Jump to content

draft technique


BCHabnut

Recommended Posts

So BG never really balanced how he drafted, IMO. He more or less drafted in waves. For 3 years in a row, he went after defensemen. Now if you look at prospects, (not including the Russians), they have Subaan and Carle, who I think are capable of top 4. They have Belle and Weber, who could probably be in the NHL or are NHL ready to a degree. Bottom 4 and low minutes. The issue is, who do we have to call up that slides into top 6 territory easily? So in 3 years, when all our defense prospects are traded or have moved up, all the forwards we drafted last year will be rounding into form in Hamilton, but there won't be any top 4 D. I hope PG breaks from this trend a bit. I understand that you have to play the odds and draft as many of one position as possible when you foresee a weakness, but these waves of forwards and defense really started with BG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So BG never really balanced how he drafted, IMO. He more or less drafted in waves. For 3 years in a row, he went after defensemen. Now if you look at prospects, (not including the Russians), they have Subaan and Carle, who I think are capable of top 4. They have Belle and Weber, who could probably be in the NHL or are NHL ready to a degree. Bottom 4 and low minutes. The issue is, who do we have to call up that slides into top 6 territory easily? So in 3 years, when all our defense prospects are traded or have moved up, all the forwards we drafted last year will be rounding into form in Hamilton, but there won't be any top 4 D. I hope PG breaks from this trend a bit. I understand that you have to play the odds and draft as many of one position as possible when you foresee a weakness, but these waves of forwards and defense really started with BG.

Whatever. Pierre Gauthier was head of scouting during Gainey's reign, so I doubt we'll see any radical changes in the pattern. For my money, the issue all along has not been drafting at all, but player development - a whole other kettle of fish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever. Pierre Gauthier was head of scouting during Gainey's reign, so I doubt we'll see any radical changes in the pattern. For my money, the issue all along has not been drafting at all, but player development - a whole other kettle of fish.

Someone confirm or deny: Gauthier was head of pro scouting, so he had nothing do with drafting. That's Timmins. And BG has always gone with the BPA. How can you address an immediate need with a draft choice that likely will take 3-4 years to pan out? It doesn't work that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone confirm or deny: Gauthier was head of pro scouting, so he had nothing do with drafting. That's Timmins. And BG has always gone with the BPA. How can you address an immediate need with a draft choice that likely will take 3-4 years to pan out? It doesn't work that way.

Confirm - he still is director of pro scouting actually. I wouldn't say he has nothing to do with drafting but he'd have had a very small input, surely not the final decision though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to clarify some things: GMs rarely have any say in drafting except for the first round, sometime the 2nd. GMs usually trust their head scout and regional scouts to make the best picks. GMs simply dont have time during the season to watch 600 prospects...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone confirm or deny: Gauthier was head of pro scouting, so he had nothing do with drafting. That's Timmins. And BG has always gone with the BPA. How can you address an immediate need with a draft choice that likely will take 3-4 years to pan out? It doesn't work that way.

OK, my bad...but the point still stands, nothing has changed for the Habs in terms of relevant personnel, and Gauthier was Bob's right-hand guy for those years, so it's unlikely we'll see any huge change in approach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, my bad...but the point still stands, nothing has changed for the Habs in terms of relevant personnel, and Gauthier was Bob's right-hand guy for those years, so it's unlikely we'll see any huge change in approach.

I agree, probably nothing has changed. The Canadiens have traditionally tried to pull the proverbial "rabbit out of a hat" technique, which has cost them dearly. I don't want to start a first round selection war again. I would say this, I would prefer that they pick players that are closer to NHL ready in the early rounds. If you are going to pick high school players and/or Russians you better be damn sure you evaluation is accurate and you are going to see them play in North America. This year I would alter picks, every other pick being a defenseman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This year I would alter picks, every other pick being a defenseman.

When will we start drafting big centres?? Isn't it obvious that this is our weak point?

Edited by Habsfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, probably nothing has changed. The Canadiens have traditionally tried to pull the proverbial "rabbit out of a hat" technique, which has cost them dearly. I don't want to start a first round selection war again. I would say this, I would prefer that they pick players that are closer to NHL ready in the early rounds. If you are going to pick high school players and/or Russians you better be damn sure you evaluation is accurate and you are going to see them play in North America. This year I would alter picks, every other pick being a defenseman.

Well, I just have trouble accepting that we have a profound problem in drafting, considering that for years the players of the Gainey rebuild were considered by all the experts as among the very best groups of prospects in all of hockey. It's hard to be sure about these matters, but I would suspect that Gainey correctly identified the real problem - player development, not drafting - when he fired the entire coaching staffs in both Montreal and Hamilton. That (especially the latter!) was about as clear a signal as you can get that Gainey felt something was gravely wrong in the way the Habs were bringing their prospects along. That he retained the scouting personnel further shows that he viewed development as the primary weakness. Given, first, the universal praise of the Habs' young talent until 2008-09, and second, Gainey's clear signals about what he thinks went wrong, I tend to favour the 'development, not drafting, was the problem' hypothesis.

Edited by The Chicoutimi Cucumber
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with C.C. Drafting wasn't the big problem...it was player development. We drafted some good young players...but for one reason or another, they never developped like we thought they would.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with C.C. Drafting wasn't the big problem...it was player development. We drafted some good young players...but for one reason or another, they never developped like we thought they would.

In a time when fans think 7th round picks are NHL locks, I think it's definitely fair to say that prospects never develop as we think they will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to see us give more attention to European scouting, and local (Q) scouting. With Euros in particular, it would be great to see more Mark Streit-type picks in the later rounds, capable young vets who have a fairly developed game but still have enough upside to take it up a level or two. Obviously not all of them will pan out the way Streit did, but Jersey, Detroit and Dallas among others have shown that it's a model that can work well.

With local scouting, we're long removed from in the era of territorial rights, but we should really have a better grip on what's happening in our backyard than anyone else. Every now and then a guy can slip thru a la Bergeron, but we ought be finding those diamonds in the rough too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With local scouting, we're long removed from in the era of territorial rights, but we should really have a better grip on what's happening in our backyard than anyone else. Every now and then a guy can slip thru a la Bergeron, but we ought be finding those diamonds in the rough too.

Two words: Gabriel Dumont. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When will we start drafting big centres?? Isn't it obvious that this is our weak point?

Well sure, but what's the point if the only good centres are taken early and what's left and available to us is junk? Of course there are always some that trickle through, but really, it's a crapshoot as you get past the first round. Should we just draft big centres for two straight drafts and hope that a couple pan out? I guess in some sense, that's an okay idea, but I'd rather havbe the team go out and draft players they think will make it over big centres exclusive of whether they have the talent to succeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

still can't believe we don't draft Sweden players.

Not quite true (they did draft Torp), but yeah the Swedish haul is quite pathetic. Two recent free agent signings (hopefully Engqvist pans out) but yeah they really fell behind on both Sweden and Finland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two words: Gabriel Dumont. ;)

Exactly. Dumont and PK are examples of good things that can happen when you pay closer attention to local scouting. Of course it's not an exact science, and for every Gabriel Dumont you'll have several Marc-Andre Thinel's but i'd rather take a few high-risk high-reward shots on well scouted local guys, than blow picks on middling U.S. college talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well sure, but what's the point if the only good centres are taken early and what's left and available to us is junk? Of course there are always some that trickle through, but really, it's a crapshoot as you get past the first round. Should we just draft big centres for two straight drafts and hope that a couple pan out? I guess in some sense, that's an okay idea, but I'd rather havbe the team go out and draft players they think will make it over big centres exclusive of whether they have the talent to succeed.

isn't that what the Habs did with defensemen for a few years? (hainsey, Komisarek, O'Byrne, Yemelin, Streit, Valentenko, Fisher, Mcdonough, Subban, Weber etc...)

I'm not saying we should only draft Big centres, any type of big forward would do!

How many players do we usually draft in a year? 7 maybe 8? Well for the next 3 years, we should draft 3 to 4 big forwards each year...maybe then we can find that elusive diamond in the rough!

Edited by Habsfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

you mean like Kyle Chipchura?

Naatinen is big

Leblanc is not small unless Joe Sakic and Yzerman were "too small" too.

At 6', Leblanc isn't what I would call big. In case you hadn't noticed, but the average height for an NHLer today is 6'1"!

Anything below is considered small to one degree or another!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I wouldn't even the 6'2" Chipchura big (especially since he was constantly told to stay lean to improve his foot speed, what's the point?). Same with the 6'2" Latendresse, though he was built a bit bigger. I've kind of found it ridiculous that everyone that is 6'1" or higher in this organization is generally expected to 'play big', even though they still can't do anything vs. a Pronger type out there. We need some 6'3" to 6'5" guys up front. I think we have Conboy and that's about it up front. Engqvist is 6'3" I guess, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I wouldn't even the 6'2" Chipchura big (especially since he was constantly told to stay lean to improve his foot speed, what's the point?). Same with the 6'2" Latendresse, though he was built a bit bigger. I've kind of found it ridiculous that everyone that is 6'1" or higher in this organization is generally expected to 'play big', even though they still can't do anything vs. a Pronger type out there. We need some 6'3" to 6'5" guys up front. I think we have Conboy and that's about it up front. Engqvist is 6'3" I guess, too.

we could always go after Ponikarovsky at the end of the season. He is 6'4, 229lbs and will probably always wake up to play the leafs. Not sure where he would fit... wouldn't mind seeing A Kost go for someone who actually plays with some size. A Plex/Cammy/Poni line could be really good.

Edited by JacksonJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I just have trouble accepting that we have a profound problem in drafting, considering that for years the players of the Gainey rebuild were considered by all the experts as among the very best groups of prospects in all of hockey. It's hard to be sure about these matters, but I would suspect that Gainey correctly identified the real problem - player development, not drafting - when he fired the entire coaching staffs in both Montreal and Hamilton. That (especially the latter!) was about as clear a signal as you can get that Gainey felt something was gravely wrong in the way the Habs were bringing their prospects along. That he retained the scouting personnel further shows that he viewed development as the primary weakness. Given, first, the universal praise of the Habs' young talent until 2008-09, and second, Gainey's clear signals about what he thinks went wrong, I tend to favour the 'development, not drafting, was the problem' hypothesis.

I would note that Bob put in place all the personel for drafting and player development and had the right to change them at any time and did so several times over. Sorry, but Bob just didn't get the job done. I would like very much for this years team to go the distance and put a new face on Bob's legacy; I just don't think it is going to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

isn't that what the Habs did with defensemen for a few years? (hainsey, Komisarek, O'Byrne, Yemelin, Streit, Valentenko, Fisher, Mcdonough, Subban, Weber etc...)

I'm not saying we should only draft Big centres, any type of big forward would do!

How many players do we usually draft in a year? 7 maybe 8? Well for the next 3 years, we should draft 3 to 4 big forwards each year...maybe then we can find that elusive diamond in the rough!

This is my point guys. I'm not really complaining about the draft. I'm merely pointing out that we draft in waves. Right now there are arguably 3 or 4 (definitely 2) potential top 4 defense prospects that could be called up next year. There are 0 top 6 forward prospects. That is because we draft one kind of player like crazy. 3 years of just drafting defensemen, and there are no forwards in the system.

Edited by BCHabnut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. Dumont and PK are examples of good things that can happen when you pay closer attention to local scouting. Of course it's not an exact science, and for every Gabriel Dumont you'll have several Marc-Andre Thinel's but i'd rather take a few high-risk high-reward shots on well scouted local guys, than blow picks on middling U.S. college talent.

There's a plus to "blowing picks" on US guys - you get a lot more time to evaluate them. Junior players must be signed within 2 years or you lose their rights; for college, that could be as high as 5 years (assuming 1 year of USHL and 4 of NCAA). In the later rounds, I'm a big fan of going US prospects, one or two may very well turn into diamonds in the rough by the end of their college career, negating the need to go sign the Hunter Bishop's of the world later on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...