HF Habs: 2025 NHL Draft: Part II

[Hacketts]

what do you guys think of Cullen Potter?

 

[WeThreeKings]

what do you guys think of Cullen Potter?

Great skater, 2nd line upside, not gonna be thick or strong. Budget Cooley.

 

[WeThreeKings]

Grant was on 690 today and said some teams think Prokhorov could go as high as 12th overall. He's who he wants the Habs to pick at 16.

You have to try to get such low assist numbers in the MHL. I can't get behind Prokhorov that early.

 

[TheBuriedHab]

There's a non zero chance he'll still be around by the time the third round starts. It would be quite the reach, as much as the kid is legit interesting.

I think Grant's hot takes are usually correct because he get's his info from guys like Trevor Timmins. Like last year he was the first among the public lists to have Sennecke top 5 when the rest of the lists still had him in the late teens and everyone thought he was crazy.

I'd guess if the chatter about Prohkorov being a potential top 12 pick amongst nhl scouts that means he almost assuredly goes in the first round.

 

[MtlSars]

what do you guys think of Cullen Potter?

Already a notorious Montreal contributor

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[montreal]

Great skater, 2nd line upside, not gonna be thick or strong. Budget Cooley.

to me he's more like Danny Kristo, great speed/skating and shot but not much else, doesn't seem to know what to do with the puck other then shoot it, perhaps his feet are quicker then his brain.

 

[WinterLion]

what do you guys think of Cullen Potter?

I like him. I think he will go in the "next tier" with Reschny & Cootes... as always if a team thinks he can stay at C that will be a deciding factor. I think he will go somewhere around where we pick. College hockey is very high level... but it's always harder to get a good read on guys in college at least for me. There are a lot of boom bust types in this draft though so I am definitely expecting the actual draft to be very different from the boring lists that most people are spewing out. Potter is fast and skilled but is he smart enough to make up for his size and play C? Big question... not sure...

 

[WinterLion]

to me he's more like Danny Kristo, great speed/skating and shot but not much else, doesn't seem to know what to do with the puck other then shoot it, perhaps his feet are quicker then his brain.

hopefully worst case scenario... but similar players indeed

 

[Playmaker09]

what do you guys think of Cullen Potter?

Newhook 2.0

 

[VirginiaMtlExpat]

reminds me of Marchand... the way he skates... and his nose

Hopefully with the same pitbull resilience as Marchand. I get the appeal of someone like Bear, who also combines skill and determination, but if I were drafting based on an fMRI scan along with the classical hockey metrics, Reschny is very compelling at 16 or 17. I'd be inclined to pick them both, in fact, one after another, assuming the top RDs are gone. As I mention a lot, drafting is like mathematical optimization, and my objective function includes parameters for both need and position rarity, in contrast to the pure BPA orthodoxes.

 

[Erika]

Great skater, 2nd line upside, not gonna be thick or strong. Budget Cooley.

hmm more like homeless Cooley imo... he looks tiny.
He's more like a player you would draft in the 2nd round... just by chance he develops into something unexpectedly good.

 

[Team_Spirit]

Damn!

Budget Cooley
Homeless Cooley
Danny Kristo

 

[WinterLion]

Hopefully with the same pitbull resilience as Marchand. I get the appeal of someone like Bear, who also combines skill and determination, but if I were drafting based on an fMRI scan along with the classical hockey metrics, Reschny is very compelling at 16 or 17. I'd be inclined to pick them both, in fact, one after another, assuming the top RDs are gone. As I mention a lot, drafting is like mathematical optimization, and my objective function includes parameters for both need and position rarity, in contrast to the pure BPA orthodoxes.

Would be very exciting!

Just to play Devil's advocate:
Size though is also a scarce commodity and could be included in the same "position rarity" type equation, no?

 

[VirginiaMtlExpat]

Would be very exciting!

Just to play Devil's advocate:
Size though is also a scarce commodity and could be included in the same "position rarity" type equation, no?

Size, pace, hockey IQ are all parameters in this objective function, which fall under "classical hockey metrics".

Edit... it's all a question of how you perceive opportunities, based on the "gradient" of the objective function along the draft. If you think that there are other RDs comparable in quality in a second round, you might tweak that value for position rarity temporarily in favor of cerebral, competitive 1/2 Cs in round 1. Likewise for pacy, tall wingers, who might also percolate into round 2 or even 3. I view a pronounced gradient in value in 1/2Cs after round one, but I might be wrong.

 

[WinterLion]

Size, pace, hockey IQ are all parameters in this objective function, which fall under "classical hockey metrics".

I'm quite sure that is what NHL teams are doing... of course how they weight each and objectify them would be very hard!!

 

[VirginiaMtlExpat]

I'm quite sure that is what NHL teams are doing... of course how they weight each and objectify them would be very hard!!

Which is precisely why a BPA in the abstract and in isolation of team need and rarity is difficult to justify in my eyes. I view it as mathematically nonsensical, based on this metaphor. If your team is loaded with LDs, and the clear BPA in the abstract is another LD, the less-than-perfect marketplace will not necessarily trade you a comparably valued C or RD for one of your excess LDs, because other GMs can see you coming and smell your desperation.

 

[WinterLion]

Which is precisely why a BPA in the abstract and in isolation of team need and rarity is difficult to justify in my eyes. I view it as mathematically nonsensical, based on this metaphor. If your team is loaded with LDs, and the clear BPA in the abstract is another LD, the less-than-perfect marketplace will not necessarily trade you a comparably valued C or RD for one of your excess LDs, because other GMs can see you coming and smell your desperation.

Also that these guys are drafted under 18yrs old... after the top 10 or so in most drafts there are tiers where it becomes extremely debatable (as we can see even here) who is going to have the better career.

 

[WinterLion]

Which is precisely why a BPA in the abstract and in isolation of team need and rarity is difficult to justify in my eyes. I view it as mathematically nonsensical, based on this metaphor. If your team is loaded with LDs, and the clear BPA in the abstract is another LD, the less-than-perfect marketplace will not necessarily trade you a comparably valued C or RD for one of your excess LDs, because other GMs can see you coming and smell your desperation.

The interesting thing for the Habs though is that are actually quite deep organizationally at most positions. I'm not sure that LHD is actually an organizational strength when you consider that in 3-4 the players playing now in the NHL could move on for many variety of reasons and the only real solid LHD prospect we have is Engstrom.

 

[VirginiaMtlExpat]

The interesting thing for the Habs though is that are actually quite deep organizationally at most positions. I'm not sure that LHD is actually an organizational strength when you consider that in 3-4 the players playing now in the NHL could move on for many variety of reasons and the only real solid LHD prospect we have is Engstrom.

Just an example. I could have used Gs or wingers. I do feel that stars at C and RD are still an organizational need, though I'm optimistic about Hage and Reinbacher.

 

[Kennerback]

Grant was on 690 today and said some teams think Prokhorov could go as high as 12th overall. He's who he wants the Habs to pick at 16.

He's the player I want to gamble on at 17. Drives the net like no one else in this draft class. 6'6 but already strong like a bull. Skates very well for a guy that size. Pulverizes players like no one else in this draft, except maybe Aitcheson.

I can add that either teams have been poorly scouting Russia or there's a real unwillingness to pick Russians, because recently you had 3 monsters of 6'3, 6'5 and 6'6 that slipped through the cracks Marchenko in Round 2, Protas in Round 3, and Voronkov in Round 4.

 

[McGees]

Damn!

Budget Cooley
Homeless Cooley
Danny Kristo

Danny Kristo if he lost all his toes to frostbite.

 

[Kennerback]

It I'd trust my gut (I don't). Prokhorov to me is a top-10 pick. On what I see alone, not stats, not what everyone tells me, I like him better than a healthy McQueen. I'd have him at 8, behind O'Brien but ahead of Martin. But once again, I don't trust my gut, and the fact many people put him in the 3rd round makes me think I have a complete blindspot in evaluating this player.

 

[crosbyshow]

Who has the best IQ that will be available at 16th ?

́pcik him.
.no matter his size, speed etc....always pick the smartest player... always.

Suzuki was 5.11 slow like a turtle..at 13th...but...so smart.

 

[Kennerback]

Who has the best IQ that will be available at 16th ?

́pcik him.
.no matter his size, speed etc....always pick the smartest player... always.

Suzuki was 5.11 slow like a turtle..at 13th...but...so smart.

Maybe Bear if he drops that far.

 

[crosbyshow]

Easy to look at weight and height or speed to analyse a player.

But I am curious to read you guys about the smart players who will be available between 15th and lets say..25th cause the smartest is the one to pick and not a big tall dumb player...