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

2021 NHL Draft


Recommended Posts

We dug ourselves into a whole with this pick.  First off the pick was made because he was the best French player left on the board simple as that,  once again this stupid language barrier has impacted our team in a negative way. 

With that said I have no issue with giving this kid a second chance and truly feel that he deserves it, everyone deserves a second chance.  I really hope that MTL can offer up the support the kid needs to overcome this and learn from his mistakes and could very well turn him into an outstanding person and secondly a player.

The draft as a whole was terrible for us, we passed on many good players just because we had to take some French players and once again this will come to hurt this team.  It's time to put this langauge barrier behind us and take the best players/coaches available regardless of what language they speak

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Regis22 said:

https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/groups-say-habs-draft-choice-trivializes-violence-against-women/wcm/b3d4f134-e0f1-4c77-9323-216d567dd54a

Groups say Habs' draft choice 'trivializes' violence against women

Montreal Canadiens' decision to draft Logan Mailloux sends a terrible message to fans, according to Quebec advocacy groups and politicians.

This is taking the selection and even the crime too far. To flat out say that it trivialize violence against women is a gross exaggeration. This was not a violent crime, it wasn't even a sex crime! He was for sure an immature A** and deserved the fine for invading her privacy but let's not overreact. Of course the advocacy groups are going to want to overplay this to push their agendas and the media loves the controversy because it sells papers. It is funny to see how divided the world is over this, in my own personal family I have 6 sisters (some half and step) and 2 brothers, I also have a Daughter and 4 sons. It is strange to see but the majority of the females are on the side that the kid has paid for his crime and it's time to move on, where as the majority of the men are outraged and want his head on a stake forever. See the males in my family were all raised to do everything we can to protect women from any and all injustices. I think society as a whole over the last 40-50 years have tried to take this same approach. Sometimes though the injustices are precieved to be worse than they actually are. Let's reverse the roles for a minute, we will leave the participants as they are (Mailloux being a young prospect). IF the young lady had taped and released the video and Mailloux was the victim do you think this would have even been news worthy? My guess is she wouldn't have even been fined.  Do you think that she would have been shunned by the entire world? I would guess that most people right or wrong would have said or at least thought that Mailloux should toughen up and get over it. There are a few reasons that this is news worthy IMO. 1. It happened outside of Canada making it an international incident. 2. The content of the video was sexual in nature (still not a sex crime though). 3. It was the male in this case that committed the crime. Remove any one of those 3 elements and it never even makes the news. If he had shared a video of the young lady crossing a road with his friends and she found out the crime would have been the same and it still would have been an international incident but it wouldn't have made the news. Same thing with the other two elements, if it had happened in N.A. it likely makes the local papers but doesn't go much further than that or like outlined above if the roles were reversed than likely no one even cares. The problem is this was the perfect storm for the media to run with and exploit the story. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 26NCounting said:

We dug ourselves into a whole with this pick.  First off the pick was made because he was the best French player left on the board simple as that,  once again this stupid language barrier has impacted our team in a negative way. 

He's from Ontario. He's not french. He has a french name, yes but thats about it.  From what ive ready he speaks less French than Paul Byron. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, maas_art said:

He's from Ontario. He's not french. He has a french name, yes but thats about it.  From what ive ready he speaks less French than Paul Byron. 

Yeah I feel like this was more of a positional need and he could be a potential Weber/Petry replace ment in 1-3 years. Before the incident became public he was projected by many scouts to be a top 20 pick that has top pairing potential but he also has an AHL floor. Classic boom or bust pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maas_art said:

He's from Ontario. He's not french. He has a french name, yes but thats about it.  From what ive ready he speaks less French than Paul Byron. 

I stand corrected, I watched him speak and he did speak some French so I assumed he was bilingual.  Come to find out they were the only french words he know LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 26NCounting said:

I stand corrected, I watched him speak and he did speak some French so I assumed he was bilingual.  Come to find out they were the only french words he know LOL

Well, he sure "sounds" right in terms of heritage but my understanding is that he doesnt speak a lot - he's certainly not a native french speaker - but either way, it was a dumb pick.

Not that the quality of player should factor in when someone has done something as egregious but he's not even a "can't fail" prospect, so to take someone who's a borderline first round pick but 100% controversial is really really bad. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He hasn't even played Major junior or even junior A hockey yet. The scouting report says his edge work is poor, he makes poor decisions on the ice and his defensive positional play is atrocious......but may have potential enough to be a NHL player........doesn't sound much like a NHL top 4 D in 1 to 3 years but MB does like a bargain. 

The women in my family think he showed himself to be an immature Ahole. I agree. The culture of ignoring sexual malfeasance in hockey is disgusting, how many more years are we going to put up with this crap? In my little corner of Ontario there have been numerous incidents in the past 3 years involving coaches abusing players and players on two junior teams have been accused of abusing minor teenage girls!  Numerous coaches at the junior A level and above in Canada have abused kids for years and it was often ignored with only 4 or 5 facing charges. It even occurs at the NHL level. Sexual hazing is also still occurring but at least minor hockey is trying to put an end to it. This boy's transgression might seem minor to some but it is indicative of a much larger problem in hockey. We can't just talk about respecting others, we have to actually do it. It is not that hard. Drafting him in the first round tells me that my Hockey team does not respect their female fans.

