Prospect Info: 2023 CHL Memorial Cup: Quebec Remparts beat Seattle Thunderbirds 5-0

[superdeluxe]

Dang, Not how I wanted to go out. But proud of my team and its accomplishments. Also Davidson played most of the playoffs with a high ankle sprain. Warrior. Hope you guys sign him, Don't ever bet against this kid!

CHeers!

 

[Team_Spirit]

Then why is there more bottom of the barrel teams in the O and W if only the Q is top heavy?

O and W and 10 wins teams lol

Q 20 wins minimum.

Dang, Not how I wanted to go out. But proud of my team and its accomplishments. Also Davidson played most of the playoffs with a high ankle sprain. Warrior. Hope you guys sign him, Don't ever bet against this kid!

CHeers!

The kd is a warrior. It was obvious he was hurt he's usually skating much faster. Mysak had the same issues at the mem cup iirc.

 

[rahad]

I was hoping he would of been Montreal choice instead of St-louis but would love for him to join has an assistant coach.

His ego is to big for a assistant coach role.

 

[montreal]

Well that's not the tie breaker here.

It just come down to being more familiar and watching the O more closely. So for late rounds picks where a bunch of choices can conceivably be considered "equivalent", they go with what they know.

that makes sense. The problem is who are you talking about?

First you have the regional scout, if they see enough they like then the crossover scout will get involved. If that goes well then your head scout will get involved with the AGM or GMs for those that get more involved in scouting then other GMs.

At least that's how it's been explained to me a long time ago in general terms. So the regional scout it would make sense they would push for their player from their league since that's what gets them noticed down the line, if said pick excels and his name is on the scouting reports. At the bottom he's likely not got a ton of job security until he has more of a track record or just wants to be a local scout to their area. So logically you would think people who don't know if they will have a job next season, I can see why they would go with what they know but also think that most would be smart that at the end of the day they need to be right if they want to keep their jobs.

I don't know what the % of NHL exces that work for NHL teams that are from the O, but usually there are layers of scouts putting eyes on said pick and you would think that GMs would remember scouts that stuck to their guns or missed on someone like say a Kulich and pushed for say Mesar (not saying it will or won't pan out for us but wow is it looking bad)

 

[OnTheRun]

that makes sense. The problem is who are you talking about?

First you have the regional scout, if they see enough they like then the crossover scout will get involved. If that goes well then your head scout will get involved with the AGM or GMs for those that get more involved in scouting then other GMs.

At least that's how it's been explained to me a long time ago in general terms. So the regional scout it would make sense they would push for their player from their league since that's what gets them noticed down the line, if said pick excels and his name is on the scouting reports. At the bottom he's likely not got a ton of job security until he has more of a track record or just wants to be a local scout to their area. So logically you would think people who don't know if they will have a job next season, I can see why they would go with what they know but also think that most would be smart that at the end of the day they need to be right if they want to keep their jobs.

I don't know what the % of NHL exces that work for NHL teams that are from the O, but usually there are layers of scouts putting eyes on said pick and you would think that GMs would remember scouts that stuck to their guns or missed on someone like say a Kulich and pushed for say Mesar (not saying it will or won't pan out for us but wow is it looking bad)

The context of what @SergeConstantin74 was talking about is the overall number of NHL draftees from the Q decreasing. So it's about who get drafted and who doesn't get drafted at all. Mesar/Kulich are too high profile for this context.

He gave an example of 2 fictitious players Jeff Smith (Oshawa) and Simon Poirier (Shawinigan).
Now to clear up a misunderstanding in this discussion: If a scout, any scout, think Simon Poirier is going to be a NHL player, the scout is going to push hard for his guy and Poirier will to be drafted. But that's not the type of prospect he was referring to here.

In any given draft roughly 50% of the draftees never play in the NHL, most of that bunch never even get a pro contract. So a lot are long shot, teams taking a flyer on players with low chances of success in hope they will figure it out in the next year or two and earn a pro contract.

Now if both Smith and Poirier are similar player in the crapshot-tier.
Teams are just more likely to pick Smith because they will have seen more of Oshawa than Shawinigan (scouting unbalance) and/or because one NHL Exec know Oshawa's coach personally because he used to work in that league or he played with the guy, which is a lot less likely to be the case for Shawinigan's coach. Both junior coach are vouching for their player and NHL teams are just more likely to put more weight on the words of someone they know personally than someone they don't (networking).

They go with what they know and if it's scaled up to an entire draft, more "Poirier" will go undrafted than "Smith".
Most of the "Smith" will never play in the NHL and most of the "Poirier" would have failed if they had been drafted but it wasn't about "who make it", it was about the number of draftees from the Q.

 

[HuGort]

Hope we sign Rousseau after the Memorial Cup. Would be a great story.

He'd be quite a long shot to make it. Not that big

 

[WeThreeKings]

The Mooseheads play in the Q and I could actually care less which league is 'better'.

I don't know why people care so much about that shit.

 

[1909]

The Q winning 4 straight Memorial's has nothing to do with strength of league. I would argue that's it's easier to build super teams in the Q because there is less top end talent. Look at how far superior the top 4 teams in the Q were this year. The strength of a league is it's it's depth. The Q is far behind and is the dominant factor why there are less Q players drafted.

You are right to a certain point. The Q has not enough available talented players to fill 18 teams. On most teams, the 3rd and 4th lines players are really not skilled at all, as well as at least 50% of their d-corps. The talent pool is shallow in Quebec and the Maritimes. Of course, like any other CHL teams, they can draft some good Europeans prospects, and attract some American kids (rare). If they would cut it to 12 teams, they would become all more competitive, and would attract the attention of all NHL scouts and managements. You have many very small market teams like in Baie-Comeau, Bathurst, Sydney, and some areas have too many teams like in Abitibi (2) and the Victoriaville- Drummondville area.

BUT. it is no reason - for the Habs especially - to miss on some Q talents over and over through the years.

 

[montreal]

The context of what @SergeConstantin74 was talking about is the overall number of NHL draftees from the Q decreasing. So it's about who get drafted and who doesn't get drafted at all. Mesar/Kulich are too high profile for this context.

He gave an example of 2 fictitious players Jeff Smith (Oshawa) and Simon Poirier (Shawinigan).
Now to clear up a misunderstanding in this discussion: If a scout, any scout, think Simon Poirier is going to be a NHL player, the scout is going to push hard for his guy and Poirier will to be drafted. But that's not the type of prospect he was referring to here.

In any given draft roughly 50% of the draftees never play in the NHL, most of that bunch never even get a pro contract. So a lot are long shot, teams taking a flyer on players with low chances of success in hope they will figure it out in the next year or two and earn a pro contract.

Now if both Smith and Poirier are similar player in the crapshot-tier.
Teams are just more likely to pick Smith because they will have seen more of Oshawa than Shawinigan (scouting unbalance) and/or because one NHL Exec know Oshawa's coach personally because he used to work in that league or he played with the guy, which is a lot less likely to be the case for Shawinigan's coach. Both junior coach are vouching for their player and NHL teams are just more likely to put more weight on the words of someone they know personally than someone they don't (networking).

They go with what they know and if it's scaled up to an entire draft, more "Poirier" will go undrafted than "Smith".
Most of the "Smith" will never play in the NHL and most of the "Poirier" would have failed if they had been drafted but it wasn't about "who make it", it was about the number of draftees from the Q.

the problem with that line of thinking is that you bring up 2 players from different leagues and say teams are just more likely to pick Smith because they have seen more of him but you are talking like this would fall under 1 scout, which it wouldn't, several scouts would be involved so how would all of them just deflect to what they know vs who they think is the best.

It sounds like someone is talking more about at the GM level then which is a different discussion since some GMs get heavily involved in scouting and others like Gainey just don't.

 

[OnTheRun]

the problem with that line of thinking is that you bring up 2 players from different leagues and say teams are just more likely to pick Smith because they have seen more of him but you are talking like this would fall under 1 scout, which it wouldn't, several scouts would be involved so how would all of them just deflect to what they know vs who they think is the best.

It sounds like someone is talking more about at the GM level then which is a different discussion since some GMs get heavily involved in scouting and others like Gainey just don't.

Smith and Poirier in the example are just a representation of the generic draft eligible players in each league.
The more your senior scouts get involved in scouting a specific league, the more they get to see those generic guys, and this familiarity with the league products come into play later on when scouts are debating the team draft list "What about that Smith kid from Oshawa? We saw him a few time and I liked him".

 

[Habnot]

You are right to a certain point. The Q has not enough available talented players to fill 18 teams. On most teams, the 3rd and 4th lines players are really not skilled at all, as well as at least 50% of their d-corps. The talent pool is shallow in Quebec and the Maritimes. Of course, like any other CHL teams, they can draft some good Europeans prospects, and attract some American kids (rare). If they would cut it to 12 teams, they would become all more competitive, and would attract the attention of all NHL scouts and managements. You have many very small market teams like in Baie-Comeau, Bathurst, Sydney, and some areas have too many teams like in Abitibi (2) and the Victoriaville- Drummondville area.

BUT. it is no reason - for the Habs especially - to miss on some Q talents over and over through the years.

So I don't necessarily disagree but it's too easy to make blanket statements without context.

Let's just use one example. Habs selected Engstrom last year at 92 with Jordan Dumais (and Jeremy Langlois) still on the board. Are you saying that this was a mistake? Both were selected right after but even with Dumais's season I think Engstrom still has the most NHL potential. I don't think that anyone would have that opinion right after the draft.

 

[montreal]

Smith and Poirier in the example are just a representation of the generic draft eligible players in each league.
The more your senior scouts get involved in scouting a specific league, the more they get to see those generic guys, and this familiarity with the league products come into play later on when scouts are debating the team draft list "What about that Smith kid from Oshawa? We saw him a few time and I liked him".

So in this example are you saying the senior scouts saw both Smith and Poirier but because they grew up or played or worked in the OHL before being a scout would then say lets go with the Smith kid we saw a few times.

Or did they only see Smith play and not Poirier?

 

[OnTheRun]

So in this example are you saying the senior scouts saw both Smith and Poirier but because they grew up or played or worked in the OHL before being a scout would then say lets go with the Smith kid we saw a few times.

Or did they only see Smith play and not Poirier?

Not quite. But if wanted to cut it short that would be closer to the latter.

Smith and Poirier represent a group of dime a dozen kind of prospects in each league, realistically teams will have 50 scouting reports on players that look similar to Smith/Poirier scouting report.

But since senior scouts spent more time in Smith's league scouting higher profile prospects, they end up seeing more of Smith at the same time.
So when it's time to decide what is what for the draft, Smith's advantage is the people in the room know him and have a better grasp of who he is while Poirier have a higher chance to go unnoticed and fly under their radar.

 

[SergeConstantin74]

Thanks @OnTheRun for the great explanations!

 

[HuGort]

Patrick Roy should of been out GM. That was flawless coaching. He's head and shoulders better than MSL. Remparts one of best teams I ever saw.. Roy has that great passion for the game gives you edge to get thru playoff grind.

He's seems good with young players. His fire to win what we need here. Gorton and Hughes too soft spoken and passive. No energy

 

[Kojo]

Patrick Roy should of been out GM.

LMAO

 

[1909]

So I don't necessarily disagree but it's too easy to make blanket statements without context.

Let's just use one example. Habs selected Engstrom last year at 92 with Jordan Dumais (and Jeremy Langlois) still on the board. Are you saying that this was a mistake? Both were selected right after but even with Dumais's season I think Engstrom still has the most NHL potential. I don't think that anyone would have that opinion right after the draft.

Engstrom should had been drafted instead of Rohrer, and then Dumais or Langlois could had been selected where Engstrom was selected.

 

[montreal]

Not quite. But if wanted to cut it short that would be closer to the latter.

Smith and Poirier represent a group of dime a dozen kind of prospects in each league, realistically teams will have 50 scouting reports on players that look similar to Smith/Poirier scouting report.

But since senior scouts spent more time in Smith's league scouting higher profile prospects, they end up seeing more of Smith at the same time.
So when it's time to decide what is what for the draft, Smith's advantage is the people in the room know him and have a better grasp of who he is while Poirier have a higher chance to go unnoticed and fly under their radar.

I see what you are saying clearer now, if the senior scout knows his league better then he will pick him vs a kid he doesn't know from another league.

The problem with this is just how it works. The crossover scouts aren't making the picks, and neither would the regional scouts, but in the later rounds when they have 50 scouting reports on similar players, it's the Director or Head Scout that will look to those scouts to help for his decision (unless it's a GM that's more involved with scouting as it's my understanding that for many GM's after the 1st round or two the Head Scout is calling the shots) So with your example of Smith and Poirier, the problem is you have your regional scouts so one in the O, then another in the Q, they would call in the crossover scout at some point. if they like what they see then comes the Director or Head Scout and GM or AGM. So in you situation we seem to agree that the regional scouts would of course speak for their league Smith or Poirier since that's who they would have scouted all year (meaning league not said player). So then you add in more senior scouts or the crossover scouts since that's their job, to go to cover more then 1 league. So in their case, unless they say grew up/played for or worked in said league that would cause them to favor someone locally vs actually going with the best player (since in my case the Senior scout or crossover would for sure have seen both players)

But if they did that, it's still the head scout or director's job to make the call on picking Smith or Poirier. Or would you also be suggesting that not only the crossover scout but the Director of Scouting would then also just go with Smith because I know that league better?

And even if that happened you would hope your GM would be stepping to say weight in on this.

I just don't buy it. I could see some old timers stuck in their ways maybe, and I 100% can see how scouts might have a regional basis if they played, worked or grew up there. But my problem with this is based off the vids the Habs have put out on the draft. While Timmins had the final say, it's a debate between the regional scouts. So if it's Smith vs Poirier then you would have Turek and Audette both presenting their case for said player. Then Boisvert would give his take on the two. Then Lapointe/Bobrov would have to weigh in with Gorton and Hughes looking on. So who in this list would just go with the player they know because you say Smith would have the upper hand because the scouts know him but the regional scouts are going to know both players the majority of time since it's not like there's a ton of players draft eligible in one region.

I guess my problem is it just doesn't make any sense since there are going to be a room full of scouts all looking to do the best job they can so they can keep doing this. I'm sure back in the day there were many scouts that say didn't want to draft a player from certain leagues or various reasons but today with video scouting it's extremely rare that the room full of scouts won't have access to lots of video of said players.

 

[OnTheRun]

I see what you are saying clearer now, if the senior scout knows his league better then he will pick him vs a kid he doesn't know from another league.

The problem with this is just how it works. The crossover scouts aren't making the picks, and neither would the regional scouts, but in the later rounds when they have 50 scouting reports on similar players, it's the Director or Head Scout that will look to those scouts to help for his decision (unless it's a GM that's more involved with scouting as it's my understanding that for many GM's after the 1st round or two the Head Scout is calling the shots) So with your example of Smith and Poirier, the problem is you have your regional scouts so one in the O, then another in the Q, they would call in the crossover scout at some point. if they like what they see then comes the Director or Head Scout and GM or AGM. So in you situation we seem to agree that the regional scouts would of course speak for their league Smith or Poirier since that's who they would have scouted all year (meaning league not said player). So then you add in more senior scouts or the crossover scouts since that's their job, to go to cover more then 1 league. So in their case, unless they say grew up/played for or worked in said league that would cause them to favor someone locally vs actually going with the best player (since in my case the Senior scout or crossover would for sure have seen both players)

But if they did that, it's still the head scout or director's job to make the call on picking Smith or Poirier. Or would you also be suggesting that not only the crossover scout but the Director of Scouting would then also just go with Smith because I know that league better?

And even if that happened you would hope your GM would be stepping to say weight in on this.

I just don't buy it. I could see some old timers stuck in their ways maybe, and I 100% can see how scouts might have a regional basis if they played, worked or grew up there. But my problem with this is based off the vids the Habs have put out on the draft. While Timmins had the final say, it's a debate between the regional scouts. So if it's Smith vs Poirier then you would have Turek and Audette both presenting their case for said player. Then Boisvert would give his take on the two. Then Lapointe/Bobrov would have to weigh in with Gorton and Hughes looking on. So who in this list would just go with the player they know because you say Smith would have the upper hand because the scouts know him but the regional scouts are going to know both players the majority of time since it's not like there's a ton of players draft eligible in one region.

I guess my problem is it just doesn't make any sense since there are going to be a room full of scouts all looking to do the best job they can so they can keep doing this. I'm sure back in the day there were many scouts that say didn't want to draft a player from certain leagues or various reasons but today with video scouting it's extremely rare that the room full of scouts won't have access to lots of video of said players.

We are getting close.

Let's put it that way:
If the team think Poirier is the better pick, they will take Poirier all the time.
If the team think Smith is the better pick, they will take Smith all the time.
If the team think Smith and Poirier are equivalent and interchangeable, they will go with Smith most of the time.

Not because the Smith kid is anglo-saxon or whatever, but because they scout more intensively in Smith's league (easier to sell the pick) and because they have a better inner-track in Smith's league (they trust the intel they get from there more). It doesn't mean they will never take a gamble on a Poirier, it's just going to be less frequent.

 

[SergeConstantin74]

 

[montreal]

but because they scout more intensively in Smith's league (easier to sell the pick) and because they have a better inner-track in Smith's league (they trust the intel they get from there more)

ok I see what you are saying but just don't agree because they would have scouted both leagues. 1 scout could watch 200-300 games a year, so with a room full of scouts, it's going to be hard pressed that several of them have seen said prospects though.

But ask yourself this, if you are in the business of scouting, why would they scout one league over another more extensively?

 

[OnTheRun]

ok I see what you are saying but just don't agree because they would have scouted both leagues. 1 scout could watch 200-300 games a year, so with a room full of scouts, it's going to be hard pressed that several of them have seen said prospects though.

But ask yourself this, if you are in the business of scouting, why would they scout one league over another more extensively?

Because ultimately, time still remain a finite resources. And you're looking at the range of picks where a team won't shy away from picking the son of someone working for the org, they are doing their best to find the next "Mark Stone" but they also know from the get go they are simply more likely to end up with the next "Joe Rogalski".

 

[montreal]

Because ultimately, time still remain a finite resources. And you're looking at the range of picks where a team won't shy away from picking the son of someone working for the org, they are doing their best to find the next "Mark Stone" but they also know from the get go they are simply more likely to end up with the next "Joe Rogalski".

But with so many scouts and video scouting, that just doesn't fly imo.

 

[OnTheRun]

But with so many scouts and video scouting, that just doesn't fly imo.

It's not like anyone in the room is willing to bet their house on Jeff Smith, Simon Poirier or Mirko Hoeff from Germany becoming the next 6~7 round wonder either. It's that by nature most of your gambles are going to come from the place you know the most.

 

[montreal]

It's not like anyone in the room is willing to bet their house on Jeff Smith, Simon Poirier or Mirko Hoeff from Germany becoming the next 6~7 round wonder either. It's that by nature most of your gambles are going to come from the place you know the most.

again just sounds like nonsense to me. I think you are 100% wrong on the comment about no one willing to bet their house on Jeff Smith, Poirier, etc.. the later rounds are the regional scouts time to shine, so of course those guys will push for the player they know because you going to have one scout pushing for Smith because that's who he knows, one scout pushing for Poirier cause that's who he knows, and one scout pushing for Hoeff cause that's who he knows. It's now like the scout that just scouts the Q, will push for a kid from the DEL cause he's not going to have seen him.

So unless you are talking about lesser scouted places like say Norway, that would make sense in your example if they didn't get to see said prospect.