HF Habs: 2023 NHL Draft part 2

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree. Overvaluing hockey IQ, and overdramatizing over a perceived lack of hockey IQ has been the cause of my worst misses. I mean, sure it seems like I was right about Broberg and Podkolzin, but I was wrong about K'Andre Miller and Cozens. IQ is important, and affects the outcome, the best players have the most of it, and the busts often lack it, but it's just a trait like all the others.
Heck, Montréal's most iconic player, #9, was not the birghtest bulb on and off the ice. Ovechkin, arguably the best player or of his generation, is not a great mastermind or strategist, just a bull in a china shop.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NotProkofievian
Don't think Wright is a great shooter at all. Tavares changed his Wright-like shooting motion because he was not precise enough, Wright has to change his motion as well.

Don't think so. It's the only think that's transferred so far. He has other things to worry about.
 
Heck, Montréal's most iconic player, #9, was not the birghtest bulb on and off the ice. Ovechkin, arguably the best player or of his generation, is not a great mastermind or strategist, just a bull in a china shop.
Thats you mistaking IQ and like... I dont know what. You dont become as good as 8 and 9 without IQ. Ovechkins IQ shines when he gets open, he plays to his strength a lot, its not all him standing around and shooting, though there is a lot of that.

Richard is too far removed for me to comment but I highly doubt he didnt have st least above average IQ
 
Don't think so. It's the only think that's transferred so far. He has other things to worry about.

He adapted his shooting motion already, which is why it transferred.

But the rest man, it just seems like he lost 'it'. I think he'll be a good NHLer but it really doesn't seem super farfetched at this point that there won't be a gulf between him and someone like Owen Beck.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SOLR
Thats you mistaking IQ and like... I dont know what. You dont become as good as 8 and 9 without IQ. Ovechkins IQ shines when he gets open, he plays to his strength a lot, its not all him standing around and shooting, though there is a lot of that.

Richard is too far removed for me to comment but I highly doubt he didnt have st least above average IQ

Ovechkin's game makes me think of this Bill Burr bit



''Why didn't I think of that!?''

He adapted his shooting motion already, which is why it transferred.

But the rest man, it just seems like he lost 'it'. I think he'll be a good NHLer but it really doesn't seem super farfetched at this point that there won't be a gulf between him and someone like Owen Beck.

His range is ''polarized'' now. Either he fixes what people didn't like about his game and he becomes a really good NHLer, or he doesn't and he comes and plays for my local team HIFK.
 
Heck, Montréal's most iconic player, #9, was not the birghtest bulb on and off the ice. Ovechkin, arguably the best player or of his generation, is not a great mastermind or strategist, just a bull in a china shop.

Shooters can be high IQs as well. IQ is a programmable thing; these 2 programmed their patterns to use their speed, strength and power to great goal-scoring effect. And then, when you become good enough at X, you become relied upon for it, which basically reinforces learning.

It generally happens in the development curve where the kid becomes strong at 13-14 at multiple standards of deviation over their peer. So they don't need a pass, they can just go score and they don't need to pass because they can score better than any teammates. Caufield isn't like that, he has to deploy all of his thinking in being in the right place and hitting the right part of the net (precision). IQ is just an optimization device. Caufield relies on having another high-IQ player create the space and getting him the puck.
 
Many aspects of the game are conflated into hockey IQ. The term is often trivialized.

Ovechkin is a mastermind at finding soft spots, but I wouldn't say he's the guy you expect to see systematically checking a guy who's a pass away from getting the puck. He'll react to that, not anticipate.
 
Thats you mistaking IQ and like... I dont know what. You dont become as good as 8 and 9 without IQ. Ovechkins IQ shines when he gets open, he plays to his strength a lot, its not all him standing around and shooting, though there is a lot of that.

Richard is too far removed for me to comment but I highly doubt he didnt have st least above average IQ

Shooters can be high IQs as well. IQ is a programmable thing; these 2 programmed their patterns to use their speed, strength and power to great goal-scoring effect. And then, when you become good enough at X, you become relied upon for it, which basically reinforces learning.

It generally happens in the development curve where the kid becomes strong at 13-14 at multiple standards of deviation over their peer. So they don't need a pass, they can just go score and they don't need to pass because they can score better than any teammates. Caufield isn't like that, he has to deploy all of his thinking in being in the right place and hitting the right part of the net (precision). IQ is just an optimization device. Caufield relies on having another high-IQ player create the space and getting him the puck.
I'm not saying they were brain-damaged, they obviously need to have at least average IQ to have been this dominant, but it's their physical attributes (including shot) and fearlessness that shone the most during their respective career. NP's point was that IQ is important, but so are skating, physicality, hands, etc. Good players can't rely on one or few attributes, they need to excel in some of them or be average/above-average in everything.

The inital conversation was about Slaf vs Dvorsky and how the latter wasn't superior even if he has better IQ, because JS's whole package gives him an edge.
 
20230524_113040.jpg
 
Thats you mistaking IQ and like... I dont know what. You dont become as good as 8 and 9 without IQ. Ovechkins IQ shines when he gets open, he plays to his strength a lot, its not all him standing around and shooting, though there is a lot of that.

Richard is too far removed for me to comment but I highly doubt he didnt have st least above average IQ
Exactly... Sports is about reading the play and anticipating what will develop and where to be to take advantage of that.
1 step in the right or wrong direction is a difference maker on 90% of goals scored.
Sports IQ is different from life IQ.
 

Their mock draft gives us :

5 Smith

31 Dragicevic/32 Nadeau

37 Hrabal

I'm cool with that
5- Smith

31/32 : Willander or Bonk

37 : Price / Haltunen

Smith + Willander + Haltunen would be awesome!
 
Can someone give me a compelling argument as to why Smith doesn't turn into Drouin?

Can someone give me a compelling argument why Cristall does?
I don’t really see a Smith to Drouin comp at all, Drouin was a winger who’s best asset was his skating.

I also think when discussing the Drouin outcome, it needs to be acknowledged his development derailed due to mental health issues. Drouin went from playing with such energy in junior to playing like his dog just died in the NHL.

How would you compare Dvorsky to Wright? Wright's pedigree is much more impressive at this point, but as he seems to plateau since his 15yo season, I'm not sure he's actually a better prospect. I think their traits are pretty similar: Wright's a better skater but not by much, probably has better vision as well, but Dvorsky is definitely more intense.

My point is, with 1 year of hindsight, do we really want a Wright 2.0? Obviously I'm oversymplifiying things here, and I know most of us wanted him last year, but aren't most of Wright's flaws also attributable to Dvorsky?
Wright is hardly a confirmed bust.

But also they aren’t that similar. Dvorsky is highly competitive and much more physically engaged which if Wright busts will be for that reason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jaynki
Can someone give me a compelling argument as to why Smith doesn't turn into Drouin?

Can someone give me a compelling argument why Cristall does?
Can give an opinion on your first question. Drouin doesn’t score goals. Smith is a goal scoring machine. Drouin´s shot is a muffin. Smith’s is a bullet that is very accurate. Drouin scores little up close around the net. Smith is deadly and can lift the puck that’s 9 inches from the goalie pad and place it where he wants both on his forehand and backhand, while being slashed or cross checked.

Smith will burn the goalie with his puck or his sauce. Goalies barely give a glimpse to Drouin. He won’t shoot. His passmate will. Smith is the top dog on his line with great leadership, he directs Leonard and Perreault´s positioning and play. Drouin seems a bit of a head case.
 
Last edited:
Can give an opinion on your first question. Drouin doesn’t score goals. Smith is a goal scoring machine. Drouin´s shot is a muffin. Smith’s is a bullet that is very accurate. Drouin scores little up close around the net. Smith is deadly and can lift the puck that’s 9 inches from the goalie of where both on his forehand and backhand, while being slashed or cross checked.

Smith will burn them with his puck or his sauce. Goalies barely give a glimpse to Drouin. He won’t shoot. His passmate will. Smith is the top dog, with great leadership, he orders Leonard and Perreault around. Drouin seems a bit of a head case.
Im not sure i see Smith in the same way you do and I think youre using the 30 yo broken down version of Drouin to compare them, which ie a bit unfair if were honest. I mean, you dont score almost a gpg in your Q career if that is true.
 
I agree. Overvaluing hockey IQ, and overdramatizing over a perceived lack of hockey IQ has been the cause of my worst misses. I mean, sure it seems like I was right about Broberg and Podkolzin, but I was wrong about K'Andre Miller and Cozens. IQ is important, and affects the outcome, the best players have the most of it, and the busts often lack it, but it's just a trait like all the others.
To me IQ just means “this player is good at a bunch of things but it’s hard for me to my finger on exactly what”. It becomes a catchall when the skill doesn’t fall easily into skating/shooting/passing/physicality/etc. I think this is an area that advanced stats can help since they help quantify skills at a more granular level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ReHabs and Toene
I'm not saying they were brain-damaged, they obviously need to have at least average IQ to have been this dominant, but it's their physical attributes (including shot) and fearlessness that shone the most during their respective career. NP's point was that IQ is important, but so are skating, physicality, hands, etc. Good players can't rely on one or few attributes, they need to excel in some of them or be average/above-average in everything.

The inital conversation was about Slaf vs Dvorsky and how the latter wasn't superior even if he has better IQ, because JS's whole package gives him an edge.
If Slav had Dvorsky IQ he would be Malkin - ie there is an IQ component in goal-scoring level like Ovechkin and Richard, it's just optimized for that task - both were way above average IQ players who used the tools at their disposal for the task they focused on.

Richard even coached the Habs, as proof of a well-rounded, high-IQ individual.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: phillytennis
Im not sure i see Smith in the same way you do and I think youre using the 30 yo broken down version of Drouin to compare them, which ie a bit unfair if were honest. I mean, you dont score almost a gpg in your Q career if that is true.
I remember when Drouin was coming up and his WJC U-20 performance. My memory was he was very fast, an awesome passer, McKinnon was the shooter. He was a pass first player back then too. But sometimes in Juniors if you play with solid linemates you can pile up goals by finishing plays against 5’11 goalies with poor technique.
 
To me IQ just means “this player is good at a bunch of things but it’s hard for me to my finger on exactly what”. It becomes a catchall when the skill doesn’t fall easily into skating/shooting/passing/physicality/etc. I think this is an area that advanced stats can help since they help quantify skills at a more granular level.
Been waiting for an unforced errors/60 column for years.

Missed coverage without turnovers preceded by it/60

Puck staring/60

1NDhvsH.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: SOLR
We need a Foward elite and a Top #1 defense

Smith and ASP should be the target.
Go all in trying to get thoses 2,
#32 + #37 + #69 + Kidney for ASP ?
 
  • Wow
Reactions: waitin425
Brzustiwicz is often ranked mid to late 2nd round. I think he's a good target for 37th pick. He skated well, acceptable size, right handed, moves the puck. He looked good in games I watched this year.

If I had to pick a 2nd or 3rd round defenseman that I think will break out offensively next year (a la Ty Nelson) I think Brzustiwicz.
 
I remember when Drouin was coming up and his WJC U-20 performance. My memory was he was very fast, an awesome passer, McKinnon was the shooter. He was a pass first player back then too. But sometimes in Juniors if you play with solid linemates you can pile up goals by finishing plays against 5’11 goalies with poor technique.
I mean that definitely revionnist. Drouin had it all in juniors. Aside from Crosby, McDavid and Bedard he is one the most dominant junor players of the last 20 years. He played on an absolutely stacked team, but he was the top point getter for a reason.

Smith doesn't drive the play like Drouin did in juniors. Not even comparable.

Edit: people forget that 2013 was seen as a potential generational draft like 2003 at the time. It ended up having very little depth, but it was an absolutely stacked draft at the time. Barkov, Jones, Drouin, Lindholm were all incredible prospects on the level of Fantili, Michkov, Carlsson.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JAVO16 and Mrb1p
So many dumb takes saying that Slaf wouldnt even be a top 10 pick in this draft... He would be right there with Carlsson and Fantilli.
I had Slaf 7th last year, so while I'm sure he would go around there in this draft, I wouldn't select him there.

When I watch Slaf and I watch Wood, I know who I prefer, and it isn't Slaf.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad