Harry Kakalovich
Like and reply
Those are public tiers in media. Organizations will have very different and much more focused opinions.
HF Habs: 2024 NHL Draft Thread
- Thread starter MarkovsKnee
- Start date
- Status
Habs Halifax
Loyal Habs Fan
le_sean
Registered User
- Oct 21, 2006
- 41,634
- 44,428
Of course. It’s not like NHL teams rank players by tiers and just close their eyes and point to a name. But I think you can make an argument for a lot of players that could go 2nd overall.
Harry Kakalovich
Like and reply
SannywithoutCompy
Registered User
- Dec 22, 2020
- 2,381
- 4,406
Don't get me wrong, I love Iggy and have him 6th, but I don't think you can genuinely evaluate whether or not someone has "fire in their eyes", and how much of an impact that would even have.
McGees
Registered User
- Jun 15, 2016
- 13,494
- 26,832
YouTube scout:
I have him at a 3/5 fire in the eyes.
The good thing is that there are fire in the eye coaches and that’s something that the player can work on to at least get to a fire in the eyes league average so I’m not too worried.
Habs Halifax
Loyal Habs Fan
Same reply as the last post. One layer of context among many. It's not something to completely ignore or over put lots of focus on. Are you telling me it means nothing? 0%? Sure. I don't think it's a 0% factor.
Focus is one of the things I evaluate. ONE of MANY things. You're not going to draft Iggy on his fire eyes alone bud. It's just a side context possibly showing how focused he is. Trying to dig into how competitive the player is and how obsessed the player is at improving is of value with me. Watching them read into the play is one area to evaluate and it's not just with the eyes/focus. It could be their tempo or other things.
Watch this carry on for a entire page now.
.
Last edited:
WeThreeKings
Demidov is a HAB
I certainly don't have major convictions on a lot of prospects in this draft.
Celebrini has got a high ceiling and a high floor, San Jose got lucky here.
My #2 is Demidov, but you are lying to yourself if you think it's a comfortable feeling to take a guy that talented without dynamic skating, a game we've never really seen much of at the NHL level, and being stuck playing at the MHL level again this year. The lack of viewings against professionals makes it hard to be definitive on his upside and the skating is very Hutson-esque.
My #3 is Catton, but I'm not convinced he's a center. I'm not so concerned about the size but he is sleight, so how he plays in the playoffs at the NHL level will be a question. He's got a lot of great skills and tools, but the motor and defense went in and out which can be explained by the late injury and the high minutes he played, but the high minutes also could inflate his production, as well.
My #4 is Lindstrom, but I'm not convinced he's a center. The health issues are a ? that we can't answer so it's just a variable we have to put outside the scope of our armchair evaluations. The skill level and shot are great, he's an exceptional athlete but the sample size of top 5 level play is very small and the skating stride is effective but odd.
My #5 is Sennecke, but the production took off when Ritchie got back off his injury. Now there's reasons why that would be the case as he had a massive growth spurt and getting your coordination and figuring out your game at that new size, as a teenager can be tough. Will his style of play work in the NHL? Can he adapt? Was it a prolonged hot streak or a legitimate high upward trajectory?
My #6 is Parekh, but he's not the biggest guy out there similar build to Catton and there are some skating things, his defense is suspect at best. His shot will play but is there enough of a playmaking game to support that?
My #7 is Dickinson, left hand shot, how much better will be compared to Guhle? He's got a lot of the same elements with the big differentiator being that he has a bigger and heavier shot.
My #8 is Levshunov, is he so advanced physically that he might have plateaud? Are the IQ issues a result of being relatively new to hockey or just not a smart defender?
My #9 is Iginla, but I worry he's just prime Gallagher. A great player to have but there's limitations and is that a 5 overall prospect? Great shot, inside drive, good puck protection but the puck handling goes in and out, he has trouble making passes that he needs to make to be a dual threat and can his style of play be maintained over 82 games with his good but not great size?
My #10 is Buium, very similar to Hutson. Great numbers but on a stacked team. Defense is still suspect and I don't know if his offense will translate to the NHL, Hutson did make that move look easy in 2 games but that's a small sample size. I'd not take him for the Habs as if Hutson makes it, we already have him, if he fails, Buium looks destined to fail too.
Celebrini has got a high ceiling and a high floor, San Jose got lucky here.
My #2 is Demidov, but you are lying to yourself if you think it's a comfortable feeling to take a guy that talented without dynamic skating, a game we've never really seen much of at the NHL level, and being stuck playing at the MHL level again this year. The lack of viewings against professionals makes it hard to be definitive on his upside and the skating is very Hutson-esque.
My #3 is Catton, but I'm not convinced he's a center. I'm not so concerned about the size but he is sleight, so how he plays in the playoffs at the NHL level will be a question. He's got a lot of great skills and tools, but the motor and defense went in and out which can be explained by the late injury and the high minutes he played, but the high minutes also could inflate his production, as well.
My #4 is Lindstrom, but I'm not convinced he's a center. The health issues are a ? that we can't answer so it's just a variable we have to put outside the scope of our armchair evaluations. The skill level and shot are great, he's an exceptional athlete but the sample size of top 5 level play is very small and the skating stride is effective but odd.
My #5 is Sennecke, but the production took off when Ritchie got back off his injury. Now there's reasons why that would be the case as he had a massive growth spurt and getting your coordination and figuring out your game at that new size, as a teenager can be tough. Will his style of play work in the NHL? Can he adapt? Was it a prolonged hot streak or a legitimate high upward trajectory?
My #6 is Parekh, but he's not the biggest guy out there similar build to Catton and there are some skating things, his defense is suspect at best. His shot will play but is there enough of a playmaking game to support that?
My #7 is Dickinson, left hand shot, how much better will be compared to Guhle? He's got a lot of the same elements with the big differentiator being that he has a bigger and heavier shot.
My #8 is Levshunov, is he so advanced physically that he might have plateaud? Are the IQ issues a result of being relatively new to hockey or just not a smart defender?
My #9 is Iginla, but I worry he's just prime Gallagher. A great player to have but there's limitations and is that a 5 overall prospect? Great shot, inside drive, good puck protection but the puck handling goes in and out, he has trouble making passes that he needs to make to be a dual threat and can his style of play be maintained over 82 games with his good but not great size?
My #10 is Buium, very similar to Hutson. Great numbers but on a stacked team. Defense is still suspect and I don't know if his offense will translate to the NHL, Hutson did make that move look easy in 2 games but that's a small sample size. I'd not take him for the Habs as if Hutson makes it, we already have him, if he fails, Buium looks destined to fail too.
Ozmodiar
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2017
- 6,216
- 7,509
Hannibal
Fear the Weber
- Feb 11, 2007
- 10,754
- 8,005
I dont know who you can compare Iggy to Gallagher lol…
Iggy is already bigger, way better shot catalog, way better release, better puck protection, his edges are 10 times better than Gally.
Wtf?
Iggy is already bigger, way better shot catalog, way better release, better puck protection, his edges are 10 times better than Gally.
Wtf?
A few weeks ago I almost called him a "forward version of Hutson" when someone asked a description of Demidov. Good to see I'm not the only one who see it.
le_sean
Registered User
- Oct 21, 2006
- 41,634
- 44,428
The edges are similar. So is the lack of high end speed. He’s slippery but he won’t be beating defenders in puck races.
WeThreeKings
Demidov is a HAB
Like don't get me wrong, I'd be over the moon if we managed to get Demidov.. the point is that, the minute you feel completely convinced on any of these guys without asking questions of them, I think you are making a mistake.
Pretty much every prospect has a wart, you just need to do the best you can to figure out if that something matters or not.
SannywithoutCompy
Registered User
- Dec 22, 2020
- 2,381
- 4,406
I think Buium's offense gets overrated and his defense gets underrated. I don't think he's Parekh level offensively, but I think he's possibly the best defensively of the big 6, even above Dickinson who makes more mistakes defensively at this stage of his development.
Yup. You just swap the column(s) where you put the ? on your grid ranking sheet. And the combine interviews will give most of the answers to how the ? can be handled going forwards.
That's why I'm not feeling anything special about whomever gets taken with #5. Habs will do their homework to make sure they can get the most out of the prospect they select.
Redux91
I do Three bullets.
Like clockwork lol
And because Lindstrom and Catton didn't play U18 , they should drop and tumble down the rankings lol
WeThreeKings
Demidov is a HAB
Imagine how insane that U18 team would have been if those two kids got to go?
sampollock
Registered User
CanadienShark
Registered User
- Dec 18, 2012
- 39,566
- 13,990
It's one of those deals that neither side will like. Habs fans like the progression from Mailloux. Sharks fans want to swing the fences for higher perceived upside.
Plus, they’re are a LOT of personal favorites it seems.
For example, those that like Yakemchuk; they f***ing LOVE Yakemchuk. Sennecke will have his own stans, so will Parekh.
This thing will be all over the place
Trabdy2
Registered User
- Nov 30, 2018
- 552
- 696
Sennecke's game feels so raw to me, but the impressive tools and playmaking ability makes me imagine how special he could be in the NHL if his game matures. With the right development in the right hands, he could become the second best forward in the draft, but without the right progression he could be a player who perpetually tries to maintain a second line role in the NHL without a "B" game to fall back on in the bottom six. I find it really hard to project him. There's a very high ceiling and a very low floor.
SannywithoutCompy
Registered User
- Dec 22, 2020
- 2,381
- 4,406
He's someone you take if either
A) you absolutely believe in your development team to get the most out of his tools. If this were the Bergevin era and we took him it would be a huge mistake. Now I have some faith we could make him that player.
B) you are stacked on forward prospects and can afford to swing on the upside. A team like Buffalo, for example, could do that.
Seb
All we are is Dustin Byfuglien
- Jul 15, 2006
- 17,752
- 13,951
I don't think it's fair to say Iginla can be "just a prime Gallagher". His shot and skills are kilometers (screw you americans) better than Gallagher. He's closer to Marchand than he is to Gallagher.
WeThreeKings
Demidov is a HAB
His shot is better but he's not better around the net than Gallagher is/was currently. There's no perfect comparisons to be made, I'm just talking about a shoot first, pretty much shoot only, player, with no real playmaking game and a similar approach to scoring.
I can't get the Marchand comparison where Marchand's playmaking game is much better and further advanced, the puck skills are better and he's got a defensive game/PK game I don't see in Tij currently.
The bolded needs to be said more often around here. People make the mistake of acting like BPA is a unanimous thing, some posters need to be reminded that BPA is a subjective thing.
- Status
