HF Habs: 2024 NHL Draft Thread

  • PLEASE check any bookmark on all devices. IF you see a link pointing to mandatory.com DELETE it Please use this URL https://forums.hfboards.com/

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.

26Mats

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
33,036
25,466
In the event that Lindstrom and Demidov (along with Levshunov) are gone i'm 100% good with taking Iginla and somewhat fine with taking Sennecke, Buium or Dickinson.

I'm really interested to see what HuGo will do.

One thing is for sure: they will do their homework, exhaustively, and they will come up with their own opinion, with out consideration of other lists or what the fans want.

That's what they did with Slaf, Reinbacher, Hutson, Newhook, Beck, Fowler, Engstrom, Bogdan, Xhekaj, etc...
 

ReHabs

Registered User
Sponsor
Jan 18, 2022
7,809
12,036
There are a lot of hockey people who will disagree as there are a lot questions regarding his IQ, reads and defensive play. Levshunov is top D on a lot of lists but many lists coming out now are showing Buium as their top D. Bobby Mac's poll of scouts has had Silayev as the top D all year. Like the forwards after Celebrini, there is no consensus on the D prospects.
I don't think this is accurate. If Levshunov has "a lot of questions" about his defensive play so does every other prospect ever.

I'm really interested to see what HuGo will do.

One thing is for sure: they will do their homework, exhaustively, and they will come up with their own opinion, with out consideration of other lists or what the fans want.

That's what they did with Slaf, Reinbacher, Hutson, Newhook, Beck, Fowler, Engstrom, Bogdan, Xhekaj, etc...
Timmins and Bergevin did the same too. They did their homework, double checked, made calls, interviews, asked around, etc. They worked very very hard, in fact and never drafted to please the fans but rather based on their process.
 

26Mats

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
33,036
25,466
I don't think this is accurate. If Levshunov has "a lot of questions" about his defensive play so does every other prospect ever.


Timmins and Bergevin did the same too. They did their homework, double checked, made calls, interviews, asked around, etc. They worked very very hard, in fact and never drafted to please the fans but rather based on their process.
Two points:

1) Timmins said after the Leblanc draft he chose him because the fans would have crucified him if he hadn't. But that could just be making excuses post-hoc.

2) I have much more confidence in this management's judgement and vision, particularly when it comes to drafting for need, and how to take need into consideration. For example, I would think they would have been able to avoid KK.

But they only have a two year track record. So another reason I'm looking forward to seeing who they select is to get more data points on their drafting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HabzSauce

SOLR

Registered User
Jun 4, 2006
13,195
6,740
Toronto / North York
Suzuki's IQ is one of his main strenght, if not his main. He may not be up to Crosby's level, but so few are.

Matheson is highly athlectic, skates like the wind and oftentimes knows when to rush the puck. He's got some IQ in specific situations. But he's clearly not the best at walking the blueline. Not the worst, but not the best. For what it's worth I love Matheson, great player.

I just think Matheson has greater responsibilities than Suzuki, thus his IQ is more tested. Not saying IQ is not Suzuki strength just would rank him under Matheson on overall game comprehension right now.
 

ReHabs

Registered User
Sponsor
Jan 18, 2022
7,809
12,036
Two points:

1) Timmins said after the Leblanc draft he chose him because the fans would have crucified him if he hadn't. But that could just be making excuses post-hoc.
Timmins is the master of post-draft bullshitting but he has 9x as many quotes saying they draft BPA and do all sorts of exhaustive analysis and yada yada yada.
2) I have much more confidence in this management's judgement and vision, particularly when it comes to drafting for need, and how to take need into consideration. For example, I would think they would have been able to avoid KK.

But they only have a two year track record. So another reason I'm looking forward to seeing who they select is to get more data points on their drafting.
I have more confidence in this management's judgement too. We have no choice to but trust them.
 

Schooner Guy

Registered User
Jun 23, 2006
13,788
13,801
I don't think this is accurate. If Levshunov has "a lot of questions" about his defensive play so does every other prospect ever.
I've watched some of his games. There's very little structure, a lot of poor reads and very little urgency defensively. I think he'll get eaten alive at the next level and I've been saying this all season. His tools are great.

I know I'm in the minority on this board when it comes to Levshunov but I noticed the HP Black Book has several NHL scout quotes saying the same things I've been saying. I hope Chicago takes him at #2.
 

samsagat

Registered User
Jun 20, 2013
1,146
856
Am I the only one that think Sennecke isn't a top 5 prospect?

I know the projections on him are tempting, but when I watch full games of his, I can't see anything else than a project.

A lot of junior stuff in his game, a lot of inconsistencies in his effort and dedication. Not very steady in his defensive focus.

He's very raw.

Plus he's not a play driver. I haven't seen him carry the puck much and when he did, he slowed down when he had possession.

Personally, when you draft early you want both a high floor and a high roof.

Sennecke has a mysterious roof, but his floor, IMHO, is relatively low. Too low for a 5th overall, IMHO.

I like him, but later than 5th overall.

I prefer Iginla over him but if Demidov/Lindstrom are gone at 5, Buium would be my choice.

His floor is higher than Sennecke's and his roof is at least as high.
 

ReHabs

Registered User
Sponsor
Jan 18, 2022
7,809
12,036
I've watched some of his games. There's very little structure, a lot of poor reads and very little urgency defensively. I think he'll get eaten alive at the next level and I've been saying this all season. His tools are great.

I know I'm in the minority on this board when it comes to Levshunov but I noticed the HP Black Book has several NHL scout quotes saying the same things I've been saying. I hope Chicago takes him at #2.
So it's your expert eye that says his defensive game is bad or that of "a lot of hockey people"? I'm having a tough time keeping up. Can you share the quotes about Lev from hockeyprospect's black book?
 

JeffreyLFC

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
10,683
7,820
Hey guys does anybody here remember which year Bob McKenzie was predicting almost every single pick on Twitter right before the pick was made?

I was looking for an article or tabs about that but can’t find anything.
Not almost. He predicted all of them and some were from the left field, it was not on twitter though, I remember it being live on TV. He has inside knowledge from almost all executives.
 

Bourdon101

Registered User
Jul 21, 2012
937
224
I think I would rather draft Sennecke than Lindstrom.

What is the more significant sample? 32 regular season games in the WHL, or 16 playoff games in the OHL?

Because over those two samples, Sennecke and Lindstrom have produced similar numbers. They are both seen as having late-bloomer potential due to either a late start in the sport (Lindstrom) or a late growth spurt (Sennecke). Both players have big frames, but Sennecke has yet to fill out.

So far, they seem about equal. Then you factor in Lindstrom's injury history and the edge would go to Sennecke.

I think the reason public perception differs so much on these players stems from the fact that Lindstrom had a crazy start to his draft season, while Sennecke had a crazy finish. Thus, we have been accustomed to seeing Lindstrom in the top 5, while Sennecke is pegged as a "riser".
 

Kents polished head

Formerly Tough Au Lit
Feb 4, 2013
9,673
4,656
Am I the only one that think Sennecke isn't a top 5 prospect?

I know the projections on him are tempting, but when I watch full games of his, I can't see anything else than a project.

A lot of junior stuff in his game, a lot of inconsistencies in his effort and dedication. Not very steady in his defensive focus.

He's very raw.

Plus he's not a play driver. I haven't seen him carry the puck much and when he did, he slowed down when he had possession.

Personally, when you draft early you want both a high floor and a high roof.

Sennecke has a mysterious roof, but his floor, IMHO, is relatively low. Too low for a 5th overall, IMHO.

I like him, but later than 5th overall.

I prefer Iginla over him but if Demidov/Lindstrom are gone at 5, Buium would be my choice.

His floor is higher than Sennecke's and his roof is at least as high.

No. The ones who have reservations just get told they don't know shit and that they never saw the guy play by the usual mob. But even a blind man can see this guy is a risky pick at 5. Very odd looking player.

EDIT: The post right under mine is a good example of that. "People don't want to understand". :laugh:
 

WeThreeKings

Demidov is a HAB
Sep 19, 2006
94,663
104,224
Halifax
Am I the only one that think Sennecke isn't a top 5 prospect?

I know the projections on him are tempting, but when I watch full games of his, I can't see anything else than a project.

A lot of junior stuff in his game, a lot of inconsistencies in his effort and dedication. Not very steady in his defensive focus.

He's very raw.

Plus he's not a play driver. I haven't seen him carry the puck much and when he did, he slowed down when he had possession.

Personally, when you draft early you want both a high floor and a high roof.

Sennecke has a mysterious roof, but his floor, IMHO, is relatively low. Too low for a 5th overall, IMHO.

I like him, but later than 5th overall.

I prefer Iginla over him but if Demidov/Lindstrom are gone at 5, Buium would be my choice.

His floor is higher than Sennecke's and his roof is at least as high.

No you're not the only one, he has gotten a lot of flack because people don't want to understand that his profile is very good and attractive. They just wanna throw him out the window because he's a late riser and because Kotkaniemi didn't work, no late riser can ever work again.

He's on the fringe of a top 5 pick. He's my 5 and that's because when you have small man skill in a growing body like that and you can do what he did at the end of the season and playoffs while you are getting used to your body, have massive athletic and physical growth potential, it's a very intriguing player that could really just be a fixture on a top line. You don't get many chances to draft 6'3 kids with this skill level.

Most prospects are projects but you don't get elite upside from outside of the top 1-2 of a draft without some projection. If you think there's a squeaky clean prospect outside of Celebrini in this draft then you're not looking for warts hard enough on the other guys the same way you are on Sennecke.

There is junior stuff in his game. There's junior stuff in Demidov's game. There's junior stuff with Buium. There's junior stuff with Iginla, etc.

Yes, he's raw - he has to be raw, he grew like 5 inches in a short period of time. He essentially woke up one day with all these physical differences and had to figure it all out. That's EXCITING, it's not a downside.

He absolutely is a play driver. He's a play creator. He's creative as hell. His hands are elite. He was dominant in the playoffs against great teams and his team was a ghost without him.

The upside play on Sennecke and Iginla is not close. If you want safer with Iginla, fine, but the ceiling on Sennecke is naturally higher. He's a skilled forward with size and magic hands. Iginla will never have that size and reach advantage.
 

WeThreeKings

Demidov is a HAB
Sep 19, 2006
94,663
104,224
Halifax
No. The ones who have reservations just get told they don't know shit and that they never saw the guy play by the usual mob. But even a blind man can see this guy is a risky pick at 5. Very odd looking player.

EDIT: The post right under mine is a good example of that. "People don't want to understand". :laugh:

Well, you don't - whether you agree or not he's the right pick. You have to admit that the profile is an attractive and intriguing one.


If this guy had more buzz earlier, this board would be going nuts at the idea of a kid with this size, growth potential and skill. No one ever said there was no risk here. There's a risk. If you don't want the risk - that's FINE. Just say you want the safer player and put it at that. You don't have to diminish his qualities and potential upside to make that point.
 

Andrei79

Registered User
Jan 25, 2013
15,951
29,404
I just think Matheson has greater responsibilities than Suzuki, thus his IQ is more tested. Not saying IQ is not Suzuki strength just would rank him under Matheson on overall game comprehension right now.

Specifically which parts of game comprehension makes him rank higher?
 

26Mats

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
33,036
25,466
Timmins is the master of post-draft bullshitting but he has 9x as many quotes saying they draft BPA and do all sorts of exhaustive analysis and yada yada yada.

I have more confidence in this management's judgement too. We have no choice to but trust them.
Timmins admitted they draft for need. He said it with McCarron, Galchenyuk, Kotkaniemi, and all the LD's we drafted when we had Weber and Petry as our top 2. The thing is he drafted all those LD's when Weber and Petry were old and they wouldn't be around when the LD's were fully developed. It was a flawed plan even when it came to addressing a need. He said players these days can be in the league in 2 to 3 years post draft. But really, they won't be nearly fully developed that fast, as we see with Harris, Struble, Trudeau, etc.. Even Romanov wasn't decently ready until his 4th year post draft.
 

samsagat

Registered User
Jun 20, 2013
1,146
856
I think I would rather draft Sennecke than Lindstrom.

What is the more significant sample? 32 regular season games in the WHL, or 16 playoff games in the OHL?

Because over those two samples, Sennecke and Lindstrom have produced similar numbers. They are both seen as having late-bloomer potential due to either a late start in the sport (Lindstrom) or a late growth spurt (Sennecke). Both players have big frames, but Sennecke has yet to fill out.

So far, they seem about equal. Then you factor in Lindstrom's injury history and the edge would go to Sennecke.

I think the reason public perception differs so much on these players stems from the fact that Lindstrom had a crazy start to his draft season, while Sennecke had a crazy finish. Thus, we have been accustomed to seeing Lindstrom in the top 5, while Sennecke is pegged as a "riser".

Personally, I'd say it's because of the way they play.

Before his injuries, Lindstrom was very impressive. He was steady in his play and effort. He was seen to go between 2-3 overall at that time.

Sennecke is more of a spurt player. He surfs the game, you don't notice him then bang!! He makes a spectacular play.

I'd say Lindstrom contribution to the game is more steady and more multidimensional.
 
Last edited:

Mrb1p

PRICERSTOPDAPUCK
Dec 10, 2011
90,354
57,285
Citizen of the world
It appears this way because of IQ, these are all trained adults in their prime, if you measured strenght etc. they would not be world apart, Another ridiculous idea, that athlete are in their prime can be worlds apart in athleticism. 1-5% sure, but they are probably 20% apart in IQ.
That's fine and all but the very existence of Mcdavid and Mackinnon and guys like Kotkaniemi, Gusev, Brink, Benson, and so many others completely disproves your thesis. Either your perceived differences of "5%" is absolutely massive or it's more than that. The difference between Mcdavid and Benson is clearly not "iq", it's athleticism.
 

WeThreeKings

Demidov is a HAB
Sep 19, 2006
94,663
104,224
Halifax
Out of the main pack of guys that seem to be in consideration, Sennecke would probably be my least favorite, which makes me think management is probably leaning towards him lol.

Sennecke and anyone else has been pretty much only been talked about in contingency of Demidov and Lindstrom being gone.

I think we know where the tier of forwards goes at this point, but the closer we get to the draft, the more that the noise seems to indicate that Sennecke is a mini tier between Lindstrom/Demidov and Iginla/Catton/Helenius.
 

samsagat

Registered User
Jun 20, 2013
1,146
856
No you're not the only one, he has gotten a lot of flack because people don't want to understand that his profile is very good and attractive. They just wanna throw him out the window because he's a late riser and because Kotkaniemi didn't work, no late riser can ever work again.

He's on the fringe of a top 5 pick. He's my 5 and that's because when you have small man skill in a growing body like that and you can do what he did at the end of the season and playoffs while you are getting used to your body, have massive athletic and physical growth potential, it's a very intriguing player that could really just be a fixture on a top line. You don't get many chances to draft 6'3 kids with this skill level.

Most prospects are projects but you don't get elite upside from outside of the top 1-2 of a draft without some projection. If you think there's a squeaky clean prospect outside of Celebrini in this draft then you're not looking for warts hard enough on the other guys the same way you are on Sennecke.

There is junior stuff in his game. There's junior stuff in Demidov's game. There's junior stuff with Buium. There's junior stuff with Iginla, etc.

Yes, he's raw - he has to be raw, he grew like 5 inches in a short period of time. He essentially woke up one day with all these physical differences and had to figure it all out. That's EXCITING, it's not a downside.

He absolutely is a play driver. He's a play creator. He's creative as hell. His hands are elite. He was dominant in the playoffs against great teams and his team was a ghost without him.

The upside play on Sennecke and Iginla is not close. If you want safer with Iginla, fine, but the ceiling on Sennecke is naturally higher. He's a skilled forward with size and magic hands. Iginla will never have that size and reach advantage.

Do I prefer safer?

Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying, the earlier you pick in the draft, the more you want BOTH a high ceiling and a high floor.

Plus you're confusing play driver with good offensive player passed the opposite blue line.
Sennecke is a magician inside the offensive zone, but he's not the one who carry the puck into it.

Anyway, my point is there'll be better prospects than him, with a better balance between ceiling and roof, at 5.

You don't agree?

That's fine for me.

This is the beauty of this draft, it's all over the place and there's a lot of good prospects with various tools. You can see everybody's preferences and priorities when it comes to evaluating...

P.S.: I watched full games for a lot of prospects so no, I didn't make my opinion based on others, but on what I saw from him.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad