GHT120 Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 6 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said: meanwhile, in Dallas Good for Drouin ... I am happy for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 2 hours ago, GHT120 said: Good for Drouin ... I am happy for him. I’m neither happy nor unhappy. I assume this is just another one of his temporary hot streaks. If he manages to keep it up, then I will become seriously annoyed, but the odds of that happening are negligible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habs Fan in Edmonton Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 2 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said: I’m neither happy nor unhappy. I assume this is just another one of his temporary hot streaks. If he manages to keep it up, then I will become seriously annoyed, but the odds of that happening are negligible. That's kind of how I feel. I wish Drouin a happy productive life but I don't want another situation like John Leclair where a player goes into beast mode when they leave the Habs. That's unlikely to happen but I think Colorado is the perfect situation for him, he gets to play with skilled players away from the intense media spotlight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Minister Koivu Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 I’m pretty damned excited about where the Habs are as far as prospect depth and young player development. BUT this post from 2018 is a good reminder that prospects, even great looking ones, may not turn out! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 31 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said: I’m pretty damned excited about where the Habs are as far as prospect depth and young player development. BUT this post from 2018 is a good reminder that prospects, even great looking ones, may not turn out! Aahahahahahaahha great throwback. This is why I am usually quite skeptical about prospects, until I actually see them deliver. One of the things that's happening is that several of our prospects do, in fact, seem to be delivering at the NHL level, which is more than most of the turds in that post ever did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 16 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said: Aahahahahahaahha great throwback. This is why I am usually quite skeptical about prospects, until I actually see them deliver. One of the things that's happening is that several of our prospects do, in fact, seem to be delivering at the NHL level, which is more than most of the turds in that post ever did. Let’s not forget that this mgmt team does seem to have a development plan, rather than expecting guys like Mete to be a top pairing right away - or putting them into that position because they have zero depth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomh009 Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said: One of the things that's happening is that several of our prospects do, in fact, seem to be delivering at the NHL level, which is more than most of the turds in that post ever did. Well, ultimately Lindgren really did work out ... after the Habs gave up on him! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habs Fan in Edmonton Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 One player on that list who I thought was really going to make it was Josh Brook. Outstanding junior career, excellent at the world juniors, seemed to have all the tools. Not sure what happened there. It's a crapshoot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 42 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said: It's a crapshoot. When drafting immature high school kids, for sure it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 1 hour ago, tomh009 said: Well, ultimately Lindgren really did work out ... after the Habs gave up on him! He's 30 and really only became an NHL regular at 29...AND his current strong season is a pretty huge statistical outlier. I dunno, hard to feel that he was "one that got away;" how long are we supposed to keep guys in the system? 🤷♂️ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomh009 Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 2 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said: He's 30 and really only became an NHL regular at 29...AND his current strong season is a pretty huge statistical outlier. I dunno, hard to feel that he was "one that got away;" how long are we supposed to keep guys in the system? 🤷♂️ I know, I'm with you on that decision. He was consistently a sub-.900 goalie in the AHL, and at 27 it made no sense to keep him any longer. But somehow he put his game together after that, and hasn't had an NHL or AHL season worse than .899 since then. No way I would have predicted that! (Should I add that goalies are voodoo?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfredoh2009 Posted January 20 Author Share Posted January 20 11 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said: Aahahahahahaahha great throwback. This is why I am usually quite skeptical about prospects, until I actually see them deliver. One of the things that's happening is that several of our prospects do, in fact, seem to be delivering at the NHL level, which is more than most of the turds in that post ever did. I was high on Juulsen (26th 2015) , he is a depth defenseman for VAN. Evans (207th 2014) has turned out great for where he was drafted. But most of those players were late picks and did great for where they were picked: Scherbak (26th 2014) Juulsen (26th 2015) Poehling (25th 2017) Brook (56th 2017) Lernout (73rd 2014) Fleury (87th 2017) Mete(100th 2016) Hudon (122nd 2012) Primeau (199th 2017) Lindgren (NCAA free agent) Scherbak was a bust, Juulsen got injured, Poehling was a bust. Those bad 1st round picks really hurt the Habs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomh009 Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 I took the point of PMK’s post more as a reminder that we tend to get excited about prospects but the reality is that many of them do not make it to NHL regulars, let alone impact players. Not so much about whether the picks were good or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Minister Koivu Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 1 hour ago, tomh009 said: I took the point of PMK’s post more as a reminder that we tend to get excited about prospects but the reality is that many of them do not make it to NHL regulars, let alone impact players. Not so much about whether the picks were good or not. Exactly Look at how proud Grant is in his post. Boasting about junior successes of these prospects and how filled our cupboard is. All that excitement at that time and no excitement now 🥳 I posted because I’m excited as hell about our prospects and young players - more than I’ve ever been Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 Grant has always been too overconfident though. Hes developped a clown reputation over the years Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfredoh2009 Posted January 20 Author Share Posted January 20 38 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said: Exactly Look at how proud Grant is in his post. Boasting about junior successes of these prospects and how filled our cupboard is. All that excitement at that time and no excitement now 🥳 I posted because I’m excited as hell about our prospects and young players - more than I’ve ever been The difference with now is that the prospects the Habs have now are early picks lots of 1st round and early 2nd the talent pool is much higher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 Scherbak, Juulsen, Poehling, Brook.... they were 1st and 2nds too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomh009 Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 40 minutes ago, Commandant said: Scherbak, Juulsen, Poehling, Brook.... they were 1st and 2nds too. Late first (and late second), though, not early. Nevertheless, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. So, to me, the particularly encouraging thing is how well our young D have played in the NHL in spite of their young age and lack of experience. Not to mention Caufield and Slafkovsky ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfredoh2009 Posted January 20 Author Share Posted January 20 Just now, tomh009 said: Late first (and late second), though, not early. Nevertheless, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. So, to me, the particularly encouraging thing is how well our young D have played in the NHL in spite of their young age and lack of experience. Not to mention Caufield and Slafkovsky ... yes, the current prospect pool is the best it has been in over 20 years ? Or whenever the patches/pk crop was Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GHT120 Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 10 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said: But most of those players were late picks and did great for where they were picked: Is "great" the right description ... I-M-O the ones who weren't busts for the most part did "fine", but not really anything more ... as a 5th round pick Gallagher did "great" before the injuries seem to have pushed him off the cliff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfredoh2009 Posted January 20 Author Share Posted January 20 3 minutes ago, GHT120 said: Is "great" the right description ... I-M-O the ones who weren't busts for the most part did "fine", but not really anything more ... as a 5th round pick Gallagher did "great" before the injuries seem to have pushed him off the cliff. great, or above expectations if you prefer. How would you expect 3rd round picks and later to perform in the NHL? 73rd, 87th, 100th, 122nd, 199th and College free agent? The flip side is how disappointed we all are on how bad those 1st round picks bombed. They sank the franchise Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GHT120 Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 41 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said: great, or above expectations if you prefer. How would you expect 3rd round picks and later to perform in the NHL? 73rd, 87th, 100th, 122nd, 199th and College free agent? The flip side is how disappointed we all are on how bad those 1st round picks bombed. They sank the franchise 3rd round picks and later are either not NHLers or bottom-half of the roster players at best ... anything more than that would be "great". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfredoh2009 Posted January 20 Author Share Posted January 20 1 hour ago, GHT120 said: 3rd round picks and later are either not NHLers or bottom-half of the roster players at best ... anything more than that would be "great". for me, amy 3rd rounder and later that makes it into a regular NHL roster is great. different points of opinion, which is good for this forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GHT120 Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 8 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said: for me, amy 3rd rounder and later that makes it into a regular NHL roster is great. different points of opinion, which is good for this forum. Then how do you differentiate Gallagher (147 overall), Luc Robitaille (171 overall), Doug Gilmour (134 overall), Brett Hull (117 overall), etc. from those guys? Somewhat reminds me of the WWF/WWE use of the term "superstar" to describe their bottom of the card jobbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfredoh2009 Posted January 21 Author Share Posted January 21 3 hours ago, GHT120 said: Then how do you differentiate Gallagher (147 overall), Luc Robitaille (171 overall), Doug Gilmour (134 overall), Brett Hull (117 overall), etc. from those guys? Somewhat reminds me of the WWF/WWE use of the term "superstar" to describe their bottom of the card jobbers. they did better than great? 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.