GDT San Jose Sharks vs. Montreal Canadiens | December 16th, 2016 | 7:30 EST

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I can't claim anything like Commandant's knowledge of prospects. But it seems to me that if McCarron becomes an intimidating third line C who can also chip in as a big body on the PP, that would be a satisfactory outcome and a solid use of that pick. The error must be in expecting the kid to become a scorer, which, I agree, he doesn't seem likely to become. But that doesn't necessarily make him a bad pick.

[Commandant]

Here is the thing.....

 

Third line and Fourth Line Cs are available in Free Agency every single year and cost considerably less than 1st line players. 

 

You need to swing for the fences in the draft and develop guys who can score.  You can't fill your top 6 with all trades and free agents, the cost will be enormous and the cap will constantly be a problem.  You need to get some young, cost-controlled players in your top 6.  Thats the only way to compete in a cap world, to have players on ELCs or Bridge Contracts who are major pieces in your core and to replenish them.

 

If you are using first round picks on guys with third line upside, you are doing it wrong.  Again, I'd take 2 busts and a legit top line player, over 3 guys to fill out the bottom six.  

 

Its a failure in organizational philosophy to go searching for third liners in the first round.  You can get them in round 4 or later, and if you don't hit on those... you can easily sign them in Free Agency, or trade a 7th rounder for Torrey Mitchell; or get Brian Boyle for 2.5 million or whatever.  Instead of having to spend 6 or 7 million to find a forward.

 

 

 

Look at 2nd line centre.  We can't find one.  Is that all the pick of McCarron's fault? No.  But it is the fault of a number of silly picks in this lets draft a guy with limited upside philosophy.... Chipchura, JDLR, Crisp, Tinordi, etc.... many players we are drafting early, who don't have the potential to be stars in the league.  Even if McCarron is a third liner, and Scherbak busts, i'll still say Scherbak is a better pick from an organizational philosophy cause you need to at least try to develop top line talent.  You can't teach someone to score, you can teach guys to defend. 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

12 minutes ago, Commandant said:

Here is the thing.....

 

Third line and Fourth Line Cs are available in Free Agency every single year and cost considerably less than 1st line players. 

 

You need to swing for the fences in the draft and develop guys who can score.  You can't fill your top 6 with all trades and free agents, the cost will be enormous and the cap will constantly be a problem.  You need to get some young, cost-controlled players in your top 6.  Thats the only way to compete in a cap world, to have players on ELCs or Bridge Contracts who are major pieces in your core and to replenish them.

 

If you are using first round picks on guys with third line upside, you are doing it wrong.  Again, I'd take 2 busts and a legit top line player, over 3 guys to fill out the bottom six.  

 

Its a failure in organizational philosophy to go searching for third liners in the first round.  You can get them in round 4 or later, and if you don't hit on those... you can easily sign them in Free Agency, or trade a 7th rounder for Torrey Mitchell; or get Brian Boyle for 2.5 million or whatever.  Instead of having to spend 6 or 7 million to find a forward.

 

 

 

Look at 2nd line centre.  We can't find one.  Is that all the pick of McCarron's fault? No.  But it is the fault of a number of silly picks in this lets draft a guy with limited upside philosophy.... Chipchura, JDLR, Crisp, Tinordi, etc.... many players we are drafting early, who don't have the potential to be stars in the league.  Even if McCarron is a third liner, and Scherbak busts, i'll still say Scherbak is a better pick from an organizational philosophy cause you need to at least try to develop top line talent.  You can't teach someone to score, you can teach guys to defend. 

 

That seems 100% sound. 

 

I guess the counter argument would be that Big Mac isn't just another grinder - that his size makes him a special case with unique and valuable attributes. I'll admit, though, that this may be a bit of over compensation for our organizational tendency to not be 'heavy' enough. Nonetheless,  having a 6-foot-6 physical C does have a special appeal, and the case for that pick would rest on that. But I do agree with you that the Habs do seem to draft for 'completeness' more than offensive skill and that it may be hurting us organizationally.

[DON]

Just a Boone note;

• Price on the Friday Night Look: “I was just pissed … at myself and everyone else.”

[CerebusClone]

2 hours ago, Commandant said:

Here is the thing.....

 

Third line and Fourth Line Cs are available in Free Agency every single year and cost considerably less than 1st line players. 

 

You need to swing for the fences in the draft and develop guys who can score.  You can't fill your top 6 with all trades and free agents, the cost will be enormous and the cap will constantly be a problem.  You need to get some young, cost-controlled players in your top 6.  Thats the only way to compete in a cap world, to have players on ELCs or Bridge Contracts who are major pieces in your core and to replenish them.

 

If you are using first round picks on guys with third line upside, you are doing it wrong.  Again, I'd take 2 busts and a legit top line player, over 3 guys to fill out the bottom six.  

 

Its a failure in organizational philosophy to go searching for third liners in the first round.  You can get them in round 4 or later, and if you don't hit on those... you can easily sign them in Free Agency, or trade a 7th rounder for Torrey Mitchell; or get Brian Boyle for 2.5 million or whatever.  Instead of having to spend 6 or 7 million to find a forward.

 

 

 

Look at 2nd line centre.  We can't find one.  Is that all the pick of McCarron's fault? No.  But it is the fault of a number of silly picks in this lets draft a guy with limited upside philosophy.... Chipchura, JDLR, Crisp, Tinordi, etc.... many players we are drafting early, who don't have the potential to be stars in the league.  Even if McCarron is a third liner, and Scherbak busts, i'll still say Scherbak is a better pick from an organizational philosophy cause you need to at least try to develop top line talent.  You can't teach someone to score, you can teach guys to defend. 

 

That case can be made for DeLarose - although he was a second rounder not first - however I would not say the Canadiens drafted McCarron in the hopes to see him become a strong 3rd liner. Obviously no one ever saw him become a rushing, highlight-reel offensive dynamite out there, however Trevor Timmins did describe him as big physical presence who can also play hockey, a player with good hands and a very good potential. The Canadiens did see potential for McCarron to play as a Top 6 forward... and I still see that potential, however more like a Gallagher type (i.e. someone who completes an offensive duo) than a Galchenyuk or Radulov type. 

 

Besides 2 years ago McCarron was centering the first line of the Memorial Cup champions, and was seen as an impact player when he was on the ice. He had a fairly good offensive start in the AHL despite some limited offensive help around him (which again we must admit he needs, he is not an offense generating forward), this year has been more difficult offensively (although still close to a 50-point season over 82 games) however from what I've heard he still has been doing a lot of good things, and has had some impact. 

 

Anyway all that to say that I think Montreal drafted McCarron because they saw a player who could have a positive impact in the NHL, potentially as a Top 6 forward, but if not someone who could still bring a lot to the table. 

 

[Commandant]

If you watched mccarron as a 16 and 17 year old and saw a future top 6 player... i want to know what he was smoking.

 

He always talks up the kids on draft day... but realistically this was a third liner the day he was drafted.

 

Its exceedingly rare to have a milan lucic  a kid who isnt scoring at 16 and 17 agai st kids his own age and suddenly start scoring post draft.  It is so rare that drafting expecting that outcome is dumb.

 

Mccarron wasnt a scorer on the usntdp either at the under 17 or under 18 level.  He had the size advantage but couldnt dominate offensively against kids his own age.  Who was expecting him to score at a top 6 nhl level?

[Machine of Loving Grace]

47 minutes ago, Commandant said:

If you watched mccarron as a 16 and 17 year old and saw a future top 6 player... i want to know what he was smoking.

 

He always talks up the kids on draft day... but realistically this was a third liner the day he was drafted.

 

Its exceedingly rare to have a milan lucic  a kid who isnt scoring at 16 and 17 agai st kids his own age and suddenly start scoring post draft.  It is so rare that drafting expecting that outcome is dumb.

 

Mccarron wasnt a scorer on the usntdp either at the under 17 or under 18 level.  He had the size advantage but couldnt dominate offensively against kids his own age.  Who was expecting him to score at a top 6 nhl level?

 

Philly and a few other teams had McCarron around the same spot as Montreal did. Which was why Timmins didn't test trying to get him in the second round and picked him then instead of DLR.

 

That draft is so stupid to me the way people overreact on that pick. Montreal selected 25th and 34th. The guy they took at 34 they almost took at 25. The picks were completely interchangeable. You can get mad Timmins didn't want Marko Dano or Chris Bigras but he wasn't ever going to take them. If the Habs beat the Sens and weren't so size weary they still would have taken De la Rose. When they tried to take McCarron might have changed, and even then I believe Timmins wanted McCarron for the same reasons he wanted Jarred Tinordi, Andrei Kostitsyn, Kyle Chipchura, Ryan O'Byrne, Gui Latendresse, and Brett Lernout. He has always tried to draft players with size and strength in the early rounds.

 

McCarron is actually what you talk about. He was a home run attempt by the Habs to get a power forward. Washington did similar with Tom Wilson, who they drafted 16th overall when he had 27 points in 49 games with the Plymouth Whalers. If he doesn't develop into a top six scorer (or even a Bryan Bickell third line ES/1st/2nd wave PP guy) McCarron could still develop into a strong player in the bottom six. And as I've pointed out before, the best player to be selected at 25th overall since 1980 is Cam Ward, followed by Brendan Morrow and Steve Ott.

 

Way too much attention paid for a pick that was interchangeable with the Habs second round pick compared to, oh, how Trevor Timmins has drafted only three top six forwards in the past 10 years of NHL Entry Drafts and one of them was a third overall pick. If Lehkonen continues developing, he can claim four. Big success there.

[Commandant]

1) Where other teams had him ranked is irrelevant.  If he's not a first line talent, let them have him.

 

2) A long history of drafting the Chipchura, Tinordi, O'Byrne, etc... types that has failed.  Its the Le Boeuf du Ouest failure all over again. 

 

3) Tom Wilson was also a mistake of a pick, by the capitals.  Luckily for them, they also got players like Andre Burakovsky and Evgeni Kuznetsov in the 20s. 

 

4) Who cares if it was interchangeable with the 34th pick.  Drafting two guys who top out as third liners doesn't make it better, it makes it worse.  Having three picks in the top 36 and not getting a single top 6 forward or top 4 dman should be considered a bad use of those 3 picks.

 

Thank goodness they took a home run swing on Lehkonen and he's worked out, or that would be one bad draft. 

[CerebusClone]

2 hours ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

 

Philly and a few other teams had McCarron around the same spot as Montreal did. Which was why Timmins didn't test trying to get him in the second round and picked him then instead of DLR.

 

That draft is so stupid to me the way people overreact on that pick. Montreal selected 25th and 34th. The guy they took at 34 they almost took at 25. The picks were completely interchangeable. You can get mad Timmins didn't want Marko Dano or Chris Bigras but he wasn't ever going to take them. If the Habs beat the Sens and weren't so size weary they still would have taken De la Rose. When they tried to take McCarron might have changed, and even then I believe Timmins wanted McCarron for the same reasons he wanted Jarred Tinordi, Andrei Kostitsyn, Kyle Chipchura, Ryan O'Byrne, Gui Latendresse, and Brett Lernout. He has always tried to draft players with size and strength in the early rounds.

 

McCarron is actually what you talk about. He was a home run attempt by the Habs to get a power forward. Washington did similar with Tom Wilson, who they drafted 16th overall when he had 27 points in 49 games with the Plymouth Whalers. If he doesn't develop into a top six scorer (or even a Bryan Bickell third line ES/1st/2nd wave PP guy) McCarron could still develop into a strong player in the bottom six. And as I've pointed out before, the best player to be selected at 25th overall since 1980 is Cam Ward, followed by Brendan Morrow and Steve Ott.

 

Way too much attention paid for a pick that was interchangeable with the Habs second round pick compared to, oh, how Trevor Timmins has drafted only three top six forwards in the past 10 years of NHL Entry Drafts and one of them was a third overall pick. If Lehkonen continues developing, he can claim four. Big success there.

 

Well it's still soon to evaluate the most recent of that last 10 years, but Timmins did indeed draft three Top-6 forwards in Galchenuk, Pacioretty, and Gallagher. Lehkonen has played mostly Top 6 already as a rookie this season, and looks to be a forth. That's a pretty good start, and we still have players like Scherbak, Reway, McCarron, and Hudon who could still end up as Top 6 forwards.  

 

We should also not forget that during these 10 years, Timmins drafted at least two top pairing defensemen in McDonagh and Subban, and possibly a third one in Sergachev. We can also add possibly two more second pairing defensemen in Beaulieu and Juulsen, although Juulsen still has lots to prove before we can view him as a sure thing. You add Lernout as a number 6, and Timmins may have given Montreal a very solid defensive group to play in front of Carey Price

[IN THE HEARTS OF MEN]

Im sorry but i just dont buy what your selling.

 

-Mike McCarron has shown significant growth in development each year of his very young career

-if he was scoring at will at 16 we'd be comparing him to Eric Lindros and he'd go #1

-he doubled his point production from his rookie year in the O to his sophomore year after moving to C and was in fact their best C while winning the memorial cup (not their highest scorer but their best C)

-he was successful in his rookie pro career and completely destroyed the low bar you set for him in point production before he even stepped on the ice. 

-this season he was the best rookie in camp and was putting up points

-he also had a great pre season and was only sent down because of the roster make up and not by merit

-yes his confidence was low to start the year and he had a horrible opening month to the schedule but so would you if u did everything right, had a great camp, and still got cut!! but after his fight/ head butt and suspension incident, he has woken up and has played well. He is once again trending up and I wouldn't be suprised one bit if he stuck with the habs the rest of the way!!

 

who says his ceiling is 3rd line 4th line C at best in the NHL? You? 

 

3rd/4th line is the worst case for him as his development continues an upward trajectory yearly. It isn't so far fetched to see mike as a guy who is more suited to play in the NHL and he's exactly the swing for the fences prospect we covet...

 

just imagine our point producing  #1C (galchenyuk) and behind him big mike playing the tough minutes replacing plex as a huge 2 way 2nd line centre... that's his ceiling!!!!!

 

 

[dlbalr]

16 minutes ago, IN THE HEARTS OF MEN said:

-he also had a great pre season and was only sent down because of the roster make up and not by merit

-yes his confidence was low to start the year and he had a horrible opening month to the schedule but so would you if u did everything right, had a great camp, and still got cut!! but after his fight/ head butt and suspension incident, he has woken up and has played well. He is once again trending up and I wouldn't be suprised one bit if he stuck with the habs the rest of the way!!

 

I'd disagree that he had a great preseason.  He had a couple of good games and a few where he failed to make any sort of impression.  I would suggest he was sent down due to merit, not the roster makeup either.  Andrighetto was a placeholder and was quickly waived and Carr outplayed him both last season and in training camp where he was fourth in team scoring.  Lehkonen, another youngster that was vying for a spot, beat him out and that certainly looks like the right decision too.  It's also worth noting that he played in more games than any Hab in the preseason - they gave him a good look and he didn't play his way onto the team like the other youngsters did.  Don't get me wrong, that's not a bad thing either.  More time in the AHL for him to work on his offensive game isn't a bad thing at all.

 

Yes, McCarron is having a slow start offensively.  Is that a fluke though or was his hot start to last season the fluke?

 

Here are the numbers - Which of these is more telling of his realistic upside?

 

a) 13 goals and 12 assists in his first 30 games last year, or

b) 8 goals and 17 assists in 49 games (AHL) since then.

 

Did he overachieve in his first 2.5 pro months or has he been underachieving since then?  If you think 'a' is the true sign of his potential, that type of AHL production would bode well for him being a top six NHL forward.  If you think 'b' is the more true sign though, that type of minor league production translates to a bottom six NHL role.  He could still be quite an impact player in that type of role as you note given his size, especially if he continues to develop as a centre.

[Commandant]

Holy Hyperbole.... 

 

Once again the idea of what you think the player is, and what the play on the ice is actually showing are two different things. 

[bbp]

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

Holy Hyperbole.... 

 

Once again the idea of what you think the player is, and what the play on the ice is actually showing are two different things. 

I dunno I've seen a few McCarron games in person at the AHL level and he has shown some incredibly soft hands around the net while being quick to get the puck off his stick in transition. Also the games I saw he was stationed in front of the net for St John's where he handled lose pucks very well... There are aspects of his game that could translate to a 2C. I don't think he'll hit that level because well... I generally am hesitant about big guys for obvious reasons... but to say what he shows on the ice means he has no ability to become a 2C kinda makes me wonder what you're smoking.

 

Yes it isn't consistent but as a ceiling 2C isn't as ridiculous a statement as you make it out to be... do I think he'll be a top six center? No.

[Commandant]

26 minutes ago, bbp said:

I dunno I've seen a few McCarron games in person at the AHL level and he has shown some incredibly soft hands around the net while being quick to get the puck off his stick in transition. Also the games I saw he was stationed in front of the net for St John's where he handled lose pucks very well... There are aspects of his game that could translate to a 2C. I don't think he'll hit that level because well... I generally am hesitant about big guys for obvious reasons... but to say what he shows on the ice means he has no ability to become a 2C kinda makes me wonder what you're smoking.

 

Yes it isn't consistent but as a ceiling 2C isn't as ridiculous a statement as you make it out to be... do I think he'll be a top six center? No.

 

It is incredibly rare... unbelievably rare to have a player who over the last 6 seasons since he was 16 years old. was a scorer for the following times

 

16 nope

17 nope

18 nope

19 1/2 season

20 1/2 season

21 nope

 

And expect him to be a number 2 C.

 

The guy has never been a consistent scorer at any point in his career and you expect it to suddenly happen.

 

Its like Lars Eller all over again... he's gonna score guys... he's gonna do it... its been 6 years and he hasn't scored at a consistent rate, but don't worry it will happen.

 

Thats the thing, he can make a nice play or two, then he can also make the play like the pass back to Weber at the point that missed him by 20 feet.   Brian Flynn can make nice plays close to the net too... so can Torrey Mitchell.  The whole thing is none of them will do it consistently enough to be a number 2 C. 

 

 

[Guest Stogey24]

Having a great run in the OHL and being a huge part of winning the memorial cup means nothing? Developing into permanent centre, earning all Star and team rookie of the year honours. Not to mention Bergevin singing his praises about how well he's done each year. Even going as far as to say he's a cornerstone piece. None of that means anything?

 

Seems like he's developing pretty well to me. 

 

Sorry he doesn't meet your standards though. I bet McCarron is pretty upset over that. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

This sounds like déjà vu to me...fans putting all sorts of hope into a prospect who is less than elite. Commandant makes a pretty compelling case. The reasonable hope is that he will be a strong, intimidating 3rd line C who can chip on as a big body on the PP. I'd be fully satisfied with that as an outcome for a late 1st round pick. Given his history, pencilling him in for top-6 duty does seem analogous to fan fantasizing about Eller, Tinordi, Komisarek,  or Emelin- all players who many fans expected to become major, impact NHLers, but whose actual careers have ranged from pathetic (Tinordi) to adequate (Emelin).

[DON]

1 hour ago, Stogey24 said:

Having a great run in the OHL and being a huge part of winning the memorial cup means nothing? Developing into permanent centre, earning all Star and team rookie of the year honours. Not to mention Bergevin singing his praises about how well he's done each year. Even going as far as to say he's a cornerstone piece. None of that means anything?

 

Seems like he's developing pretty well to me. 

 

Sorry he doesn't meet your standards though. I bet McCarron is pretty upset over that.

 

Well put and he is unique of all prospects, given size and grit. Not sure why Commandant keeps referring to one bad pass, when he played very well for 1st game of year. But, no one on this planet has been more critical of McCarron, so seems biased take on all things McCarron. Not that I think he will be top six neither, but do hope he can develop into a solid NHLer, still think his skating is what he needs to keep working on most.

[IN THE HEARTS OF MEN]

a compelling case?? his development has only continued upward each year, judging the kid at what he did at 16 on goals scored is a joke!!

Why is our only reasonable hope that of a 3rd liner??? because comm says so? because scouts say so? he also said he wouldnt get more then 30 points in his rookie season... guess what? he was wrong! and scouts are wrong EVERYDAY, otherwise everyone in the 1st round would make it... and why even draft in the latter rounds..

Now trust me that i'm not fantasising about mcCarron turning into the next eric lindros... But, at this stage of his development and seeing his continuing upward progression the least we can expect from him is 3rd, 4th line duty not the most....

 

Eller and him aren't even comparable as fans hope of eller finally scoring comes 5+ years into his NHL career and the latter is just starting his.

 

like i said his ceiling is a good 2way 2nd line center... his floor is a good 4th line center

 

 

Ask Conner McDavid if he thinks Mike McCarron's ceiling is that of just a physical 3rd liner at best after playing him head to head in the playoffs...

 

Who says this guy isn't blooming late. he's still only a kid21... watch some st. johns games and you'll see that hes' getting his chances, hes getting his shots and they just werent going in... all the while doing all the heavy lifting for his team as well as taking on the enforcer roll to.

 

if he's gonna play 8 minutes a night on the 4th line expect 4th line production.. but if his first 3 strides continue to improve as it has... why cant we set the bar higher!

 

 

 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

16 minutes ago, IN THE HEARTS OF MEN said:

a compelling case?? his development has only continued upward each year, judging the kid at what he did at 16 on goals scored is a joke!!

Why is our only reasonable hope that of a 3rd liner??? because comm says so? because scouts say so? he also said he wouldnt get more then 30 points in his rookie season... guess what? he was wrong! and scouts are wrong EVERYDAY, otherwise everyone in the 1st round would make it... and why even draft in the latter rounds..

Now trust me that i'm not fantasising about mcCarron turning into the next eric lindros... But, at this stage of his development and seeing his continuing upward progression the least we can expect from him is 3rd, 4th line duty not the most....

 

Eller and him aren't even comparable as fans hope of eller finally scoring comes 5+ years into his NHL career and the latter is just starting his.

 

like i said his ceiling is a good 2way 2nd line center... his floor is a good 4th line center

 

 

Ask Conner McDavid if he thinks Mike McCarron's ceiling is that of just a physical 3rd liner at best after playing him head to head in the playoffs...

 

Who says this guy isn't blooming late. he's still only a kid21... watch some st. johns games and you'll see that hes' getting his chances, hes getting his shots and they just werent going in... all the while doing all the heavy lifting for his team as well as taking on the enforcer roll to.

 

if he's gonna play 8 minutes a night on the 4th line expect 4th line production.. but if his first 3 strides continue to improve as it has... why cant we set the bar higher!

 

 

 

 

Hey, I hope you're right. I don't have any axe to grind here.

 

But when 'scouts say so,' and when a player's career statistics also say so, well, this sounds like a best case scenario rather than a realistic, level-headed set of expectations. And with all due respect, I can see in your post all the same old excuses for beloved prospects that don't become elite: it will all be the fault of coaches for using him wrong, not playing him with Pacioretty, etc., etc..

 

Nothing wrong with holding out hope that a player can exceed expectations. But those expectations should be realistic rather than hyper optimistic.

[Guest Stogey24]

4 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Hey, I hope you're right.

 

But when 'scouts say so,' and when a player's career statistics also say so, well, this sounds like a best case scenario rather than a realistic, level-headed set of expectations. And with all due respect, I can see in your post all the same old excuses for beloved prospects that don't become elite: it will all be the fault of coaches for using him wrong, not playing him with Pacioretty, etc., etc..

 

Nothing wrong with holding out hope that a player can exceed expectations. But those expectations should be realistic rather than hyper optimistic.

He's trying to defend the kid from basically being called garbage 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Just now, Stogey24 said:

He's trying to defend the kid from basically being called garbage 

 

A big, strong 3rd line C is not garbage.

[IN THE HEARTS OF MEN]

Well we are talking about his ceiling and floor... i just think his ceiling is much higher then what people are suggesting... he does have to realize it though.

 

and his switch from Wing to C by hunter in his 2nd year at london showed instant success. and like i said he's only showed upward progression and great work ethic and a commitment to being a pro. 

 

who sets his expectations to exceed? hockey futures for one had this to say

 

Future

McCarron made his NHL debut with the Canadiens in December 2015 as a 20-year-old and played in 20 games with Montreal in 2015-16; splitting the season between the NHL and the AHL. One of the team leaders in points and penalty minutes for the St. John's IceCaps, he continues to develop the tactical game in terms of using his physical play to advantage while avoiding unnecessary penalties. McCarron has the tools to become a top-six power forward at the NHL level, but could drop off a notch into the top-nine role.

Read more at http://www.hockeysfuture.com/prospects/mike-mccarron/#cQYilLQbr363vqVs.99

[KoRP]

13 hours ago, Commandant said:

Holy Hyperbole.... 

 

Once again the idea of what you think the player is, and what the play on the ice is actually showing are two different things. 

 

What exactly is a top 6 forward on the Habs? 

 

In my opinion Big Mike is already looking like soon he will be better than Carr, Andrighetto, Terry, and several other prospects including Scherbak so far... and I don't need him to be a dominant second liner personally. Just a big body with a solid 200' game, 3rd line C I can live with... if he can score enough for that.

 

Right now, I don't see what harm there would be to leave him up, and see how he does with limited minutes, hopefully he surprises.

 

 

[IN THE HEARTS OF MEN]

ive watched st. johns alot over 2 seasons and i'm a knights fan, so when hunter switched him to C then traded him shortly after i was so pissed cause he looked really good centering 2 offensive dynamo's on London. But, it worked out for him in the end as he won a memorial cup.

[IN THE HEARTS OF MEN]

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=725

 

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=145517

 

 

now why cant we set this type of expectation rather then brian boyle at best? no offense to brian?