Toggle sidebar

Prospect Info: David Reinbacher

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Reader mode
Kaladin said:
Disparate topics? lol. Them letting him play in Switzerland is an additional dot underpinning my belief they took needs vs BPA. There are many other dots I've listed in other posts. Such as Hughes basically admitting if Reinbacher was a left hand D they may not have drafted him. I've never said whether Reinbacher plays in Switzerland or Laval is the only evidence.

If you choose to keep your blinders on and ignore direct quotes from our own GM what even is the point of continuing this conversation?
Click to expand...
You're misinterpreting the quote tho. His point was we as the Habs management have a few people on the same tier, making BPA inadmissible when deciphering who to take. At that point, with, let say, 2 wingers and a defensemen, they chose to pick the most sought after position. I read it as we picked Reinbacher because the other players we deemed equal to him are wingers and if he were a LD which we have tons of already, we would've opted for the RW who we see as equal talent to Reinbacher
 
  • Like
Reactions: themilosh
Kaladin said:
Even if it's their preference, it is leading them to stray away from the BPA philosophy. I personally think you should draft the best player available at your given draft slot. If their preference is leading them away from that then I disagree with it.

Those 2 skaters were their top picks in their respective drafts. It suggests to me a certain cowardice. They want their top picks to not bust so they pick safe floors. It's not what you want to see. At lower acquisition costs they are fine with making bigger swings.
Click to expand...
Size in itself is a « skill » as in it’s part of the global evaluation of a player. They could have (and probably did) felt that Reinbacher was a better package overall than the other players that were available.

Therefore, he would (was) be their BPA
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sorinth, themilosh and ChesterNimitz
Lafleurs Guy said:
Much has been made of CC’s lack of assists but honestly he was fine in that department when the team was scoring. When it dropped off he scored a third of the club’s goals. He was making passes same as before but we couldn’t score.

He’s never going to be an Yzerman type guy but he could very well be a consistent 50 plus goal scorer and point per game player. In my books that would qualify as a superstar player.
Click to expand...
Caufield is the first and real winger I see he can do better than Paccioretty. Paccio was between 3rd to 7th best winger nhl scorer, Caufield can hit 45 g and maybe a couple of years in the 50 g.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BLONG7
Kaladin said:
Even if it's their preference, it is leading them to stray away from the BPA philosophy. I personally think you should draft the best player available at your given draft slot. If their preference is leading them away from that then I disagree with it.

Those 2 skaters were their top picks in their respective drafts. It suggests to me a certain cowardice. They want their top picks to not bust so they pick safe floors. It's not what you want to see. At lower acquisition costs they are fine with making bigger swings.
Click to expand...
Maybe it shows certain courage to resist the forces of consensus and select the player that was in their independent judgment the best player available.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: salbutera, Andrei79, BLONG7 and 1 other person
ReHabs said:
I didn’t express any concern. It is my opinion that after Hutson and Reinbacher we have a pedestrian prospect pool.

Guhle isn’t a prospect. We’ve already acknowledged Reinbacher and Hutson. Criticism of Mailloux is that he doesn’t know how to play defence and isn’t a sure thing to make it in the NHL. Every NHL team has a prospect like Engstrom.

Well, I wasn’t talking about the future of the team. Discussion of a hockey team’s prospect pool is a pretty self-contained and well defined thing. The Habs have generally had a highly ranked prospect pool due to quantity/depth and not star power potential and it’s not worked out well for us or borne fruit.

He went pointless for an entire calendar month and Hughes the genius GM who you adore didn’t send him down.

So Hughes in only two years manages to reach Bergevin’s end game: hope and pray for a deus ex machina to get the Habs out of Loser Team orbit.

Sorry for offending you.

Outside of Caufield we have zero uniquely interesting players. 60-odd point Suzuki and 50-odd point Dach are found on every team in the league — even Arizona has Clayton Keller (far better than any Habs player).

If they improve the analysis will change, let’s hope they improve.

Busts are only bitter if you feel entitled to the success of the prospect. If you approach prospects without entitlement you don’t suffer the ignominy of being defeated by them.

I repeat: Outside of Hutson and Reinbacher we do not have interesting prospects.

Cheers thanks for the chat.
Click to expand...
Recently the Habs have been rated as #2 out of 32 teams for prospect pool.
Where would you rank them as of now?
We do not seem to have game breakers, but there is a lot of quality kids coming.....and potential assets to be turned into something that we need.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catanddogguitarrr
.
Kaladin said:
Even if it's their preference, it is leading them to stray away from the BPA philosophy. I personally think you should draft the best player available at your given draft slot. If their preference is leading them away from that then I disagree with it.

Those 2 skaters were their top picks in their respective drafts. It suggests to me a certain cowardice. They want their top picks to not bust so they pick safe floors. It's not what you want to see. At lower acquisition costs they are fine with making bigger swings.
Click to expand...


By all accounts, they wanted one of the top 4 and tried to move up, which included Smith. Doesn't that completely contradict what you just said ?
 
SuzukiSZN said:
I wouldn’t go there this year since he’ll be coming back from surgery but i also think it’s not impossible. 40 with a complete season played i think would be good.
Click to expand...

I wonder if the best move is to pair him with Dach, at least this season. It would help Dach game grow his confidence and they offset each other's weaknesses (size, shot, defense).

Having Suzuki & Newhook on another line would really create 2 lines that can score.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DAChampion
Andrei79 said:
You talk about picking players with safe floors. Will Smith isn't that at all.
Click to expand...
If you actually tracked the conversation it was mainly about a aversion to picking smaller players with their top picks. They clearly seem to associate size with safer.
 
Kaladin said:
If you actually tracked the conversation it was mainly about a aversion to picking smaller players with their top picks.
Click to expand...

"They want their top picks to not bust so they pick safe floors"

So, this sentence didn't exist ?
 
Reader mode
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom