquhart, Grabovski, White if they move to the wing. None of them have the skill level of Cherepanov, but if they brought Alexei in, it would be at the expense of one of the other good young prospects at the position. Cherepanov seems like he marches to his own drummer as well, he could easily get caught up in the Kovalev/Samsonov/Perezhogin politics in Montreal.

On the other hand, they are pretty much bereft of solid prospects on the left wing, to the extent that they have brought in three from outside the organization within the past month or so. Lahti, Russell, and Salmalainen. Outside of those three you're looking at the likes of Michael Lambert and Jimmy Bonneau. So Pacioretty was an obvious choice. Esposito will likely end up at left wing, but he figures to be a one dimensional player there, whereas Max can adjust to the role required.

I see and understand the point ... however ...

Latendresse played most of last year as a left winger. Right wing may be his natural position, but when he played on the first line Ryder was the right winger, and when he played on the second line Kovalev was the right winger, and when he played on the third line Perezhogin was the right winger ....

Grabovski played center for us last year in the 3 games he did play.

I don't know that much about the rest .... but my point is, I guess, that players can and will be moved from their natural positions.

[Skilly]

turnbuckle said:

I heard an Anaheim scout describe Cherepanov perfectly the other day.

"In games where the going is easy he's a star. When the game gets tough he disappears."

Were all the games in the Russian elite league easy?

You are talking about a player who beat Pavel Bure's record for points by a rookie, and he had more points than Ovechkin and Malkin in their rookie seasons. Would you pass up on those two?

He had the most points in the WJC as well. The last three forwards to win the Directorate award as the top forward were Ovechkin, Malkin and Cherapanov.

I hope our picks pan out ... but I'll never be able to shake this feeling that we missed out on a golden opportunity in this draft. We finally had a chance to get a potential perrenial star who would contend with the scoring leaders ..... something missing since Mats Naslund.

[franko]

Skilly: you'll get over it when Cherepanov shows how inconsistent he can be. After all, he's going to be playing with one of hte best at that game.

Superstar? Nope. Star? Possibly. Yashon-like? My thought.

[Skilly]

franko said:

Skilly: you'll get over it when Cherepanov shows how inconsistent he can be. After all, he's going to be playing with one of hte best at that game.

Superstar? Nope. Star? Possibly. Yashon-like? My thought.

But until then I'll complain ... LOL

[franko]

skilly said:

franko said:

Skilly: you'll get over it when Cherepanov shows how inconsistent he can be. After all, he's going to be playing with one of hte best at that game.

Superstar? Nope. Star? Possibly. Yashon-like? My thought.

But until then I'll complain ... LOL

Good. It'll give us something to do/talk about this summer. I'll be House; you be Foreman. But stick around/don't be run off. ;D

[skunk]

I would have taken Cherepanov ahead of McDonagh, I think he will have much more of an impact in the NHL. By the same token, I think that Cherepanov is much better off in N.Y. than he would have been in Montreal. Just as Esposito is better off in Pittsburgh than he would have been in Montreal. You have to look at what is best for the most people involved. As a fan of the game of hockey and the NHL, things probably turned out as well as they could have in the first round.

In almost every individual drat pick that any team makes, you can find someone taken later in the draft who turned out to be a better player. If you remember the clip that TSN ran about late round steals prior to their draft coverage, that pretty much puts a total lie to all the hollow protestations that execs make about taking "the best player available" at the spot.

Players like Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Alfredsson, Markov, Kaberle, Vokoun, etc. have turned out better than hundreds of players drafted ahead of them in their respective draft years. Every year the same thing happens, so as long as a team gets a servicable player who fits into their system and their needs, they should consider themselves lucky. Inevitably there will be players taken later in the draft that turn out better than the guy they took.

What I have a hard time understanding is how the Habs could use the #10 overall pick in a deep draft (2003) on a player who managed 0 points in 6 games in the RSL in his draft year (and wasn't any better the following year), but were afraid to risk the #12 overall in a shallow draft (2007) on a kid who scored 40 odd points in the same league in his draft year. Same size, and seems a lot smarter to boot.

It is ironic that the same fans who will defend the selection of Kostitsyn to the gates of hell find a way to write off Cherepanov as being "too risky" a pick.

[jkr]

skunk said:

What I have a hard time understanding is how the Habs could use the #10 overall pick in a deep draft (2003) on a player who managed 0 points in 6 games in the RSL in his draft year (and wasn't any better the following year), but were afraid to risk the #12 overall in a shallow draft (2007) on a kid who scored 40 odd points in the same league in his draft year. Same size, and seems a lot smarter to boot.

It is ironic that the same fans who will defend the selection of Kostitsyn to the gates of hell find a way to write off Cherepanov as being "too risky" a pick.

I think most people here don't really defend the pick any longer but are prepared to give A. Kostitsyn one more season before they call it a bust but he really has to be given quality minutes.

However it really stung to watch the playoffs & see Getzlaf, Perry & Parise.