Jump to content

What needs to change our development of players or our scouting of players especially 1st round picks??


Habsfan89

Recommended Posts

NHL coaches don't, as a rule, work much on player development, they are focused on winning now.

 

AHL coaches, yes, hopefully (e.g. Bouchard). Or dedicated player development personnel. (Do we have some?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, tomh009 said:

NHL coaches don't, as a rule, work much on player development, they are focused on winning now.

 

AHL coaches, yes, hopefully (e.g. Bouchard). Or dedicated player development personnel. (Do we have some?)

Chris Nolan makes a point of saying how much Claude Ruel contributed to him becoming a successful NHLer ... largely through post-practice coaching/drills ... that could be a piece the habs are missing ... a NHL level coach separate from the coaching staff whose sole role is development ... from what I've heard the player development folks say their focus seems to be on ,amor league and junior/university players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Zowpeb said:

Who was the last Habs coach that actually did a good job with young talent and developed them?  I'm going to say Pat Burns but that's a long way back and I may be foggy about it.

 

Jacques Demers got a lot out of some young players (DiPietro and Dionne stand out in my memory) during the 93 cup run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tomh009 said:

AHL coaches, yes, hopefully (e.g. Bouchard). Or dedicated player development personnel. (Do we have some?)

 

Yep.  Rob Ramage is the Director of Player Development and Francis Bouillon is a development coach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dlbalr said:

Yep.  Rob Ramage is the Director of Player Development and Francis Bouillon is a development coach.

Thanks. I knew about Ramage but I didn't know who he had working for him. Now, is Bouillon the right coach? And is it enough to have one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, GHT120 said:

Chris Nolan makes a point of saying how much Claude Ruel contributed to him becoming a successful NHLer ... largely through post-practice coaching/drills ... that could be a piece the habs are missing ... 

But Nilan was likely playing limited minutes and was very very worried about earning more icetime, simply staying in the NHL and carving out a role with Habs.

Whereas a Galchenyuk, i think was noted, simply worked on his one timer after practice, which wasnt a weakness and likely not what he should of been worried about. Muller maybe should of helped him improve on his centre 'stuff', maybe.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DON said:

But Nilan was likely playing limited minutes and was very very worried about earning more icetime, simply staying in the NHL and carving out a role with Habs.

Whereas a Galchenyuk, i think was noted, simply worked on his one timer after practice, which wasnt a weakness and likely not what he should of been worried about. Muller maybe should of helped him improve on his centre 'stuff', maybe.

Don't disagree ... my point was that the Habs should have a "skills coach" whose primary responsibility is to work with NHL players on various aspects of their game, and who isn't tied down by the day-to-day responsibilities of being part of the coaching staff ... in the modern NHL perhaps better described as made available to the players, as I don't know if the team could mandate their use ... as pointed out elsewhere, having specialty coaches (e.g. skating) available should also be resource the Habs should provide

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A curious point. I was looking at the Habs’ depth chart this morning. We have a grand total of four forwards who were internally drafted and developed:

 

-Gallagher

-Lehkonen

-Evans

-Caufield 

 

And exactly one defenceman (Romanov).

 

That can’t be normal, can it? Only five regulars, if we call Caufield a regular, internally drafted and developed?

 

The fact that the roster has quite a bit of legit NHL talent on it seems an impressive testament to MB’s wheeling and dealing skills. He has been able to deal away assets and sign UFAs to assemble a team that ran to the Finals. But something seems clearly amiss. Or am I wrong about the numbers, and most teams have this low a % of internally-drafted/developed guys on their roster?

 

A second point. I’ve long wondered whether Habs’ management understands the perils of hockey life in Montreal or what to do about it. Young guys come in and are treated like gods. We saw KK (apparently) resist coaching and correction; ditto Galy; Subban was accused, probably unfairly, of the same thing; Price was set up in a condo by himself as a 19-year-old in the Old Port, which is equivalent to putting a huge bull’s-eye on his back. It’s a miracle he came through it. The entire Gainey Rebuild 1.0 seemed to immolate in a haze of partying and entitlement. 

 

Of **course**, grunts like Lehkonen and Evans come in and thrive. They understand from the get-go that their only chance is to work hard, commit, and respect the coaches. Gallagher too - his coach father always instilled in him that a player his size had to work twice as hard, be twice as diligent, to succeed. But if you are a gifted player, you come in here and you have literally a million people telling you you’re great, you’re special, you’re a star being held back by idiots; that you’re entitled to a top-line spot; that the coaches are not giving you what you deserve and that management is stupid; etc. 

