POLL: Your preferred draft pick?

[H_T_L]

We all pretty much assume that Wright will be the pick if we win the lottery and chose 1st.

Who would be your choice should we pick 2nd, 3rd or 4th ??

[habsisme]

22 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

We all pretty much assume that Wright will be the pick if we win the lottery and chose 1st.

Who would be your choice should we pick 2nd, 3rd or 4th ??

best player available, I don't pay attention to position unless its equal, then of course I go C, D, W in that order. Slafkovsky could be the best player available even if he's a winger. He would look great with Suzuki and Caufield and we'll have a first line for the first time in a long time

[maas_art]

12 minutes ago, habsisme said:

best player available, I don't pay attention to position unless its equal, then of course I go C, D, W in that order. Slafkovsky could be the best player available even if he's a winger. He would look great with Suzuki and Caufield and we'll have a first line for the first time in a long time

If we had anyone else in the system that made me think they were a legit top 6 centre, Id be down for that.   Slaf-Suzuki-CC could be dominant.  But i have to think that adding another top centre would be better for us, long term.   

I usually am in full agreement with BPA but this year Im not sold that anyone in the top 5 is a clear "BPA" and because our needs for a top centre are so much greater than a winger, I think id personally, in order, pick:

1. Wright

2. Cooley

3. Savoie

4. Nemec

5. Slaf 

 

I have this gut feeling we're going to get either 1st or 2nd TBH.   If Arizona picks first, Im not certain its a given they pick Wright.  They have 2 young, very good young centres in recent 5th overall Barrett Hayton and the newly signed Jack McBain.  Im not saying thats McDavid / Draitsaitl but when you look at their winger depth they might actually better off taking a guy like Slafkovsky.  

Gonna be an interesting draft imho. 

 

[electron58]

I'll wait til I see where we're picking.  We've already speculated on another thread. 

[Regis22]

BPA - team is weak every where , so pick the best player then work it out at camp 

[CaptWelly]

2 hours ago, habsisme said:

best player available, I don't pay attention to position unless its equal, then of course I go C, D, W in that order. Slafkovsky could be the best player available even if he's a winger. He would look great with Suzuki and Caufield and we'll have a first line for the first time in a long time

I agree BPA

[H_T_L]

41 minutes ago, Regis22 said:

BPA - team is weak every where , so pick the best player then work it out at camp 

 

4 minutes ago, CaptWelly said:

I agree BPA

Modified the poll to include that choice.

[BigTed3]

BPA. That said, positional value goes into that assessment. Let's say two guys have the same base skills as measured by a skills competition: they skate at the same speed, they have similar shot accuracy, the same slapshot speed, the same cone agility, etc. A center is also taking face-offs and generally-speaking has experience taking on a larger role, being more defensively responsible, and so on. It's also easier for a center to move to wing than for a winger to move to center, so you get more flexibility by drafting a center too. So in general, yes BPA, that's my vote. But A Cooley is more valuable than a Kemell if they have similar overall skill. And Savoie if you think he's a center is more valuable than Savoie if you think he's a winger. Case in point for this would be Suzuki, who wasn't clearly a center or winger when we acquired him but definitely has more value now that we know he can play center, or conversely Drouin who failed as a center, still has the same base skill level, but is less valuable as a winger.

[electron58]

So, if this is 2018 and we're picking BPA?  Who do pick? And no, we're not using hindsight.  We all had our BPA @ that time. And remember,  it's not a popularity selection,  just who you felt was BPA, when it was our turn to pick.

[Regis22]

42 minutes ago, electron58 said:

So, if this is 2018 and we're picking BPA?  Who do pick? And no, we're not using hindsight.  We all had our BPA @ that time. And remember,  it's not a popularity selection,  just who you felt was BPA, when it was our turn to pick.

I don't follow drafts  so I don't know who the BPA was at that time BUT if the attached was somewhat accurate  then I guess the current captain of the Senators seemed like the logical choice 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_NHL_Entry_Draft

[habs1952]

BPA , but only the teams picking will decide whom they deem to be the BPA.  

[claremont]

I have to qualify my vote as follows: 

I would prefer a Centre as BPA as I want more scoring, and driving of the offense (even though I acknowledge a good puck mover on the D opens up / sets up the offense but doesn’t usually put up 20-30 direct goals) - I’m tired of seeing our team outshoot the opposition or fall behind by 2-3 goals and having no comeback hope 

I can accept / support mgmt taking a RHD Nemec or LW in Slafkovsky without dumping heaps of criticism on that choice 

As to later picks, I hope we don’t draft LHD at this time (wait till next year) unless it’s clearly the BPA, so I hope we fill our boots with other scorers or RHD. With 7 picks in the first 3 rounds, we can afford to gamble on a late 2nd round or an early 3rd round pick on a potential high ceiling player (would include the Russian contingent where we may have to wait) 

 

[electron58]

29 minutes ago, Regis22 said:

I don't follow drafts  so I don't know who the BPA was at that time BUT if the attached was somewhat accurate  then I guess the current captain of the Senators seemed like the logical choice 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_NHL_Entry_Draft

That link says it all. Previous regime always thought they were smarter than the experts.

[BigTed3]

1 hour ago, electron58 said:

So, if this is 2018 and we're picking BPA?  Who do pick? And no, we're not using hindsight.  We all had our BPA @ that time. And remember,  it's not a popularity selection,  just who you felt was BPA, when it was our turn to pick.

At the time, the decision came down to Kotkaniemi vs. Zadina, with some discussion about Tkachuk and Hughes as well. Those were the guys in the conversation as the #3 BPA. Dahlin was consensus #1. Svechnikov was consensus #2. But after that, it really wasn't clear. If we're going to re-hash this, then it's important to note that

- JK had added value as a center, just as Hayton was picked #5 as a center

- JK had a late birthday for his draft year and was seen as a player who impressed in the last few months of his season, hence why he rose up the rankings all of a sudden but wasn't necessarily on everyone's radar earlier.

- Multiple sources have indicated the Coyotes would have taken JK at 5 or that another team would have traded into the top 5 to take him, so it was not just the Habs who liked him

As for Tkachuk, yes he's played to his potential, but he's still a guy who isn't very strong defensively and he's been given much more opportunity than others like Kotkaniemi, Zadina, Bouchard, or so on. So he's risen more quickly and taken advantage of the ice time that came with playing for a bad team. The questions about Tkachuk were whether he could score at the NHL level, and obviously that question has been answered, but it was by no means a given at the time of the draft. The whole draft is just looking at how guys play at 16-18 years old across different leagues and platforms and trying to project how their games will mature, how much room they have to grow physically and mentally, and how their games will translate to the NHL. It's very easy to be wrong about that, and the "best" players at 17 aren't always the best players at 20 or 25 or 28. In general, more of the top 10 prospects will end up being great than the next 10 or the 10 after that, but there are always guys who move up or down, so nothing holds true for any one player.

At the end of the day, there simply weren't any clearly strong centers in the top 10 and there wasn't a surefire thing there either at any other position. Tkachuk had question marks. Hughes had question marks about his size. Bouchard had question marks about the speed of his play. Zadina had question marks about the completeness of his game past being a scorer. Personally if I was going to re-draft picks 3 through 10, I'd take

3. Dobson

4. Hughes

5. Tkachuk

6. Kotkaniemi

7. Farabee

8. Boqvist

9. Wahlstrom

10. Bouchard

There's obviously some subjectivity here and things will still change over time, but this wasn't a strong draft and IMO Kotkaniemi is still the best centerman to have come out of 2018.

 

 

[BigTed3]

31 minutes ago, electron58 said:

That link says it all. Previous regime always thought they were smarter than the experts.

Everyone has their own opinion. IMO, Timmins and Bergevin took way too much heat for their drafting, when their record shows they've actually done better than average. Look at my post above, and selecting JK is really not as bad a choice as some would make it out to be. He's still largely been better than 95% of his draft year. And looking lower down the draft, you'll see the same management team selected Romanov at 38. That choice surprised all the pundits, who didn't have him ranked almost at all, and yet he's turned out to be probably the best player picked in the draft outside the 1st round. Ylonen at 35 may yet be better than half the players picked in the 1st round too. So it's entirely possible that when we look back at this draft, we find out TT and MB did know better than the media experts. They chose 5 players in 2018 who have already played in the NHL, and frankly an average team's draft yields 1-2 NHL players. We selected Kotkaniemi, who will likely end up being a 10-year NHLer, Romanov who will likely be a top 3-4 D man when all is said and done, Ylonen who could be a middle 6 winger, and Harris who looks like he'll have a long NHL career as well. 4 bonafide quality NHLers in one draft is a rare thing. So for me, credit to the Habs for finding those players.

[RCAF48]

My preferred draft pick would be the best North American player available when we pick.

[jennifer_rocket]

BPA for me.

I just think anyone we draft in the top-five (assuming they aren't a bust) will help this team in the future. I think you have to trust in your scouting department and go for who you think is BPA. We're several years away from competing and we can continue to evaluate areas of strength and weakness over the next several years. I don't think we need to say, "darn, we really need an awesome LWer for next season," because next season we're not going to compete anyway. Just grab BPA and develop them over the next 2-3 years.

[AH64]

BPA  hoping we get wright, can use a 2 way center.  hes 8th in scoring in the ohl and hes 17. similar stats to suzuki. 

[maas_art]

3 hours ago, jennifer_rocket said:

BPA for me.

I just think anyone we draft in the top-five (assuming they aren't a bust) will help this team in the future. I think you have to trust in your scouting department and go for who you think is BPA. We're several years away from competing and we can continue to evaluate areas of strength and weakness over the next several years. I don't think we need to say, "darn, we really need an awesome LWer for next season," because next season we're not going to compete anyway. Just grab BPA and develop them over the next 2-3 years.

I agree to a point.  I think Wright is the easy pick if we get #1 but things get cloudy after that (assuming that someone doesnt go off the board & pick Slav over Wright & we get him with the #2). 

If our scouting team thinks that Nemec or Slafkovsky are better than say Cooley or Savoie then you make that pick. It would be very interesting to see who our group has listed 1 - 5. 

[claremont]

17 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Everyone has their own opinion. IMO, Timmins and Bergevin took way too much heat for their drafting, when their record shows they've actually done better than average. Look at my post above, and selecting JK is really not as bad a choice as some would make it out to be. He's still largely been better than 95% of his draft year. And looking lower down the draft, you'll see the same management team selected Romanov at 38. That choice surprised all the pundits, who didn't have him ranked almost at all, and yet he's turned out to be probably the best player picked in the draft outside the 1st round. Ylonen at 35 may yet be better than half the players picked in the 1st round too. So it's entirely possible that when we look back at this draft, we find out TT and MB did know better than the media experts. They chose 5 players in 2018 who have already played in the NHL, and frankly an average team's draft yields 1-2 NHL players. We selected Kotkaniemi, who will likely end up being a 10-year NHLer, Romanov who will likely be a top 3-4 D man when all is said and done, Ylonen who could be a middle 6 winger, and Harris who looks like he'll have a long NHL career as well. 4 bonafide quality NHLers in one draft is a rare thing. So for me, credit to the Habs for finding those players.

I agree with this summary. The problem is that Bergevin didn't really put enough early stock in the draft in his earlier years and actually started to draft well in his later years with the exception of last year's Mailloux off the board pick. 2019 should yield Caufield and Struble / Norlinder one if not both should who have ceiling upside and perhaps be roster support players. 2020 should yield Guhle. Our 2nd rounders of Mysak and Tuch are long shots but most of that draft is still TBD - good thing Hugo supplemented with Heineman and Barron via trade. 2021 - still too early on Mailloux, Kidney and Joshua Roy is either luck or skill 

[booboo_mtl]

41 minutes ago, maas_art said:

I agree to a point.  I think Wright is the easy pick if we get #1 but things get cloudy after that (assuming that someone doesnt go off the board & pick Slav over Wright & we get him with the #2). 

If our scouting team thinks that Nemec or Slafkovsky are better than say Cooley or Savoie then you make that pick. It would be very interesting to see who our group has listed 1 - 5. 

Biggest reason why I hope we get 1 OA, anything else and our pick gets debated and scrutinized for years. Lets just get 1 and we can debate our other picks

[campabee82]

12 minutes ago, claremont said:

I agree with this summary. The problem is that Bergevin didn't really put enough early stock in the draft in his earlier years and actually started to draft well in his later years with the exception of last year's Mailloux off the board pick. 2019 should yield Caufield and Struble / Norlinder one if not both should who have ceiling upside and perhaps be roster support players. 2020 should yield Guhle. Our 2nd rounders of Mysak and Tuch are long shots but most of that draft is still TBD - good thing Hugo supplemented with Heineman and Barron via trade. 2021 - still too early on Mailloux, Kidney and Joshua Roy is either luck or skill 

I agree with most of this, except that Mysak is a long shot. He was a 2nd round pick but had he made the trip across the pond sooner and gotten into more games his stock may have been higher (like late 1st round pick). He has the skill and is more than a ppg player this year (his first full year in the OHL). I think Mysak will make the NHL and be a solid middle 6C like Dvorak. Also Mailloux although a creep was projected to be a 1st rounder as well before the whole thing came out, so it was off the board in the sense that he requested not to be drafted but it wasn't off the board talent wise.

[claremont]

38 minutes ago, campabee82 said:

I agree with most of this, except that Mysak is a long shot. He was a 2nd round pick but had he made the trip across the pond sooner and gotten into more games his stock may have been higher (like late 1st round pick). He has the skill and is more than a ppg player this year (his first full year in the OHL). I think Mysak will make the NHL and be a solid middle 6C like Dvorak. Also Mailloux although a creep was projected to be a 1st rounder as well before the whole thing came out, so it was off the board in the sense that he requested not to be drafted but it wasn't off the board talent wise.

I concur on your clarifications - Mysak's stock has certainly increased and Mailloux drafted for his talent ceiling may work out to be a good gamble. I still go back to Mailloux being thrust into playing with men in a foreign country, struggling for acceptance, fit and peer pressure, with no parental supervision or guidance was just a recipe for disaster by his agent and surrounding circle. That's not an excuse for his behaviour but just some understanding for how it happened. It's a cloud that will haunt our org and him for years.

[H_T_L]

Looks like we can put Wright back in the conversation after that point by the Yotes last night. If we manage to end 32nd, and win the lottery,,, is it a guarantee we pick him? Is he actually #1 on HuGo's list??

[campabee82]

1 hour ago, H_T_L said:

Looks like we can put Wright back in the conversation after that point by the Yotes last night. If we manage to end 32nd, and win the lottery,,, is it a guarantee we pick him? Is he actually #1 on HuGo's list??

I think he is still #1 on everyone's list. It's after that that I think it is up in the air. Skill wise I personally think Savoie is #2 and Cooley #3 but I also wouldn't rule out Lambert being top 5 either and all of them are really close. Also let's not forget Nemec, Slafkovsky and Jiricek, I think the lists will vary significantly this year after Wright and will mostly depend on needs in the top 5-7 over BPA since that 2nd tier could be so large.