2022-23 NHL Discussion Thread

[DON]

3 hours ago, tomh009 said:

I do believe that Caufield has the potential to do that.

Why? He was on a 65pt pace this year.

Which would of been tied for 63rd in scoring last year.

[Prime Minister Koivu]

4 minutes ago, DON said:

Why? He was on a 65pt pace this year.

Which would of been tied for 63rd in scoring last year.

Was he not also on pace for 49 goals?

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

5 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

if the injury doesn't affect his shot

 

That would be just our luck.

 

But yeah, a 50 goal scorer is elite by definition IMHO

[alfredoh2009]

10 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

That would be just our luck.

 

But yeah, a 50 goal scorer is elite by definition IMHO

Good point, we need another elite player like that!

[Commandant]

23 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

 

yes, that is it.

A generational talent, which we did not get last season at the draft

 

By definition, a generational talent is once in a generation.... so every 10-20 years in terms of drafting. 

 

We shouldn't expect one at a draft just by being 1st overal. 

 

The 2024, 2025 drafts have good players, but no generational talent like Bedard either. 

[Commandant]

23 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

 

on the top-20, I count half a dozen that at some point played like generational players and carried their teams further in the playoff than without them. EDM is on the cusp PIT is on the downslide

 

There are 2 generational talents on this list.... McDavid and Crosby. 

 

That's it.

 

If you think the others are generational talents, then you simply don't understand the definition of generational talent.  Its not someone who has one or two seasons at the top of the league, its a player who quite simply comes along once in a generation and is going to dominate the NHL for a decade, as Crosby and McDavid have. 

 

There might be a third in Ovechkin, but I think he's more a generational goal scorer than overall talent.  His all-around game isn't quite at the level of others but his goal scoring has been elite for a generation. 

[hab29RETIRED]

1 minute ago, Commandant said:

 

There are 2 generational talents on this list.... Bedard and Crosby. 

 

That's it.

 

If you think the others are generational talents, then you simply don't understand the definition of generational talent.  Its not someone who has one or two seasons at the top of the league, its a player who quite simply comes along once in a generation and is going to dominate the NHL for a decade, as Crosby and McDavid have. 

 

There might be a third in Ovechkin, but I think he's more a generational goal scorer than overall talent.  His all-around game isn't quite at the level of others but his goal scoring has been elite for a generation. 

I’m pretty sure you meant the other Connor that is in the league.

[Commandant]

1 minute ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I’m pretty sure you meant the other Connor that is in the league.

 

yes, fixed

 

but my point stands.... we can't look at a list of scoring leaders and call six players generational talents. 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

3 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

Good point, we need another elite player like that!

 

LOL, two Caufields would indeed be awesome. Although then we’d start hearing about “Smurfs” 🙄

 

One way to look at it is along these lines. You can build a Cup winner in many ways, but you usually need some of the following elements:

 

1. A stud #1C

2. A stud #1D

3. A deadly sniper

4. A good-to-great goalie

5. A shutdown C/D

6. Monster power FW

 

Assuming CC is not damaged goods, we have (3) for sure.

 

We may have (1), though as noted I have some worries that Suze is not really that.

 

It’s not clear that we have any of these other pieces in the system. Guhle may or may not become (2). Dach may become (5) although I’d prefer that he becomes a #1A power C.

 

Slaf may or may not become (6). I hate how they are handling his development. 

 

To the extent that we don’t have the key pieces listed, the question is whether we can achieve the same results “by committee” - e.g., no dominant D-man, but four strong guys. No stud C but two excellent #1As.

 

I think it can be done. But you still need *some* of the other pieces listed above. Think about 2014, we had Subban and Markov (two legit stud #1 D-men), a superstar G, and a stud two-way C in Pleks. The rest was done by committee, and we still almost made it.

 

One thing I’ll say is that if we were to add Pierre Luc Dubiois, the picture would change considerably. Him, Slick Nick, and Dach down the middle would set us up for years, with strength down the middle to rival anyone.

 

Still work to do IMHO. This draft will likely be decisive for the future of the rebuild.

 

 

 

[alfredoh2009]

18 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

LOL, two Caufields would indeed be awesome. Although then we’d start hearing about “Smurfs” 🙄

 

One way to look at it is along these lines. You can build a Cup winner in many ways, but you usually need some of the following elements:

 

1. A stud #1C

2. A stud #1D

3. A deadly sniper

4. A good-to-great goalie

5. A shutdown C/D

6. Monster power FW

 

Assuming CC is not damaged goods, we have (3) for sure.

 

We may have (1), though as noted I have some worries that Suze is not really that.

 

It’s not clear that we have any of these other pieces in the system. Guhle may or may not become (2). Dach may become (5) although I’d prefer that he becomes a #1A power C.

 

Slaf may or may not become (6). I hate how they are handling his development. 

 

To the extent that we don’t have the key pieces listed, the question is whether we can achieve the same results “by committee” - e.g., no dominant D-man, but four strong guys. No stud C but two excellent #1As.

 

I think it can be done. But you still need *some* of the other pieces listed above. Think about 2014, we had Subban and Markov (two legit stud #1 D-men), a superstar G, and a stud two-way C in Pleks. The rest was done by committee, and we still almost made it.

 

One thing I’ll say is that if we were to add Pierre Luc Dubiois, the picture would change considerably. Him, Slick Nick, and Dach down the middle would set us up for years, with strength down the middle to rival anyone.

 

Still work to do IMHO. This draft will likely be decisive for the future of the rebuild.

 

 

 

 

for the longest time, MIN had great Ds but were lacking scoring punch. Now, these aging Ds may still perform well but may also decline sooner than their Fs. I hope the Habs do better.

 

If we consider Suzuki(#1), Matheson(#2), Caufield(#3), Evans(#5) and Anderson(#6) then the Habs may be an elite goalie away from contending.

I view Gurianov more of a power forward than Slafkovski. Slafko seems to be like Latendresse, preferring to dangle than to lean-in to cut to the crease. But Gurianov is still work in progress.

 

I am excited about Guhle-Barron, Harris-Mailloux, Xhekaj-Hutson, Beck

 

Habs seem to have some pieces, I hope they can align their combined best years (peaks) into a cup contending team.

 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

1 minute ago, alfredoh2009 said:

 

for the longest time, MIN had great Ds but were lacking scoring punch. Now, these aging Ds may still perform well but may also decline sooner than their Fs. I hope the Habs do better.

 

If we consider Suzuki(#1), Matheson(#2), Caufield(#3), Evans(#5) and Anderson(#6) then the Habs may be an elite goalie away from contending.

I view Gurianov more of a power forward than Slafkovski. Slafko seems to be like Latendresse, preferring to dangle than to lean-in to cut to the crease. But Gurianov is still work in progress.

 

I am excited about Guhle-Barron, Harris-Mailloux, Xhekaj-Hutson, Beck

 

Habs seem to have some pieces, I hope they can align their combined best years (peaks) into a cup contending team.

 

 

The boldfaced part right there is why we’re one of the league’s worst teams. Matheson is great, but he is not a stud #1D any more than Petry was. Suzuki is not a stud #1C, at least not yet. Evans is barely an NHLer. Anderson is a power FW, true, but his prime is out of sync with the development curve of this team. The only clear-cut piece that fits my list of criteria is Caufield. 

[hab29RETIRED]

53 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

yes, fixed

 

but my point stands.... we can't look at a list of scoring leaders and call six players generational talents. 

Oh I agree with you. I’d say there are three generational players playing today - Crosby, McDavid and Ovechkin.  There are a lot of elite franchise players - some teams have multiple of those players. And really that is what we need. Not sure if Suzuki will be one of those guys yet. I do think Caufield is on track, and hopefully Guhle and Slafkovsky can be in that elite in their position/franchise type of players as well.
 

I still hope that we land that generational player this year, but it’s ludicrous to have an expectation that any management team gets that generational player. In the past a team like the penguins could tank to get a Lemieux, and Pollack could plan ahead and make multiple moves to maneuver to get Lafleur. In todays league, you really have to get lucky to get the franchise player. Hell, even Edmonton landing McDavid was lottery luck in a season the oilers didn’t expect to be as bad as they were, while Buffalo was tanking for McDavid.

[GHT120]

55 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

... If we consider Suzuki(#1), Matheson(#2), Caufield(#3), Evans(#5) and Anderson(#6) ...

 

That is a 

The key is not whether Habs fans consider the players to be what was listed ... to fit the formula, if players actually match the description the hockey world in general would agree.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

28 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Oh I agree with you. I’d say there are three generational players playing today - Crosby, McDavid and Ovechkin.  There are a lot of elite franchise players - some teams have multiple of those players. And really that is what we need. Not sure if Suzuki will be one of those guys yet. I do think Caufield is on track, and hopefully Guhle and Slafkovsky can be in that elite in their position/franchise type of players as well.
 

I still hope that we land that generational player this year, but it’s ludicrous to have an expectation that any management team gets that generational player. In the past a team like the penguins could tank to get a Lemieux, and Pollack could plan ahead and make multiple moves to maneuver to get Lafleur. In todays league, you really have to get lucky to get the franchise player. Hell, even Edmonton landing McDavid was lottery luck in a season the oilers didn’t expect to be as bad as they were, while Buffalo was tanking for McDavid.

 

I agree. It makes a hell of a lot more sense to talk in terms of "franchise players" than "generational players." 

 

Generational players are historic players. Next level up from "superstars." Orr. Gretzky. Lemieux. Crosby. McDavid. Maybe Lidstrom. Maybe Roy/Hasek/Brodeur.

 

Even guys like Sakic and Yzerman, I don't see as "generational." They were franchise players for sure, though. Lafleur is probably closer to "franchise" than generational. Price was a franchise player.

 

A team that finishes in the bottom of the standings, especially over 2-3 years, should be able to draft itself a franchise player. Bagging a generational player is another matter, you need a happy confluence of timing to do it.

[GHT120]

3 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

I agree. It makes a hell of a lot more sense to talk in terms of "franchise players" than "generational players." 

 

Generational players are historic players. Next level up from "superstars." Orr. Gretzky. Lemieux. Crosby. McDavid. Maybe Lidstrom. Maybe Roy/Hasek/Brodeur.

 

Even guys like Sakic and Yzerman, I don't see as "generational." They were franchise players for sure, though. Lafleur is probably closer to "franchise" than generational. Price was a franchise player.

 

A team that finishes in the bottom of the standings, especially over 2-3 years, should be able to draft itself a franchise player. Bagging a generational player is another matter, you need a happy confluence of timing to do it.

 

Well said ... I think the reason "generational players" gets used is that "franchise player" is itself overused ... as is "superstar" (the next step down IMO).

[alfredoh2009]

I still want Bedar this draft and another generational player between this draft and next year's. Why not?

 

Habs are tanking hard right now, and I hope no positivism by MSL will change that. Habs are so close to scoring that type of draft. They have a revamped scouting department under Hugh-Gort: if that is not the plan, what then?

 

An elite player like Marner, Draisaitl or Malkin would also be good to have if no generational player is found, an all star!

 

 

[alfredoh2009]

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

The boldfaced part right there is why we’re one of the league’s worst teams. Matheson is great, but he is not a stud #1D any more than Petry was. Suzuki is not a stud #1C, at least not yet. Evans is barely an NHLer. Anderson is a power FW, true, but his prime is out of sync with the development curve of this team. The only clear-cut piece that fits my list of criteria is Caufield. 

 

that is why I still hope the Habs scouting team comes through where Timmins seems to have failed by all accounts: draft elite player(s)

[GHT120]

4 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I still want Bedar this draft and another generational player between this draft and next year's. Why not?

 

Habs are tanking hard right now, and I hope no positivism by MSL will change that. Habs are so close to scoring that type of draft. They have a revamped scouting department under Hugh-Gort: if that is not the plan, what then?

 

An elite player like Marner, Draisaitl or Malkin would also be good to have if no generational player is found, an all star!

 

I don't think there is another "Bedard" for a while ... but there are allegedly a handful of projected "franchise" level players available early in this draft ... the more talent the merrier.

[Commandant]

45 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I still want Bedar this draft and another generational player between this draft and next year's. Why not?

 

Habs are tanking hard right now, and I hope no positivism by MSL will change that. Habs are so close to scoring that type of draft. They have a revamped scouting department under Hugh-Gort: if that is not the plan, what then?

 

An elite player like Marner, Draisaitl or Malkin would also be good to have if no generational player is found, an all star!

 

 

 

You can want all you want... but getting one generational player is hard enough.  Two is near impossible, and I challenge you to find a team that had two generational players at the same time. 

The only one i can think of is Pittsburgh having Lemieux and Crosby at the same time, and that was Lemieux in his final season in the league at nearly 40 and Crosby as an 18 year old rookie.   

 

The why not, is cause its just not realistic.

[hab29RETIRED]

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

I agree. It makes a hell of a lot more sense to talk in terms of "franchise players" than "generational players." 

 

Generational players are historic players. Next level up from "superstars." Orr. Gretzky. Lemieux. Crosby. McDavid. Maybe Lidstrom. Maybe Roy/Hasek/Brodeur.

 

Even guys like Sakic and Yzerman, I don't see as "generational." They were franchise players for sure, though. Lafleur is probably closer to "franchise" than generational. Price was a franchise player.

 

A team that finishes in the bottom of the standings, especially over 2-3 years, should be able to draft itself a franchise player. Bagging a generational player is another matter, you need a happy confluence of timing to do it.

I have to respectively disagree with you about Lafleur. No player scored 50g+/100p+ for six straight years until he did. I don’t think anyone else accomplished that other than Gretzky and Bossy. The only thing that made Lafleur slip from the all time great status, is his rapid decline after having an injury season following the end of the dynasty. But he was the best of his era and the only other comparable in dominating and controlling the game was Orr. I would call Esposito, Dionne, Trottier Franchise players, the same way as I would with Yzerman, Sakic, Modano, Lafontaine, or Modano.
 

From the players that had careers that overlapped Lafleur during his prime, I’d consider Bossy a generational player, even though he never one a Hart or Art Ross (Lafleur was a multiple winner). Having said that, I still consider Bossy a generational player like Hull, and Ovechkin. But they were more pure goal scorers.

 

But I think you to classify guys as generational, you have to look at how they dominated against their peers in thr regular season and playoffs, and need you look at overall impact to their team AND dominating league wide. My list of generational talents would include Richard, Howe, Beliveau, Harvey, Bobby Hull, Orr, Lafleur, Bossy, Gretzky, Lemieux, Brett Hull, Jagr, Lidstrom,  Crosby, Ovechkin, McDavid. Maybe Potvin, and Bourque. These guys dominated the league in the regular season and in the playoffs.

 

As for goalies, you absolutely have to include them. From modern goalies, I’d consider Hasek, Roy and Brodeur, As for now the only ones I’d consider generational. For me, to include a goalie, they have to have been the main reason their teams won cups, and they regularly dominated against their peers throughout their careers. Historically, looking at goalies, I think you have to include Plante, Sawchuck, hall, Parent, and albeit a personal bias of mine - Dryden.

[hab29RETIRED]

1 hour ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I still want Bedar this draft and another generational player between this draft and next year's. Why not?

 

Habs are tanking hard right now, and I hope no positivism by MSL will change that. Habs are so close to scoring that type of draft. They have a revamped scouting department under Hugh-Gort: if that is not the plan, what then?

 

An elite player like Marner, Draisaitl or Malkin would also be good to have if no generational player is found, an all star!

 

 

Because there doesn’t appear to be a generational player other than Bedard the next few years. And there is no way to get Bedard, outside of a luck of the draw. So you can’t actually have a plan and evaluate Mgmts performance in getting the generational player. You can evaluate their performance in selecting and developing elite players (ie Tampa with Kucherov), but basically you want to win thr lottery. Well, I’d love to win the Lotto Max, but won’t be complaining when I won’t.

[DON]

Gurianov seems exactly the player as advertised and i was expecting.

Skilled winger who can skate and shoot; but lacking as an all round player.

Cant see the Habs having a ton of interest in resigning. 

 

Ylonen 3g 10pts in 26 games 13:29/gm. 

10g and 30pts/82games seems him (smaller faster version of Armia), but still has just has 40 NHL games experience.

[hab29RETIRED]

1 hour ago, alfredoh2009 said:

 

that is why I still hope the Habs scouting team comes through where Timmins seems to have failed by all accounts: draft elite player(s)

I put more of the blame on the absence of a development plan by the GM. Even if we had scouted and drafted Kucherov, would he have become the player he is in Tampa? Would Marchand have been any better than Gallagher with the coaching, development and leadership Montreal had?

[hab29RETIRED]

42 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

You can want all you want... but getting one generational player is hard enough.  Two is near impossible, and I challenge you to find a team that had two generational players at the same time. 

The only one i can think of is Pittsburgh having Lemieux and Crosby at the same time, and that was Lemieux in his final season in the league at nearly 40 and Crosby as an 18 year old rookie.   

 

The why not, is cause it’s just not realistic.

Id argue, the pens, with Mario and Jagr.

 

though some probably wouldn’t consider him to be a generational player, the same way I wouldn’t consider Messier to be a generational player. I’d also say we had Richard, Beliveau, and Harvey.

 

[Commandant]

6 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Id argue, the pens, with Mario and Jagr.

 

though some probably wouldn’t consider him to be a generational player, the same way I wouldn’t consider Messier to be a generational player. I’d also say we had Richard, Beliveau, and Harvey.

 

 

I don't know that Jagr was generational.  Franchise player and generational are not the same.   By definition generational players are like once a generation.  Your list in the other post has far more than one per generation in terms of players considered generational.

 

There just isn't many generational players and they are hard to get.

 

Thats fine though, the Blackhawks didn't have a generational player, still won three cups.    Kings won two without one.   Tampa won two.