 

It’s not a great recipe. Some, like Slick Nick and Patches, rise above it to fulfill their potential. (Subban is a special case who seemed to both ignore Therrien’s BS and succeed spectacularly on the ice). But a higher percentage of talented players risk going by the wayside in that culture.

 

When Crosby joined the Penguins, he billeted with Mario Lemieux. They didn’t throw the kid to the wolves like the Habs did with Price. Have the Habs gotten any smarter in this respect since then? I don’t know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The team seems to be treating each player individually, not following a formula. I think that is smart, especially in today’s age.  What worked 10-20-30 years ago does not any longer.

Times change, the game changes, players change.

There is no right or wrong until hindsight. Using hindsight in this conversation is meaningless.  Fans do not know the inner workings, multitude of reasons a player doesn’t pan out as projected.

The odds of a pick turning out to be valuable player are greatly against the team, perhaps we should be looking at the wins and apparent healthy trajectory of treating each player uniquely: CC vs Poehling for example.  
 

There is always room for improvement, but we as fans lack the data, inside knowledge he to critique someone as a professional scout, etc.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

... When Crosby joined the Penguins, he billeted with Mario Lemieux. They didn’t throw the kid to the wolves like the Habs did with Price. Have the Habs gotten any smarter in this respect since then? I don’t know.

All good points ... highlighted the last one because it is a point the "everyone's favourite" GM candidate (Pierre McGuire) has also reiterated many times ... there is a difference between treating players like men and treating them the way they need to be treated ... last instance I can recall was Brendan Gallagher being taken in by Josh Gorges ... at very least (IMO) if a player is going to live on their own they should have a veteran "buddy" to support them away from the rink. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

A curious point. I was looking at the Habs’ depth chart this morning. We have a grand total of four forwards who were internally drafted and developed:

 

-Gallagher

-Lehkonen

-Evans

-Caufield 

 

And exactly one defenceman (Romanov).

 

That can’t be normal, can it? Only five regulars, if we call Caufield a regular, internally drafted and developed?

 

The fact that the roster has quite a bit of legit NHL talent on it seems an impressive testament to MB’s wheeling and dealing skills. He has been able to deal away assets and sign UFAs to assemble a team that ran to the Finals. But something seems clearly amiss. Or am I wrong about the numbers, and most teams have this low a % of internally-drafted/developed guys on their roster?

 

A second point. I’ve long wondered whether Habs’ management understands the perils of hockey life in Montreal or what to do about it. Young guys come in and are treated like gods. We saw KK (apparently) resist coaching and correction; ditto Galy; Subban was accused, probably unfairly, of the same thing; Price was set up in a condo by himself as a 19-year-old in the Old Port, which is equivalent to putting a huge bull’s-eye on his back. It’s a miracle he came through it. The entire Gainey Rebuild 1.0 seemed to immolate in a haze of partying and entitlement. 

 

Of **course**, grunts like Lehkonen and Evans come in and thrive. They understand from the get-go that their only chance is to work hard, commit, and respect the coaches. Gallagher too - his coach father always instilled in him that a player his size had to work twice as hard, be twice as diligent, to succeed. But if you are a gifted player, you come in here and you have literally a million people telling you you’re great, you’re special, you’re a star being held back by idiots; that you’re entitled to a top-line spot; that the coaches are not giving you what you deserve and that management is stupid; etc. 

 

It’s not a great recipe. Some, like Slick Nick and Patches, rise above it to fulfill their potential. But a higher percentage of talented players risk going by the wayside in that culture.

 

When Crosby joined the Penguins, he billeted with Mario Lemieux. They didn’t throw the kid to the wolves like the Habs did with Price. Have the Habs gotten any smarter in this respect since then? I don’t know.

Hard to grow players when most are drafted late.  And especially hard to grow players when team is always in win-now mode, at least constantly desiring that due to internal/external pressures, history.  That is not a franchise that can suffer a lot of youth mistakes and the late drafting spot means not getting elite talent that can slide into a competing team and contribute reliably.

In Habs terms, there have been some dark years but compared to Pens (to get Sid) or Oilers, Avs, many more who have stars the Habs have not really hit bottom and scored an elite player via draft.  
 

Re. KK - I immediately upon drafting saw disturbing trends in his over usage and self-aggrandizing on social media and that is example of narcissistic behaviour. I wrote it off to youth, but combined with the selfish attitude he showed during playoffs (that whole “4” thing for the scratched guys should never have come public, represent schisms in the group which always undermines collective objective) I am not surprised he accepted the ridiculous offer sheet, gonna cost himself out of work.  
Sad to see him go, but in hindsight no I am not. I believe he was a future locker room cancer who will never produce more than inconsistency à la Armia/Lehks.

Never saw him as more than 3C anyways.  He will be playing 3rd/4th line wing by Christmas.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

All good points ... highlighted the last one because it is a point the "everyone's favourite" GM candidate (Pierre McGuire) has also reiterated many times ... there is a difference between treating players like men and treating them the way they need to be treated ... last instance I can recall was Brendan Gallagher being taken in by Josh Gorges ... at very least (IMO) if a player is going to live on their own they should have a veteran "buddy" to support them away from the rink. 

Gorges was very good with many of the young players from different accounts.

Was a stand up guy and player, regardless of talent level.

That statement is so true, these young players are experiencing a dizzying array of changes at all levels of their lives.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hockeyrealist said:

Hard to grow players when most are drafted late ...

Cannot disagree ... but it is possible ... I was surprised to find that amongst the top 9 top goals scorers last season (38+/82gm) were a 2nd rounder, two 3rd rounders and a 5th rounder ... but the scouts have to find that diamond in the rough and the team must provide all the tools and support for the player to develop ... Gallagher (2010) is the last Habs pick who developed into a regular/frequent 25+ goal scorer ... Pacs (2007), Ryder (1998) and Leclair (1987) before that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

A curious point. I was looking at the Habs’ depth chart this morning. We have a grand total of four forwards who were internally drafted and developed:

 

-Gallagher

-Lehkonen

-Evans

-Caufield 

 

And exactly one defenceman (Romanov).

 

That can’t be normal, can it? Only five regulars, if we call Caufield a regular, internally drafted and developed?

 

The Habs are certainly near the bottom in that category.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, hockeyrealist said:

The team seems to be treating each player individually, not following a formula. I think that is smart, especially in today’s age.  What worked 10-20-30 years ago does not any longer.

 

I'm curious as to why you think that's the case as I have the exact opposite feeling on that one.  Listening to Bergevin's press conference on Monday, he emphasized how Kotkaniemi had all of the same opportunities as other prospects.  When further pressed about it by Eric Engels who had asked something along the lines of refining or adding to what they do, Bergevin danced around the question entirely and talked about how he and the coaching staff speak to young players.  I took it as an indication that they have a very rigid 'one size fits all' approach and that if it works, it works and if it doesn't, they don't exactly look to find different ways to try to make it work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dlbalr said:

 

The Habs are certainly near the bottom in that category.

 

 

 

Thanks. That's pretty poor, although interesting to see that COL - a very well-regarded team - is comparable to us. Apart from that, though, our closest comparators are all either expansion teams or garbage.

 

55 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

I'm curious as to why you think that's the case as I have the exact opposite feeling on that one.  Listening to Bergevin's press conference on Monday, he emphasized how Kotkaniemi had all of the same opportunities as other prospects.  When further pressed about it by Eric Engels who had asked something along the lines of refining or adding to what they do, Bergevin danced around the question entirely and talked about how he and the coaching staff speak to young players.  I took it as an indication that they have a very rigid 'one size fits all' approach and that if it works, it works and if it doesn't, they don't exactly look to find different ways to try to make it work.

 

It seems to me that you do need to have some shared baseline expectations. All players have to work hard, commit to top-end fitness, listen to coaches, and respect the team system, for example.

 

But beyond that, it is axiomatic that you have to modify your approach and your message for the specific player. Some guys you have to ride hard. Others you don't. Some are motivated by positive feedback, others spoiled by too much of it. I cannot believe the Habs do not know this.

 

I would also argue - and here I differ from the NHL default position - that some flexibility should be shown for elite players who have proven they can deliver. I never liked the idea that PK was a "problem" because he rushed the puck more than the "system" dictated, for example. The guy was an advanced stats behemoth who scored and set up loads of chances, came to play every night, was physical, and pretty strong in his own end too. There is little point in riding a guy like that because he is insufficiently deferential to The System. Let him run. In such cases, you have to make some allowance for talent...provided, again, the guy delivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, GHT120 said:

Don't disagree ... my point was that the Habs should have a "skills coach" whose primary responsibility is to work with NHL players on various aspects of their game, and who isn't tied down by the day-to-day responsibilities of being part of the coaching staff ... in the modern NHL perhaps better described as made available to the players, as I don't know if the team could mandate their use ... as pointed out elsewhere, having specialty coaches (e.g. skating) available should also be resource the Habs should provide

That would be Francis Bouillon (player development coach), then, would it not? And Dale Lablans (strength and conditioning coach).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Thanks. That's pretty poor, although interesting to see that COL - a very well-regarded team - is comparable to us. Apart from that, though, our closest comparators are all either expansion teams or garbage.

But why is it "poor"? Why do we need to have more players whom we have drafted?

 

Bergevin has built an organization that is strong in pro scouting, and he has been leveraging that to make (mostly) strong trades. If trading a drafted player makes the team stronger, should we really turn down that opportunity?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

But why is it "poor"? Why do we need to have more players whom we have drafted?

 

Bergevin has built an organization that is strong in pro scouting, and he has been leveraging that to make (mostly) strong trades. If trading a drafted player makes the team stronger, should we really turn down that opportunity?

 

That's why I said that this suggests MB has an impressive track record of wheeling and dealing. However, something is still awry if you are constantly shipping out guys you drafted/developed, and if the only way to build a successful team is to trade them out. What you really want is for the players you draft and develop to be so good that you wouldn't think of trading them away. You know, like Gallagher or Price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

That would be Francis Bouillon (player development coach), then, would it not? And Dale Lablans (strength and conditioning coach).

As I said earlier, my impression from what I've read/heard in the media is that Bouillon and Ramage are focused on Junior, university, European and maybe AHL players ...  I was talking about a dedicated NHL role outside the coaching staff; with The Rocket in Laval they could work with the AHLers as well when possible ... and while strength and conditioning are important, I was looking at more specific skills (e.g., skating, shooting, stick handling, etc.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not looked at my spreadsheet in about a year; but last time I looked into this, I compared the Habs picks versus the Jets and the Preds(not sure?!) whom seemed to have success with their development. I compared against two other teams anyways.

 

What I saw was an evolution of the quality of the prospect pool helped by savvy trading for necessary pieces without giving up prospects or breaking the salary cap structure.

 

I'll take a look again and post the results here; but if memory serves me well, the Habs were above average on their drafting and won most of their trades. They were hampered by Sly when he coached Hamilton/St-John and improved under Bouchard.

In years were the draft sucked but they had high picks, they have managed to trade for better players from that year and improve the NHL roster mix.

 

Centre and RD are still thin. Loosing Danault, Kotkaniemi, Juulsen hurt there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

That's why I said that this suggests MB has an impressive track record of wheeling and dealing. However, something is still awry if you are constantly shipping out guys you drafted/developed, and if the only way to build a successful team is to trade them out. What you really want is for the players you draft and develop to be so good that you wouldn't think of trading them away. You know, like Gallagher or Price.

Yes ... but we have rarely picked in the top 10 to get guys like Price. Of the ~300 top-10 draft picks in the Bergevin era, we have only had three. And I do think that makes it more important to maximize asset values through trading. We do have guys that we wouldn't think of trading away: Weber, Petry, Suzuki, for example, but Bergevin acquired them through trading, not the draft.

 

It's a different approach, not necessarily better or worse, but it's the path that Bergevin has clearly been pursuing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

Yes ... but we have rarely picked in the top 10 to get guys like Price. Of the ~300 top-10 draft picks in the Bergevin era, we have only had three. And I do think that makes it more important to maximize asset values through trading. We do have guys that we wouldn't think of trading away: Weber, Petry, Suzuki, for example, but Bergevin acquired them through trading, not the draft.

 

It's a different approach, not necessarily better or worse, but it's the path that Bergevin has clearly been pursuing.

MB has had 3 top 10 picks. He’a had what 9 drafts. That’s not a bad percentage. None of those picks are with the team. That’s unacceptable. None of the trades yielded a top line forward or top pairing dman. Also unacceptable. 
 

the Avs don’t have a high percentage of picks in their roster. However there core are draft picks:

1) McKinnon - 1st overall 

2) Landeskogg - 2nd overall

3) Makar - 4th overall

4) Rantanan- 10th overall 

up and coming 

5) Bryan - 4th overall

6) Newhook  - 16th pick.

 

admittedly, they’ve had more high number picks, but even with their later picks, there is much more elite drafted taken in their lineup.  After the lousy Ryan O’Reilly that saw: Sakic has learned and did much better with Duschane. On the other hand. We have squandered the high picks we have, and gotten a lousy return.

 

we have:

1. Price 
2. Gallagher 

up and coming 

3. Caufield 

4. Romanov 

 

the rest are lower level end players  only two of the these players are under MB’s watch.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, tomh009 said:

But only two players below the midpoint of the league -- the midpoint is seven.

Sure. But how many elite players vs Lekhonan type of players are in the NHL??

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...