IMO drafting this boy in the first round this year was the wrong thing to do. The NHL acted as the facilitator in doing the wrong thing and the Montreal Canadiens happily played along. Waiting a year would showed the victim that the crime was not completely ignored. It may also have helped the immature boy realize that his actions have real consequences and not given the league such a self inflicted wound. 

The people defending this draft choice are entitled to their opinion as I am to mine and while I don't agree with them I did take their views on the subject under advisement. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, RCAF48 said:

He hasn't even played Major junior or even junior A hockey yet. The scouting report says his edge work is poor, he makes poor decisions on the ice and his defensive positional play is atrocious......but may have potential enough to be a NHL player........doesn't sound much like a NHL top 4 D in 1 to 3 years but MB does like a bargain. 

The women in my family think he showed himself to be an immature Ahole. I agree. The culture of ignoring sexual malfeasance in hockey is disgusting, how many more years are we going to put up with this crap? In my little corner of Ontario there have been numerous incidents in the past 3 years involving coaches abusing players and players on two junior teams have been accused of abusing minor teenage girls!  Numerous coaches at the junior A level and above in Canada have abused kids for years and it was often ignored with only 4 or 5 facing charges. It even occurs at the NHL level. Sexual hazing is also still occurring but at least minor hockey is trying to put an end to it. This boy's transgression might seem minor to some but it is indicative of a much larger problem in hockey. We can't just talk about respecting others, we have to actually do it. It is not that hard. Drafting him in the first round tells me that my Hockey team does not respect their female fans.

IMO drafting this boy in the first round this year was the wrong thing to do. The NHL acted as the facilitator in doing the wrong thing and the Montreal Canadiens happily played along. Waiting a year would showed the victim that the crime was not completely ignored. It may also have helped the immature boy realize that his actions have real consequences and not given the league such a self inflicted wound. 

The people defending this draft choice are entitled to their opinion as I am to mine and while I don't agree with them I did take their views on the subject under advisement. 

 

Great, succinct post. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, RCAF48 said:

He hasn't even played Major junior or even junior A hockey yet. The scouting report says his edge work is poor, he makes poor decisions on the ice and his defensive positional play is atrocious......but may have potential enough to be a NHL player........doesn't sound much like a NHL top 4 D in 1 to 3 years but MB does like a bargain. 

The women in my family think he showed himself to be an immature Ahole. I agree. The culture of ignoring sexual malfeasance in hockey is disgusting, how many more years are we going to put up with this crap? In my little corner of Ontario there have been numerous incidents in the past 3 years involving coaches abusing players and players on two junior teams have been accused of abusing minor teenage girls!  Numerous coaches at the junior A level and above in Canada have abused kids for years and it was often ignored with only 4 or 5 facing charges. It even occurs at the NHL level. Sexual hazing is also still occurring but at least minor hockey is trying to put an end to it. This boy's transgression might seem minor to some but it is indicative of a much larger problem in hockey. We can't just talk about respecting others, we have to actually do it. It is not that hard. Drafting him in the first round tells me that my Hockey team does not respect their female fans.

IMO drafting this boy in the first round this year was the wrong thing to do. The NHL acted as the facilitator in doing the wrong thing and the Montreal Canadiens happily played along. Waiting a year would showed the victim that the crime was not completely ignored. It may also have helped the immature boy realize that his actions have real consequences and not given the league such a self inflicted wound. 

The people defending this draft choice are entitled to their opinion as I am to mine and while I don't agree with them I did take their views on the subject under advisement. 

 

Does any of this really surprise you??  The Habs scouting staff is horrendous at best, yes we got CC but that was a no brainer.  Otherwise the picks have been absolutely brutal for the past 5 years. 

 

With any luck this will cost MB as well as the entire scouting dept their jobs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, RCAF48 said:

He hasn't even played Major junior or even junior A hockey yet. The scouting report says his edge work is poor, he makes poor decisions on the ice and his defensive positional play is atrocious......but may have potential enough to be a NHL player........doesn't sound much like a NHL top 4 D in 1 to 3 years but MB does like a bargain. 

The women in my family think he showed himself to be an immature Ahole. I agree. The culture of ignoring sexual malfeasance in hockey is disgusting, how many more years are we going to put up with this crap? In my little corner of Ontario there have been numerous incidents in the past 3 years involving coaches abusing players and players on two junior teams have been accused of abusing minor teenage girls!  Numerous coaches at the junior A level and above in Canada have abused kids for years and it was often ignored with only 4 or 5 facing charges. It even occurs at the NHL level. Sexual hazing is also still occurring but at least minor hockey is trying to put an end to it. This boy's transgression might seem minor to some but it is indicative of a much larger problem in hockey. We can't just talk about respecting others, we have to actually do it. It is not that hard. Drafting him in the first round tells me that my Hockey team does not respect their female fans.

IMO drafting this boy in the first round this year was the wrong thing to do. The NHL acted as the facilitator in doing the wrong thing and the Montreal Canadiens happily played along. Waiting a year would showed the victim that the crime was not completely ignored. It may also have helped the immature boy realize that his actions have real consequences and not given the league such a self inflicted wound. 

The people defending this draft choice are entitled to their opinion as I am to mine and while I don't agree with them I did take their views on the subject under advisement. 

 

You said "waiting a year would have showed the victim that the crime was not completely ignored." Would you be shocked to know that this "crime" not "sexual crime" occurred 8 months ago? So the Canadiens did give the young lady pretty much a full year to start to put her life back on track while also giving Mailloux pretty much a full year to contemplate his actions and seek counseling to help better himself. You are entitled to your opinion and I am not judging you for it. In my view this whole situation has been blown way out of proportion and everyone involved be it fans, the media, the young lady and even Mailloux needs to be able to put it behind them. It took the media almost a year to even pickup the story and the only reason they did is because the season was winding down and the draft was starting to get media attention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree that the NHL acted as the facilitator. They could have easily declared him ineligible for this years draft, and the kid made it easy on them by stating he wanted to pass. IMO they should be sharing equally in the criticism that's being thrown at MB and the Habs right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, RCAF48 said:

He hasn't even played Major junior or even junior A hockey yet. The scouting report says his edge work is poor, he makes poor decisions on the ice and his defensive positional play is atrocious......but may have potential enough to be a NHL player........doesn't sound much like a NHL top 4 D in 1 to 3 years but MB does like a bargain. 

The women in my family think he showed himself to be an immature Ahole. I agree. The culture of ignoring sexual malfeasance in hockey is disgusting, how many more years are we going to put up with this crap? In my little corner of Ontario there have been numerous incidents in the past 3 years involving coaches abusing players and players on two junior teams have been accused of abusing minor teenage girls!  Numerous coaches at the junior A level and above in Canada have abused kids for years and it was often ignored with only 4 or 5 facing charges. It even occurs at the NHL level. Sexual hazing is also still occurring but at least minor hockey is trying to put an end to it. This boy's transgression might seem minor to some but it is indicative of a much larger problem in hockey. We can't just talk about respecting others, we have to actually do it. It is not that hard. Drafting him in the first round tells me that my Hockey team does not respect their female fans.

IMO drafting this boy in the first round this year was the wrong thing to do. The NHL acted as the facilitator in doing the wrong thing and the Montreal Canadiens happily played along. Waiting a year would showed the victim that the crime was not completely ignored. It may also have helped the immature boy realize that his actions have real consequences and not given the league such a self inflicted wound. 

The people defending this draft choice are entitled to their opinion as I am to mine and while I don't agree with them I did take their views on the subject under advisement. 

 

 

If we still had the "post of the day" thread from years back, I'd be nominating this one.  Your point about hockey culture is a really good one, and it's helped to put this whole thing into better perspective for me.

 

3 minutes ago, campabee82 said:

You said "waiting a year would have showed the victim that the crime was not completely ignored." Would you be shocked to know that this "crime" not "sexual crime" occurred 8 months ago? So the Canadiens did give the young lady pretty much a full year to start to put her life back on track while also giving Mailloux pretty much a full year to contemplate his actions and seek counseling to help better himself. You are entitled to your opinion and I am not judging you for it. In my view this whole situation has been blown way out of proportion and everyone involved be it fans, the media, the young lady and even Mailloux needs to be able to put it behind them. It took the media almost a year to even pickup the story and the only reason they did is because the season was winding down and the draft was starting to get media attention.

 

I mean it was a crime, it was involving sex... I don't think it's going too far out on a limb to call it a sexual crime, no?  It's not sexual assault, granted, and yes there are varying degrees of crimes, but it still fits in very much with the general hockey culture of "boys will be boys" that RCAF was talking about above.

I get the idea of giving second chances, and I agree with it, but there's a difference between "second chances" and "no consequences".  I think that that's the issue here, for me.  Give the kid a year to figure himself out.  See if he shows any sort of remorse, but more importantly, see if he can actually change his behaviour.  If he does, and if he's still looking like a worthwhile prospect, then by all means draft him then.  That's giving him a second chance, but it's giving someone a second chance after he's had to own up to what happened.  More importantly, it also demonstrates to other young players looking to break into the league that just because you're a hockey player on the path to success doesn't mean that you've got carte blanche to act however you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

I have to agree that the NHL acted as the facilitator. They could have easily declared him ineligible for this years draft, and the kid made it easy on them by stating he wanted to pass. IMO they should be sharing equally in the criticism that's being thrown at MB and the Habs right now.

It's tough, because there's a lot of fingers that can be pointed in a lot of different directions here.  If Montreal hadn't picked him then some other team probably would have.  So from that perspective, why not draft him if you're Bergevin?  It's not like he was going to learn his lesson anyway, so we might as well be the team to benefit from it.

I think you're right that the NHL had probably the best chance keep him from being drafted, but if you ask them they'd just say that they're beholden to the member teams and if those teams want to make the draft choice, it's their decision.

I mean I can't even get too high and mighty here.  I can talk all I want about how this is a horrible choice and how we need to consider the victim, etc, but am I going to stop watching the team because of this draft pick?  Nope.  Am I going to cheer if he makes it to the NHL and scores a goal?  You bet.  So even as a fan, I have no problem saying all the right things and yet I'm doing absolutely nothing about it.  It's so easy to pass the buck on to someone else at each level, which is why nothing is actually really changing.

 


With all that said, though, I'm still going to criticize this selection.  Even if someone was eventually going to pick him up, it didn't have to be us and it didn't have to be in the first round.  Show some class, Canadiens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Manatee-X said:

I mean it was a crime, it was involving sex... I don't think it's going too far out on a limb to call it a sexual crime, no?  It's not sexual assault, granted, and yes there are varying degrees of crimes, but it still fits in very much with the general hockey culture of "boys will be boys" that RCAF was talking about above.

One of the things that has bothered me about this whole situation is how many articles start off talking about "sexual violence"  - this had nothing to do with sexual violence. All parties agree the sex was 100% consensual.  Its absolutely invasion of privacy - on probably the highest level - but there's world of difference between sharing a sex photo and rape.  I dont like the fact the two are getting lumped together because it clouds both issues. 
 

24 minutes ago, Manatee-X said:

I get the idea of giving second chances, and I agree with it, but there's a difference between "second chances" and "no consequences".  I think that that's the issue here, for me.  

Agree. Its irrelevant that the incident happened 8 or 10 months ago or whatever.  Making him ineligible for this year's draft would push back his development and serve as a punishment.   I personally think it would have been the right thing to do but I also think that as bad of a move as it was Montreal to draft him, Im willing to see what they do now.  Will they lend support to the victim?  Will they set up programs to educate people on this crime so that others dont do the same thing? etc etc.  

 

24 minutes ago, Manatee-X said:

Give the kid a year to figure himself out.  See if he shows any sort of remorse, but more importantly, see if he can actually change his behaviour.  If he does, and if he's still looking like a worthwhile prospect, then by all means draft him then.  That's giving him a second chance, but it's giving someone a second chance after he's had to own up to what happened.  More importantly, it also demonstrates to other young players looking to break into the league that just because you're a hockey player on the path to success doesn't mean that you've got carte blanche to act however you want.

See and the thing is, im not convinced he needs to "change any behaviour" because I have no idea if this is indicative of repetitive actions.   I am NOT in any way downplaying the severity of what he did. I have 2 daughters, I would be livid. But it sounds like an absolutely boneheaded error in judgement & I don't think he understood how upsetting this would be to the girl.  I remember the bravado about girlfriends in the high school locker rooms - we all did this crap - but obviously these days, with phones, its a different world - and much, much more serious.  It was inexcusable, what he did, but I am not convinced (i mean none of us know him) that he's a chronic repeat offender or something. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, maas_art said:

See and the thing is, im not convinced he needs to "change any behaviour" because I have no idea if this is indicative of repetitive actions.   I am NOT in any way downplaying the severity of what he did. I have 2 daughters, I would be livid. But it sounds like an absolutely boneheaded error in judgement & I don't think he understood how upsetting this would be to the girl.  I remember the bravado about girlfriends in the high school locker rooms - we all did this crap - but obviously these days, with phones, its a different world - and much, much more serious.  It was inexcusable, what he did, but I am not convinced (i mean none of us know him) that he's a chronic repeat offender or something. 

 

I'm going back to RCAF's post again (because it really did help shape my thoughts on this quite a bit) but I think this is representative of a bigger issue in hockey culture generally.  I mean it's perfectly likely that this is his first offense, if by offense we mean sharing photos like this.  But, like you said, this kind of "lock room talk" is absolutely pervasive, and has been for a long time.  With or without the photos, it's that sort of underlying disrespect that needs changing - the photos in this case are just taking it to the extreme.


Is it fair to pin all of that on one 17-year-old kid who did something stupid?  Probably not.  But the world isn't exactly fair (and, as an aside, it's even less fair to the girl who he took the photos of), and if he's a good enough player I'm sure he'd have been drafted next year anyway.  The issue I have isn't even necessarily with the kid - he may very well be able to learn from this and come out the other side a better person - it's with the message that the Canadiens as a hockey team are sending by picking him this year in the first round.  That message is that "we, as a team, are ok with this".  And IMO they shouldn't be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Manatee-X said:

 

If we still had the "post of the day" thread from years back, I'd be nominating this one.  Your point about hockey culture is a really good one, and it's helped to put this whole thing into better perspective for me.

 

 

I mean it was a crime, it was involving sex... I don't think it's going too far out on a limb to call it a sexual crime, no?  It's not sexual assault, granted, and yes there are varying degrees of crimes, but it still fits in very much with the general hockey culture of "boys will be boys" that RCAF was talking about above.

I get the idea of giving second chances, and I agree with it, but there's a difference between "second chances" and "no consequences".  I think that that's the issue here, for me.  Give the kid a year to figure himself out.  See if he shows any sort of remorse, but more importantly, see if he can actually change his behaviour.  If he does, and if he's still looking like a worthwhile prospect, then by all means draft him then.  That's giving him a second chance, but it's giving someone a second chance after he's had to own up to what happened.  More importantly, it also demonstrates to other young players looking to break into the league that just because you're a hockey player on the path to success doesn't mean that you've got carte blanche to act however you want.

I don't agree with your saying there were "no consequences" he plead guilty to the charges which means he owned up to them and the consequences are two-fold. 1. He received a fine for his crime, by a court of law. Which the court and both attorneys felt was adequate punishment so who are we to say it was not enough. 2. He will be dealing with his own degree of embarrassment and public scrutiny for years to come so on a personal level he is feeling the consequences, so I ask again who are we to judge that that is not enough of a consequence as well? 

You also said that we should have given the kid a year to figure himself and his issues out. However since it has already been 8 months, what you are really saying is he needs at least 2 years. Why do we get to determine what is an adequate amount of time for the kid? If he is ready to move on and he indicated this in his pre-draft interview why should we question that?

Society forgets that we have laws and courts to deal with and pass judgment on these types of issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RCAF48 said:

He hasn't even played Major junior or even junior A hockey yet. The scouting report says his edge work is poor, he makes poor decisions on the ice and his defensive positional play is atrocious......but may have potential enough to be a NHL player........doesn't sound much like a NHL top 4 D in 1 to 3 years but MB does like a bargain. 

The women in my family think he showed himself to be an immature Ahole. I agree. The culture of ignoring sexual malfeasance in hockey is disgusting, how many more years are we going to put up with this crap? In my little corner of Ontario there have been numerous incidents in the past 3 years involving coaches abusing players and players on two junior teams have been accused of abusing minor teenage girls!  Numerous coaches at the junior A level and above in Canada have abused kids for years and it was often ignored with only 4 or 5 facing charges. It even occurs at the NHL level. Sexual hazing is also still occurring but at least minor hockey is trying to put an end to it. This boy's transgression might seem minor to some but it is indicative of a much larger problem in hockey. We can't just talk about respecting others, we have to actually do it. It is not that hard. Drafting him in the first round tells me that my Hockey team does not respect their female fans.

IMO drafting this boy in the first round this year was the wrong thing to do. The NHL acted as the facilitator in doing the wrong thing and the Montreal Canadiens happily played along. Waiting a year would showed the victim that the crime was not completely ignored. It may also have helped the immature boy realize that his actions have real consequences and not given the league such a self inflicted wound. 

The people defending this draft choice are entitled to their opinion as I am to mine and while I don't agree with them I did take their views on the subject under advisement. 

Astute observations on all the culture aspects and his potential does not excuse his actions. I, my wife and 2 adult daughters are sick of the richie-rich privileged syndrome where they seem to skirt a lot of punishment, and play the forgiveness card. 

That said, the reports I read on him differ substantially from yours. He would have played in the OHL this season had they had a season, and instead took the risk to play in 3rd division men's hockey in Sweden. At 6-3, 214 lbs and one of the more younger in his draft class at April birthday, he is a raw product - ranked #23 by Central scouting North American skaters and #35 by Bob McKenzie, so he was selected in or around our pick based on pure ability. Someone in our scouting dept. or MB overruled, that there was a risk in waiting until our #62 pick. I am not condoning their actions, and believe there were alternatives but need at RHD, the greed for a high ceiling, had to have overruled the character aspects. I understand why they chose this pick, but do not in any way condone the selection. Character should have overruled. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great post above RCAF and I agree with you and Manatee... this is as much a culture problem as it is a problem with one individual. We all know he's far from being the first to be involved in something like this and there are likely a ton of similar incidents that occur that don't get caught or publicized. But this whole idea that "it's not a crime" or that "he was punished appropriately" is a large part of the problem. If all that happens is that you get a $1,000 fine and then go back to your regular life, possibly going on to make millions of dollars as a professional hockey player, what's the real deterrent there. Meanwhile, the poor victim remains a victim for the rest of her life. She doesn't get to move on or have the incident undone.

If some want to think of this in hockey terms, imagine Scheifele had hit Evans in the head and had received nothing more than a $1,000 fine. Meanwhile, imagine Evans misses the rest of the playoffs and has to deal with the lingering health issues from having a concussion for the rest of his life. Maybe he has chronic headaches, maybe he has issues with his memory or concentration, maybe he has to stop playing hockey because he's at risk. It hasn't happened to Evans yet, but there are guys to whom this happens. Is that fair? Should we say "Scheifele paid his dues, move on with your life, Evans"? Should we say "this is Scheifele's only questionable hit so it can't be that big a deal"? The victim was violated. Yes, I get that there are worse transgressions in the big picture of things, but it's not for us to decide how the victim feels about this. Apparently her statement was that Mailloux never really gave a proper apology (other than a short text) and that she did not feel he was really that sorry nor that he understood what he did. It also sounds like a lot of his public apology has really only come in the context of his being drafted and trying to smooth over his PR image.

So there are multiple levels to what happened here. On the one hand, it's terrible that the victim is affected to a greater proportion here than the transgressor is. But past that, the league did nothing about this and the Habs chose to ignore it like it was no big deal. I'm sure a bunch of other teams would have done the same, and all of these hockey executives are guilty of propagating the culture that this whole incident is no big deal. That's the problem. It is a big deal. And we're taught that it's not because frankly, we don't view things through the eyes of the victim here. We view things through the eyes of the aggressor because he's the public figure and we say "oh he was just a minor" or "how can we ruin a young man's life or career" or so on. It's the wrong line of thought. The thought should be that a young woman's life was already affected by this and the onus should be on Mailloux to show he's changed. His request to be ignored at the draft was perhaps a start to this, but at that point, really, it's on the league and the Habs to have some common sense here. The Habs flat out said our on-ice chances are more important than this issue of sexual misconduct. It's too late to change what Mailloux did, but it's not too late to change the culture here. Come down harder on this guy from the league's end or make it the issue it should be and other people will think twice about doing something similar in the future. I don't for a second think that some of these guys who make dirty hits do anything other than laugh at having to pay a $5,000 fine. I think the end result is pretty much the same here for Mailloux: very little consequence to what he did but a much more important effect on the victim that's being ignored as the main part of the story here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the Habs should have accepted the kids desire and NOT drafted him. This would have avoided all the public scrutiny . It’s not like this is a “can’t miss “ prospect. And for MB to preach about character players , to select the kid , goes against his wanting players with character theme. MB traded Kassian, AG , Nathan B and a few others due to their indiscretions yet he selects this guy . 🤦‍♂️Look at the Canucks they waived Virtanin . And the talk about seeking counselling , seriously what’s going to happen , someone telll him not to take pictures  and share them 🤷‍♂️😅

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Regis22 said:

Maybe the Habs should have accepted the kids desire and NOT drafted him. This would have avoided all the public scrutiny . It’s not like this is a “can’t miss “ prospect. And for MB to preach about character players , to select the kid , goes against his wanting players with character theme. MB traded Kassian, AG , Nathan B and a few others due to their indiscretions yet he selects this guy . 🤦‍♂️Look at the Canucks they waived Virtanin . And the talk about seeking counselling , seriously what’s going to happen , someone telll him not to take pictures  and share them 🤷‍♂️😅

Agree on your first 3 sentences. There's a slight difference to your 4th sentence - all of the transgressions by the players you mentioned happened when they were representing the NHL and had the riot act read to them upon joining their respective teams with proper media and ethics / behaviour training by professional personnel  - Montreal or Vancouver respectfully as a condition of their employment. Sure it sounds like I am defending the kid or trying to lessen or excuse his behaviour but who knows whether his parents, billets or coaches where he was playing in 3rd division of Sweden provided him with any surrounding support? Perhaps they just toseed him to the wolves. He should have had a proper moral compass then but maybe he got caught up in trying to impress an older crowd as a 17 year old. Again not excusing his behaviour just trying to understand the environment he was in before throwing the baby out with the bath water. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

Great post above RCAF and I agree with you and Manatee... this is as much a culture problem as it is a problem with one individual. We all know he's far from being the first to be involved in something like this and there are likely a ton of similar incidents that occur that don't get caught or publicized. But this whole idea that "it's not a crime" or that "he was punished appropriately" is a large part of the problem. If all that happens is that you get a $1,000 fine and then go back to your regular life, possibly going on to make millions of dollars as a professional hockey player, what's the real deterrent there. Meanwhile, the poor victim remains a victim for the rest of her life. She doesn't get to move on or have the incident undone.

If some want to think of this in hockey terms, imagine Scheifele had hit Evans in the head and had received nothing more than a $1,000 fine. Meanwhile, imagine Evans misses the rest of the playoffs and has to deal with the lingering health issues from having a concussion for the rest of his life. Maybe he has chronic headaches, maybe he has issues with his memory or concentration, maybe he has to stop playing hockey because he's at risk. It hasn't happened to Evans yet, but there are guys to whom this happens. Is that fair? Should we say "Scheifele paid his dues, move on with your life, Evans"? Should we say "this is Scheifele's only questionable hit so it can't be that big a deal"? The victim was violated. Yes, I get that there are worse transgressions in the big picture of things, but it's not for us to decide how the victim feels about this. Apparently her statement was that Mailloux never really gave a proper apology (other than a short text) and that she did not feel he was really that sorry nor that he understood what he did. It also sounds like a lot of his public apology has really only come in the context of his being drafted and trying to smooth over his PR image.

So there are multiple levels to what happened here. On the one hand, it's terrible that the victim is affected to a greater proportion here than the transgressor is. But past that, the league did nothing about this and the Habs chose to ignore it like it was no big deal. I'm sure a bunch of other teams would have done the same, and all of these hockey executives are guilty of propagating the culture that this whole incident is no big deal. That's the problem. It is a big deal. And we're taught that it's not because frankly, we don't view things through the eyes of the victim here. We view things through the eyes of the aggressor because he's the public figure and we say "oh he was just a minor" or "how can we ruin a young man's life or career" or so on. It's the wrong line of thought. The thought should be that a young woman's life was already affected by this and the onus should be on Mailloux to show he's changed. His request to be ignored at the draft was perhaps a start to this, but at that point, really, it's on the league and the Habs to have some common sense here. The Habs flat out said our on-ice chances are more important than this issue of sexual misconduct. It's too late to change what Mailloux did, but it's not too late to change the culture here. Come down harder on this guy from the league's end or make it the issue it should be and other people will think twice about doing something similar in the future. I don't for a second think that some of these guys who make dirty hits do anything other than laugh at having to pay a $5,000 fine. I think the end result is pretty much the same here for Mailloux: very little consequence to what he did but a much more important effect on the victim that's being ignored as the main part of the story here.

I understand that you are upset with the team and the optics of the situation. However where does it stop? When does the punishment from a court ever feel adequate enough to the victim or their family? Do you think a victim of a sexual assault would be comforted by having their attacker sentence to 10 years instead of 5? Would the family of a murder victim be happier seeing the guilty party get the death penalty than 25 years in jail. The fact of the matter is we have courts to doll out punishment and determine guilt and innocence. Mailloux plead guilty he paid his dues in the eyes of the court, he will be ridiculed and judged everytime he walks out his front door. Should we go through the prison systems of the world dolling out punishments that society feels is fair instead of what the courts felt was just? How does the length of an apology make it more or less sincere? No one except Mailloux knows whether or not his apology was sincere we can only guess. Perhaps he was too ashamed to write more or perhaps he felt like there was nothing he could say to adequately describe how he felt or the regret he felt. Perhaps he didn't care or was not remorseful. Only Mailloux can answer those questions and whether he answers them truthfully or not is another factor to consider. Society want reconing not justice. They need to feel like Mailloux has served enough punishment in THEIR EYES. This is not about the victim this is about the optics. What the victim said she wanted was an apology she felt was sincere not him to go updraft or pay for his transgressions to the publics satisfaction. Just an apology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ya know, there have been other players who have commited worse "crimes", and have had actual charges laid against them. There's a littany of NHLers who haven't exactly been angels. Some, while when they were playing "in" the NHL. LM hasn't even played for the London Knights yet. He knows all eyes will be follwing him wherever he goes. Mark Hunter (Knights coach & GM) , drafted him at 33, and MH isn't an idiot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also wanted to add on to the end of my previous comment.

We all know that Mailloux's apology was 3 lines and seemed insincere but what we don't know is why it was only 3 lines. Perhaps this was at the advice of his counsel or manager. Maybe he was advised (correctly or incorrectly) to keep it short and sweet so as to not make the court feel like he was mocking them with a long tear filled apology. Perhaps his agent or counsel have advised him not to contact this young lady again and this is why he has not issued a more sincere apology. We are not privy to what is happening behind the scenes here. We all know that agents and PR departments and lawyers vet what players say especially when there are legal issues involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, campabee82 said:

This is taking the selection and even the crime too far. To flat out say that it trivialize violence against women is a gross exaggeration. This was not a violent crime, it wasn't even a sex crime! He was for sure an immature A** and deserved the fine for invading her privacy but let's not overreact. Of course the advocacy groups are going to want to overplay this to push their agendas and the media loves the controversy because it sells papers. It is funny to see how divided the world is over this, in my own personal family I have 6 sisters (some half and step) and 2 brothers, I also have a Daughter and 4 sons. It is strange to see but the majority of the females are on the side that the kid has paid for his crime and it's time to move on, where as the majority of the men are outraged and want his head on a stake forever. See the males in my family were all raised to do everything we can to protect women from any and all injustices. I think society as a whole over the last 40-50 years have tried to take this same approach. Sometimes though the injustices are precieved to be worse than they actually are. Let's reverse the roles for a minute, we will leave the participants as they are (Mailloux being a young prospect). IF the young lady had taped and released the video and Mailloux was the victim do you think this would have even been news worthy? My guess is she wouldn't have even been fined.  Do you think that she would have been shunned by the entire world? I would guess that most people right or wrong would have said or at least thought that Mailloux should toughen up and get over it. There are a few reasons that this is news worthy IMO. 1. It happened outside of Canada making it an international incident. 2. The content of the video was sexual in nature (still not a sex crime though). 3. It was the male in this case that committed the crime. Remove any one of those 3 elements and it never even makes the news. If he had shared a video of the young lady crossing a road with his friends and she found out the crime would have been the same and it still would have been an international incident but it wouldn't have made the news. Same thing with the other two elements, if it had happened in N.A. it likely makes the local papers but doesn't go much further than that or like outlined above if the roles were reversed than likely no one even cares. The problem is this was the perfect storm for the media to run with and exploit the story. 

This pretty much sums it up. For too many commentators, whether they be professional or amateur, there are only two settings when it comes to sports, politics, or society in general, namely, OUTRAGED or asleep. There is now room for nuance, perspective or mitigating factors. They just immediately scream "Off with their heads" and then become even more outraged if that outcome in not immediately implemented. Observing this in so many facets of modern society I often wonder how these people are not completely exhausted because I know that I find it exhausting having to observe it all of the time.

For the professional commentators I can understand it somewhat. The modern media landscape requires outrage to generate clicks, which drives revenues and profits for media companies. And if you have seen the layoffs at media companies during the last 5 to 10 years you know they need to generate as many clicks as possible. This story is tailored for doing just that so seeing the outrage from the media types is not surprising, even if there might be a little hypocrisy underneath the outrage. As for the amateurs I would imagine that a large number of them gain a feeling of superiority by expressing their outrage with the added bonus of not having to look in towards their own souls. Not everybody who has expressed outrage falls into this category but I would estimate that a large chunk of them do.

What this youngster did is wrong, there is not denying that. As well, in Sweden, what he did is a crime for which he was required to pay the penalty for committing it. He gravely injured his victim and she may never forgive him for it, which would not surprise me one bit and which I completely understand. However, he still has his whole life to live and he is going to have to get on with it, living with what he did going forward. Maybe he will truly regret his actions and never do it again or maybe he won't. If he does not then he will not be unique. 

With regard to drafting him the silliest argument I have heard is he should not have had the "honour" of being drafted in the 1st round. Hogwash. By most accounts that I have read he has the tools to become a top pair defenceman in the mold of Jeff Petry/Shea Weber. If his being drafted after the 32nd pick overall is sufficient "punishment" for his transgressions I would say that people who believe that may not be totally sincere in their outrage at his actions.

One final thought. Right now many commentators believe this youngster is "the scum of the earth". However, if his game does grow to resemble that of the two defenceman I mentioned in the previous paragraph I would imagine most of those same commentators will be saying "What a fine fellow we have made him". If he does not, he, his crime and his victim will be forgotten.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Capital Habs Fan said:

This pretty much sums it up. For too many commentators, whether they be professional or amateur, there are only two settings when it comes to sports, politics, or society in general, namely, OUTRAGED or asleep. There is now room for nuance, perspective or mitigating factors. They just immediately scream "Off with their heads" and then become even more outraged if that outcome in not immediately implemented. Observing this in so many facets of modern society I often wonder how these people are not completely exhausted because I know that I find it exhausting having to observe it all of the time.

For the professional commentators I can understand it somewhat. The modern media landscape requires outrage to generate clicks, which drives revenues and profits for media companies. And if you have seen the layoffs at media companies during the last 5 to 10 years you know they need to generate as many clicks as possible. This story is tailored for doing just that so seeing the outrage from the media types is not surprising, even if there might be a little hypocrisy underneath the outrage. As for the amateurs I would imagine that a large number of them gain a feeling of superiority by expressing their outrage with the added bonus of not having to look in towards their own souls. Not everybody who has expressed outrage falls into this category but I would estimate that a large chunk of them do.

What this youngster did is wrong, there is not denying that. As well, in Sweden, what he did is a crime for which he was required to pay the penalty for committing it. He gravely injured his victim and she may never forgive him for it, which would not surprise me one bit and which I completely understand. However, he still has his whole life to live and he is going to have to get on with it, living with what he did going forward. Maybe he will truly regret his actions and never do it again or maybe he won't. If he does not then he will not be unique. 

With regard to drafting him the silliest argument I have heard is he should not have had the "honour" of being drafted in the 1st round. Hogwash. By most accounts that I have read he has the tools to become a top pair defenceman in the mold of Jeff Petry/Shea Weber. If his being drafted after the 32nd pick overall is sufficient "punishment" for his transgressions I would say that people who believe that may not be totally sincere in their outrage at his actions.

One final thought. Right now many commentators believe this youngster is "the scum of the earth". However, if his game does grow to resemble that of the two defenceman I mentioned in the previous paragraph I would imagine most of those same commentators will be saying "What a fine fellow we have made him". If he does not, he, his crime and his victim will be forgotten.

Yep but the Mob is angry so this will go on. I wonder who this helps? probably not the kid probably not the victim. good for the news cycle though.

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...