Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
dlbalr

2017-18 NHL Thread

Recommended Posts

Scouts dont have a crystal ball.

 

Did.people know that 3 months after he was drafted, Chipchura would tear his Achilles tendon and his speed would never recover?

 

Are the scouts the people who develop the player.  Louis leblanc came up in 2011-12 and looked good.  Played less than half the season and had 7 goals and 14 points and never played another nhl game after that.  Is that a failure of.scouting... or did coaching and player development take a decent prospect and not advance his game?

 

But those things besides the point. Even if you blame scouting on both...

 

The point that you are missing is that nhl teams get 7 picks per draft.  On average each team picks 1.8 guys who actually play 100 games in the league.  Less than that who are impact players.

 

Tge excercise of using hindsight on each pick and saying... oh they should have picked him instead as a way to critcize the scouting dept is foolhardy.  Every single team in the nhl, when evaluated this way, would fail.

 

You can find 5 or 6 picks a year from.every team and say... they picked player a... player b went 20 picks later... should have taken him instead.

 

The only proper way to see if your.scouting dept is doing well is to look at how many picks you had and how many NHL players as well as impact players you had.

 

If you want to go pick by pick... give me the team and i can easily find you 10-15 garbage picks in 10 years. Any team in the league fails this evaluation method.  So tell me.  What team do.you think is the best at drafting?

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Commandant said:

Scouts dont have a crystal ball.

 

Did.people know that 3 months after he was drafted, Chipchura would tear his Achilles tendon and his speed would never recover?

 

But thats besides the point.

 

The point that you are missing is that nhl teams get 7 picks per draft.  On average each team picks 1.8 guys who actually play 100 games in the league.  Less than that who are impact players.

 

Tge excercise of using hindsight on each pick and saying... oh they should have picked him instead as a way to critcize the scouting dept is foolhardy.  Every single team in the nhl, when evaluated this way, would fail.

 

You can find 5 or 6 picks a year from.every team and say... they picked player a... player b went 20 picks later... should have taken him instead.

 

The only proper way to see if your.scouting dept is doing well is to look at how many picks you had and how many NHL players as well as impact players you had.

 

If you want to go pick by pick... give me the team and i can easily find you 10-15 garbage picks in 10 years

I am pointing out centers because that's our biggest need still 20 years later. If we would of evaluated players better we could of easily address that need through the draft.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is drafting galchenyuk a bad move.  He is the highest scorer of any player drafted in 2012.  He may soon be passed by forsberg and only be the second higgest scorer in that draft... but hes miles ahead of third place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people are.real.dicks with the downvote button.  If you cant deal with lists of facts and actual reasoning to an argument. Welcome to my ignore list.

 

Not enough hours in the day to deal with bullshit if.you are going to downvote every post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Metallica said:

I am pointing out centers because that's our biggest need still 20 years later. If we would of evaluated players better we could of easily address that need through the draft.

 

Maybe a better way to put it is to say that the team should have been prioritizing C in the draft. Of course, this would represent a deviation from the 'BPA' principle.

 

Conversely, defenders of BPA always say that you later trade from areas of strength to address areas of weakness. So in a sense the problem is that the Habs have failed to do this properly. We've shown some strength in drafting elite defencemen over the years. And instead of using that strength to fix the hole at C, we

 

-traded one elite D prospect to get Gomez (right idea, horrible execution),

-traded a young elite D for an older elite D (pointless lateral move at best),

-and  traded an elite D prospect for a W whom we prayed could transition to C (wing and a prayer move). In effect we've squandered our area of drafting strength by bungling all these D trades.

 

Add to that the misuse of Galy, and the problem perhaps lies in player development and asset management more than in drafting per se.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Maybe a better way to put it is to say that the team should have been prioritizing C in the draft. Of course, this would represent a deviation from the 'BPA' principle.

 

Conversely, defenders of BPA always say that you later trade from areas of strength to address areas of weakness. So in a sense the problem is that the Habs have failed to do this properly. We've shown some strength in drafting elite defencemen over the years. And instead of using that strength to fix the hole at C, we

 

-traded one elite D prospect to get Gomez (right idea, horrible execution),

-traded a young elite D for an older elite D (pointless lateral move at best),

-and  traded an elite D prospect for a W whom we prayed could transition to C (wing and a prayer move). In effect we've squandered our area of drafting strength by bungling all these D trades.

 

Add to that the misuse of Galy, and the problem perhaps lies in player development and asset management more than in drafting per se.

I would agree with that if we would of made centers the top of our list when we needed to it would of been better off for the team in those draft years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Metallica said:

I would agree with that if we would of made centers the top of our list when we needed to it would of been better off for the team in those draft years.

 

Well, that, OR, as I note in that post above, properly managing assets so that we get top-6 C back in trades. Either would work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Maybe a better way to put it is to say that the team should have been prioritizing C in the draft. Of course, this would represent a deviation from the 'BPA' principle.

 

Conversely, defenders of BPA always say that you later trade from areas of strength to address areas of weakness. So in a sense the problem is that the Habs have failed to do this properly. We've shown some strength in drafting elite defencemen over the years. And instead of using that strength to fix the hole at C, we

 

-traded one elite D prospect to get Gomez (right idea, horrible execution),

-traded a young elite D for an older elite D (pointless lateral move at best),

-and  traded an elite D prospect for a W whom we prayed could transition to C (wing and a prayer move). In effect we've squandered our area of drafting strength by bungling all these D trades.

 

Add to that the misuse of Galy, and the problem perhaps lies in player development and asset management more than in drafting per se.

 

Bingo.

 

Its all at the GMs feet. 

 

Nashville doesn't draft Cs, but when they trade their surplus at other positions, they have Johansen and Turris up the middle.

 

Reaching for a Joe Veleno, or Barrett Hayton in this draft, over a far more talented defenceman would be a huge mistake, but that is what happens if you prioritize Centre over BPA. 

 

Taking Logan Brown over Mikhail Sergachev would have been a huge mistake, but that is what people are asking for with making drafting a focus on centres. 

Reaching for a need is the easiest way to #### up your draft, every time. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think its time to part ways with Mr.Timmins? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Commandant said:

How is drafting galchenyuk a bad move.  He is the highest scorer of any player drafted in 2012.  He may soon be passed by forsberg and only be the second higgest scorer in that draft... but hes miles ahead of third place.

I put galchenyuk there because we evaluated him as a center but now we evaluate him as a winger. Our evaluation of players needs to be better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Metallica said:

I put galchenyuk there because we evaluated him as a center but now we evaluate him as a winger. Our evaluation of players needs to be better.

We didn’t evaluate him as a center, the entire league did. Furthermore, he was always a center/winger. At 3rd overall, he was the best player available, so the fact he was a center was an added bonus. 

 

It’s also overblown how “we’ve needed a top center over the past 20 years.” We obviously haven’t had a great one, and those who agree will point to the fact that no Stanley cup winner wins without a bonafide top line center, but there have been many seasons were the Habs have effectively rolled 3 lines with capable centers.  In my opinion, it’s only been in the past few years (since Danault started playing in a role he shouldn’t be) where it’s really been a huge issue. Sure, we had Desharnais as a top line center but he was arguably even more effective than Drouin because of his chemistry with Pacioretty.

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Arrrgh. Imagine being so rich at C you can afford to 'throw away' RNH at wing. Meanwhile, for our GM, well...as we all know, getting a legitimate top-6 C is too 'tough'.

 

The Oiler's abundance at center comes from a #1 overall pick, another #1 overall pick and a #3 overall pick. Comparing that to Montreal isn't a fair argument 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, illWill said:

 

The Oiler's abundance at center comes from a #1 overall pick, another #1 overall pick and a #3 overall pick. Comparing that to Montreal isn't a fair argument 

 

True. I wasn't actually condemning Bergevin on the basis of the Oilers comparison per se. Nashville is the correct comparator for this organization - almost the Habs' inverted image, in terms of making skillful deals and building a contender and making moves to address weaknesses.

 

xXx, there are two different issues that often get elided when talking about the Habs' problems at C. One is the absence of the big, stud, all-star #1 C. The other is the absence of legitimate top-6 C options. Plekanec-Desharnais was no one's idea of a quality 1-2 punch at C, but at least both of those guys (for a while) could have been considered legitimate top-6 NHL C. Gomez in 2010 was a legit #1A C. So was Ribeiro. It's true the Habs have not has a Joe Thornton type stud C since Koivu blew out his knee, but we *have* had some good #1a-#2 C in the organization. In recent years, though, we haven't even had that.

 

That's why I always talk about acquiring top-6 C rather than the Stud #1C. Bergevin's propaganda trades on the confusion of the two questions. He talks about it as if the ONLY goal is to acquire Ryan Getzlaf and then shrugs, saying it's too tough. No doubt, that's certainly tough (though far from impossible, as the Seguin and Johansen trades prove). But it in no way excuses the ridiculous situation where the team does not have a single top-6 C in the entire organization. That is a result of managerial incompetence.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

True. I wasn't actually condemning Bergevin on the basis of the Oilers comparison per se. Nashville is the correct comparator for this organization - almost the Habs' inverted image, in terms of making skillful deals and building a contender and making moves to address weaknesses.

