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

[ReHabs]

He also ranked Slafkovsky at 16th overall last year.

Seems like his model had foresight most of the scouts missed.

I ask a hypothetical and everyone bends over backwards to avoid answering.

The hypothetical is asinine. It's like asking what if Will Smith refuses to sign after his NCAA career. So what? Chalk it up as a bust and move on. Michkov himself said he wants to join the NHL and there is precedent that the best Russian players do play in the NHL - so it's only you magnifying something in an obviously unnecessary and exaggerated way to justify your dislike of the prospect.

So I hope you have the same irrational bent against Leonard, because who knows maybe he'll be another American that hates living/playing in Canada and refuse to sign with the Habs. Huge risk that, no?

So you're saying that a 5 year wait is a dealbreaker?

We can do it for Bedard too if you want.

Not sure why this is such a challenging exercise.

Longer waits change the risk calculus, that's obvious.

 

[Kennerback]

I think 3 years of this is ok, but it's the absolute maximum. Extending beyond that is way too risky, I just don't see how it works out.



It's f***ing crazy to me that nobody is willing to answer a hypothetical question.

So you're saying that a 5 year wait is a dealbreaker?

We can do it for Bedard too if you want.

Not sure why this is such a challenging exercise.

Your questions assume 5-years and 8-years fixed delay. It can’t be longer or shorter. 8 years is too long for me. 5 years is fine. Many NHLers start peaking at 23. But if there’s no Suge Knight to dangle him off a balcony like Vanilla Ice, he’s here in 3. Furthermore, I believe the team that drafts him will find a way to get him over even earlier than 3 years. Either by getting a deal done with SKA that skirts around the transfer rules, just breaking the contract or some mix of both.

 

[Rapala]

Why did he sign the long term deal in the first place if his goal was to play in North America? Anyone would know that a contract taking him 3 years passed his draft year was going to be a problem for teams wanting to draft him.

And now that you're beholden to that KHL team to play you and develop you, they can easily start using your ice time as a weapon against you to extend longer.

This has always been the puzzler for me. Bad advice and no doubt about it. His family could have been in financial distress and SKA took advantage knowing this? Many people aren't taking time as a consideration when valuing the propect. Is there anyone out there who likes to waiting three years before opening a gift? If the bottom teams aren't selecting him this is one of the main reasons. They are all rebuilding and can't afford to have a main piece missing for that long. If this draft is as good as we think it is most teams at the top of the draft want/expect these players to be 1 year away maximum.

 

[Adam Michaels]

 

[waffledave]

Seems like his model had foresight most of the scouts missed.


The hypothetical is asinine. It's like asking what if Will Smith refuses to sign after his NCAA career. So what? Chalk it up as a bust and move on. Michkov himself said he wants to join the NHL and there is precedent that the best Russian players do play in the NHL - so it's only you magnifying something in an obviously unnecessary and exaggerated way to justify your dislike of the prospect.

So I hope you have the same irrational bent against Leonard, because who knows maybe he'll be another American that hates living/playing in Canada and refuse to sign with the Habs. Huge risk that, no?


Longer waits change the risk calculus, that's obvious.

You want to do it with Smith or Leonard too? Ok. If they told me they were hell-bent on finishing their 4 year degree before coming over then yes, it would knock them down a few spots for me.

See? Not hard. I didn't get all bent out of shape, complaining about how asinine it is and refusing to answer the question. I'm not worried that Smith or Leonard are going to find out what I said and hate me.

I'm telling you man, it's cult-like behaviour at this point. Nobody can even bring themselves to say that maybe, just maybe, there is a world in which they wouldn't take Michkov.

 

[SannywithoutCompy]

You want to do it with Smith or Leonard too? Ok. If they told me they were hell-bent on finishing their 4 year degree before coming over then yes, it would knock them down a few spots for me.

See? Not hard. I didn't get all bent out of shape, complaining about how asinine it is and refusing to answer the question. I'm not worried that Smith or Leonard are going to find out what I said and hate me.

I'm telling you man, it's cult-like behaviour at this point. Nobody can even bring themselves to say that maybe, just maybe, there is a world in which they wouldn't take Michkov.

Nobody is saying there isn't a world in which they don't take Michkov. They're saying to not take Michkov would be a mistake

 

[waffledave]

Your questions assume 5-years and 8-years fixed delay. It can’t be longer or shorter. 8 years is too long for me. 5 years is fine. Many NHLers start peaking at 23. But if there’s no Suge Knight to dangle him off a balcony like Vanilla Ice, he’s here in 3. Furthermore, I believe the team that drafts him will find a way to get him over even earlier than 3 years. Either by getting a deal done with SKA that skirts around the transfer rules, just breaking the contract or some mix of both.

The first half of your post is a fine response to my hypothetical. You don't need to walk it back afterwards.

 

[Colezuki]

This has always been the puzzler for me. Bad advice and no doubt about it. His family could have been in financial distress and SKA took advantage knowing this? Many people aren't taking time as a consideration when valuing the propect. Is there anyone out there who likes to waiting three years before opening a gift? If the bottom teams aren't selecting him this is one of the main reasons. They are all rebuilding and can't afford to have a main piece missing for that long. If this draft is as good as we think it is most teams at the top of the draft want/expect these players to be 1 year away maximum.

even signing/performance bonuses as a rookie are wild, he could legitimately be losing millions in bonuses because of his decision

 

[ReHabs]

You want to do it with Smith or Leonard too? Ok. If they told me they were hell-bent on finishing their 4 year degree before coming over then yes, it would knock them down a few spots for me.

See? Not hard. I didn't get all bent out of shape, complaining about how asinine it is and refusing to answer the question. I'm not worried that Smith or Leonard are going to find out what I said and hate me.

I'm telling you man, it's cult-like behaviour at this point. Nobody can even bring themselves to say that maybe, just maybe, there is a world in which they wouldn't take Michkov.

Michkov has not said he's hell-bent on finishing his contract either. So why the magnified interest in a hypothetical further extension?

Yes, if he's frozen away for FIVE years he's obviously not worth using the 5OA on when there are nearly-as-good prospects around.

It's not hard for you to admit you're refusing to see eye-to-eye with those of us who want BPA. If we had the 2OA or 3OA you wouldn't hear so much noise about Michkov because there would genuinely be as-good options with easier risk profiles (albeit slightly inferior skill profiles). That would've been much less agonizing. Fantilli the Stud or Carlsson the Lion, it would've been easy. Sadly neither last year nor this year's drafts have been easy.

 

[waffledave]

Michkov has not said he's hell-bent on finishing his contract either. So why the magnified interest in a hypothetical further extension?

Yes, if he's frozen away for FIVE years he's obviously not worth using the 5OA on when there are nearly-as-good prospects around.

It's not hard for you to admit you're refusing to see eye-to-eye with those of us who want BPA. If we had the 2OA or 3OA you wouldn't hear so much noise about Michkov because there would genuinely be as-good options with easier risk profiles (albeit slightly inferior skill profiles). That would've been much less agonizing. Fantilli the Stud or Carlsson the Lion, it would've been easy. Sadly neither last year nor this year's drafts have been easy.

But see, it's not so clear cut because there are people here who have said they'd be ok with a 5 year wait. I'm just trying to get a feel on how much people weigh talent over circumstances. Why is that so hard to understand? People are getting borderline defensive at my question which I sincerely do not understand at all. That's what's leading to me calling it cult-like.

There's nothing wrong with saying you'd be willing to wait 5 years because you think he's just THAT good. There's also nothing wrong with saying 5 years is too much. For me, it's too much. For others, it's ok. At the end of the day there's no such thing as a universal BPA, everything needs to be taken into consideration. The idea of taking the BPA only comes into play when looking at organizational needs and positions. The personal circumstances of a given player absolutely affects his draft position and should not just be ignored "because BPA."

 

[Schooner Guy]

Okay, let's unpack this quickly and without speaking in circles.

1) Your bent against Bader is irrational because you're not also acknowledging the indisputable fact that everyone involved in scouting is imprecise to a degree. I don't even follow Bader or agree with this formula but he's one of many who is trying to quantify something that has been thus far unquantifiable -- it should be challenged to be improved, not challenged to be dismissed.

2) Hughes will make mistakes if he hasn't made mistakes already, his fluffed up bio is irrelevant. Timmins and Begevin had even more intimate relationship with hockey and they made many mistakes.

3) Every prospect has flaws and downsides and weaknesses. They're teenagers after all. To magnify a prospect's weaknesses without contextualizing it is to follow the wrong path of analysis. You're welcome to do so as you wish, I disagree.

4) As for me, personally, Wright's flaws and prospect profile (as of 2022 Draft) was MORE attractive to me than Slafkovsky's flaws and prospect profile. The things I rate in a prospect, the rubric by which I (personally) evaluate them, is heavily stats and QoC based and takes into account the context in which they played. I never said I'm without question right but I try to argue even-handedly in favour of my preferred prospects -- in the 2023 draft's case, for the Habs at 5OA I rate Smith and Benson more than Leonard, Dvorsky, and Reinbacher and Michkov more than all of them. It is my interpretation of their prospect profiles, warts and all. Seems like I'm not really saying anything controversial here.

I'll be even quicker. In response to your 4 points...

1. Bader's a joke. His Sanderson comparables were journeymen dmen. Sanderson's now a top 2 dman at age 20. This is just one of many examples of horse-bleep I've seen from him.

2. Yes. Everyone makes mistakes. Batting averages after the first half of Round 1 are worse than Baseball batting averages.

3. For a full year now, we've been reading you ripping the only 18 year old on the planet to stick in the NHL for his "downsides and weaknesses." You might want to practice what you preach on this point.

4. Fair point.

 

[ReHabs]

But see, it's not so clear cut because there are people here who have said they'd be ok with a 5 year wait. I'm just trying to get a feel on how much people weigh talent over circumstances. Why is that so hard to understand? People are getting borderline defensive at my question which I sincerely do not understand at all. That's what's leading to me calling it cult-like.

There's nothing wrong with saying you'd be willing to wait 5 years because you think he's just THAT good. There's also nothing wrong with saying 5 years is too much. For me, it's too much. For others, it's ok. At the end of the day there's no such thing as a universal BPA, everything needs to be taken into consideration. The idea of taking the BPA only comes into play when looking at organizational needs and positions. The personal circumstances of a given player absolutely affects his draft position and should not just be ignored "because BPA."

Five years is not on the table, it's simply a hypothetical you've jammed into the discourse.

What if Leonard is MAGA and flips out in the case something happens to Trump or something, what then? What if Reinbacher goes on a racist rant on social media and Justin Trudeau calls out the Habs? What if Dvorsky converts to Jainism and refuses to pick up a stick ever again?

It's so hard to understand why anybody would rate those prospects...

 

[ReHabs]

I'll be even quicker. In response to your 4 points...

1. Bader's a joke. His Sanderson comparables were journeymen dmen. Sanderson's now a top 2 dman at age 20. This is just one of many examples of horse-bleep I've seen from him.

2. Yes. Everyone makes mistakes. Batting averages after the first half of Round 1 are worse than Baseball batting averages.

3. For a full year now, we've been reading you ripping the only 18 year old on the planet to stick in the NHL for his "downsides and weaknesses." You might want to practice what you preach on this point.

4. Fair point.

1. You should extend this to every scout who's ever published something -- they've all made mistakes as bad as Bader's Sanderson.

2. That's why I don't trust Hughes or anybody at the draft table.

3. Slaf shouldn't have been in the NHL and this past season proved I was right to say so -- he was not NHL quality. It's less to do with him and more to do with the Habs and Hughes putting him in the NHL to get pummelled every other week.

I was also happily cheering Slaf on when he had that tiny hot streak besides Monahan. I hope to see them paired up again.

Listen pal, we're all here rooting for the Habs. It isn't like we're working against each other. Slaf's success is ultimately my success but I won't accept an emperor's new clothes situation where everybody insists the Habs are right to rush an 18 year old to the NHL despite all evidence and historical precedence.

 

[waffledave]

Five years is not on the table, it's simply a hypothetical you've jammed into the discourse.

What if Leonard is MAGA and flips out in the case something happens to Trump or something, what then? What if Reinbacher goes on a racist rant on social media and Justin Trudeau calls out the Habs? What if Dvorsky converts to Jainism and refuses to pick up a stick ever again?

It's so hard to understand why anybody would rate those prospects...

If any of these things happened before the draft then yeah, it would and should affect their draft position.

I explained it before. My hypothetical is that Michkov tells you straight up before the draft that he's not coming for 5 years.

You're getting so bent out of shape just at the mere prospect of a hypothetical scenario. I don't understand it at all.

 

[ReHabs]

If any of these things happened before the draft then yeah, it would and should affect their draft position.

I explained it before. My hypothetical is that Michkov tells you straight up before the draft that he's not coming for 5 years.

You're getting so bent out of shape just at the mere prospect of a hypothetical scenario. I don't understand it at all.

Who's bent out of shape? We already went over it -- if Michkov says that he's going to extend his contract a further two years, you don't draft him with the 5OA, simple as. There are good-enough prospects at 5 to not take on that risk.

 

[Koivu11]

Bob McKenzie’s Final Draft Rankings (Top 10):

1. Connor Bedard
2. Adam Fantilli
3. Leo Carlsson
4. Will Smith
5. Matvei Michkov
6. Ryan Leonard
7. Dalibor Dvorsky
8. David Reinbacher
9. Zach Benson
10. Gabe Perreault

 

[badfish]

McKenzie's top-5:
1. Bedard
2. Fantilli (9/10 scouts voted here)
3. Carlsson
4. Smith
5. Michkov

 

[Alexandre Magny]

My Choice 5 = Michkov but feeling canadiens mot draft Michkov ans draft Dalibor Dvorsky

Mesar,Slaf,Dvorsky juste feeling.

 

[Andrei79]

Not the least bit surprised Leonard is 6th. He's a really good player.

View attachment 719928View attachment 719929

I can understand some of the reasoning behind skipping Michkov as we don't have all the information and he could be showing red flags, or they could have doubts about his potential. But, all else being equal, I can't get behind not drafting him because we have Caufield. That doesn't make sense to me.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

So you're saying that a 5 year wait is a dealbreaker?

We can do it for Bedard too if you want.

Not sure why this is such a challenging exercise.

It's not challenging, it's completely pointless.

 

[badfish]

Market ineffeciencies have led to arguably the Habs best 2-picks in the last few years, and possibly a 3rd. Smaller players being ranked lower got us Caufield and Hutson, and Mailloux's troubles led us to getting him late 1st when on talent many had him in the 1st round.

I hope history repeats itself with Michkov, where the lack of familiarity/sociopolitical factors appear to be pushing him lower than he should be picked.

 

[Adam Michaels]

I get the sense that if Smith and Carlsson are off the board, Habs will go with Leonard.

 

[Kudo Shinichi]

Bob has Michkov 5 and Leonard 6.
Seems pretty likely we pick one of them

 

[Kennerback]

Well Leonard it is.

 

[Rapala]

Thanks Bob for putting Michkov front and center in the Habs slot.
Grabbing one of the others isn't as big a stretch as people think?