31Careyprice Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 Mikhail Grigorenko would be my pick for the habs, a big center who can play RW. 46 games, 31 goals, 69 points is simply amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnerdunner Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 Mikhail Grigorenko would be my pick for the habs, a big center who can play RW. 46 games, 31 goals, 69 points is simply amazing. Those point levels are not that amazing - Take a look at David Desharnais Q numbers. 63 Games - 33 goals - 85 Assists = 118 pts next year 61 Games - 38 goals 70 Assists = 108 Pts Both PPG are higher than Grigorenko. Then take it another level look at Mario's, Crosby's, Lafleurs, Lafontaines and even Brad Richards numbers all put up more than 180 points in a season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jennifer_rocket Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 Pretty exciting anticipating that we might actually obtain a top five pick! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nine1One Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 Those point levels are not that amazing - Take a look at David Desharnais Q numbers. 63 Games - 33 goals - 85 Assists = 118 pts next year 61 Games - 38 goals 70 Assists = 108 Pts Both PPG are higher than Grigorenko. Then take it another level look at Mario's, Crosby's, Lafleurs, Lafontaines and even Brad Richards numbers all put up more than 180 points in a season. first season on smaller ice, and really big. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kinot-1 Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 Mikhail Grigorenko would be my pick for the habs, a big center who can play RW. 46 games, 31 goals, 69 points is simply amazing. I agree,,,,Yakupov, IMHO, has an attitude problem. He didn't participate in the Prospects Game because he didn't want to, and was suspended for 2 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corazu Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 I agree,,,,Yakupov, IMHO, has an attitude problem. He didn't participate in the Prospects Game because he didn't want to, and was suspended for 2 games. There was more to that story - he had only been back from his injury for a few days...his coach and the team doctor advised him not to go. They had the teams best interests in heart. Issue blown out of proportion imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nine1One Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 There was more to that story - he had only been back from his injury for a few days...his coach and the team doctor advised him not to go. They had the teams best interests in heart. Issue blown out of proportion imo. this. Roy was flipping mad about the suspension Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kinot-1 Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 There was more to that story - he had only been back from his injury for a few days...his coach and the team doctor advised him not to go. They had the teams best interests in heart. Issue blown out of proportion imo. He had just played 3 previous games,,,,,so what was his problem? If he was indeed still injured,,,,then why was he allowed to play those 3 games? What was the coach and Dr.'s advice at that time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nine1One Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 He had just played 3 previous games,,,,,so what was his problem? If he was indeed still injured,,,,then why was he allowed to play those 3 games? What was the coach and Dr.'s advice at that time? lol, the coach didn't want him to go, you listen to your coach. the all star game is more intense i've heard than our all star game, cause players are trying to improve their draft stock, no need for him to reinjure himself in a meaningless came coming off an injury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest habs1952 Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 From TSN: RISERS AND FALLERS FOR 2012 NHL ENTRY DRAFT Risers and Fallers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aussie6898 Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 Seems like we'll be drafting 3rd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roy_133 Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 Those point levels are not that amazing - Take a look at David Desharnais Q numbers. 63 Games - 33 goals - 85 Assists = 118 pts next year 61 Games - 38 goals 70 Assists = 108 Pts Both PPG are higher than Grigorenko. Then take it another level look at Mario's, Crosby's, Lafleurs, Lafontaines and even Brad Richards numbers all put up more than 180 points in a season. Big, big difference between the 2 Desharnais seasons you mention (when he was an overager) and Grigorenko's rookie season in the Q. As a rookie Desharnais had 51 points in 70 games. As for the other players you mentioned, many of them were different eras. The style of play in the Q is massively better than it was, even 10 years ago, when it was viewed as a wide open, no defense league. Anyway, if he turned into ANY of the guys you mentioned after Desharnais, it would be outstanding but measuring a 17 year old based on stats is dangerous, the tools are great. I'd obviously be thrilled to get him but there's a few other kids I really like around where we'll be picking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corazu Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 this. Roy was flipping mad about the suspension So was I! My dad and I had tickets to see Sarnia play vs Barrie (in Barrie) specifically to watch him play...we've had them since December or something, was bummed when he got injured...then I found out he was playing again...then that he was suspended and was going to miss the game! Gah! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnerdunner Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 Big, big difference between the 2 Desharnais seasons you mention (when he was an overager) and Grigorenko's rookie season in the Q. As a rookie Desharnais had 51 points in 70 games. As for the other players you mentioned, many of them were different eras. The style of play in the Q is massively better than it was, even 10 years ago, when it was viewed as a wide open, no defense league. Anyway, if he turned into ANY of the guys you mentioned after Desharnais, it would be outstanding but measuring a 17 year old based on stats is dangerous, the tools are great. I'd obviously be thrilled to get him but there's a few other kids I really like around where we'll be picking. Your right it is a big deal what a couple years can do, just trying to show that as a 17 year old it's not like he is doing something that doesn't happen often because it does. He is not as a 17 anywhere near the Crosby level not saying he couldn't be a top 5 nhl'er but if you compare the 2 at 17 Crosby finished his year with 168 points in 62 games the league hasn't changed that much in 7 years. Also Crosby was the latest QMJHL to go #1 so the easiest to compare to. Also the Q is always weaker than Ohl and Whl - I've looked at all the first round picks from the Q since 2007 (Here are all the players who were drafted from the Q in round 1 who are playing currently in the NHL) 2007 - David Perron - St Louis 2008 - No QMJHL drafted in First Round 2009 - Dmitri Kulikov - Florida - *Louis Leblanc - Montreal 2010 - None currently playing in NHL 2011 - Sean Couturier - Philly So out of the past 5 years first round draft picks from the Q only 3 are regularly playing in the NHL. This is not meant to be a huge knock on Grigorenko because I haven't actually seen him play but it is meant to show how much weaker the Q is then other junior leagues and how he is no where near the Crosby skill level that gets you drafted #1 automatically. If i'm drafting I take Yakupov any day of the week 55 points in 29 Games in a much stronger league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA_Champion Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 So out of the past 5 years first round draft picks from the Q only 3 are regularly playing in the NHL. This is not meant to be a huge knock on Grigorenko because I haven't actually seen him play but it is meant to show how much weaker the Q is then other junior leagues and how he is no where near the Crosby skill level that gets you drafted #1 automatically. If i'm drafting I take Yakupov any day of the week 55 points in 29 Games in a much stronger league. In a likely scenario, the Habs don't choose between Yakupov and Grigorenko, Columbus chooses, and then we pick the remaining player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTed3 Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 In a likely scenario, the Habs don't choose between Yakupov and Grigorenko, Columbus chooses, and then we pick the remaining player. Well I'm not convinced we end up with the #2 pick anyways. It's looking like we could be anywhere from #2-#10, so it's unfortunately still too premature to speculate on all these variables. I also wouldn't count out one of the other top 2 forwards sneaking into the 2nd slot, nor would I rule out a guy like Murray or Dumba getting in there if Edmonton gets the #2 pick. As I said, there are still too many variables at play, but it will be fun to iron out who we might get as the season comes closer to its end and we have a better idea of where we're likely to pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nine1One Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 Well I'm not convinced we end up with the #2 pick anyways. It's looking like we could be anywhere from #2-#10, so it's unfortunately still too premature to speculate on all these variables. I also wouldn't count out one of the other top 2 forwards sneaking into the 2nd slot, nor would I rule out a guy like Murray or Dumba getting in there if Edmonton gets the #2 pick. As I said, there are still too many variables at play, but it will be fun to iron out who we might get as the season comes closer to its end and we have a better idea of where we're likely to pick. I'm pretty sure edmonton will be trading down. they should be atleast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
31Careyprice Posted February 25, 2012 Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 In a likely scenario, the Habs don't choose between Yakupov and Grigorenko, Columbus chooses, and then we pick the remaining player. As of right now most GM and Amatuer Scouts would take Yakupov over Grigorenko, Yakupov is an purely offesive player, while Grigorenko is more two way, hockey sense and bigger as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grecohab Posted February 25, 2012 Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 Well I'm not convinced we end up with the #2 pick anyways. It's looking like we could be anywhere from #2-#10, so it's unfortunately still too premature to speculate on all these variables. I also wouldn't count out one of the other top 2 forwards sneaking into the 2nd slot, nor would I rule out a guy like Murray or Dumba getting in there if Edmonton gets the #2 pick. As I said, there are still too many variables at play, but it will be fun to iron out who we might get as the season comes closer to its end and we have a better idea of where we're likely to pick. Assuming that: a. Columbus is a lock to pick No1. b. We can unload some contracts at the deadline (AK, Moen, Campoli, Kaberle?). c. We continue to play like crap. d. We dont rush Markov back in the line up. i can see us ending up 14th or 15th in the East, 27th or 28th in the league. This means we are going to pick a top-5 pick, likely in the 2-4 spot. One of Grigorenko, Forsberg or Galtsenyuk, will be our pick, guranteed. I still think we must do everything we can to claim another 1st rounder in the 15-30 range, so we can have a shot at one of Gaunce, Grigersons or maybe even Faksa, and the elements for us to do so, can be Kostitsyn, Weber, Diaz, CGY 2nd in 2013, NSH 2nd in 2012. ( a combination of those) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTed3 Posted February 25, 2012 Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 Just to put things in perspective regarding the draft, there was an analysis done of players chosen between 1990-1999 to see how many of them ended up being veritable NHLers (defined in this case as playing 200 career games or more). Looking back now, they found 63% of 1st round picks met this definition, but only 25% of 2nd rounders, and 12% of picks after the 2nd round. What does that mean? It means that having one 1st round pick, even ignoring the player's contribution when he gets to the NHL, is 2-3 times as good as a 2nd and 5 times as good as a 3rd, 4th or 5th. If you then factor in that the 1st round pick likely makes a greater contribution, that number jumps even more. If you're dealing for extra picks at the deadline, a GM would essentially need to fetch 2 extra 2nd rounders and 4 extra lower-tier picks to produce one extra NHLer for his club. Conversely, if you go out and get one extra 1st round pick, it gives you decent odds all by itself. All this to say that PG needs to be working hard to find us a 1st round pick and not a bunch of lower ones if he can. Maybe he needs to package guys together or add a 3rd round pick to a player to make it happen, but that should be the goal. Second, if we look at how well each team has fared of late (from 2001-2009) in terms of producing full-time NHLers to date, there are quite a few surprises. Teams who are perceived as being good drafters are actually poorly-ranked. NJ is 30th and dead last at 5.7%, TB is 29th at 6.6%, and Van is 24th at 11.8%. The NYI, despite all their top picks, are 27th at 10.6%. Detroit, deemed to be a powerhouse at the draft, has actually only produced NHLers out of 13.5% of its picks to date, good for 15th only. And who's number 1? If you said Montreal, you'd be correct. The Habs have turned 21.6% of their picks from the 2000s into NHLers, higher than teams with much better average draft rankings and teams with perceived better scouting. The fact is that our scouts and GM seem to have done a terrific job identifying talent throughout the draft. Where we've failed is developing that talent ourselves. Despite successes like Subban and Price and Pacman, we've also dealt away guys like McDonaugh, Lats, Laps, D'Ags, Sergei, OB, and Halak. Going back further, the pattern holds true if you look at guys like Hainsey, Robidas, or Ribeiro, for example. These are all guys who have gone on to have success with other clubs before fully developing here. Some have had disputes with coaches, some have been rushed into the Mtl market and weren't able to handle it, some were just not properly developed and identified as NHL-ready in the minors. We can further draw a parallel to the number of rookie coaches we helped propel into the league who had success with teams other than ourselves. The bottom line is that I have confidence in our scouts and GM to make the right choices and I think it will be a nice opportunity to see what they can do with a top pick (we've only had one in recent years and I think we can all agree it was a homerun). However, fans and media need to be prepared to let those picks develop here and make mistakes every so often instead of trying to chase players out of town (like some have done Subban). It would be inane to trade Subban, Eller, Pacman, or even Plekanec at this point. So let these guys play and let's hope we can add on some talent that will be NHL-ready within 2-3 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kinot-1 Posted February 25, 2012 Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 Just to put things in perspective regarding the draft, there was an analysis done of players chosen between 1990-1999 to see how many of them ended up being veritable NHLers (defined in this case as playing 200 career games or more). Looking back now, they found 63% of 1st round picks met this definition, but only 25% of 2nd rounders, and 12% of picks after the 2nd round. What does that mean? It means that having one 1st round pick, even ignoring the player's contribution when he gets to the NHL, is 2-3 times as good as a 2nd and 5 times as good as a 3rd, 4th or 5th. If you then factor in that the 1st round pick likely makes a greater contribution, that number jumps even more. If you're dealing for extra picks at the deadline, a GM would essentially need to fetch 2 extra 2nd rounders and 4 extra lower-tier picks to produce one extra NHLer for his club. Conversely, if you go out and get one extra 1st round pick, it gives you decent odds all by itself. All this to say that PG needs to be working hard to find us a 1st round pick and not a bunch of lower ones if he can. Maybe he needs to package guys together or add a 3rd round pick to a player to make it happen, but that should be the goal. Second, if we look at how well each team has fared of late (from 2001-2009) in terms of producing full-time NHLers to date, there are quite a few surprises. Teams who are perceived as being good drafters are actually poorly-ranked. NJ is 30th and dead last at 5.7%, TB is 29th at 6.6%, and Van is 24th at 11.8%. The NYI, despite all their top picks, are 27th at 10.6%. Detroit, deemed to be a powerhouse at the draft, has actually only produced NHLers out of 13.5% of its picks to date, good for 15th only. And who's number 1? If you said Montreal, you'd be correct. The Habs have turned 21.6% of their picks from the 2000s into NHLers, higher than teams with much better average draft rankings and teams with perceived better scouting. The fact is that our scouts and GM seem to have done a terrific job identifying talent throughout the draft. Where we've failed is developing that talent ourselves. Despite successes like Subban and Price and Pacman, we've also dealt away guys like McDonaugh, Lats, Laps, D'Ags, Sergei, OB, and Halak. Going back further, the pattern holds true if you look at guys like Hainsey, Robidas, or Ribeiro, for example. These are all guys who have gone on to have success with other clubs before fully developing here. Some have had disputes with coaches, some have been rushed into the Mtl market and weren't able to handle it, some were just not properly developed and identified as NHL-ready in the minors. We can further draw a parallel to the number of rookie coaches we helped propel into the league who had success with teams other than ourselves. The bottom line is that I have confidence in our scouts and GM to make the right choices and I think it will be a nice opportunity to see what they can do with a top pick (we've only had one in recent years and I think we can all agree it was a homerun). However, fans and media need to be prepared to let those picks develop here and make mistakes every so often instead of trying to chase players out of town (like some have done Subban). It would be inane to trade Subban, Eller, Pacman, or even Plekanec at this point. So let these guys play and let's hope we can add on some talent that will be NHL-ready within 2-3 years. Thanks for the reasearch Ted. It is an eye-opener for sure. We can only hope for a top 5 pick and develope him the right way, and keep him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roy_133 Posted February 25, 2012 Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 The bottom line is that I have confidence in our scouts and GM to make the right choices and I think it will be a nice opportunity to see what they can do with a top pick (we've only had one in recent years and I think we can all agree it was a homerun). However, fans and media need to be prepared to let those picks develop here and make mistakes every so often instead of trying to chase players out of town (like some have done Subban). It would be inane to trade Subban, Eller, Pacman, or even Plekanec at this point. So let these guys play and let's hope we can add on some talent that will be NHL-ready within 2-3 years. I don't lack confidence in our drafting ability but I also feel graduated players is only telling a part of the story. Our administration is at times, quite risk averse, particularly in round one. Regardless, over the time frame you mentioned we've lacked the home run picks. If we're picking top 3-5, a home run is paramount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weepingminotaur Posted February 25, 2012 Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 If we're picking top 3-5, a home run is paramount. Agreed. If you're drafting top-5, you have to go for the game-breaker, not play it safe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA_Champion Posted February 25, 2012 Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 Agreed. If you're drafting top-5, you have to go for the game-breaker, not play it safe. They did that with Price. Timmins said to Gainey, either Carey Price or Marc Staal. Timmins told Gainey Price had the higher ceiling, so they went with Price. That's the story I heard while watching a broadcast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jennifer_rocket Posted February 25, 2012 Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 They did that with Price. Timmins said to Gainey, either Carey Price or Marc Staal. Timmins told Gainey Price had the higher ceiling, so they went with Price. That's the story I heard while watching a broadcast. Too bad we didn't have Marc Staal as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.