 

xXx, there are two different issues that often get elided when talking about the Habs' problems at C. One is the absence of the big, stud, all-star #1 C. The other is the absence of legitimate top-6 C options. Plekanec-Desharnais was no one's idea of a quality 1-2 punch at C, but at least both of those guys (for a while) could have been considered legitimate top-6 NHL C. Gomez in 2010 was a legit #1A C. So was Ribeiro. It's true the Habs have not has a Joe Thornton type stud C since Koivu blew out his knee, but we *have* had some good #1a-#2 C in the organization. In recent years, though, we haven't even had that.

 

That's why I always talk about acquiring top-6 C rather than the Stud #1C. Bergevin's propaganda trades on the confusion of the two questions. He talks about it as if the ONLY goal is to acquire Ryan Getzlaf and then shrugs, saying it's too tough. No doubt, that's certainly tough (though far from impossible, as the Seguin and Johansen trades prove). But it in no way excuses the ridiculous situation where the team does not have a single top-6 C in the entire organization. That is a result of managerial incompetence.

I agree I find it hard to believe that this organization can't draft a top 6 center or even trade for a top 6 center but other organizations can. Something just doesn't add up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

We didn’t evaluate him as a center, the entire league did. Furthermore, he was always a center/winger. At 3rd overall, he was the best player available, so the fact he was a center was an added bonus. 

 

It’s also overblown how “we’ve needed a top center over the past 20 years.” We obviously haven’t had a great one, and those who agree will point to the fact that no Stanley cup winner wins without a bonafide top line center, but there have been many seasons were the Habs have effectively rolled 3 lines with capable centers.  In my opinion, it’s only been in the past few years (since Danault started playing in a role he shouldn’t be) where it’s really been a huge issue. Sure, we had Desharnais as a top line center but he was arguably even more effective than Drouin because of his chemistry with Pacioretty.

 

 

 

 

If he's not a centre, the issue isn't on the scouting, its on the development. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Metallica said:

The point I am making is that we as an organization had many opportunity to get a Ture  # center in the draft but we passed on drafting them.

True #1 centre, such as? And 2003 is just about last century and most were pleased with AK46 pick, seizures were only issue he had, did you object to that pick at the time or doing the hindsight thing, which even a monkey could do?

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, DON said:

True #1 centre, such as? And 2003 is just about last century and most were pleased with AK46 pick, seizures were only issue he had, did you object to that pick at the time or doing the hindsight thing, which even a monkey could do?

At the time and I remember everyone wondering why we didn't pick a center in a draft that was loaded with them, when we needed a center.

 

I have been a habs fan since 89' you know what I have been hearing every year at the draft, trade deadline and start of free agency???

I hear every year at the draft our number one need is a #1 center, do we address it no.

Ever trade deadline I hear team needs are a number one center, do we address it no.

 

Ever start at free agency I hear our number one need is a #1 center. Do we address it no.

 

Why can't this organization address there #1 need???????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Metallica said:

At the time and I remember everyone wondering why we didn't pick a center in a draft that was loaded with them, when we needed a center.

 

I have been a habs fan since 89' you know what I have been hearing every year at the draft, trade deadline and start of free agency???

I hear every year at the draft our number one need is a #1 center, do we address it no.

Ever trade deadline I hear team needs are a number one center, do we address it no.

 

Ever start at free agency I hear our number one need is a #1 center. Do we address it no.

 

Why can't this organization address there #1 need???????

Actually, no one was wondering about Habs taking a centre in 2003 and 6 of next 7 picks after AK, no team took a centre. So, not sure what you are talking about.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Red Wings win and pass us in the standings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Commandant said:

Red Wings win and pass us in the standings

Could be a big game next week vs Wings again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Go Sens Go

You can beat Florida!

(just looked at standings and Sens are too far "ahead" of Habs to be passed by next Sat.)

Edited by DON
2nd thought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DON said:

Could be a big game next week vs Wings again.

 

Start Fucale

 

Play McCarron and Lernout 25 minutes each

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

Start Fucale

 

Play McCarron and Lernout 25 minutes each

Put Galchenyuk at #1 centre?:lol:

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Senators win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canucks pull within 1 point of the Habs with a win. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×