HF Habs: 2024 NHL Draft Thread

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.

SannywithoutCompy

Registered User
Dec 22, 2020
2,132
3,849
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.
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.
 

le_sean

Registered User
Oct 21, 2006
41,238
43,309
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.
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.
 

Seb

All we are is Dustin Byfuglien
Jul 15, 2006
17,636
13,464
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.

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

Harry Kakalovich

Registered User
Sep 26, 2002
6,409
4,593
Montreal
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.
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

Favster

Registered User
Jul 21, 2013
2,306
2,701
Montreal
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.
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.
 

Favster

Registered User
Jul 21, 2013
2,306
2,701
Montreal
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.
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.
 

Runner77

**********************************************
Sponsor
Jun 24, 2012
84,637
153,488
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.
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.
 

Doublechin

Registered User
Jun 23, 2013
3,229
1,426
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?
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.
 

Harry Kakalovich

Registered User
Sep 26, 2002
6,409
4,593
Montreal
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.
Yes. There is surely lots of variance between teams as they home in on different players.
 

le_sean

Registered User
Oct 21, 2006
41,238
43,309
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.
Gallagher definitely had a shot. The hand injuries destroyed it, but he would occasionally rip a goal from the hash marks back in the day.

Gally is also better at protecting the puck than Iginla. There’s a reason he was always so valued in possession metrics.

And I get that Iginla tries hard, but the compete is nothing like Gallagher. It’s just good compete for a sniper, in contrast to Eiserman. The playmaking is also comparable between the two. Iginla isn’t some standout passer.
 

McGees

Registered User
Jun 15, 2016
13,301
26,346
Waddell x Timmins
Who they gonna pick?

IMG_9855.jpeg
 

McGees

Registered User
Jun 15, 2016
13,301
26,346
Apparently he was hands off in the draft and just lets his scouts decide. But one thing is for sure, he and his staff were never afraid to pick smaller skilled guys or Russians.
Also always forwards with his 1st pick but some said that was a Dundon thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dinodebino

WeThreeKings

Demidov is a HAB
Sep 19, 2006
93,417
99,741
Halifax
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.

I mean on Bob's list, Kotkaniemi was at 5 behind Zadina at 3 and Tkachuk at 4. He was in the mix for anyone at that spot, it isn't like they passed on Andrei Svechnikov at 2 who was consensus BPA there. McCarron absolutely, he was a projected mid 2nd rounder.

"The No. 5 spot on TSN’s final rankings goes to Finnish centre Jesperi Kotkaniemi, who was No. 19 on the mid-season rankings and No. 10 on the draft lottery edition rankings. His strong performance at the World Under-18 Championships in April has vaulted him into the top five and provided this draft with something that it seemed to be missing all season long — a potential No. 1 centre."

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.

I think that's pretty unfair. The prime Gallagher was a good player, he could score from the hashmarks, he was involved in the play.

Iginla has some dangles, sure, but he exposes the puck a lot in the middle of the ice and got routinely stripped of it against PG and in the U18s. Puck possession was great for Gallagher too.

I'm just using Gallagher as an example, you're not gonna find two players who overlay one another perfectly. What I'm saying is, is that, if his playmaking game and handle game doesn't improve then that's really what you are going to get, a shoot first/only guy who tries to get to the front of the net on the majority of his puck touches.

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.

There's no surefire center after Celebrini in the top 10 of the draft, Helenius has similar questions. I think you'd have to go down to Luchanko and Beaudoin to find a 1st round center, they're gonna get over drafted because of that too, imo.

I'm not sure that drafting a D with the intention of moving them for a center is going to pay off long term either. Like other than Seth Jones for Johansen and more recently Byram for Mittelstadt, that's the only two cases over the last what 15 years?

Come to think of it, I don't think I've ever seen Iginla complete a pass. Bust, DND.

I saw him miss a lot of very slam dunkish passes for scoring opportunities. Enough of a frequency for me to question that part of his game.

Again, these are my ? marks, the exercise should always be are these ? things we can see being fixed and if they can't be, can we live with the player with that question mark?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad