HF Habs: 2024 NHL Draft Thread

[Habs Halifax]

Feels like the local media has been pretty universal in hammering home the notion that we're absolutely picking a forward this time, so I do expect a bit of a backlash if we go with a Dman again. It probably won't be red hot, but there's definitely going to be some heat if they go that way.

Most reasonable fans want BPA. BPA can vary depending on who you ask in this 2-14 mix but the Habs will have their own BPA board. If they feel they need to draft a D because they are much better than the F's, they will and they should. Personally, I don't see that many top line forwards and top paring D. I do see close to an equal amount of D vs F and most of them have top 4D and top 6F ability with the chances one or two of them turns into a top of the line-up stud.

I for one do not see more D quality over F quality. It just depends on who you take and how they develop after the draft. I hope we land one of Demidov, Dickenson, Iggy, Lindstrom.

If the Habs take a D, most of the knowledgeable fans will be OK with it. The gullible and whinny type of fans are the ones who will take a hissy fit because they fall for media click baits too much.

 

[salbutera]

What I can't get over with Sennecke is that if he ends up being a successful NHLer, you're pretty much banking on him learning to play a game he doesn't play in the juniors.

So it's not as much about tangible upside, it's about the upside you imagine he COULD have IF he plays like you think he CAN play.

That's a lot of ifs.

I just think it's not just about pure upside, it's about the likelyhood the guy you pick reaches his upside.

A guy might really well be perceived as having a lower upside, but higher odds to reach it.

At this point what do you do when you're a team with absolutely nothing in the pipeline up front?

My common sense tells me you play the odds.

Gambling on being taught hockey IQ - which FWIW MSL is a strong believer can be done

 

[Kent Nilsson]

If Utah trades that pick it`s for an established physical D. Wouldn`t be too surprised to see Edmonton in that mix around Nurse+.

Are you joking

 

[Kents polished head]

Gambling on being taught hockey IQ - which FWIW MSL is a strong believer can be done

It's not just hockey IQ. It's the whole way he plays the game. From his disengagement in a lot of areas of the ice, to the very fact his main attractive trait is the fact that he beats defenders one-on-one at center ice, which never happens in the league for anyone not named Connor McDavid.

Then there's the notion that "he'll use his frame when he grows into his body", which is far from a certainty. If the guy played his whole life in a smaller frame, there are good odds that he'll keep playing just the way he is at some extent. Contrarily to a guy like Lindstrom who's been a physical freak his whole life and for whom it's a second nature to use it to his advantage.

I think that's too much wishful thinking for a guy who, again, has not even shown it can work consistently even in juniors. Stats are the symptoms of good decisions/good plays. They're not completely meaningless. Not to that extent. If he had the numbers to show for it it would at least erase some doubts.

People will say it was about him growing accustomed to his body. Meanwhile, Scott Wheeler said a lot of junior coaches and scouts seemed to indicate that it was more about attitude and off-ice behavior when asked about it last fall.

Are those really questions you want to ask yourself when picking at 5?

 

[Jaynki]

I love the direction of the current team, I'm on board with them fully. Feels like we're being built the right way on a lot of levels.

My point is that the era before Bergevin was more painful than his reign.

I'd argue the team made the right pick on 3 at the time. It's easy to say now we screwed that up, but the majority of fans wanted Galchenyuk. The prospect pool he inherited was a joke, compared to what HuGo received.

Say what you want, this man also brought us the most exciting Spring we had since 93' with a team that he actually spent his $$.

You're not wrong about him missing the opportunity to turn us into something more, and the fact Carey never got that support over a sustained time is his biggest failure.

He inherited a weak prospect pool but he also inherited this

Subban, Price, Pacioretty, Eller, Gallagher all U23, a top 3 pick, 31YO Markov, 30YO Plek, Erik Cole who just scored 35 goals, Gionta, Gorges, two free buy out.

In other words, he inherited a contender and had one simple mandate. Add to it.

Instead, we never traded 1st RD picks or signed a big FA. We also failed our drafting for one decade. Nailing one single draft pick from 2012-2015 would have been massive, just one. Blunder after blunder. It was always reclamation project or players like Mike Weaver.

 

[Habs Halifax]

We were terrible from the late 90s to the 2000s. So yeah, they were darker days.

But in 2013 we had a great young core and a 3rd overall. If we hired even a decent GM we’d have become legit contenders. Instead… we squandered a great young core. THAT is far more tragic than just being a brutal team.

This regime has chosen a direction, is miles above at development, seems to be drafting extremely well… what’s not to like?

The great core we had in 2013 was backed up by a very poor prospect pool. The miscalculation was we should have moved Pleky and Markov for more futures. NO, we decided to move forward with holes in key places and not much depth to support it. This was the Leafs problem too. Great core but horrible depth. This will gain momentum in the regular season but not for the playoffs.

Bergevin was hired for the 2012 summer. In the 4 years prior, Habs had 8 top 100 picks (Brutal). Yeah, we had Price, Subban, Patch, Gallagher and with the 3rd OA (Chucky). Then vets like Pleky and Markov. Where is the center? Galchenyuk?

 

[No ReGretzkys]

Catton reminds me so much of Drouin, any chance we take him? I feel like we would be a a small team with him caufield hutson newhook... but you can't deny his skill is unbelievable

 

[Pompeius Magnus]

It's not just hockey IQ. It's the whole way he plays the game. From his disengagement in a lot of areas of the ice, to the very fact his main attractive trait is the fact that he beats defenders one-on-one at center ice, which never happens in the league for anyone not named Connor McDavid.

Then there's the notion that "he'll use his frame when he grows into his body", which is far from a certainty. If the guy played his whole life in a smaller frame, there are good odds that he'll keep playing just the way he is at some extent. Contrarily to a guy like Lindstrom who's been a physical freak his whole life and for whom it's a second nature to use it to his advantage.

I think that's too much wishful thinking for a guy who, again, has not even shown it can work consistently even in juniors. Stats are the symptoms of good decisions/good plays. They're not completely meaningless. Not to that extent. If he had the numbers to show for it it would at least erase some doubts.

People will say it was about him growing accustomed to his body. Meanwhile, Scott Wheeler said a lot of junior coaches and scouts seemed to indicate that it was more about attitude and off-ice behavior when asked about it last fall.

Are those really questions you want to ask yourself when picking at 5?

He's different on the PP, but 5 on 5 he does have a pretty heavy tendency to just attack the middle alone and try to dangle his way through the entire defense by himself. It works for him at that level though, he'd be dumb not to take advantage of his tools and it's the same with Demidov TBH. This is where the scouting comes into play and you have to determine if he's capable of adapting when his go-to stuff won't be working so well, if he has the work ethic, etc.

 

[Jaynki]

Not sure who's the right pick, if Demidov is there you gotta take him. however if we had picked michkov or leornard last year instead of a freaking defensive D in reibacher then we wouldnt have this problem right now. It doesn't even make sense to me how they didn't know that this year's draft class was filled with great Defensemen. Now we will pick for need once again and the cycle continues

You don't select a player in function of next year draft. That is lunacy. List change a lot in one year and you dont even have a clue where you will draft.

You pick the best player at your spot. That its. The rest is distraction.

This year, if management believe Buium is the player with the most upside at 5, then you go for him and what we already have is irrelevant in the equation.

Its all about extracting the most value with your pick and the only variable in play is the player you choose/those you misses on. Next year draft, current team needs, depth at a certain position, nothing more than distraction in the scouting and drafting process.

 

[Whitesnake]

Most reasonable fans want BPA. BPA can vary depending on who you ask in this 2-14 mix but the Habs will have their own BPA board. If they feel they need to draft a D because they are much better than the F's, they will and they should. Personally, I don't see that many top line forwards and top paring D. I do see close to an equal amount of D vs F and most of them have top 4D and top 6F ability with the chances one or two of them turns into a top of the line-up stud.

I for one do not see more D quality over F quality. It just depends on who you take and how they develop after the draft. I hope we land one of Demidov, Dickenson, Iggy, Lindstrom.

If the Habs take a D, most of the knowledgeable fans will be OK with it. The gullible and whinny type of fans are the ones who will take a hissy fit because they fall for media click baits too much.

The misconception about BPA is astounding. BPA isn't about my list. Your list. Or anybody's list. BPA could ONLY be about 2 things only.

As far as we, THE FANS, are concerned, it's about consensus. Not just the McKenzie list. But taking every public list out there and put them together. Take elite prospects that tells me what most lists are having any kids.They even have a consolidated rankings. But for example, Dean Letourneau could be a fine prospect. But does anybody has him top 5? Does picking him top 5 reads BPA or needs? I know, nobody says he will be picked there and he won't....but that's my point about how AS FANS, we can see BPA vs needs. I took Letourneau to prove a point but maybe you could take every player not usually named top 10 and it makes as much sense.

Then, as a TEAM, don't just come and say that you pick this guy because he's a right d-man. That's the opposite to BPA. Now, you can say it's a good pick nonetheless. Fine. What you think of the pick is irrelevant.....but it's NOT what BPA is all about.

 

[Kents polished head]

He's different on the PP, but 5 on 5 he does have a pretty heavy tendency to just attack the middle alone and try to dangle his way through the entire defense by himself. It works for him at that level though, he'd be dumb not to take advantage of his tools and it's the same with Demidov TBH. This is where the scouting comes into play and you have to determine if he's capable of adapting when his go-to stuff won't be working so well, if he has good work ethics, etc.

At which extent does it even work though? Because the numbers certainly don't reflect it works ALL that much.

 

[SOLR]

Are you joking

Nope, not at all. Sell Nurse and you'll see a first rounder. Did you look at the competition for Nurse? There's a defensive D hole between 25 and 30, that's why everybody is drafting them like crazy right now.

Utah has all the cap space in the world, and I assume they will go from a bottom spending team to adding quite a bit of cap hit this summer. Nurse does make them much better. And Lavoie is ready to play in the NHL next year. They would also be in on Guentzel I assume.

Then I said Nurse+ it will be costly for Edmonton given the contract, goal would be to promote Broberg and 3 team- a replacement for Ceci (the 6h overall being the transitional piece). Might cost them another roster player, Lavoie + picks.

Lots of team will come knocking for 6th overall, but there's not that many Ds that fit the bill here. Unless they get a big forward instead, they need size at all positions pretty much.

 

[Pompeius Magnus]

At which extent does it even work though? Because the numbers certainly don't reflect it works ALL that much.

It was working in the second half of the season, not so much in the first half. That's the whole narative with him, sharp progression and whatnot. You either buy it or you don't. I happen to be mostly buying it, I guess, I just really like the raw tools he has.

 

[Hacketts]

He inherited a weak prospect pool but he also inherited this

Subban, Price, Pacioretty, Eller, Gallagher all U23, a top 3 pick, 31YO Markov, 30YO Plek, Erik Cole who just scored 35 goals, Gionta, Gorges, two free buy out.

In other words, he inherited a contender and had one simple mandate. Add to it.

Instead, we never traded 1st RD picks or signed a big FA. We also failed our drafting for one decade. Nailing one single draft pick from 2012-2015 would have been massive, just one. Blunder after blunder. It was always reclamation project or players like Mike Weaver.

How are you calling us a contender without a 1c and finishing last in the East in 2011-12? lol.

I agree he should of been more aggressive, but looking at everything in hindsight to what the actually reality was are two different things.

 

[Rockomax]

I normally don't panic about any of this (the Lindstrom stuff was hilarious) but this one seems a more legit concern. We've heard the entire time that Chicago is debating Levshunov vs Demidov. If that is a debate and the factors that edged Demidov behind Levshunov are quelled by the combine, then its reasonable to assume they could flip.

It doesn't change anything about Anaheim or CBJ as neither have been heavily rumored to want the player.

I've seen talk about CBJ warming up to him quite a bit lately. Not sure if it's founded or not though, but I don't see why they would not be.

Mathias Brunet's argument is that CBJ want a star player, no matter the position; it does make sense in my opinion. In which case Demidov would be their most probable pick.

I did believe that Demidov might have fallen to 5 earlier this month and maybe I'm being pessimistic, but I don't see it anymore from what I'm reading and the player's profile.

 

[Garbageyuk]

What I can't get over with Sennecke is that if he ends up being a successful NHLer, you're pretty much banking on him learning to play a game he doesn't play in the juniors.

So it's not as much about tangible upside, it's about the upside you imagine he COULD have IF he plays like you think he CAN play.

That's a lot of ifs.

I just think it's not just about pure upside, it's about the likelyhood the guy you pick reaches his upside.

A guy might really well be perceived as having a lower upside, but higher odds to reach it.

At this point what do you do when you're a team with absolutely nothing in the pipeline up front?

My common sense tells me you play the odds.

That’s a good way to put it. For me, his upside just isn’t high enough to justify the risk higher in the round.

I’m not even sure if I’d take him if he was somehow still there at 26. There are enough quality prospects there to make it interesting for sure - along with the guys I mentioned previously, there’s guys like Artamanov and Hemming that should be available in that range. Both safer, imo, with similar upside.

If you want to take a risk on a boom or bust type, I’d be more inclined to go with one of Parascak or Letourneau at 26, rather than Sennecke earlier in the round. Both those guys have way higher upside than Sennecke, with comparable risk in the case of Parascak.

With Parascak, only one area needs serious work. That’s not the case with Sennecke, who probably plays the most junior style game of anyone we’ve talked about here, apart from Letourneau.

Letourneau, yeah he’s more risky, but he’ll be available near the end of round 1, and if he hits, the upside is sky high.

All in all, Sennecke is a first round talent, but I’m not seeing the hype he’s getting and he’s not my cup of tea. There are just too many other good or better options. He really does have a strange risk/upside (and hype) profile.

 

[Jaynki]

How are you calling us a contender without a 1c and finishing last in the East in 2011-12? lol.

I agree he should of been more aggressive, but looking at everything in hindsight to what the actually reality was are two different things.

Well a contender was too strong of a terms but he inherited a f***ing core.

Norris level D. Franchise G. All U23. Perennial 35G scorer Pac. Markov, Eller, Plek, Gallagher, top 3 picks, two buy out.

I mean, compared to the books full of burden he gaves his successor.

 

[Whitesnake]

Slowly but surely, it's becoming Iginla vs Sennecke.

Habs management....good luck. Don't f*** this up.

 

[Habs Halifax]

The misconception about BPA is astounding. BPA isn't about my list. Your list. Or anybody's list. BPA could ONLY be about 2 things only.

As far as we, THE FANS, are concerned, it's about consensus. Not just the McKenzie list. But taking every public list out there and put them together. Take elite prospects that tells me what most lists are having any kids.They even have a consolidated rankings. But for example, Dean Letourneau could be a fine prospect. But does anybody has him top 5? Does picking him top 5 reads BPA or needs? I know, nobody says he will be picked there and he won't....but that's my point about how AS FANS, we can see BPA vs needs. I took Letourneau to prove a point but maybe you could take every player not usually named top 10 and it makes as much sense.

Then, as a TEAM, don't just come and say that you pick this guy because he's a right d-man. That's the opposite to BPA. Now, you can say it's a good pick nonetheless. Fine. What you think of the pick is irrelevant.....but it's NOT what BPA is all about.

BPA is taking the best guy you like that is available when you pick. In a lot of cases, there are waives of talent and teams just don't list one guy after another. It's more like a waive or group of guys ahead of another waive. We just didn't take Reinbacher last year because he was a RD. We took him because he was trending well, had good skating/size and great work ethic. Just so happened to be a RD that we need. It added up.

I really don't care about BPA among fans. Bob has the most credible list but the 32 teams will have a different list. How much variance will their be? Your guess is as good as mine. In this draft from 2-13, I find BPA listing one guy after another is flawed. We all have been digging into this as deep as we can and I'm sure you know the variance between fans and lists you see on the net. This is an indicator that BPA from 2-13 will also vary with the teams IMO.

The real value is establishing your waives of talent but not reaching to push someone like KK up to a waive he really was not in. That to me was a need trap (Center).

 

[Kent Nilsson]

Nope, not at all. Sell Nurse and you'll see a first rounder. Did you look at the competition for Nurse? There's a defensive D hole between 25 and 30, that's why everybody is drafting them like crazy right now.

Then I said Nurse+ it will be costly for Edmonton given the contract, goal would be to promote Broberg and 3 team- a replacement for Ceci (the 6h overall being the transitional piece). Might cost them another roster player, Lavoie + picks.

Nurse barely qualifies at being a defenseman and he’s certainly not a defensive one.

 

[Jaynki]

Slowly but surely, it's becoming Iginla vs Sennecke.

Habs management....good luck. Don't f*** this up.

Cant ignore the D.

It would be on a KK/Tkachuk level incompetence to not consider the D.

There is no forward in this draft aside Celebrini that justify skipping on the six top D.

 

[Milhouse40]

On other site, betting odds for 3rd overall are out
Silayev and Levshunov leading the way.

 

[Habs Halifax]

You don't select a player in function of next year draft. That is lunacy. List change a lot in one year and you dont even have a clue where you will draft.

You pick the best player at your spot. That its. The rest is distraction.

This year, if management believe Buium is the player with the most upside at 5, then you go for him and what we already have is irrelevant in the equation.

Its all about extracting the most value with your pick and the only variable in play is the player you choose/those you misses on. Next year draft, current team needs, depth at a certain position, nothing more than distraction in the scouting and drafting process.

Let me give you a potential scout breakdown and you play GM.

Buium will be a good top 4D at min. Iggy will be a top 6F at min. Iggy has the better chance to be a top line forward vs Buium being a top pairing defenseman.

Top 4D's are worth more than top 6F. Would you agree? If so, how do you manage your decision where the top 6F has a higher chance to reach top line vs the top 4D reaching top pairing.

How do you make your decision with your BPA strategy? Explain

 

[Whitesnake]

Cant ignore the D.

It would be on a KK/Tkachuk level incompetence to not consider the D.

There is no forward in this draft aside Celebrini that justify skipping on the six top D.

I wouldn't. But I'm expecting they would. If a Dickinson is there, you have to consider him so much.

 

[Jaynki]

Let me give you a potential scout breakdown and you play GM.

Buium will be a good top 4D at min. Iggy will be a top 6F at min. Iggy has the better chance to be a top line forward vs Buium being a top pairing defenseman.

Top 4D's are worth more than top 6F. Would you agree? If so, how do you manage your decision where the top 6F had a higher chance to reach top line vs the top 4D reaching top pairing.

How do you make your decision? Explain

It is subjective at this point and both players have a case.

My point from the post you quoted is that "teams current needs" and "next year draft" are not variable to take into account in the process. They are distraction. If that is where you wanted me to cut the cake. (Needing a top 6F more than a top 4D)

If i was a GM and it would come down to these two players, i would define as a group which one we prefer. Character, attitude, resilience, starpower would all be way more important to me than needing a top 6F or having already a plethora of LD.

I wouldn't. But I'm expecting they would. If a Dickinson is there, you have to consider him so much.

I personally expect them to pick a LD way more than discarding the D.