Commandant Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Are you suggesting that teams (Montreal in particular) draft for need and not BPA? I think we are making progress. Do teams draft for need and not BPA? Of course they do. Is this a good strategy? I don't think it is. But do teams do it? Yeah, team management makes mistakes all the time. With this draft class there is no clear BPA between 4-9 though, the guys are pretty close, so I would prefer that a forward falls to Montreal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueKross Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Do teams draft for need and not BPA? Of course they do. Is this a good strategy? I don't think it is. But do teams do it? Yeah, team management makes mistakes all the time. With this draft class there is no clear BPA between 4-9 though, the guys are pretty close, so I would prefer that a forward falls to Montreal. Thanx Commandant- I made that case years ago. I would disagree or cast some doubt whether it is necessary a bad strategy at times. The Edmonton Oilers are a prime example of what can happen to a team that consistently takes BPA. Thankfully our beloved Montreal weave a mixed strategy.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Thanx Commandant- I made that case years ago. I would disagree or cast some doubt whether it is necessary a bad strategy at times. The Edmonton Oilers are a prime example of what can happen to a team that consistently takes BPA. Thankfully our beloved Montreal weave a mixed strategy.. The Oil are a good example, but then again, if you're just piling up BPAs, at some point you need to actually pull the damned trigger on a trade to bring back the pieces you require. Looking at Edmonton stockpile forwards while suffering from an unending dearth of quality defencemen and goalies has been almost comical. So you could argue that it's not the BPA strategy per se that's been their problem, but rather their bizarre refusal to part with any of those assets in order to address glaring lineup holes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Thanx Commandant- I made that case years ago. I would disagree or cast some doubt whether it is necessary a bad strategy at times. The Edmonton Oilers are a prime example of what can happen to a team that consistently takes BPA. Thankfully our beloved Montreal weave a mixed strategy.. Edmonton is an example of a team that 1) Has drafted terribly. They have gotten zilch from outside the first round. Zilch for a decade. A blind monkey can draft in the top 5, the Oilers have Eberle and Klefbom from late first round picks, and nothing else to show for their drafting outside of the top of the draft. 2) A team that ends up with too many players at one position needs to trade one of those players for a position of need. The Oil haven't done so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 I didn't say trade all the picks i said trade this one cause it should be a decent return if we add someone else to the mix, like Emelin, DD Eller. I know I know you get nothing for garbage. I know patience is wearing thin, but simply using pick on skilled kid is likely a better move long term...there is nothing to say Habs cant do a Washington and trade a Filip Forsberg at deadline for crap in an attempt to bolster a cup run, next season or later on (Nashville didn't mind one bit that Caps went that way). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Erik Guatafsson is one of their best late picks. He played 41 games this past season. For Chicago. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueKross Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Edmonton is an example of a team that 1) Has drafted terribly. They have gotten zilch from outside the first round. Zilch for a decade. A blind monkey can draft in the top 5, the Oilers have Eberle and Klefbom from late first round picks, and nothing else to show for their drafting outside of the top of the draft. 2) A team that ends up with too many players at one position needs to trade one of those players for a position of need. The Oil haven't done so. Yeah your right and so is CC. I used Edmonton just because they have been drafting consistently at the top of food chain, so what they are doing is obvious to all, at least in their early picks. Anyway, they might want to draft a couple of high end defenseman and possibly a goalie. You think? I expect they don't feel they can get the value back in a trade scenario. The question would be do you lose less value by picking the top candidate and try to orchestrate a trade or less value by taking maybe the second or third choice and filling the obvious need. I would argue if they had taken a top defenseman along the line, instead of all the forwards, they would be in a better place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted May 2, 2016 Author Share Posted May 2, 2016 Yeah your right and so is CC. I used Edmonton just because they have been drafting consistently at the top of food chain, so what they are doing is obvious to all, at least in their early picks. Anyway, they might want to draft a couple of high end defenseman and possibly a goalie. You think? I expect they don't feel they can get the value back in a trade scenario. The question would be do you lose less value by picking the top candidate and try to orchestrate a trade or less value by taking maybe the second or third choice and filling the obvious need. I would argue if they had taken a top defenseman along the line, instead of all the forwards, they would be in a better place. Edmonton does not seem to have a strategy. They keep drafting the same (type) of player over and over again. We should really call them the Edmonton groundhogs. There has to be a 2 3 4 5 year plan. Going forward this is what we will need. Managing the cap insists on it. We all know how valuable elc's with talent are. The other part of course is if need a piece and you have surplus (which they do) you trade. Since 2009 they have drafted in the top 10 every year. And in the last 6 the top 7 and of course in the last 5 in the top 5. With this you can't build a team? It shows the absolute incompetence of the organization. How many top 5 picks do you need? We had 1 in that same time. Alex Galchenyuk. We will have 1 this year a #9. So the point being while drafting the best player available is a good plan, you know what you are going to do with that bpa. If he doesn't fit in the long term plan trade for someone who does. It's called asset management, Edmonton needs to take a course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stogey24 Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Edmonton will probably trade their pick at the draft. The 4th pick is really no use to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Yeah your right and so is CC. I used Edmonton just because they have been drafting consistently at the top of food chain, so what they are doing is obvious to all, at least in their early picks. Anyway, they might want to draft a couple of high end defenseman and possibly a goalie. You think? I expect they don't feel they can get the value back in a trade scenario. The question would be do you lose less value by picking the top candidate and try to orchestrate a trade or less value by taking maybe the second or third choice and filling the obvious need. I would argue if they had taken a top defenseman along the line, instead of all the forwards, they would be in a better place. They drafted Darnell Nurse and Oscar Klefbom with first rounders. They drafted a shit ton of defenceman with 2nd rounders (high seconds like early 30s david musil) and 3rds and 4ths and stuff. They traded the 16th overall pick for Griffin Reinhart. Their drafting and/or development is garbage. Edmonton has drafted many defencemen. They haven't drafted many good defencemen. Edmonton will probably trade their pick at the draft. The 4th pick is really no use to them. Maybe or they draft Olli Juolevi or Jakob Chychrun or they trade Jordan Eberle or Taylor Hall and draft a winger. They have options. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stogey24 Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 It seems like Halls name is coming up alot in rumours. Mcdavid is going to captain that team sooner than later too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaos Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 McTavish and others drafted poorly for Edmonton. Peter Chiarelli is now running the show and as history has shown is pretty good at drafting, especially early in the draft. I don't think he has a problem drafting Juolevi, Chychrun, Sergachev or Bean at 4 if he believes they are the best player available, or drafting one of the forwards since he can always deal a roster forward for defensive help. Chiarelli arguably has the most options of any GM in the league right now. He can draft the best player available at 4th o/a. He can trade down....maybe to 10th or 12th o/a and still get a quality dean. He can deal forwards off his roster. His only limit is free agency where no one wants to go to Edmonton, but that could be changing with McDavid, McClellan(coach) and Chiarelli. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 McTavish and others drafted poorly for Edmonton. Peter Chiarelli is now running the show and as history has shown is pretty good at drafting, especially early in the draft. I don't think he has a problem drafting Juolevi, Chychrun, Sergachev or Bean at 4 if he believes they are the best player available, or drafting one of the forwards since he can always deal a roster forward for defensive help. Chiarelli arguably has the most options of any GM in the league right now. He can draft the best player available at 4th o/a. He can trade down....maybe to 10th or 12th o/a and still get a quality dean. He can deal forwards off his roster. His only limit is free agency where no one wants to go to Edmonton, but that could be changing with McDavid, McClellan(coach) and Chiarelli. I doubt Chia-Pete brought his scouting staff with him from Boston Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 Why did Julien Gauthier drop in ranking? 6'4" 224lb RWer and 79g in last two years (Dubois had 52g in last two years). Might he be one Habs could trade down for? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 Boston's scouting staff is hit and miss. Pastrnak was a great pick, so was lucic and guys like Hamilton and Seguin are no brainers. but you've also had some really bad picks... the 2015 picks were considered reaches by many and they did not do as well as you'd expect a first rounder to do this year, a guy like Jordan Caron sucked, Zach Hamill was a complete bust. Joe Colborne never really hit his potential, Malcolm Subban is anyones guess. Why did Julien Gauthier drop in ranking? 6'4" 224lb RWer and 79g in last two years (Dubois had 52g in last two years). Might he be one Habs could trade down for? He doesn't pass the puck, got virtually no assists this year, which was a big regression from last year. He's also a late 97 so this was his third season in the Q, where it was Dubois's second. He's ok, but not top 10. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 Boston in the mid 2000s owned the second round. They haven't done that in a while. Not sure if someone scouting left or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 Boston's scouting staff is hit and miss. Pastrnak was a great pick, so was lucic and guys like Hamilton and Seguin are no brainers. but you've also had some really bad picks... the 2015 picks were considered reaches by many and they did not do as well as you'd expect a first rounder to do this year, a guy like Jordan Caron sucked, Zach Hamill was a complete bust. Joe Colborne never really hit his potential, Malcolm Subban is anyones guess. He doesn't pass the puck, got virtually no assists this year, which was a big regression from last year. He's also a late 97 so this was his third season in the Q, where it was Dubois's second. He's ok, but not top 10. But didn't say take him at 9, would a 2nd pick or two to trade down to say 12th and take Gauthier seem palatable (passing up on Jost/Keller/one of top d-men). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaos Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 But didn't say take him at 9, would a 2nd pick or two to trade down to say 12th and take Gauthier seem palatable (passing up on Jost/Keller/one of top d-men). If you follow Schuckers draft pick value chart, the Habs can expect a 4th round pick for trading down from 9th to 12th. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 If you follow Schuckers draft pick value chart, the Habs can expect a 4th round pick for trading down from 9th to 12th. But they don't follow it. To trade up from 12 to 9 will cost more than simply the difference in pick stand alone 'value'. I would guess it would call for adding a 2nd pick at minimum not a 4th rounder to move up into top ten. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 Last year moving 29th to 24th cost an extra second round pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neech Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 I'm all for taking the best player available, and I think that's what we'll do. Sure we need forward help, but the 9th pick almost certainly isn't jumping into the lineup, and our stable of D prospects is pretty bare at the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 But didn't say take him at 9, would a 2nd pick or two to trade down to say 12th and take Gauthier seem palatable (passing up on Jost/Keller/one of top d-men). I think this draft has an excellent top 10, a very good top 20-25, and then things fall off a cliff and the second round sucks. I'd rather keep 9th. Heck i'm not opposed to moving Minnesota's pick either to trade down for more picks (when the second round sucks, i want more picks, just playing the odds that someone might develop), or moving it for a pick in 2017. Or I'd try to trade 39 + 45 to see if I could get a pick in the 20s and grab one of those guys before the fall off happens. Thats just how I'm looking at this draft right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 Sure. Maybe one of small d-men Samuel Girard or Adam Fox are good options for 39th or 45th. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 Laine 3pt game in 6-2 win at world championship...watch out Matthews, you may be a Jet unless you pick up your game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 Is Sergachev as good as Provorov? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.