Confirmed with Link: Canadiens Will Pick 5th (Hughes Presser in OP) NO POLITICS

[Belial]

As a plan C in late July maybe, not something I would go out of my way to make happen tho.

The UFA crop this season is weak AF.

Bunting is one of the top UFA's...

I think bringing Monahan back would be a smart move.

 

[Schooner Guy]

There is also a reason why SKA St.Petersburg could try to retain him. Looking at the general culture of some supposedly great hockey minds, I thnik they should focus their expertise on hockey.

What if the Nords didn't pick Lindros knowing he was not going to play with them?

There was no concern of Lindros going to play in Russia over the long-term. Also, the Habs can't trade Michkov to a KHL team.

Nobody's worried about the three years left on Michkov's current KHL contract. The concern is the uncertainty with the current global situation as well as the risk that he could stay there longer. Thankfully Bobrov has an inside track and will have a far clearer prognosis than anyone on this board.

 

[26Mats]

"Michkov is Cole Caufield on steroids"
- Dobber Prospects

 

[Colezuki]

Im a Michkov stan, but if he's available and they don't select him due to issues we can't see I can respect it. If they don't select him because they think hes a worse player then Reinbacher that's where red flags go up

 

[Sorinth]

Im a Michkov stan, but if he's available and they don't select him due to issues we can't see I can respect it. If they don't select him because they think hes a worse player then Reinbacher that's where red flags go up

I agree but it's also not crazy to think that a small winger that doesn't have great speed whose flashy with his dangles on a larger ice surface might have trouble adjusting to the NHL where there's less time and space, and where he has to go up against bigger/stronger defenceman who are much harder to dangle around.

 

[Andrei79]

I agree but it's also not crazy to think that a small winger that doesn't have great speed whose flashy with his dangles on a larger ice surface might have trouble adjusting to the NHL where there's less time and space, and where he has to go up against bigger/stronger defenceman who are much harder to dangle around.

This isn't how I would describe Michkov.

 

[waffledave]

They should have the answer to that question before anyone start to pass on him.

I would expect the organization to already know the answer. I'm talking about the fans.

We should have done the same with that waster Caufield, I mean he fell like a rock.

Big difference between 5th overall in a stacked draft and the middle of the 1st round.

 

[Sorinth]

This isn't how I would describe Michkov.

It's not how I would describe him either but it's still true, he's small, he's a winger, he doesn't have a great top speed, and he makes lots of flashy dangles. So there are legitimate concerns about how his game will translate to the NHL. I think he's got enough of a motor and high enough IQ to adjust and translate but it's not a guarantee.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Remember that if Michkov falls to 5, there's a reason. The guy is supposedly the best thing ever so if 4 other teams pass on him, you need to ask yourself why.

Sometimes it's as simple as there are better options for the teams picking ahead.. Bedard is a no brainer. Fantilli/Carlsson sound like they are 1oa talents in most draft years. Plus they're all centers.

So really it's just san Jose that would be making a conscious decision to pass on him, not 4 teams.

 

[Andrei79]

It's not how I would describe him either but it's still true, he's small, he's a winger, he doesn't have a great top speed, and he makes lots of flashy dangles. So there are legitimate concerns about how his game will translate to the NHL. I think he's got enough of a motor and high enough IQ to adjust and translate but it's not a guarantee.

I understand, but that's not his game and not something he relies on. It's just something more he can do and actually attenuates his lack of top end speed. That's why it's a strange way to frame it. I would understand if a good part of his offense came from that rather than being a Caufield like shooter with one of the highest IQs in recent drafts. I'd also add that every flashy dangler in the NHL was once a dangler in lower levels. Is he brute forcing it like Drouin or is he looking at the space he has available and trying to break down defenses (changing the angle of their skates, making them commit too early,etc) which works in the pros.

 

[waffledave]

Sometimes it's as simple as there are better options for the teams picking ahead.. Bedard is a no brainer. Fantilli/Carlsson sound like they are 1oa talents in most draft years. Plus they're all centers.

So really it's just san Jose that would be making a conscious decision to pass on him, not 4 teams.

Michkov is described as a generational talent, some people say he has the talent to go 2nd overall. If he really is this good, he should go before 5th overall. If he doesn't, then there's a reason behind the scenes.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Michkov is described as a generational talent, some people say he has the talent to go 2nd overall. If he really is this good, he should go before 5th overall. If he doesn't, then there's a reason behind the scenes.

Sure. But those reasons could be non-hockey related.

 

[JohnTheBaptist]

Marty would not approve.
View attachment 711574

It's easy to build legs when you're 5'2

 

[Sorinth]

I understand, but that's not his game and not something he relies on. It's just something more he can do and actually attenuates his lack of top end speed. That's why it's a strange way to frame it. I would understand if a good part of his offense came from that rather than being a Caufield like shooter with one of the highest IQs in recent drafts.

Fair enough, but that's a view that's going to vary between scouts. I don't pretend to know which is "correct" but I can see why there are concerns beyond the Russian factor.

 

[waffledave]

Sure. But those reasons could be non-hockey related.

Right. So if those reasons are important enough that a team is willing to pass up on a potentially generational player then they must be really something.

 

[Rapala]

I’m of two minds about “BPA”. There clearly is a consensus but I don’t believe there is a best. Some unorganized thoughts:

1) There is no such objectivity in such a thing, it’s impossible — therefore BPA means basically “aligned to the consolidated or consensus draft list” not anything to do with “best” …. and best when? Best at the time of draft?, or projected best in the NHL?, or best (highest) ceiling?, or best likelihood to not bust?, or some mixture of all the above which every scout and GM would weigh differently?

2) Different clubs have different criteria and weighing of factors and qualities — therefore BPA, even if we got a fixed definition form item 1 is not universal, it’s barely more than something like: “consolidated draft list; ignoring positional needs”

3a) On the chance that a team drafts for positional need you can say then they skipped the “BPA” … but a team that desperately needs Cs would think a C prospect is better (BPA) than a W, no? It’s only for the more prominent first round picks you can have clear tiers and if a team reaches past a player to a “lower” tier they skipped the BPA. After the first round it’s not like BPA can possibly exist.

3b) What if there are some size or strength related factors? Ex. a team that is small across its lineup and has tons of small prospects decided at the draft to skip a skilled small prospect in favour of a seemingly less skilled but larger prospect — we can probably say they didn’t go BPA… but it’s likely that small player wouldn’t be perceived as that small team’s BPA BECAUSE of their positional needs…

In conclusion I feel BPA simply just means “consensus draft list (in as far as we have a consensus)” and if you brazenly skip that order in the first round you’ll have reached for another prospect… but after pick 20-25 it’s a crapshoot anyway no?

BPA is awesome 5 years down the road.

 

[JohnTheBaptist]

Habs will get Willie... I'd be ok with that. Just need to find a helmet that fits.

He's 27, too old. He should go to a team that's contending right now. We shouldn't trade for anyone older than 24.

 

[salbutera]

Im a Michkov stan, but if he's available and they don't select him due to issues we can't see I can respect it. If they don't select him because they think hes a worse player then Reinbacher that's where red flags go up

How will you ever know? Every team at draft states “we got the player we had on our list at that pick”… no team ever delves into BPA criteria..

 

[Rapala]

He and Szuuki went off their pace from the start of the year. Now that we hear Cole's injured shoulder occurred earlier in the year, that could have been the culprit...

At any rate, always good to have a good second offensive line.

People seem to forget Dach got moved off their line when Moneyhands went down. That was the main reason for the drop off in pace.

 

[Runner77]

So we just expect them to go with the flow and pass because other did so?

It seems pretty obvious to me if the Habs pass it's because they have their own set of unresolved issues with the pick they can't get over with.

Exactly. It matters not one iota why the teams ahead pass on a player. Their criteria may be skewed in any number of directions.

 

[Galaxydoggystyle]

If people are saying that michkov is too small and is too flashy with dangles the same can be said about smith. The amount I have watched smith he actually holds the puck a little too long and does dangerous dangles from the side board all the way up to the blue line. Which also wouldn't fly in the NHL either

 

[Frank Drebin]

Michkov is described as a generational talent, some people say he has the talent to go 2nd overall. If he really is this good, he should go before 5th overall. If he doesn't, then there's a reason behind the scenes.

Sounds like 1990 a bit

 

[Gillings]

When we picked Caufield, I jumped for joy as I think everyone else did. I am not even sure I would have jumped for joy for almost any other player in that draft besides a few.

Slafkovsky shocked me and I was happy we found a BIG skilled winger who can skate like a smaller guy.

Not one player really makes me wanna jump in this draft besides Michkov if he will come over. Oh and that bedard kid.

If people are saying that michkov is too small and is too flashy with dangles the same can be said about smith. The amount I have watched smith he actually holds the puck a little too long and does dangerous dangles from the side board all the way up to the blue line. Which also wouldn't fly in the NHL either

Yes, But like someone else who scouts mentioned that they let the kids in the UNTDP do that type of stuff because they want to build these players creative sides. Let them dangle all game if they have the skill in the hopes they build that skill to an NHL level and it makes watching the NHL more exciting.

If you're never allowed to try that stuff when you have the skill to do it in game then it wont grow and he's a dangle style player.

We all want one of those on our team and right now, outside of VERY raw SLAF, little caufield who more skates than dangles and suzuki whos dangle rate is just putrid..

 

[Whitesnake]

Man, BPA is very subjective and it simply means that you focus on skills and skills only. This term is annoying. There is no clear or consensus BPA at 5, like there is at 1 for Bedard.

If you believe reinbacher is BPA at 5. Then its irrelevant that there is 15 RDs in next year top ten and its irrelevant if you have Makar, Fox and Seider as your RD all signed on 8yr deal.

BPA means picking the highest upside player disregard of the rest and its very f***ing subjective.

I don't get why people don't get it.....NO....BPA is NOT skills and skills only. If true, in his draft year, Corey Locke would have been picked 1st overall. Rob Schremp would have been picked 1st overall. Every single Q players that did better offensively than everybody else would have been picked ahead of them while most of them never was......

AGAIN, BPA is NOT about this or that player. If for some it's too difficult to understand, then use that...NEEDS and NOT NEEDS. EVERYBOYD can believe that Reinbacher is the 5th best player regardless of the position. You can. I can. Everybody can. You, I or everybody can be wrong. And pros that are wrong most often then not lose their jobs.

But what I do NOT want to hear....EVER....it's what Timmins told us in 2006, or 2007 (even though it worked out somehow), or in 2012, or what other teams sometimes do tell is that they approached a draft THINKING of positions. That it was TIME to replenish to right D position. Or just D. 2006, 2007, we picked up 10 D's out of 16 picks. That's 62% of the picks. Those draft were needs drafts. And while some in there WERE BPA (see McDonagh who dropped because of the Hickey pick), most were needs. And it makes absolutely no sense. I also remember 2009 when Timmins said that they were going to aim for C's...and guess what..they picked 4 C's out of 8.

So the issue is not that we ended up picking 10 out of 16 D's...it,s because behind those picks, it's a stupid strategy of WE NEED TO FILL A NEED!!!! NO YOU DON'T. You pick the best players...and at the moment you need to fill a need...you TRADE for the need with the extra great players you picked.

Draft = BPA. Trade = Needs. At the time of the draft, Tampa thought JDrouin was the BPA. Later on, when they discover that he wasn't and needed help on othe back end, Tampa traded the said BPA for needs in Sergachev.

 

[NotProkofievian]

I don't get why people don't get it.....NO....BPA is NOT skills and skills only. If true, in his draft year, Corey Locke would have been picked 1st overall. Rob Schremp would have been picked 1st overall. Every single Q players that did better offensively than everybody else would have been picked ahead of them while most of them never was......

AGAIN, BPA is NOT about this or that player. If for some it's too difficult to understand, then use that...NEEDS and NOT NEEDS. EVERYBOYD can believe that Reinbacher is the 5th best player regardless of the position. You can. I can. Everybody can. You, I or everybody can be wrong. And pros that are wrong most often then not lose their jobs.

But what I do NOT want to hear....EVER....it's what Timmins told us in 2006, or 2007 (even though it worked out somehow), or in 2012, or what other teams sometimes do tell is that they approached a draft THINKING of positions. That it was TIME to replenish to right D position. Or just D. 2006, 2007, we picked up 10 D's out of 16 picks. That's 62% of the picks. Those draft were needs drafts. And while some in there WERE BPA (see McDonagh who dropped because of the Hickey pick), most were needs. And it makes absolutely no sense. I also remember 2009 when Timmins said that they were going to aim for C's...and guess what..they picked 4 C's out of 8.

So the issue is not that we ended up picking 10 out of 16 D's...it,s because behind those picks, it's a stupid strategy of WE NEED TO FILL A NEED!!!! NO YOU DON'T. You pick the best players...and at the moment you need to fill a need...you TRADE for the need with the extra great players you picked.

Draft = BPA. Trade = Needs.

Hi there. Who is BPA at 5?