Big Picture Ideas, Questions and Predictions Based on Cap Management, Team Construction and the Theory of Everything

[Butterface]

6 minutes ago, Commandant said:

Not a reporter, once again a fan site

So far.. awinninghabit and thehockeywriters are fan sites. Got it. They come up in searches and sometimes have ideas that are interesting to chat about.

 

From Heineman injury and Laine flu, we’ve learned that Pez’s time with the team has likely run its course. MSL is not interested in playing him much. Pez seems to get in the way of himself on the ice. 

[tomh009]

14 minutes ago, Commandant said:

I'd leave the Anderson - Dvorak - Gallagher line alone and slide in Roy or ABB into the Evans line.  

Full agreement here.

 

In isolation, the rearrangement of the lines could better but when you are looking for short-term improvement, the disruption by far exceeds any benefit from the optimization of the lines.

[tomh009]

Just now, Butterface said:

So far.. awinninghabit and thehockeywriters are fan sites. Got it. They come up in searches and sometimes have ideas that are interesting to chat about.

There really aren't many professional sites out there: NHL, The Athletic, TSN, Sportsnet, Gazette are what comes to mind--and even there, a lot of content comes from CP or AP. Most of the content on the Internet is fan-generated.

[Butterface]

12 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

There really aren't many professional sites out there: NHL, The Athletic, TSN, Sportsnet, Gazette are what comes to mind--and even there, a lot of content comes from CP or AP. Most of the content on the Internet is fan-generated.

I have a pretty voracious appetite for reading Canadiens news. Though I can discern really poor writing and non-sensical vlogs a lot of the time, sometimes things from outside sources catch my interest. I have learned to avoid some. Some are just too hard to stop looking at… like a National Enquirer in the Loblaws or Metro cashier line.

 

I don’t think I can wean off of it and stick to only TSN, Gazette, Sportsnet and the Athletic. Sometimes I need the calories that only junk news can provide. 

[Commandant]

3 minutes ago, Butterface said:

I have a pretty voracious appetite for reading Canadiens news. Though I can discern really poor writing and non-sensical vlogs a lot of the time, sometimes things from outside sources catch my interest. I have learned to avoid some. Some are just too hard to stop looking at… like a National Enquirer in the Loblaws or Metro cashier line.

 

I don’t think I can wean off of it and stick to only TSN, Gazette, Sportsnet and the Athletic. Sometimes I need the calories that only junk news can provide. 

 

To be clear there is nothing "bad" about a fan site. 

Just saying that the writers there have no more insight than the people who post here.  We are on the same level. 

[GHT120]

No transactions that I can find, so I guess Pezzetta gets his 4 minutes tonight.

[Butterface]

21 minutes ago, Commandant said:

We are on the same level. 

There’s a George Orwell Animal Farm quote waiting in the wings.

[Butterface]

Just now, GHT120 said:

No transactions that I can find, so I guess Pezzetta gets his 4 minutes tonight.

That’s what I read.. maybe they do it on return to Montreal 

[Commandant]

1 minute ago, GHT120 said:

No transactions that I can find, so I guess Pezzetta gets his 4 minutes tonight.

Yeah they would have sat someone for the laval game yesterday and put them on a flight to meet the team in Dallas if they were calling someone up.

 

Given that they didnt, i think they just are gonna do it after the road trip

[Dalhabs]

16 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

To be clear there is nothing "bad" about a fan site. 

Just saying that the writers there have no more insight than the people who post here.  We are on the same level. 

Cmon!

Habsworld is THE fansite. Was even mentioned as the source in an article of a major swedish newspaper.

[Butterface]

https://www.dailyfaceoff.com/news/2025-nhl-draft-rankings-mid-season-top-64-matthew-schaefer-porter-martone-james-hagens-michael-misa
 

Draft rankings from Daily Faceoff saying more depth in this 2025 draft class than previously thought and that’s why the various draft boards are dis-similar … lots to debate.
 

There are still some possibilities that are intriguing where we could end up picking.

 

Top RHD is 18th on this list. Blake Fiddler.

[Butterface]

20 minutes ago, Dalhabs said:

Cmon!

Habsworld is THE fansite. Was even mentioned as the source in an article of a major swedish newspaper.

and the guy I posted, Tyler Major-Mcnicol (awinninghabit) has a journalism degree … he’s not a teenager in a basement.. he’s got a second kid on the way.. and a beard. Wait.. might only be a diploma… but it’s something.. 🤣🤣

[GHT120]

24 minutes ago, Butterface said:

https://www.dailyfaceoff.com/news/2025-nhl-draft-rankings-mid-season-top-64-matthew-schaefer-porter-martone-james-hagens-michael-misa
 

Draft rankings from Daily Faceoff saying more depth in this 2025 draft class than previously thought and that’s why the various draft boards are dis-similar … lots to debate.
 

There are still some possibilities that are intriguing where we could end up picking.

 

Top RHD is 18th on this list. Blake Fiddler.

Why the focus on RHD?  BPA!

[Butterface]

On 1/15/2025 at 4:58 PM, Butterface said:

I’m interested to see where the consensus best RHD and LH Centres fall on the draft lists… see if we need to trade up to get them or we have options in the areas we expect to draft.

 

BPA, but if there are a group of prospects at an equal talent level, these are two choices we should lean towards.

 

5 hours ago, GHT120 said:

Why the focus on RHD?  BPA!

Read above.

 

I’ve never wavered from BPA.

 

Trading up or down is also a strategy. Seeing groups of players of equal talent and drafting the one that fills a need is still drafting BPA. At this point in our rebuild I’m only interested in moving UP in the draft for BPA… which could be a RHD or a LHC. So yeah, I’m interested where they stack up !!

 

Being curious about RHD and LHCs is just wanting to see where they fall in the expected talent tier. These two positions are our most desired need right now. Until they are addressed, I’m interested. We all should be.

 

[Commandant]

Talent is never equal.  There are always differences. 

[GHT120]

8 minutes ago, Commandant said:

Talent is never equal.  There are always differences. 

Maybe the better description is "overall rating" ... but I tend to agree that rarely is happens.

[Commandant]

14 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

Maybe the better description is "overall rating" ... but I tend to agree that rarely is happens.

 

Maybe in round 5 or something, there might be a guy whose weakness is skating and another who is size deficient and you have to choose which one you think you can fix.

 

But the first round, even in the 20s, there are differences in talent.  Take the Best Player Available. 

[Butterface]

52 minutes ago, Commandant said:

But the first round, even in the 20s, there are differences in talent.  Take the Best Player Available. 

A lot of it is subjective and once you start getting out of the high draft picks, opinions vary. Sometimes widely. Button vs Mckenzie vs Wheeler vs Peters vs Edwards vs Elite Prospects vs Johnson vs Ferrari …. They will differ. 
 

Lots of times you look at picks 15-20 … those 6 picks might be scrambled up a few different ways on lists. So unless you know for certain because you can predict the future, those prospects are for all intents and purposes, equals.

 

Lots of times the top 10 will be cut and dried… after that it’s in the eye of the beholder between two or three draftees.

If you have one go-to scout… sure there is one answer.

 

But if you are gathering opinions from several scouts or services, you might have 5 guys ranked 15th on various lists… if it is hard to choose which scout got it right and if you have a positional need… pick your need.

 

You say it happens in the 5th round, I think it happens earlier.

 

Case in point the 2012 draft….

 

https://thehockeywriters.com/re-drafting-2012-nhl-entry-draft/

 

If you can’t even pick BPA at top of the draft, what chance do you have at 15-20 ?

 

Pick BPA, but when it’s indistinguishable because multiple scouts and services vary and there is a grouping of say 3-5 players, pick for positional needs.

 

It’s not a complicated idea.

 

 

 

[Commandant]

7 minutes ago, Butterface said:

A lot of it is subjective and once you start getting out of the high draft picks, opinions vary. Sometimes widely. Button vs Mckenzie vs Wheeler vs Peters vs Edwards vs Elite Prospects vs Johnson vs Ferrari …. They will differ. 
 

Lots of times you look at picks 15-20 … those 6 picks might be scrambled up a few different ways on lists. So unless you know for certain because you can predict the future, those prospects are for all intents and purposes, equals.

 

Lots of times the top 10 will be cut and dried… after that it’s in the eye of the beholder between two or three draftees.

If you have one go-to scout… sure there is one answer.

 

But if you are gathering opinions from several scouts or services, you might have 5 guys ranked 15th on various lists… if it is hard to choose which scout got it right and if you have a positional need… pick your need.

 

You say it happens in the 5th round, I think it happens earlier.

 

Case in point the 2012 draft….

 

https://thehockeywriters.com/re-drafting-2012-nhl-entry-draft/

 

If you can’t even pick BPA at top of the draft, what chance do you have at 15-20 ?

 

Pick BPA, but when it’s indistinguishable because multiple scouts and services vary and there is a grouping of say 3-5 players, pick for positional needs.

 

It’s not a complicated idea.

 

 

 

 

Sure you can have those ideas.  Im telling you my own experience in rankings and putting together lists.  I have always seen differences in the first few rounds and the differences get smaller the deeper you go in the draft.

 

Differences might be small but they are there.

 

To me you always go BPA and trade for needs.

 

This is just an area where we will have to agree to disagree, cause i wont move off my position that a team should always go BPA in round one.

[GHT120]

2 hours ago, Butterface said:

A lot of it is subjective and once you start getting out of the high draft picks, opinions vary. Sometimes widely. Button vs Mckenzie vs Wheeler vs Peters vs Edwards vs Elite Prospects vs Johnson vs Ferrari …. They will differ. 

 

... just as teams will differ in how they rate/rank players.

 

I think the point is that while there may not be consensus amongst all teams/experts as to the BPA at each slot in the draft, each team will have its own ratings/rankings and should follow them when drafting ... rarely will a team have 2 or more players ranked/rated equally when their pick comes up.

[Butterface]

3 hours ago, Commandant said:

Differences might be small but they are there.

 

To me you always go BPA and trade for needs.

 

I’m not disagreeing with BPA though.

 

You are grading these guys yourself, so you will always see minute differences. You are one person with a strong opinion on draft prospects.

 

If five draft consultants are giving intel on a draft prospect , one might say 15th best, 2 might say 14th best and 2 might say 12th best….

 

Whose opinion should a GM agree with ? We’re talking razor thin differences that pundits may equate differently. 

 

Honestly you and I disagree on stuff sure, but usually we’re not terribly far apart (but yeah sometimes)…..  I do agree pick BPA… I don’t disagree with you there.

 

Also when you are trading for a 1C, 2C or RHD you are always coming to the trade in a position of weakness. Those are key positions. So trading for needs, when your needs are those three positions… you start off at a disadvantage.
 

I’ve heard many times while watching drafts that there are tranches of players who could be drafted in any order because their skills/talent are similar or valued in ways that make them similar. 

 

Your list is true to you, but should I go with you or Craig Button ? Likely you’ll agree with his number 1 pick, but just as likely you won’t agree on number 23 or 17.

 

So either one of you is wrong, or there are players that are subjectively different between Button and you. Who is BPA then ?

[Butterface]

9 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

rarely will a team have 2 or more players ranked/rated equally when their pick comes up.

Hard to tell. There can be only one pick. 

[Butterface]

 

Put it this way, if I was hiring a personal assistant.

One had amazing people skills.

One had amazing computer skills.

And one had amazing organizational skills.

 

Who would I hire ?

 

Similarly if I had to draft one player 15th overall…

McKenzie had one guy ranked 15th.

You had a different guy ranked 15th.

and Button had a third guy ranked 15th….

 

If felt you were all equally valued advisors…

I would draft the one who best suits my positional needs because they are all equal talent-wise based on my three most valued draft advisors.

 

That player is still BPA.

 

Now if I have 19th pick and I can add a sweetener to move up to 15th to get that positional need, I’m still drafting BPA. 

 

 

[Commandant]

1 hour ago, Butterface said:

 

I’m not disagreeing with BPA though.

 

You are grading these guys yourself, so you will always see minute differences. You are one person with a strong opinion on draft prospects.

 

If five draft consultants are giving intel on a draft prospect , one might say 15th best, 2 might say 14th best and 2 might say 12th best….

 

Whose opinion should a GM agree with ? We’re talking razor thin differences that pundits may equate differently. 

 

Honestly you and I disagree on stuff sure, but usually we’re not terribly far apart (but yeah sometimes)…..  I do agree pick BPA… I don’t disagree with you there.

 

Also when you are trading for a 1C, 2C or RHD you are always coming to the trade in a position of weakness. Those are key positions. So trading for needs, when your needs are those three positions… you start off at a disadvantage.
 

I’ve heard many times while watching drafts that there are tranches of players who could be drafted in any order because their skills/talent are similar or valued in ways that make them similar. 

 

Your list is true to you, but should I go with you or Craig Button ? Likely you’ll agree with his number 1 pick, but just as likely you won’t agree on number 23 or 17.

 

So either one of you is wrong, or there are players that are subjectively different between Button and you. Who is BPA then ?

 

BPA is the player who YOUR SCOUTS that you employ feel is the best.  Every team will make a list ranking players by BPA.  Those lists might be different, but you should be trusting your scouts, not me, not button, not wheeler or anyone else, and if you think those people are better than your own scouts, you fire your scouts and hire them. 

 

Every team has long meetings with their scouts to make the BPA list.  And when that is done, that's the list you gotta stick with.   All the issues you bring up, what if one scout likes one player and another scout likes a different one, they discuss it in the room, watch more film and poll all the consultants and then rank the players by BPA based on the GM's final decision. 

[GHT120]

1 minute ago, Commandant said:

BPA is the player who YOUR SCOUTS that you employ feel is the best.  Every team will make a list ranking players by BPA.  

Teams have pre-draft meetings to thrash-out the the opinions of everyone involved (internally) and develop that list ... they may be aware of external opinions and might even choose to consider some ... but the final list is THE list for that team.