2023 NHL Entry Draft

[Sir_Boagalott]

I wouldn't trade the 5th to the Flyers either, or any other team in the Habs conference.  If there was a team in the other conference I would consider it.

 

Hmm, Arizona has the picks that are around where Dvorsky or Reinbacher are slated to go.  They would have to really want Michkov and the Habs would have to give them their 31st pic and possibly more.  That could potentially be worth if for the Habs though if they did end up both of those players. However, there is no guarantee that Reinbacher would still be available at 12th.

[Commandant]

If the trade is good.for your team dont worry about conference.  You want to win the trade which means you are getting stronger than your rival.

[GHT120]

4 minutes ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

I wouldn't trade the 5th to the Flyers either, or any other team in the Habs conference.  If there was a team in the other conference I would consider it ...

 

 

2 minutes ago, Commandant said:

If the trade is good.for your team dont worry about conference.  You want to win the trade which means you are getting stronger than your rival.

 

I agree with Commandant ... in the world of free agency and cap restrictions, you optimize the trade ... cut your market in half and you not only reduce your return but you have no guarantee that the player you are giving up doesn't end up back in your conference in short order anyway.

[Sir_Boagalott]

1 minute ago, Commandant said:

If the trade is good.for your team dont worry about conference.  You want to win the trade which means you are getting stronger than your rival.

 

I highly disagree, because it is possible to win a trade, but the trade makes the other team way stronger than yours.  Then, you have to: a) face the player you traded away in the regular season more, and b) face them in the playoffs and constantly lose to them.  

[GHT120]

7 minutes ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

I highly disagree, because it is possible to win a trade, but the trade makes the other team way stronger than yours.  Then, you have to: a) face the player you traded away in the regular season more, and b) face them in the playoffs and constantly lose to them.  

 

Takes years to know who won a trade ... IMO just get the best assets you can get ... but neither of us will convince the other.

 

Let's hope Anaheim grabs him at #2, or CBJ at #3 or SJS at #4 and render the discussion moot ... at least as regards Michkov. 

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

If you are not willing to trade within your conference then you are eliminating 1/2 the teams you can trade with so it really cuts down on the opportunity to maximize value. If the trade improves your team then you make it period. Hughes doesn't get paid to worry about how the other 15 teams in the conference are shaping up. 

 

Even the Oilers and Flames have been trading partners in the past (ie. Lucic to Calgary)

[dlbalr]

I wasn't planning on running a draft pool this year but I had a few minutes to throw one together if you want to see if you can out-guess your fellow posters (plus some of our writers): https://www.habsworld.net/2023/06/2023-habsworld-draft-pool/

 

The mock draft is just about ready to run, I want to take one more crack at proofreading as it's once again a long read.  Hoping to have that posted on Tuesday.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

3 hours ago, Commandant said:

If the trade is good.for your team dont worry about conference.  You want to win the trade which means you are getting stronger than your rival.

 

I’m with you on that. I always felt that refusing to trade within the Conference (or even to major rivals) was more about managerial ego - not wanting to end up with egg on your face - than with on-ice success. If you have a chance to improve your team, take it.

[Sir_Boagalott]

3 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

If you are not willing to trade within your conference then you are eliminating 1/2 the teams you can trade with so it really cuts down on the opportunity to maximize value. If the trade improves your team then you make it period. Hughes doesn't get paid to worry about how the other 15 teams in the conference are shaping up. 

 

Even the Oilers and Flames have been trading partners in the past (ie. Lucic to Calgary)

 

Yes, it does eliminate half the teams but I certainly disagree with making the team do it comment though.

 

That underlined part is really irrelevant to the discussion though because we are discussing a player that might be the next OV who is about break Gretzky's all time records.   

 

Do you think the Oilers would trade McDavid to the Flames?  They could end up with 3 30 goal scorers and you know win the trade.  ex:  McDavid's 60 g vs 90 - would make their team better.  Plus, they wouldnt have all their eggs in 1 basket either.  However, they'd have to play a whole lot of games against a 60 g scorer.  

 

 

 

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

18 minutes ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

 

Yes, it does eliminate half the teams but I certainly disagree with making the team do it comment though.

 

That underlined part is really irrelevant to the discussion though because we are discussing a player that might be the next OV who is about break Gretzky's all time records.   

 

Do you think the Oilers would trade McDavid to the Flames?  They could end up with 3 30 goal scorers and you know win the trade.  ex:  McDavid's 60 g vs 90 - would make their team better.  Plus, they wouldnt have all their eggs in 1 basket either.  However, they'd have to play a whole lot of games against a 60 g scorer.  

 

 

 

 

I think might be is the key phrase.  If there is a good chance Michkov becomes the next Ovechkin then I wouldn't trade the pick period, Eastern or Western Conference team. I would draft him.

 

No I don't think the Oilers would trade McDavid to the Flames or any team in the Eastern Conference because it would difficult to improve your team by trading the world's best player. 

 

It's all about improving your team. Sure, Lucic to Calgary is not a great example but it shows that two bitter rivals weren't concerned about helping each other because they thought the trade would be good for their own team. 

[Sir_Boagalott]

10 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

I think might be is the key phrase.  If there is a good chance Michkov becomes the next Ovechkin then I wouldn't trade the pick period, Eastern or Western Conference team. I would dr

 

No I don't think the Oilers would trade McDavid to the Flames or any team in the Eastern Conference because it would difficult to improve your team by trading the world's best player. 

 

It's all about improving your team. Sure, Lucic to Calgary is not a great example but it shows that two bitter rivals weren't concerned about helping each other because they the trade would be good for their own team. 

 

Talent wise, Michkov is 2nd only to Bedard.  It is possible that the Ducks take him.  He might be the better choice for them  anyway, same with the Sharks too.  Neither of them need a player asap so having to wait for 3 years should not be a deal breaker for them.  CBJ and the Habs don't have that time and can't wait that long.    Imagine, 5 straight years of bottom 5 finishes - no thanks.  The Habs rebuild will be complete in 2024.  

 

Trading 60 g guy for 3 30 goal guys = 90 goals, that is a 30 g surplus.  However, that is a win- win- lose scenario.  They would win the trade for the players and win improving their team, but ultimately they would lose by watching McJesus perform miracles against them. 

 

There are different types of trades.    There is also lose-win-win where you pay a lot and lose the trade but you win on improving your team and win by you know ultimately winning.  ex: give up a ton to get 1 guy, but that guy is the 1 guy you needed.  

 

There is no way that it is only about improving your team.  ex: make a trade in your division that gets you 10 more pts - you've improved your team.  If the other team gets 20 more pts that is irrelevant because your team improved 10 pts?  

 

Plus, numerous teams already have a big collection of young punks that could be all-star HOF players.  ex:  Wings, Devils, and possibly Sabers and even the Sens.  I'd be damn careful of what the difference would be for the other team.  Hence the trade to the other conference concept because it would make way less of a difference and you'd only play them in the Cup.   

[tomh009]

3 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

No I don't think the Oilers would trade McDavid to the Flames or any team in the Eastern Conference because it would difficult to improve your team by trading the world's best player. 

I do recall they traded Gretzky though—and within their own division yet!

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

6 hours ago, tomh009 said:

I do recall they traded Gretzky though—and within their own division yet!

 

Good point! I am not sure it improved the Oilers but they did win another cup without him. 

[DON]

EOTP took a stab at mock picks;

https://www.habseyesontheprize.com/habsent-minded-mock-draft-special-montreal-canadiens-podcast-2023-nhl-draft/

 

Which is better group of picks?

Not the one of the left if i had a choice (d-man and Sale, skilled but not my preference).

Musty is supposed to be underrated kid and Nadeau has a Hoffman-esque shot.

 

[GHT120]

I am racking my brain and can't pull out the details, but I recall an eastern NHL team trading a significant-ish player out west and the new team then immediately flipping him back into the east ... can someone help me?

 

[DON]

Head scratcher for me, just seems odd that many talking heads 'love' Leonard's game and none with anything negative to say and are some who question Smith's game, but Smith is higher rated by most?

JUst that much more skilled?

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

11 hours ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

 

Talent wise, Michkov is 2nd only to Bedard.  It is possible that the Ducks take him.  He might be the better choice for them  anyway, same with the Sharks too.  Neither of them need a player asap so having to wait for 3 years should not be a deal breaker for them.  CBJ and the Habs don't have that time and can't wait that long.    Imagine, 5 straight years of bottom 5 finishes - no thanks.  The Habs rebuild will be complete in 2024.  

 

Trading 60 g guy for 3 30 goal guys = 90 goals, that is a 30 g surplus.  However, that is a win- win- lose scenario.  They would win the trade for the players and win improving their team, but ultimately they would lose by watching McJesus perform miracles against them. 

 

There are different types of trades.    There is also lose-win-win where you pay a lot and lose the trade but you win on improving your team and win by you know ultimately winning.  ex: give up a ton to get 1 guy, but that guy is the 1 guy you needed.  

 

There is no way that it is only about improving your team.  ex: make a trade in your division that gets you 10 more pts - you've improved your team.  If the other team gets 20 more pts that is irrelevant because your team improved 10 pts?  

 

Plus, numerous teams already have a big collection of young punks that could be all-star HOF players.  ex:  Wings, Devils, and possibly Sabers and even the Sens.  I'd be damn careful of what the difference would be for the other team.  Hence the trade to the other conference concept because it would make way less of a difference and you'd only play them in the Cup.   

 

The idea of trading a stud, all-star/superstar player for a number of decent players always makes me think of Boston’s Thornton trade. That type of deal strikes me as generally unwise, the reason being that there are lots of ways to add 25-goal guys and second-pairing D-men to your roster, but it’s extremely difficult to find a Joe Thornton. This is why, when teams do have stud players, they generally keep them.

[dlbalr]

1 hour ago, GHT120 said:

I am racking my brain and can't pull out the details, but I recall an eastern NHL team trading a significant-ish player out west and the new team then immediately flipping him back into the east ... can someone help me?

 

Mike Hoffman - seriously.  Ottawa wouldn't move him in the East so they traded him to San Jose who, about an hour later, flipped him to Florida for what I believe was a better return than the Sens got from the Sharks.

[GHT120]

16 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

Mike Hoffman - seriously.  Ottawa wouldn't move him in the East so they traded him to San Jose who, about an hour later, flipped him to Florida for what I believe was a better return than the Sens got from the Sharks.

Thank you ... shows that you can't always "trust" your fellow GMs to respect your intent in making a trade.

[Neech]

 

The idea of passing on Michkov at #5 seems criminal to me, but given that that appears to be the way we're headed if he's still on the board, a trade down with Detroit or Washington to add another 1st rounder might not be a bad thing. The prospects from 5-8 seem roughly interchangeable and I'd be about the same level of excited for Smith, Benson, Leonard, or Reinbacher. 

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

The idea of trading a stud, all-star/superstar player for a number of decent players always makes me think of Boston’s Thornton trade. That type of deal strikes me as generally unwise, the reason being that there are lots of ways to add 25-goal guys and second-pairing D-men to your roster, but it’s extremely difficult to find a Joe Thornton. This is why, when teams do have stud players, they generally keep them.

 

Exactly. I think it was Sam Pollock who said that whoever gets the best player in a trade wins the trade.  When the game is on the line and you need a goal you want to be able to put a stud out there. 

[GHT120]

2 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

Exactly. I think it was Sam Pollock who said that whoever gets the best player in a trade wins the trade.  When the game is on the line and you need a goal you want to be able to put a stud out there. 

 

Until they reach the NHL, we have no idea who the "best player" is ... at this point it is at most just who is evaluated as the most talented/skilled ... Michkov's relative isolation the last couple of seasons does make assessing him as a player somewhat more difficult.

[dlbalr]

5 hours ago, GHT120 said:

Thank you ... shows that you can't always "trust" your fellow GMs to respect your intent in making a trade.

 

It happened to Montreal a while back as well with the Jeff Hackett trade.  They didn't want to move him to Boston so they sent him to a Western team instead with that team moving him to the Bruins.  That Western team?  San Jose.

[Sir_Boagalott]

7 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

The idea of trading a stud, all-star/superstar player for a number of decent players always makes me think of Boston’s Thornton trade. That type of deal strikes me as generally unwise, the reason being that there are lots of ways to add 25-goal guys and second-pairing D-men to your roster, but it’s extremely difficult to find a Joe Thornton. This is why, when teams do have stud players, they generally keep them.

 

What is a stud player though?  Thorton was a great regular season guy but not so much when the playoffs start.  I actually refer to players like that as "Thorton's".  ex:  when PK was traded my 1st thought was wondering if Weber is a "Thorton".

 

I disagree with the concept of having all your eggs in 1 basket and having super star players.  They cost a lot and that makes it hard to fill out the rest of the roster.  ex:  look at the Leafs and Oilers.  Plus, a team can have a Danault like shut down guy assigned to a super star player, or just double team them and there goes that teams production.  i.e. you win by committee rather than 1 super star that carries the team.  ex:  a team can't really shut down 3 30 goal scorers like they could a 60g guy.  

[Sir_Boagalott]

16 hours ago, tomh009 said:

I do recall they traded Gretzky though—and within their own division yet!

 

Was it to the same same Division though?  Same Conference anyway.  Off the top of my head that is really the only big name player I can think of that was traded within the same Conference.   I'm sure there are others but the majority of trades of top players tend to happen between Conferences.