Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

2019-20 If i were GM


H_T_L
 Share

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, maas_art said:

 

I think its basically impossible 1st gets moved because it would (as Malmacian said) take balls of steel. No GM is likely to move Lafreniere.  However, IF it somehow did happen i think it would take two things:

 

1) You'd need a team that already has elite talent. Buffalo for example, if they won the lottery, already have Eichel and Dahlin and some very nice pieces like Oloffson, Reinhart, etc.   So would they be better with one player (Lafreniere) or say 4 or 5 good players?   I could see you enticing them with a package that includes Suzuki, Domi, Romanov, and probably a couple of other pieces. Ottawa, if they win 1st OVA are not moving that pick - no way, shape or form. They need a superstar talent as much as we do.  Now you could certainly argue that trading for that pick is foolish - i mean we'd be 100% in a rebuild at that point - but what a guy to rebuild around. 

2) Our own pick has to be higher. I just cant see any team trading away 1st for a package that drops them back to like 8th or 9th.  If we have say the 3rd or 4th pick.. .maybe you have some wiggle room.  They cant get their 1st choice (Lafreniere) but after him there's a fair bit of dispute so its not out of the question that a team ends up getting the guy they wanted 2nd most with say the 4th pick. 

 

Again, i totally think its moot. I dont think anyone is moving that 1st OVA pick but i think it would take a ridiculous offer to make it happen. 

I agree, especially that no GM has the testicular fortitude to actually pull the trigger on a trade that involves the first overall

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, jennifer_rocket said:

Hypothetical.

Let's say Montreal has the, hmmmmmmmm, eighth overall draft pick in 2020. Would anyone trade the first overall pick for the eighth overall, a 2020 second rounder, Kotkaniemi, Poehling, and Brook?

At this point, I think 3 of the assets you listed have minimal value. Poehling projects right now as a bottom 6 forward. Brook had bad start to his professional career and has minimal value until he can prove something. And the 2nd rounder is nice but only has a 10-15% of becoming a regular NHLers, so isn't much to talk about. So it's three second-tier assets, Kotkaniemi and and 8th overall and that doesn't cut it.

If we're drafting 8th overall, I think it would take us trading another asset like Price, Weber, Petry, Gallagher, or so on for another top 10 pick, then packaging that pick with the 8th overall, a future 1st rounder in 2021, and Suzuki to be able to move up, and even then it depends on what team we're trying to deal with... likely not worth it to us because whatever deal it is will almost certainly be an over-pay, especially with teams knowing we want Lafreniere. I think the only ways we draft him are if we win the 1st overall pick in the lottery or if we win pick 2 or 3 and then put together some type of a better package from there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
5 minutes ago, BornToBeAHab said:

How about Domi,our first rounder,and Mete for Patrick Laine .

I dont think Laine is available and i think you'd have to replace Mete for Caufield. The standard for any high level player is a first, a roster player, and an A prospect. I don't think anything less would work, if even that would work

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, habsisme said:

I dont think Laine is available and i think you'd have to replace Mete for Caufield. The standard for any high level player is a first, a roster player, and an A prospect. I don't think anything less would work, if even that would work

Prolly Gally, or a top 6 player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MB has to be aware of what his organization depth is. We all kind of feel like his center depth has improved dramatically and that we might be able to pencil Suzuki-Kotkaniemi-Danault-Evans and potentially Poehling or Hillis or Olofsson somewhere in the line-up for a few years. But the Habs didn't draft a center last year after going all-in on them the year before. So we all know that one injury or falling out of favor could rapidly change the organizational depth there. I think it's still imperative the Habs grab another 1st round centerman in the draft if they can this year or next.

On the wing, the Habs have two legit prospects who could move onto the roster in the next 2-3 years: Caufield and Ylonen. Both are right wingers. Gallagher and Armia both hit UFA status after next season, and I could see the Habs re-signing both, but there are really no sure things locked into our line-up past next season. On the left side, things are even more bleak. Tatar will be a UFA in a year. We still control Drouin and Lehkonen's rights, but those are maybe your 2nd and 3rd line LW's on a decent team, so there's still a hole at the top.

On the right side of the D, Weber and Petry fill out your top 4 right now, but both are ageing and Petry is a UFA in a year. Juulsen, Fleury, and Brook hold some promise but the first two look more like bottom 4 D men and Brook's progress has stalled. As it stands, it doesn't look like there's much relief coming. On the left side, I think Chiarot and Mete are write-off's as far as being long-term assets. Kulak is IMO our best LHD right now but he's a 3rd-pairing player ideally. That said, LHD is probably the area with the most potential in our organization. Romanov could be a top 4 player, and Norlinder probably has a higher ceiling than Romanov, albeit with a lower floor as well. Then you add on Jordan Harris, Struble, and Fairbrother, and there are guys there who could possibly fill out your left side for a while.

In goal, Carey is likely still here another few years and Primeau could be a decent replacement.

All that to say that if I'm GM, the areas that I think are most in need of a high draft pick or trade for a young 5-to-7-year asset would be in order:

1. RHD

2. LW

3. Center

4. RW

5. Goalie

6. LHD

 

And so this is absolutely why I would be going full-force after a player like Matt Dumba

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The timing will never be better to try to get Colorado to bite on Carey Price. They've got to feel like they have one of the best rosters in the NHL with the exception of their goaltending situation. One strong goalie could put them over the top, and Sakic has personally experienced it before. Get them while the sting of being knocked out in Game 7 OT is fresh... it makes sense for them, if they can make the money work.

It seems like it makes sense for Carey too, who has a NMC but who might waive it given how much he's talked about getting older and running out of time to win a Cup. It also brings him a bit closer to his wife's home state of Washington, and it puts him in a town where the media would breathe down his neck less, not to mention being an area where there's lots of outdoor stuff to do.

From the Habs' perspective, it would hurt to lose Carey, but you now have a potential bridge player in Allen who can lead you in to Primeau. Using them as a tandem for the next 2-3 years would not be horrible. You have your young ducks lined up at the center position, but if you can add 2-3 assets that aren't in Colorado's immediate future (like Byram or Timmins or Bowers or Kamenev or Newhook or Kaut or so on) then you can build a core around those younger centers.

If you can set up something like Price for Byram, Kaut, and a 1st round pick and then make that Domi + a 2nd for Dumba, it frees you up to look at moving Weber as well, and trading Weber and Price gives you tons of cap room to re-sign Gallagher, Danault, and Petry. Maybe Winnipeg would look at Weber in a deal for one of Ehlers or Laine. I think we might have to add something else to get Laine, but I think Weber actually has higher trade value than Ehlers, so I don't think a deal based around Weber for Ehlers + Roslovic would be unreasonable, especially since Winnipeg has been rumored to be shopping both. Finally, let's say we look at something like a straight-up deal of Tatar for another player on the outs with his team like Josh Anderson in Columbus, who has been in trade rumors every year he's been in the league and who by all accounts is deemed expendable there. And I'll add in that the team could use Byron, Mete, or Poehling as other trade chips as needed. Again, just an example of where we could go, but it would leave us with a line-up that looks more like this:

 

Drouin-Suzuki-Anderson

Ehlers-Kotkaniemi-Gallagher

Lehkonen-Danault-Armia

Roslovic-Evans-Kaut

 

Romanov-Petry

Byram-Dumba

Kulak-Juulsen

Fleury

 

Allen

Primeau

 

Is it a line-up that needs a bit of experience to gel? Yes. But it's also a line-up you can build around and keep the core together for 5 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Finally, let's say we look at something like a straight-up deal of Tatar for another player on the outs with his team like Josh Anderson in Columbus, who has been in trade rumors every year he's been in the league and who by all accounts is deemed expendable there.

I read an article the other day (was think it was Columbus based) about them targeting Domi as a #2 Center, mentioned something along the lines of Anderson and a 3rd in exchange for Domi. Got me thinking a bit... I think we could probably turn that 3rd into a 2nd, and if so that might be something to consider. I know most talk has been around packaging Domi with something else to land a big fish, but falling short of that swapping Domi for a player like Anderson + would probably still be more useful than starting the season with Domi. At least we’d have a big RW who can score to slot in between Gallagher and Armia (he’s no Mantha, but...), just something to chew on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MALMACIAN_CRUNCH said:

I read an article the other day (was think it was Columbus based) about them targeting Domi as a #2 Center, mentioned something along the lines of Anderson and a 3rd in exchange for Domi. Got me thinking a bit... I think we could probably turn that 3rd into a 2nd, and if so that might be something to consider. I know most talk has been around packaging Domi with something else to land a big fish, but falling short of that swapping Domi for a player like Anderson + would probably still be more useful than starting the season with Domi. At least we’d have a big RW who can score to slot in between Gallagher and Armia (he’s no Mantha, but...), just something to chew on

I dont know Anderson very well, I like the RH and size but he seemed to suck pretty bad this year, any reason for that? He had a solid year last  year

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, habsisme said:

I dont know Anderson very well, I like the RH and size but he seemed to suck pretty bad this year, any reason for that? He had a solid year last  year

I think he was playing hurt and then opted to have surgery to repair a labrum in his shoulder, so missed most of the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, habsisme said:

I dont know Anderson very well, I like the RH and size but he seemed to suck pretty bad this year, any reason for that? He had a solid year last  year

 

14 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

I think he was playing hurt and then opted to have surgery to repair a labrum in his shoulder, so missed most of the year.

Yeah, I don’t love shoulder problems. I’d want reassurance that he’s good to go. Maybe make the 2nd conditional, turns into a 1st if he misses “x” amount of games. Both him and Domi are coming off down years compared to their prior seasons, but Domi looks to be the more valuable trade piece. Anderson looks to me to be a 25/25 guy. But he’s big, can skate and looks like he would fit in nice. RFA, might be able to hook him into a bridge deal for relatively cheap. I’m sure he thinks he’s a 30 goal scorer, but that has yet to be proven.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, MALMACIAN_CRUNCH said:

Yeah, I don’t love shoulder problems. I’d want reassurance that he’s good to go. Maybe make the 2nd conditional, turns into a 1st if he misses “x” amount of games. Both him and Domi are coming off down years compared to their prior seasons, but Domi looks to be the more valuable trade piece. Anderson looks to me to be a 25/25 guy. But he’s big, can skate and looks like he would fit in nice. RFA, might be able to hook him into a bridge deal for relatively cheap. I’m sure he thinks he’s a 30 goal scorer, but that has yet to be proven.

Anderson's playing and injury history are a concern. I think there are better alternative values to be had with Chicago (Saad or Boqvist etc. )  or Oilers - Our GM has to be patient - I’ll take youth potential over injury rebound potential 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...If Domi is done in Montreal there's no way I would even consider him for Anderson  even if a 2nd came along in the deal...the size difference is noticeable but the talent level is day and night ...I still say Montreal first tries to make a deal for a scorer like Ehlers and sends Max with a  2nd  and a young D not named Romanov .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, claremont said:

Anderson's playing and injury history are a concern. I think there are better alternative values to be had with Chicago (Saad or Boqvist etc. )  or Oilers - Our GM has to be patient - I’ll take youth potential over injury rebound potential 

 

13 hours ago, arpem-can said:

...If Domi is done in Montreal there's no way I would even consider him for Anderson  even if a 2nd came along in the deal...the size difference is noticeable but the talent level is day and night ...I still say Montreal first tries to make a deal for a scorer like Ehlers and sends Max with a  2nd  and a young D not named Romanov .

I’m not all in on Anderson. But we talk a lot about packaging Domi with other assets, just saying that trading him for a package is also worth considering. Anderson just came to my attention when reading that article about the Jackets having interest in Domi. Domi definitely has the advantage in skill, but Anderson appears to have more than just size going for him. He would fill multiple holes, size, style, position and goal scoring. Adding a player like that along with a draft pick or prospect would still be a positive gain. But as I said, I’m open minded, doesn’t have to be Anderson, he just looks to fit the mold of the type of player that we never have in our lineup, and always gives us fits when we play teams that do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we do trade Domi, let's try to get the better player in any deal, meaning, the player we get is the better player.

We got lucky when we traded Galchenyuk.  We got lucky when we traded Pacioretty.

Let's package some players/picks for a Laine or Ehlers, or Dumba or Ekman Larsson........  Let's upgrade! Then give more of our young guns an opportunity.

We need gamebreakers. ( Not sure if Taylor Hall qualifies, but he'd only cost money. )  Domi is a valuable trade chip. Personnally, I'd rather see Drouin gone, but if has to be Domi................?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MALMACIAN_CRUNCH said:

 

I’m not all in on Anderson. But we talk a lot about packaging Domi with other assets, just saying that trading him for a package is also worth considering. Anderson just came to my attention when reading that article about the Jackets having interest in Domi. Domi definitely has the advantage in skill, but Anderson appears to have more than just size going for him. He would fill multiple holes, size, style, position and goal scoring. Adding a player like that along with a draft pick or prospect would still be a positive gain. But as I said, I’m open minded, doesn’t have to be Anderson, he just looks to fit the mold of the type of player that we never have in our lineup, and always gives us fits when we play teams that do. 

I saw him play a lot as a junior here in London for the Knights ..it's not that he hasn't scored goals before but the injury and coming off a really down year are concerning flags for me ....I do however like his size , speed ...and toughness...he reminds me of a Turner Stevenson type ...he would come with a more affordable contract than Domi as well ..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, electron58 said:

If we do trade Domi, let's try to get the better player in any deal, meaning, the player we get is the better player.

We got lucky when we traded Galchenyuk.  We got lucky when we traded Pacioretty.

Let's package some players/picks for a Laine or Ehlers, or Dumba or Ekman Larsson........  Let's upgrade! Then give more of our young guns an opportunity.

We need gamebreakers. ( Not sure if Taylor Hall qualifies, but he'd only cost money. )  Domi is a valuable trade chip. Personnally, I'd rather see Drouin gone, but if has to be Domi................?

  as everybody can agree we need a game breaker ...it comes down to Hall , Laine and to a lesser degree Ehlers in terms of possible availability ....Hall will cost a lot but no picks or roster spots to get him leaving the door still open for trades ......if Domi hasn't said he wants out of Montreal I believe he wants to stay ...just because his  agent isn't a personal friend of Bergevin  shouldn't make a difference ...hopefully  ...unless fair value comes back for Max we should keep his skill set ....it's not that he's a player who suddenly became really bad or that he has a ridiculous contract in hand at the moment ...as well not so sure Bergevin gets "lucky" when he makes a good trade for the club ...maybe more credit for landing guys like Suzuki , Tatar . Danault , Kulak and Armia  ...at the same time he should also eat his mistake in Alzner and has 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, arpem-can said:

  as everybody can agree we need a game breaker ...it comes down to Hall , Laine and to a lesser degree Ehlers in terms of possible availability ....Hall will cost a lot but no picks or roster spots to get him leaving the door still open for trades ......if Domi hasn't said he wants out of Montreal I believe he wants to stay ...just because his  agent isn't a personal friend of Bergevin  shouldn't make a difference ...hopefully  ...unless fair value comes back for Max we should keep his skill set ....it's not that he's a player who suddenly became really bad or that he has a ridiculous contract in hand at the moment ...as well not so sure Bergevin gets "lucky" when he makes a good trade for the club ...maybe more credit for landing guys like Suzuki , Tatar . Danault , Kulak and Armia  ...at the same time he should also eat his mistake in Alzner and has 

I'm not disputing, that Bergevin has made good moves.  It's just that in the Domi deal, both players were underperforming  and needed a change in scenery. Did anyone expect Domi to lead the team in his first season? Definitely not I. And Pacioretty was the better player in his deal. (at that time) Yes, Tatar fetched a 1st, 2nd & 3rd round pick but didn't really mesh in Vegas. He was a salary dump by Vegas. Nobody expected him to perform as well as he has, although Vegas could have been an anomoly. As well, nobody expected Suzuki to perform as well as he has for a rookie, although he had a great Junior career. Getting Danault, Kulak and Armia were shrewd moves, and are to be applauded.  Of course, his lucky trades are to be applauded as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, electron58 said:

I'm not disputing, that Bergevin has made good moves.  It's just that in the Domi deal, both players were underperforming  and needed a change in scenery. Did anyone expect Domi to lead the team in his first season? Definitely not I. And Pacioretty was the better player in his deal. (at that time) Yes, Tatar fetched a 1st, 2nd & 3rd round pick but didn't really mesh in Vegas. He was a salary dump by Vegas. Nobody expected him to perform as well as he has, although Vegas could have been an anomoly. As well, nobody expected Suzuki to perform as well as he has for a rookie, although he had a great Junior career. Getting Danault, Kulak and Armia were shrewd moves, and are to be applauded.  Of course, his lucky trades are to be applauded as well.

when you're "lucky" that many times (including PK for Weber) you have to get credit for it. 

The biggest problem with this team is drafting in the first round

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, habsisme said:

when you're "lucky" that many times (including PK for Weber) you have to get credit for it. 

The biggest problem with this team is drafting in the first round

Very true on first round draft choices but that’s what happens when most of the time you have mediocre picks at 20 or below plus our development in the AHL with Lefevre was terrible. Alex G at #3 was a complete dud, we traded away #9 Sergachev for an underachiever and KK is still tbd. 
I’d stay the failure in having a game changer top 20 scorer over the last 15 plus years is right up there - Radulov or Kovalev are probably the closest we got and they might have cracked top 40 in points. 
I would love for us to get a second first rounder in this draft or something between 16 and 47 or a previous top prospect in any trade. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, habsisme said:

/when you're "lucky" that many times (including PK for Weber) you have to get credit for it. 

The biggest problem with this team is drafting in the first round

that and not having that many good shots at it ...for what they've had they've done reasonably ok  ....Sergachev was a solid pick and it looks like KK was too  ...Caulfield might be the steal of last years draft at #15 ...Gally a bust more or less at this point but at least Bergevin has a better and more flexible and grittier asset in RFA Domi for him for less cap hit .......Poehling and Scherbak pretty much represent what you get in the 25-30 range ...a crap shoot 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, claremont said:

Very true on first round draft choices but that’s what happens when most of the time you have mediocre picks at 20 or below plus our development in the AHL with Lefevre was terrible. Alex G at #3 was a complete dud, we traded away #9 Sergachev for an underachiever and KK is still tbd. 
I’d stay the failure in having a game changer top 20 scorer over the last 15 plus years is right up there - Radulov or Kovalev are probably the closest we got and they might have cracked top 40 in points. 
I would love for us to get a second first rounder in this draft or something between 16 and 47 or a previous top prospect in any trade. 

 

4 hours ago, arpem-can said:

that and not having that many good shots at it ...for what they've had they've done reasonably ok  ....Sergachev was a solid pick and it looks like KK was too  ...Caulfield might be the steal of last years draft at #15 ...Gally a bust more or less at this point but at least Bergevin has a better and more flexible and grittier asset in RFA Domi for him for less cap hit .......Poehling and Scherbak pretty much represent what you get in the 25-30 range ...a crap shoot 

Agreed that lower first-round picks are not worth what many people think they're worth. Most of them are 50-50 shots to become NHLers and even then, many are guys who play in the bottom half of the line-up. That's why I've spent so much time talking about the need for top 10 and especially top 5 draft picks and why falling from #9 (or #1) to #16 is a bit of a hit. You want to turn your team around and for the most part, you need to have some top-end picks in your mix. It's not impossible, but it's much harder to win a Cup when you don't have a superstar in your line-up, and most superstars are drafted and not acquired via trade (unless you're giving up another star) or free agency.

If we look at the Habs drafts in the Bergevin era, I really don't think they're as bad as people make them out to be. Starting with the 2012 draft, Galchenyuk was IMO a great pick at the time. He was a possible #1 overall who was pushed back a bit because of questions over his recovery from injury, but it was really between him and Forsberg as to who was the most skilled player in the draft. Despite his recent struggles, Galchenyuk is still the 2nd-highest scorer from his draft year and it was ultimately just a draft that had some depth but very few high-end players. So I really don't see the AG pick as having been a bad one. The rest of the draft was pretty bad, albeit Collberg was traded early and Bozon's career was derailed by illness. We still came out of it with two NHLers, which is not bad for a bad draft.

2013 was one year where I really hated our 1st round choice. But even though I was against McCarron, outside of Theodore who was picked next, Lehkonen was probably the next best player chosen in the 50 picks after McCarron, so it's not like there were a ton of guys we missed on. We ended up with three NHLers, in De La Rose, Lehkonen, and Andrighetto, and in a draft that ended up having very little depth, we probably did as well as any other team with our choices from pick 25 on. The only player I'd say is clearly better than Lehkonen after pick 26 was Guentzel, so the pickings were once again slim.

2014 same story. A bad draft where our best prospect ended up being Jake Evans, but we were once again picking late at #26. Yes, Scherbak was a whiff, but there really weren't a ton of guys picked afterwards that would have been a huge step up. Outside of Point and Arvidsson, both of whom were picked much later and bypassed by everyone else too, there weren't any stars picked after Scherbak and there certainly weren't any in the 50 picks after him. Some of the better ones were Kempe, Montour, Barbashev, and Dvorak and honestly I don't think any of those players would be on our top line or top D pairing anyways.

2015, if you start to see a pattern here, left us with pick 26 as well, and we opted for Juulsen, who might still end up being a player for us but who once again has been derailed by injuries outside of our scouting staff's control. Who should we have chosen instead? There's Beauvillier, Vince Dunn, Brandon Carlo, and of course Aho. But once again, if you look at the impact players drafted, most of them were long gone by the time we made our first choice. Aho's probably the only game-changer we missed on with that pick.

From 2016, we already have two guys we drafted become regular NHLers, which is pretty good. I'd say you can argue that Sergachev and Mete are both (thus far) better than any player drafted after them, so those two picks were both bullseyes.

2017 and onwards, we're starting to get into territory where it's too early to tell how things will shake out. But once again, in 2017, we ended up with a 25th overall pick, and there are zero players drafted after Poehling who have yet to become impact guys. And with Brook, Fleury, and Primeau, we still have 3 legitimate shots at NHL players coming out of later rounds, which would a great draft, especially if Primeau ends up becoming your starter at some point. From 2018, JK, Romanov, Ylonen, and Harris all have the potential to be regular NHLers and Hillis and Olofsson have an outside shot too. And from last year, Caufield, Struble, and especially Norlinder have shone since their draft.

I've said it before, but look at the times the Habs have had top 10 picks in the Trevor Timmins era, and we've hit on many of them. Kotkaniemi seems to be a decent pick. Sergachev was a great pick. Galchenyuk was a pretty good pick considering how bad the draft was. Carey Price has been a stud and the face of our franchise. And then add in the 2007, where we knocked it out of the park with McDonagh, Pacioretty, and Subban. The 1st rounders that haven't worked out as well are the ones where we picked later, often in the 25-26 range, and history tells us those players are not likely to become stars and only have a 50% shot at becoming NHL regulars. To believe we failed at drafting because 75% of them aren't first-line players is to have false expectations of what you get.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

 

Agreed that lower first-round picks are not worth what many people think they're worth. Most of them are 50-50 shots to become NHLers and even then, many are guys who play in the bottom half of the line-up. That's why I've spent so much time talking about the need for top 10 and especially top 5 draft picks and why falling from #9 (or #1) to #16 is a bit of a hit. You want to turn your team around and for the most part, you need to have some top-end picks in your mix. It's not impossible, but it's much harder to win a Cup when you don't have a superstar in your line-up, and most superstars are drafted and not acquired via trade (unless you're giving up another star) or free agency.

If we look at the Habs drafts in the Bergevin era, I really don't think they're as bad as people make them out to be. Starting with the 2012 draft, Galchenyuk was IMO a great pick at the time. He was a possible #1 overall who was pushed back a bit because of questions over his recovery from injury, but it was really between him and Forsberg as to who was the most skilled player in the draft. Despite his recent struggles, Galchenyuk is still the 2nd-highest scorer from his draft year and it was ultimately just a draft that had some depth but very few high-end players. So I really don't see the AG pick as having been a bad one. The rest of the draft was pretty bad, albeit Collberg was traded early and Bozon's career was derailed by illness. We still came out of it with two NHLers, which is not bad for a bad draft.

2013 was one year where I really hated our 1st round choice. But even though I was against McCarron, outside of Theodore who was picked next, Lehkonen was probably the next best player chosen in the 50 picks after McCarron, so it's not like there were a ton of guys we missed on. We ended up with three NHLers, in De La Rose, Lehkonen, and Andrighetto, and in a draft that ended up having very little depth, we probably did as well as any other team with our choices from pick 25 on. The only player I'd say is clearly better than Lehkonen after pick 26 was Guentzel, so the pickings were once again slim.

2014 same story. A bad draft where our best prospect ended up being Jake Evans, but we were once again picking late at #26. Yes, Scherbak was a whiff, but there really weren't a ton of guys picked afterwards that would have been a huge step up. Outside of Point and Arvidsson, both of whom were picked much later and bypassed by everyone else too, there weren't any stars picked after Scherbak and there certainly weren't any in the 50 picks after him. Some of the better ones were Kempe, Montour, Barbashev, and Dvorak and honestly I don't think any of those players would be on our top line or top D pairing anyways.

2015, if you start to see a pattern here, left us with pick 26 as well, and we opted for Juulsen, who might still end up being a player for us but who once again has been derailed by injuries outside of our scouting staff's control. Who should we have chosen instead? There's Beauvillier, Vince Dunn, Brandon Carlo, and of course Aho. But once again, if you look at the impact players drafted, most of them were long gone by the time we made our first choice. Aho's probably the only game-changer we missed on with that pick.

From 2016, we already have two guys we drafted become regular NHLers, which is pretty good. I'd say you can argue that Sergachev and Mete are both (thus far) better than any player drafted after them, so those two picks were both bullseyes.

2017 and onwards, we're starting to get into territory where it's too early to tell how things will shake out. But once again, in 2017, we ended up with a 25th overall pick, and there are zero players drafted after Poehling who have yet to become impact guys. And with Brook, Fleury, and Primeau, we still have 3 legitimate shots at NHL players coming out of later rounds, which would a great draft, especially if Primeau ends up becoming your starter at some point. From 2018, JK, Romanov, Ylonen, and Harris all have the potential to be regular NHLers and Hillis and Olofsson have an outside shot too. And from last year, Caufield, Struble, and especially Norlinder have shone since their draft.

I've said it before, but look at the times the Habs have had top 10 picks in the Trevor Timmins era, and we've hit on many of them. Kotkaniemi seems to be a decent pick. Sergachev was a great pick. Galchenyuk was a pretty good pick considering how bad the draft was. Carey Price has been a stud and the face of our franchise. And then add in the 2007, where we knocked it out of the park with McDonagh, Pacioretty, and Subban. The 1st rounders that haven't worked out as well are the ones where we picked later, often in the 25-26 range, and history tells us those players are not likely to become stars and only have a 50% shot at becoming NHL regulars. To believe we failed at drafting because 75% of them aren't first-line players is to have false expectations of what you get.

 

 

Well said / great draft analysis, thank you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • H_T_L locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...