HF Habs: 2024 NHL Draft Thread

[26Mats]

What is BPA though because it's not clear cut at all.

Taking last year as an example.

Most people thought at 2 that Fantilli was BPA. I thought it was Carlsson. Anaheim took Carlsson at 2.

Did they take BPA?

Yes, one can almost never be sure. Hopefully the scouting team's method for coming up with a projected BPA is a good one. If it isn't that's a problem.

I sure as hell don't have a good method. It's not my area of expertise, nor am I well enough informed about the prospects each year.

 

[Michoulicious]

I think Yakemchuk is a top defenseman in
If you go up there and say ok we have Yakemchuk as the top guy on our board - but there's a tougher path to integrate him and he isn't a massive upgrade over Mailloux who is closer to the NHL, while we have Catton who is a spot lower on our list, but doesn't have any barriers in the system and would immediately be the top center on a Laval team, were he eligible.. it makes way more logical sense to take Catton than the guy at the top of your board.

The point many (like me) are trying to make is that if a D like Yakemchuk is over Catton on your list when you draft #5-7 OA, you should draft the D, because he's the BPA.

That high in the draft you should always go BPA.

You seem to think it applies only to talents like Celebrini, but I personally think it should be applied to every pick in that range.

If your scouts tell you the Ds is superior, you take the D. If they say it is the forward, you take the forward.

Need should not even be in the conversation there.

Later in the draft? Sure.

Yup, that's fair

We're still taking F tho lol

If Bobrov and co think the forward is better than the D where we pick, I have no problem with it.

 

[WeThreeKings]

The point many (like me) are trying to make is that if a D like Yakemchuk is over Catton on your list when you draft #5-7 OA, you should draft the D, because he's the BPA.

That high in the draft you should always go BPA.

You seem to think it applies only to talents like Celebrini, but I personally think it should be applied to every pick in that range.

If your scouts tell you the Ds is superior, you take the D. If they say it is the forward, you take the forward.

Need should not even be in the conversation there.

Later in the draft? Sure.


If Bobrov and co think the forward is better than the D where we pick, I have no problem with it.

But what I am saying is that if you have Yakemchuk as the top player on your list and you have Catton as the next player on the list. Both players are in the same tier, I.E. you project Yakemchuk as a top 4 defenseman and Catton as a top 6 forward.

It's not as easy just say pluck the top guy from your list, they are in the same tier, you are evaluating them as relative equals and you are looking for things to split the difference and decide who you take on the draft floor.

The likelihood is that just like Reinbacher vs. Leonard, is that Catton WOULD be ahead of Yakemchuk on their list because they would identify that Catton would add something to the team and prospect pool that is widely missing.. while Yakemchuk just adds to the log jam that is already there.

You'd have to project Yakemchuk as definitively better than any other defenseman or defense prospect on your team to realistically make that pick.. and I don't think anyone is going to make that convincing of an argument.

There's a CLEAR hole in the top 6 of our forward group.. we are trying to figure out how to manage the amount of defenseman we have NOW and we haven't even brought over Hutson, Engstrom, Reinbacher and Konyushkov yet.

 

[WinterLion]

Basu and Godin discuss this very thing in their latest notebook.

Long story short they basically agree with me, and expect the Canadiens to take a forward. That the Habs brass do consider team building, roster construction, etc. When picking in the top end of the first round.

Most of the argument will be rendered moot because if the BPAs are defenseman, and defenseman are valued highly in the draft, more so than wingers, and we know the teams around us all lack defenseman in their pool, the chances of a forward run ahead of us is very low.

Yeah trading definitely makes sense if BPA is D... assuming you have a forward you think will have an equal impact. The D will be sought after!

 

[Michoulicious]

But what I am saying is that if you have Yakemchuk as the top player on your list and you have Catton as the next player on the list. Both players are in the same tier, I.E. you project Yakemchuk as a top 4 defenseman and Catton as a top 6 forward.

It's not as easy just say pluck the top guy from your list, they are in the same tier, you are evaluating them as relative equals and you are looking for things to split the difference and decide who you take on the draft floor.

The likelihood is that just like Reinbacher vs. Leonard, is that Catton WOULD be ahead of Yakemchuk on their list because they would identify that Catton would add something to the team and prospect pool that is widely missing.. while Yakemchuk just adds to the log jam that is already there.

You'd have to project Yakemchuk as definitively better than any other defenseman or defense prospect on your team to realistically make that pick.. and I don't think anyone is going to make that convincing of an argument.

There's a CLEAR hole in the top 6 of our forward group.. we are trying to figure out how to manage the amount of defenseman we have NOW and we haven't even brought over Hutson, Engstrom, Reinbacher and Konyushkov yet.

Yet I think we are repeating ourselves here, so that is my last post.

If your scouts place the D before and pick at #5-6 OA, you pick the D.

Scouts will put tremendous amount of discussion in that list, especially that high. Not going to the list and rationalizing it with "tiers" and "needs" is how you draft a Kotkaniemi.

 

[SannywithoutCompy]

Why pick the 5th best forward in the 2023 draft when you can have the best defenceman? You also never know what kind of 2023-24 season you will have. They might even win the lottery for all we know.

And while there’s some good RD available in this draft, none of them really profile like Reinbacher, the top guys (Levshunov, Parekh, Yakemchuk) are all more offensive and IMO not as strong in defensive potential as Reinbacher.

That presupposes that the value of the top tier of defensemen and forwards in a given draft is equal when it isn't always the case (and IMO certainly wasn't last year where Reinbacher was maybe the 10th best prospect in the draft and we passed on the 2nd best).

In 2015 for example the 5th best forward in a redraft would be...Eichel or Kaprizov. The best defenseman would be Werenski or Chabot. Who would you rather have? The 5th best forward or the best defenseman?

 

[WeThreeKings]

Yet I think we are repeating ourselves here, so that is my last post.

If your scouts place the D before and pick at #5-6 OA, you pick the D.

Scouts will put tremendous amount of discussion in that list, especially that high. Not going to the list and rationalizing it with "tiers" and "needs" is how you draft a Kotkaniemi.

And chances are the Habs will have a forward at the top of their board because their philosophy has already shown they weigh everything in their decision.

 

[WinterLion]

And chances are the Habs will have a forward at the top of their board because their philosophy has already shown they weigh everything in their decision.

I feel like they are going to be big on Lindstrom, Demidov and Iginla in terms of forwards... but I may be projecting

 

[WeThreeKings]

I feel like they are going to be big on Lindstrom, Demidov and Iginla in terms of forwards... but I may be projecting

My hopes is Catton in that third spot of forwards.. he's been unreal, especially lately. Pace, deception, using his great release.. he'd really be a zone entry machine for us and inflate some point totals.

Iginla has been rising but I don't see him as a driver the way Catton is and I think the Habs need one more driver.

 

[le_sean]

That presupposes that the value of the top tier of defensemen and forwards in a given draft is equal when it isn't always the case (and IMO certainly wasn't last year where Reinbacher was maybe the 10th best prospect in the draft and we passed on the 2nd best).

In 2015 for example the 5th best forward in a redraft would be...Eichel or Kaprizov. The best defenseman would be Werenski or Chabot. Who would you rather have? The 5th best forward or the best defenseman?

I gave you a reason why Reinbacher would possibly be the top RD taken in this draft. He brings a complete package that the ones in this draft don’t.

We didn’t pass on the 2nd best player in the draft. Unless you think the league in which Chris Wideman won best defenceman is good.

 

[1000eeer]

My february top 15:

1- Celebrini
2- Lindstrom
3- Demidov
4- Dickinson
5- Eiserman
6- Levshunov
7- Silayev
8- Ignila
9 - Buium
10- Parekh
11- Catton
12- Brandsegg-Nygard
13- Ritchie
14 - Helenius
15- Greentree

 

[SannywithoutCompy]

I gave you a reason why Reinbacher would possibly be the top RD taken in this draft. He brings a complete package that the ones in this draft don’t.

We didn’t pass on the 2nd best player in the draft. Unless you think the league in which Chris Wideman won best defenceman is good.

I think you've missed my point, which is that justifying a pick by saying he's the best in the draft at his position is flawed logic.

As for your second point, I do think the 2nd best league in the world is good. I'd also say that's throwing stones from glass houses when the best defenceman in the Swiss league last year was Henrik Tömmernes.

 

[le_sean]

I think you've missed my point, which is that justifying a pick by saying he's the best in the draft at his position is flawed logic.

As for your second point, I do think the 2nd best league in the world is good. I'd also say that's throwing stones from glass houses when the best defenceman in the Swiss league last year was Henrik Tömmernes.

It’s not the 2nd best league in the world anymore. It isn’t 2005.

 

[SannywithoutCompy]

It’s not the 2nd best league in the world anymore. It isn’t 2005.

Agree to disagree. Point remains that justifying a pick by someone being the best in their draft at that position is how you get Jack Campbell in the top 15.

 

[le_sean]

Agree to disagree. Point remains that justifying a pick by someone being the best in their draft at that position is how you get Jack Campbell in the top 15.

I wouldn’t equate goaltenders with skaters.

You’re the one with the flawed logic, bringing up Eichel who went 2nd overall and Kaprizov who went in the 5th round. Neither were really options if a team is picking around 5. We are talking the day of the draft, not 7 years later.

 

[SannywithoutCompy]

I wouldn’t equate goaltenders with skaters.

You’re the one with the flawed logic, bringing up Eichel who went 2nd overall and Kaprizov who went in the 5th round. Neither were really options if a team is picking around 5. We are talking the day of the draft, not 7 years later.

Great, Rantanen over Provorov or Werenski then. Pick your poison.

 

[le_sean]

Great, Rantanen over Provorov or Werenski then. Pick your poison.

I notice you say Rantanen but ignore Zacha and Crouse. Funny. Also Hanifin was the top defenceman that draft, another funny thing to ignore.

You saying you’d rather Pavel Zacha than Noah Hanifin? That’s the exact position the Habs were in.

 

[SannywithoutCompy]

I notice you say Rantanen but ignore Zacha and Crouse. Funny. Also Hanifin was the top defenceman that draft, another funny thing to ignore.

You saying you’d rather Pavel Zacha than Noah Hanifin? That’s the exact position the Habs were in.

I'm saying I preferred the small Russian who dropped for silly reasons to the "surefire" two way top pairing D.

 

[Jaynki]

I'm saying I preferred the small Russian who dropped for silly reasons to the "surefire" two way top pairing D.

What are those silly reasons?

 

[montreal]

Therein lies the problem: who constitutes the BPA is not a universal certainty. There is no devinely imposed list. Left or right handed, some didn’t view Reinbacher as the BPA at 5OA.

A wise manager should not allow short term organizational needs unduly affect their choice this high in the draft.

BPA to me is like someone that molds clay. If you have a lump of clay, 99% of the people that walk past it would just see a lump of clay but the artist sees what that lump of clay is once you take away all the excess. But I also look at it as current BPA and final BPA. Because there are so many factors/variables, you have to look at the draft as who is BPA now vs who might be BPA in 10 years which of course is the toughest thing to do.

I watched Anders Lee when he was 15 years old playing for STA and I said then this kid is going to be a force in the NHL as he played a power game. He went undrafted his first year because teams were scared he would go the NFL route as he was a top rated QB in Minnesota but the next year he left STA and went to a power house in Minnesota USHS in Edina and made it known he was only interested in playing hockey in the NCAA. I yelled at my tv screen every time were we able to pick him as I wanted us to get him so badly.

So to me he was BPA but the problem is one person can't scout 100/200+ kids so you then need a team of people that you can trust that can spot BPA's in their group. There's just so much that needs to go into finding the BPA.

 

[ChesterNimitz]

BPA to me is like someone that molds clay. If you have a lump of clay, 99% of the people that walk past it would just see a lump of clay but the artist sees what that lump of clay is once you take away all the excess. But I also look at it as current BPA and final BPA. Because there are so many factors/variables, you have to look at the draft as who is BPA now vs who might be BPA in 10 years which of course is the toughest thing to do.

I watched Anders Lee when he was 15 years old playing for STA and I said then this kid is going to be a force in the NHL as he played a power game. He went undrafted his first year because teams were scared he would go the NFL route as he was a top rated QB in Minnesota but the next year he left STA and went to a power house in Minnesota USHS in Edina and made it known he was only interested in playing hockey in the NCAA. I yelled at my tv screen every time were we able to pick him as I wanted us to get him so badly.

So to me he was BPA but the problem is one person can't scout 100/200+ kids so you then need a team of people that you can trust that can spot BPA's in their group. There's just so much that needs to go into finding the BPA.

If it was easy, no one would ever miss on a draft choice. Everyone would be a contender.

But alas, such is not reality.

 

[SannywithoutCompy]

What are those silly reasons?

Perceived attitude problems, a contract that ends in 2026.

 

[Anardil]

I think that the Habs will again try another Romanov style trade at the draft, now that they have obtained a 2nd first round pick, especially if the player that they were targeting with their 1st pick (forward?) is gone.

It might justify choosing a D, to replace the D traded. I just hope that the potential trade isn't for Zegras.

 

[PavelBrendl]

Given what they said when they drafted Slaf, “we went with size now so we don’t have to go with size later” would bode well for targeting a Demidov or Catton type of player over a Lindstrom or Greentree.

 

[WeThreeKings]

Given what they said when they drafted Slaf, “we went with size now so we don’t have to go with size later” would bode well for targeting a Demidov or Catton type of player over a Lindstrom or Greentree.

They won't reach on Greentree. They definitely like Lindstrom though. Which, go for it, they are doing fantastic with Slafkovsky.