Toggle sidebar

HF Habs: 2024 NHL Draft Thread

  • 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

Who do you want at #5?

  • Tij Iginla

    Votes: 209 49.5%

  • Cole Eiserman

    Votes: 14 3.3%

  • Berkly Catton

    Votes: 92 21.8%

  • Konsta Helenius

    Votes: 13 3.1%

  • Beckett Sennecke

    Votes: 75 17.8%

  • Zayne Parekh

    Votes: 19 4.5%
  • Total voters
    422
Status
Not open for further replies.
Reader mode
morhilane said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: habsfan891, Gustave, Trabdy2 and 2 others
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.
 
WeThreeKings said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SlafySZN and WeThreeKings
WeThreeKings said:
No, it's just funny that some people saw Iginla's round 1 and he was the flavor of the week, then they saw Buium in the frozen four games against Fowler/Hutson and he was the flavor of the week, now Dickinson has some excellent Memorial Cup games and he's the guy we need.
Click to expand...
Like clockwork lol

And because Lindstrom and Catton didn't play U18 , they should drop and tumble down the rankings lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: habsfan891, Trabdy2, Skip Bayless and 1 other person
le_sean said:
Yeah this isn’t like last year where you had Bedard as the top guy, then the 4 forwards clearly in Tier 2 and then about 5 players in Tier 3.

Tier 2 this time around genuinely has about 8-9 players.
Click to expand...
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
 
  • Like
Reactions: RandomTask26
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RandomTask26 and WeThreeKings
Trabdy2 said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Addik04 and Trabdy2
WeThreeKings said:
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?
Click to expand...

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.
 
Seb said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: habsfan891 and crosbyshow
Favster said:
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.
Click to expand...
I'd say the distinction would be when they go out after the draft and day they picked a guy based on a factor that wouldn't have anything to do with being BPA. E.g. centerman for Kotkaniemi, big for McCarron.
 
Trabdy2 said:
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.
Click to expand...
If I were a Habs scout pushing for him, my priority would be to show Adam Nicholas a video of Sennecke and have him explain to the rest of the staff what he could do with that type of player and skill set. I’d imagine Nicholas would see a player like that and his eyes would beam, there’s so much to refine and so much potential progression.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SlafySZN, habsfan891, BeliveauFan4ever and 2 others
WeThreeKings said:
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.
Click to expand...

Gallagher has no skill whatsoever. No shot, no speed, no puck handling, no playmaking ability. All he does (and he does it reaaaally well) is crash the net.

Iginla does know how to dangle, is great at puck possession, is a good skater and has IQ.

The only thing he and Gallagher have in common is their love for driving the net.

the sum of all of this makes Iginla a freaking interesting prospect and I would be incredibly happy if we picked him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Picaroon and bopeep
Favster said:
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.
Click to expand...
Totally. BPA just means let the scouts evaluate the players and that the gm doesn't draft based on position or need. Doesn't mean the scouts won't make mistakes, but don't limit their effectiveness by taking options out of their hands.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Favster
SannywithoutCompy said:
I'd say the distinction would be when they go out after the draft and day they picked a guy based on a factor that wouldn't have anything to do with being BPA. E.g. centerman for Kotkaniemi, big for McCarron.
Click to expand...
A case can be made for Kotkaniemi (personally I had Hughes as BPA there) but for all we know they had him as BPA. McCarron was a swing for the fences pick at 25 and he still has played nearly 200 NHL games which isn't bad for where he was picked. I have no problem with that pick.
 
Harry Kakalovich said:
Totally. BPA just means let the scouts evaluate the players and that the gm doesn't draft based on position or need. Doesn't mean the scouts won't make mistakes, but don't limit their effectiveness by taking options out of their hands.
Click to expand...
Yup and I understand what the intention of saying BPA is, it's based on the scouts list regardless of organizantional need and depth, but what is considered BPA from one team to the next will vary significantly. Sometimes we need to be reminded of that fact that's all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WeThreeKings and Harry Kakalovich
WeThreeKings said:
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.
Click to expand...
Not one bona fide C after Celebrini in that lot? To think that 4 Cs came off the board in last year’s draft and Habs fell just short.

We’re lacking in top 6 forwards and are porous at center and Dach is not a sure thing — where are they going to find a top 6 center if they keep getting trumped at the draft? It’s the toughest position to fill in hockey and teams that have cost controlled Cs are almost never making them available.

I get how we’re not drafting for need with a top pick which is why I wouldn’t be taken aback if the BPA were a D and then we could use one of our D (not Harris, Barron but someone that will hurt to trade) to land that coveted top 6 C. If the pick is a winger, then it might turn into a whole other trading scenario.

Unless Lindstrom is their BPA and the org believes he can be a C at the NHL level — and even at that, several things would need to line up for that to even happen.

Not a great time to get clarity.

However, it begs the question as to why we’re not seeing much more in depth analysis about how likely players who play center in the minors, are likely to remain centers at the NHL level and whether someone is conducting this exercise in anticipation of every draft. Maybe paywall articles or one of the annual draft guides? Seems to me that this is material info and it’s not getting enough attention.
 
Hannibal said:
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?
Click to expand...
I think the comparaison is the way he plays, competitive, some some spark and can just hit the edges and score by beating dmen with physique vs speed

Tbh, if Iginla ends up being a bigger and better skating version of Gallagher, that's a solid pick at 5.
 
Favster said:
Yup and I understand what the intention of saying BPA is, it's based on the scouts list regardless of organizantional need and depth, but what is considered BPA from one team to the next will vary significantly. Sometimes we need to be reminded of that fact that's all.
Click to expand...
Yes. There is surely lots of variance between teams as they home in on different players.
 
Reader mode
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom