Prospect Info: David Reinbacher

[Goldthorpe]

I thought it was pretty obvious he over did the weight gain just by seeing his interviews around training camp. He looks as if Sam Montembeault has been acting as his nutritionist.

Yeah, I remember that too.

It's quite common for young players to be told to gain weight, gain weight, and then struggle for a while to adjust to their new weight, up to having to lose some.

In a perfect world I guess young players should know better, but I have the feeling it's just hard to control. To get muscle you need to eat and a lot, and some of this weight will be turned into fat.

Exact same thing happened to Slaf last year btw.

 

[Miller Time]

OT but was Juolevi confirmed to be the guy that was rhumored to be playing video games at and all night?

it was a rumour but i believe it was dismissed by both the nucks and the player's reps...

he was, however, a top rated prospect that suffered a string of injuries (back, knee, hip) that derailed his development in that crucial late teens/early 20's period. Never got his career back on track after that.

since his draft year, the most games he's played in a season is 58 (D1 ohl). Let's hope that Reinbacher avoids that kind of career path!

 

[nhlfan9191]

i'm sorry you have trouble with humour. I did not mean to offend you. I'll try to remember not to attempt humour with you in the future to avoid triggering your sensitivity.

and if you are feeling inadequate or inferior due to my post, my sincere apologies. Did not mean to trigger your insecurity.

none of that changes the reality that some takes are just bad. No amount of triggered sensitivity changes that.

carry on, hope you can enjoy your day. Please feel free to add me to your ignore list if my words offend you.

I’m not offended nor am I triggered about anything you say. You’re crying on a message board because you want people to be scared to say what they think and censor themselves to only saying things that you want to hear. Nobody has to agree that the rebuild is going well like you think it is, nobody has to think Slafkovsky or Reinbacher are good prospects either. People giving their opinions on those topics doesn’t make them toxic regardless of what your opinion on it is

 

[Miller Time]

I’m not offended nor am I triggered about anything you say. You’re crying on a message board because you want people to be scared to say what they think and censor themselves to only saying things that you want to hear. Nobody has to agree that the rebuild is going well like you think it is, nobody has to think Slafkovsky or Reinbacher are good prospects either. People giving their opinions on those topics doesn’t make them toxic regardless of what your opinion on it is

you seem to be the only one "crying". why bother with all this nonsense

you either completely missed the point of my initial post, or are trying to grind some axe that has nothing to do with me. Either way, there's probably better things to do with your time. Carry on.

 

[Toene]

Meta-posting isn't bad in itself, but it becomes too much when the number of posts discussing the board exceeds the posts discussing the actual subjects of the threads.

On this note, Reinbacher may be pretty decent, but he is everything but exciting. Let's see how he develops.

 

[Whitesnake]

I have to say I am legit concerned with what they have in the group of Slaf, Mesar, Reinbacher as this team has struggled to find success drafting in the 1st round and developing said talent. We can't continue to make mistakes or this rebuild will be going on for a long time.

That said it's so early that we'll need a few years to really start to see what we may have in total.

Seems that being concerned means negative. Yet, I reserve the right to look at Jacob Fowler having maybe 2 bad games in a row and still feel that this guy is the real deal or has a REAL potential of a NHL starter. Just like I reserve the right to look at Mesar having a heck of start in the OHL and not be sure about his NHL potential.

Yeah, everything is about waiting and seeing. Yes, we have to wait 4-5 years before we have an opinion. Strangely, when we come back after 4-5 years, we are being told that it's hindsight. Or that....what's the point it's in the past. All of this on a message board. Strange.

I will always believe that ANY claim of a prospect being a bust or an all-star till D+3 is premature. Obviously. But if positively we could be excited, I think we could also be concerned and have doubts. No idea why we can't.

Also, it's not about being right. 'Cause if we say all this on this board, just a quick search and it's easy to know if somebody said something or not...lol

Let's be honest though...right now the issues are NOT about Slaf and Reinbacher. They are about who was passed over and who RIGHT now looks better. Which in the end, might or might not mean anything when it counts the most. But it's normal right now for any human being who sees Michkov, Benson, Kulich or anybody that does well to hate seeing it....ESPECIALLY when this Habs team have all the trouble in the world to have any kind of offensive game since Damphousse, Turgeon and freakin Stéphane Richer...

 

[WeThreeKings]

The why can't we be smart and rebuild like these smart genius teams edition

 

[Gravity]

Seems that being concerned means negative. Yet, I reserve the right to look at Jacob Fowler having maybe 2 bad games in a row and still feel that this guy is the real deal or has a REAL potential of a NHL starter. Just like I reserve the right to look at Mesar having a heck of start in the OHL and not be sure about his NHL potential.

Yeah, everything is about waiting and seeing. Yes, we have to wait 4-5 years before we have an opinion. Strangely, when we come back after 4-5 years, we are being told that it's hindsight. Or that....what's the point it's in the past. All of this on a message board. Strange.

I will always believe that ANY claim of a prospect being a bust or an all-star till D+3 is premature. Obviously. But if positively we could be excited, I think we could also be concerned and have doubts. No idea why we can't.

Also, it's not about being right. 'Cause if we say all this on this board, just a quick search and it's easy to know if somebody said something or not...lol

Let's be honest though...right now the issues are NOT about Slaf and Reinbacher. They are about who was passed over and who RIGHT now looks better. Which in the end, might or might not mean anything when it counts the most. But it's normal right now for any human being who sees Michkov, Benson, Kulich or anybody that does well to hate seeing it....ESPECIALLY when this Habs team have all the trouble in the world to have any kind of offensive game since Damphousse, Turgeon and freakin Stéphane Richer...

Bang on! The fact that people of this board label any criticism as being a 'hater' is rudimentary tribalism at it's finest. No you are not special. Everyone's opinion or questions regarding prospects is valid without them being branded a 'hater' or being 'toxic positive'.

 

[WeThreeKings]

Bang on! The fact that people of this board label any criticism as being a 'hater' is rudimentary tribalism at it's finest. No you are not special, everyone's opinion or questions regarding prospects is valid without them being branded a 'hater' or being 'toxic positive'.

It's not labeling any criticism as a hater.

It's about people having an opinion, often based on something they read or perpetuating something from someone else that also doesn't have enough information to formulate such a binding opinion and passing it as a fact and then keeping that as a fact regardless of anything pushing against it.

Like you can't put Slafkovsky in his own category and discuss the improvements in his game. Everything has to come back to him being the "worst 1st overall" in history and then go down into some path about passing on Cooley, or whoever it is today, and then devolving into Michkov.

It's about freaking out about any prospect who has a bad game or a cold streak and talking about how the whole rebuild is doomed and they whiffed on every pick and they will be mediocre until the end of time.

It's far beyond a criticism or a concern.. it's a toxic board right now with so many things just in the same playback loop of chronic cynicism.

 

[26Mats]

The why can't we be smart and rebuild like these smart genius teams edition

View attachment 774083

I actually think a lot of those teams are doing a good job rebuilding.

The thing is rebuilding takes time. Most of those teams near the bottom now will be at the top of the league down the line. So what I don't get is people complaining that we're losing now, when we're only 2 years into the rebuild. Like, get real. We weren't going to go to the bottom of the league, do a proper rebuild, and be a winning team in year 2 if the rebuild.

I don't get all the negativity and complaining about the current team and the direction of the rebuild.

 

[Miller Time]

Seems that being concerned means negative. Yet, I reserve the right to look at Jacob Fowler having maybe 2 bad games in a row and still feel that this guy is the real deal or has a REAL potential of a NHL starter. Just like I reserve the right to look at Mesar having a heck of start in the OHL and not be sure about his NHL potential.

Yeah, everything is about waiting and seeing. Yes, we have to wait 4-5 years before we have an opinion. Strangely, when we come back after 4-5 years, we are being told that it's hindsight. Or that....what's the point it's in the past. All of this on a message board. Strange.

I will always believe that ANY claim of a prospect being a bust or an all-star till D+3 is premature. Obviously. But if positively we could be excited, I think we could also be concerned and have doubts. No idea why we can't.

Also, it's not about being right. 'Cause if we say all this on this board, just a quick search and it's easy to know if somebody said something or not...lol

Let's be honest though...right now the issues are NOT about Slaf and Reinbacher. They are about who was passed over and who RIGHT now looks better. Which in the end, might or might not mean anything when it counts the most. But it's normal right now for any human being who sees Michkov, Benson, Kulich or anybody that does well to hate seeing it....ESPECIALLY when this Habs team have all the trouble in the world to have any kind of offensive game since Damphousse, Turgeon and freakin Stéphane Richer...

the highlighted words are the difference imo...

not being "sure", "feeling" that, "preferring" a style vs another... these types of statements are very different from those that claim certainty when all they are offering is opinion.

I think one can certainly have an opinion right away, but if that gets offered as certainty or fact, that's when it slides into silly posturing.

The "looking better" part imo is where things often get off the rails... I don't think one can make a definitive claim that Cooley "looks better" than Slaf, or Michkov "looks better" than Reinbacher... holding the opinion that one looks better than the other is different than claiming with certainty that the habs made a mistake in the draft choice because of that opinion/preference.

Right now, I don't see an issue with either Slaf or Reinbacher (and neither were my choice/preference at the time of the draft). The reasoning offered by the team for the selections, and the progress thus far, remains quite coherent and consistent. I haven't seen anything from any 2022 picks that offers definitive evidence that a superior player was picked later, ditto for RB at 5OA this past draft.

it's precisely the historical context you reference, and the emotional baggage that understandably weighs heavily on some fans, that explain the hot cynical takes flooding this and the slaf threads... but it's also exactly that emotional bias that pushes so many of these takes beyond differences of opinion and into silly, empty takes...

 

[Gravity]

It's not labeling any criticism as a hater.

It's about people having an opinion, often based on something they read or perpetuating something from someone else that also doesn't have enough information to formulate such a binding opinion and passing it as a fact and then keeping that as a fact regardless of anything pushing against it.

Like you can't put Slafkovsky in his own category and discuss the improvements in his game. Everything has to come back to him being the "worst 1st overall" in history and then go down into some path about passing on Cooley, or whoever it is today, and then devolving into Michkov.

It's about freaking out about any prospect who has a bad game or a cold streak and talking about how the whole rebuild is doomed and they whiffed on every pick and they will be mediocre until the end of time.

It's far beyond a criticism or a concern.. it's a toxic board right now with so many things just in the same playback loop of chronic cynicism.

That's fine though. Nobody has 100% intel on a prospects development (not even @montreal who watches all their games). People react based on the subset of information they have and the ultimate goal from all parties is to see a talented, winning team in Montreal.

People have a right to be cynical given how this team has been built and managed for the last 30 years. Just like how people have a right to be optimistic about what appears to finally be a competent management group. It's different sides of the same coin. Of course there are going to be concerns given that Michkov is lighting up the KHL and we haven't had a real PPG forward since Kovalev, just like how there's reason to believe Reinbacher will develop into an all around 1D.

People are going to say what they want and that's their right (especially on a forum). If you don't want to read it, ignore it. The divisiveness between the 'haters' and the 'positive' crew is hilarious since we all want the same thing.

 

[bcv]

Bang on! The fact that people of this board label any criticism as being a 'hater' is rudimentary tribalism at it's finest. No you are not special. Everyone's opinion or questions regarding prospects is valid without them being branded a 'hater' or being 'toxic positive'.

I guess it's just a coincidence that those who get called haters are negative about every aspect of the Montreal Canadiens.

ReHabs and Whitesnake are great examples of this. They're not haters, they're positive fans going through a rough patch of many years not being able to say anything positive about that team, including things that are too soon to be evaluated.

 

[WeThreeKings]

I actually think a lot of those teams are doing a good job rebuilding.

The thing is rebuilding takes time. Most of those teams near the bottom now will be at the top of the league down the line. So what I don't get is people complaining that we're losing now, when we're only 2 years into the rebuild. Like, get real. We weren't going to go to the bottom of the league, do a proper rebuild, and be a winning team in year 2 if the rebuild.

I don't get all the negativity and complaining about the current team and the direction of the rebuild.

I do, too.

And you are right.. rebuilding takes time and that is what people aren't getting through their heads. This is a long process and what is going to happen?
We will make right picks.
We will make wrong picks.
We will make good trades.
We will make bad trades.
Some players will develop fast and some will develop slow.
Some will progress quick and stagnate.
Etc. etc.

It's way too early to have a doom and gloom attitude about the rebuild. But yet people have chosen that attitude and will look for anything to confirm their bias of that.

That's fine though. Nobody has 100% intel on a prospects development (not even @montreal who watches all their games). People react based on the subset of information they have and the ultimate goal from all parties is to see a talented, winning team in Montreal.

People have a right to be cynical given how this team has been built and managed for the last 30 years. Just like how people have a right to be optimistic about what appears to finally be a competent management group. It's different sides of the same coin. Of course there are going to be concerns given that Michkov is lighting up the KHL and we haven't had a real PPG forward since Kovalev, just like how there's reason to believe Reinbacher will develop into an all around 1D.

People are going to say what they want and that's their right (especially on a forum). If you don't want to read it, ignore it. The divisiveness between the 'haters' and the 'positive' crew is hilarious since we all want the same thing.

I actually don't think the goal from all parties is to see a talent, winning team in Montreal. I actually see a lot more of people wanting the Canadiens to pick, select, trade, and do whatever they would do if they were GM and if any move goes counter to that, they will hate that move, pick on that move and ignore anything that might be counter to their intended move being right. Even if it means pretending that they wanted to pick an entirely different player than they said they would at the time.

People don't have a right to be cynical given how its been built and managed for the last 30 years. Would you have the right to go into a new relationship and give that person no trust? Just because your last partner might have done something to break your trust doesn't mean you apply that to a new person. This isn't the same management group. Bringing negativity and toxicity from previous regimes isn't fair and it isn't pertinent to the discussion, at all.

The whole discussion is centered around how things have seemingly just gotten way worse than they ever used to be. I remember the tension over whether Gainey was the right GM for the team. But it was never this bad. It really has shifted from being a hockey based discussion on what is the right approach to win.. into an all-out pissing match, doom and gloom, feedback loop of cynicism that doesn't go anywhere.

If I unignored the Slafkovsky thread, I can guarantee you that I'd see the same few people going on about f***ing Liiga stats.. and if you talk about micro-adjustments in his game regarding scanning, spacing, using his body.. you'll get hit with "lol cope no points" and then when he gets 4 pts in 5 games its "lol those are phantom points, liiga stats". You just can't have an honest discussion and assessment of his game because people wanted someone else and he isn't the traditional franchise chasing 1st overall pick.

I guess it's just a coincidence that those who get called haters are negative about every aspect of the Montreal Canadiens.

ReHabs and Whitesnake are great examples of this. They're not haters, they're positive fans going through a rough patch of many years not being able to say anything positive about that team, including things that are too soon to be evaluated.

ReHabs is a Slafkovsky hater and wouldn't acknowledge improvements in his play even if you paid him to be intellectually honest about it. He polluted that thread and wouldn't stop 18 months after the selection.

 

[Gravity]

I do, too.

And you are right.. rebuilding takes time and that is what people aren't getting through their heads. This is a long process and what is going to happen?
We will make right picks.
We will make wrong picks.
We will make good trades.
We will make bad trades.
Some players will develop fast and some will develop slow.
Some will progress quick and stagnate.
Etc. etc.

It's way too early to have a doom and gloom attitude about the rebuild. But yet people have chosen that attitude and will look for anything to confirm their bias of that.



I actually don't think the goal from all parties is to see a talent, winning team in Montreal. I actually see a lot more of people wanting the Canadiens to pick, select, trade, and do whatever they would do if they were GM and if any move goes counter to that, they will hate that move, pick on that move and ignore anything that might be counter to their intended move being right. Even if it means pretending that they wanted to pick an entirely different player than they said they would at the time.

People don't have a right to be cynical given how its been built and managed for the last 30 years. Would you have the right to go into a new relationship and give that person no trust? Just because your last partner might have done something to break your trust doesn't mean you apply that to a new person. This isn't the same management group. Bringing negativity and toxicity from previous regimes isn't fair and it isn't pertinent to the discussion, at all.

The whole discussion is centered around how things have seemingly just gotten way worse than they ever used to be. I remember the tension over whether Gainey was the right GM for the team. But it was never this bad. It really has shifted from being a hockey based discussion on what is the right approach to win.. into an all-out pissing match, doom and gloom, feedback loop of cynicism that doesn't go anywhere.

If I unignored the Slafkovsky thread, I can guarantee you that I'd see the same few people going on about f***ing Liiga stats.. and if you talk about micro-adjustments in his game regarding scanning, spacing, using his body.. you'll get hit with "lol cope no points" and then when he gets 4 pts in 5 games its "lol those are phantom points, liiga stats". You just can't have an honest discussion and assessment of his game because people wanted someone else and he isn't the traditional franchise chasing 1st overall pick.



ReHabs is a Slafkovsky hater and wouldn't acknowledge improvements in his play even if you paid him to be intellectually honest about it. He polluted that thread and wouldn't stop 18 months after the selection.

With regards to the bolded, you can't make that comparison because Lapointe is from the previous regime and Bobrov has very debatable track record with NYR. Moreover, it's Geoffy supervising it all. If you found out your current partner had cheated in his/her previous relationship, would you view him/her the same way? Of course not. Reputation and history matters and HuGo walked into a team with strong narrative of being shit drafters and developers. It takes feasible change to dispel an age old narrative. When Slaf becomes a monster and Reinbacher becomes as valuable as Michkov, then only will the narrative die.

 

[Whitesnake]

Also, I understand @WeThreeKings points about not being able to talk Slaf without having to take other players. We should be able to say that Slaf changes the way he comb his hair without having to say that Michkov anyway, doesn't have to comb his hair to look great. I get what he's saying.

But Personnally, while I do microevaluate players. I also like to look at it as a larger perspective. While we can like the way our pool looks, it might not do a single thing if every team around us has a better pool. We are not competing in a league of our own.

Just like I do admit I'm harsh about picks made from our team.....I could even be harsh about a Ylonen or Romanov pick until I realize that....in 2018, there's almost, to this day, nobody else in the whole 7 rounds that we could pick from even in hindsight.....Sharangovich....McLeod, Durzi, Kurashev...and...that,s about it....insanely bad draft. And yet PPG, Ylonen is better than McLeod. So Ylonen and Romanov in themselves might be average picks but...they might actually be one of the best there was that year.

So nobody is perfect. If scouts and head scouts aren't, so are posters. And if you dislike some of them including me, there's a way to avoid me or them.

 

[ChesterNimitz]

Y'all chewing me out for that Juolevi comment, I'm just asking. Joulevi in his draft year was highly touted as well as a two way dman with exceptional breakout abilities. No saying Rein will be a bust like Ollie. Yes I 100% wanted Michkov but I'm still going to cheer for Reinbacher to succeed.

I don't understand the hater agenda either. We all root for the same team and want our players and prospects to succeed. Check my posts, even though I want a loss every game I still cheer for Slaf to get a hat trick.

I think your hopes for both are highly unlikely.

 

[Whitesnake]

the highlighted words are the difference imo...

not being "sure", "feeling" that, "preferring" a style vs another... these types of statements are very different from those that claim certainty when all they are offering is opinion.

I think one can certainly have an opinion right away, but if that gets offered as certainty or fact, that's when it slides into silly posturing.

The "looking better" part imo is where things often get off the rails... I don't think one can make a definitive claim that Cooley "looks better" than Slaf, or Michkov "looks better" than Reinbacher... holding the opinion that one looks better than the other is different than claiming with certainty that the habs made a mistake in the draft choice because of that opinion/preference.

Right now, I don't see an issue with either Slaf or Reinbacher (and neither were my choice/preference at the time of the draft). The reasoning offered by the team for the selections, and the progress thus far, remains quite coherent and consistent. I haven't seen anything from any 2022 picks that offers definitive evidence that a superior player was picked later, ditto for RB at 5OA this past draft.

it's precisely the historical context you reference, and the emotional baggage that understandably weighs heavily on some fans, that explain the hot cynical takes flooding this and the slaf threads... but it's also exactly that emotional bias that pushes so many of these takes beyond differences of opinion and into silly, empty takes...

You know my takes on the subject. I will always be against the Habs or any other team in the league that has their strategy about needs vs BPA. Mind you, where Me and you and everybody else actually don't agree is that definition of said needs and BPA. But since I can only talk about myself, I have my own view about it. In resume, if Reinbacher is the pick 'cause they actually think he's the most and best NHL prospect at 5, I'd be behind that pick no matter if he's my pick or not. If I feel that he was picked 'cause we had to replenish the right side, I won't be for it. That's frankly the only argument and sure thing I will die on. But it's still just my opinion. Even if we hit the jackpot with a need pick....or if we hit a bust with a BPA pick...I will alway stand by view on things. Reason why I have a hard time bashing the Scherbak pick. But have no problem bashing the McCarron one. 2 Busts. But 2 different strategies.

I prefer losing on BPA than needs because I think that in general...we will win more on BPA than needs.

As My list indicated...I had Leonard and Benson ahead of Reinbacher. Purely based on my choices. Reinbacher was 7th as BPA for me. So not 30th. So I don't dislike the pick in itself. My personal taste do say that I had other in mind. But I do recognize if he reachers his potential by David will bring to this team.

 

[Miller Time]

You know my takes on the subject. I will always be against the Habs or any other team in the league that has their strategy about needs vs BPA. Mind you, where Me and you and everybody else actually don't agree is that definition of said needs and BPA. But since I can only talk about myself, I have my own view about it. In resume, if Reinbacher is the pick 'cause they actually think he's the most and best NHL prospect at 5, I'd be behind that pick no matter if he's my pick or not. If I feel that he was picked 'cause we had to replenish the right side, I won't be for it. That's frankly the only argument and sure thing I will die on. But it's still just my opinion. Even if we hit the jackpot with a need pick....or if we hit a bust with a BPA pick...I will alway stand by view on things. Reason why I have a hard time bashing the Scherbak pick. But have no problem bashing the McCarron one. 2 Busts. But 2 different strategies.

I prefer losing on BPA than needs because I think that in general...we will win more on BPA than needs.

As My list indicated...I had Leonard and Benson ahead of Reinbacher. Purely based on my choices. Reinbacher was 7th as BPA for me. So not 30th. So I don't dislike the pick in itself. My personal taste do say that I had other in mind. But I do recognize if he reachers his potential by David will bring to this team.

did you hear or read anything from the team that suggested RB was picked for perceived positional need?

I agree with you there insofar as I don't think that a lottery pick is where you prioritize specific roster/organization needs... i too think that it should be BPA in the sense of highest ceiling/perceived impact (though i do think that if you have a winger and a C or D rated similarly, you take the C or D as those roles are generally of a greater overall impact unless you are talking about an Ovechkin type generational talent at W)... G is the toughest one. typically not a great position to use a top-5 pick on, though no regrets on Price.

I thought MIchkov offered the most appealing "ceiling" talent where we picked, but as I learned more about RB and the aspects of his game that point to a very high ceiling, i get the pick. If anything, while we don't necessarily have any blue chip RB prospects, the depth of prospects we did have on D going into the draft (plus Matheson who isn't yet 30) would have lent itself to the team going with a forward like Benson/Michkov/Lenoard rather than another D if they were heavily focused on organization depth/need...

 

[Whitesnake]

did you hear or read anything from the team that suggested RB was picked for perceived positional need?

I agree with you there insofar as I don't think that a lottery pick is where you prioritize specific roster/organization needs... i too think that it should be BPA in the sense of highest ceiling/perceived impact (though i do think that if you have a winger and a C or D rated similarly, you take the C or D as those roles are generally of a greater overall impact unless you are talking about an Ovechkin type generational talent at W)... G is the toughest one. typically not a great position to use a top-5 pick on, though no regrets on Price.

I thought MIchkov offered the most appealing "ceiling" talent where we picked, but as I learned more about RB and the aspects of his game that point to a very high ceiling, i get the pick. If anything, while we don't necessarily have any blue chip RB prospects, the depth of prospects we did have on D going into the draft (plus Matheson who isn't yet 30) would have lent itself to the team going with a forward like Benson/Michkov/Lenoard rather than another D if they were heavily focused on organization depth/need...

Well we won't agree with what that mean but when I hear and read this...The GM said Reinbacher was very high on the Canadiens’ list whether he was a defenceman or not, but the fact he is a right-hand shot played into the decision to draft him.“If he were a left-shot defenceman we might have cooled a bit on him, but we don’t have as much depth on the right side,” Hughes told reporters in Nashville.

Me and you don't take that statement the same way, and it's fine. I also can say that I understand that you could take it differently. But I stick with what I think. Also, no lists had him there. And even Reinbacher didn't expect that either and frankly, those kids are a bit told by their agents where they should be picked based on what they hear. All 3 things for me, makes him a need pick.

Mind you, again, I had him No7. So it's not a need pick where we took a 3rd rounder and made him a top 5 pick. I know. But it's still a need pick nonetheless. At least, for me.

 

[Redux91]

People are going to say what they want and that's their right (especially on a forum). If you don't want to read it, ignore it. The divisiveness between the 'haters' and the 'positive' crew is hilarious since we all want the same thing.

And that's all fair and good dude,
But then you have "f*** should of taken michkov" posts in the GDT 4 months after the draft and its like
Wtf are we supposed to do with that lol
It's watching someone else unable to "deal" with their own personal feelings about how they feel about what they THINK is the immediate result of a choice made.. which we wont actually have any results for 2 and a half years at the mininum..

We tell you and a couple others to have patience about the whole thing but it's positively toxic so it's like f*** us i guess then right? lmao.

 

[Doublechin]

Bang on! The fact that people of this board label any criticism as being a 'hater' is rudimentary tribalism at it's finest. No you are not special. Everyone's opinion or questions regarding prospects is valid without them being branded a 'hater' or being 'toxic positive'.

There's a definite bias in some Hab fans that get offended when we're critical of anything Habs and especially young prospects

I can say with confidence that Reinbacher has been abysmal so far this year, he's had a horrendous stretch, am I saying he's a bust? No will be become a top 4 Dman? I'm not sure

My problem is that if I'm drafting 5th overall, I'm going low risk and going for home run talent and skill something that Reinbacher is far from

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

There's a definite bias in some Hab fans that get offended when we're critical of anything Habs and especially young prospects

I can say with confidence that Reinbacher has been abysmal so far this year, he's had a horrendous stretch, am I saying he's a bust? No will be become a top 4 Dman? I'm not sure

My problem is that if I'm drafting 5th overall, I'm going low risk and going for home run talent and skill something that Reinbacher is far from

Going for both low risk and a homerun swing in the same pick is as close to a mutually exclusive venture as you are going to find as GM of an NHL team. These are called generational prospects who are generally not available at 5 OA.

 

[nhlfan9191]

There's a definite bias in some Hab fans that get offended when we're critical of anything Habs and especially young prospects

I can say with confidence that Reinbacher has been abysmal so far this year, he's had a horrendous stretch, am I saying he's a bust? No will be become a top 4 Dman? I'm not sure

My problem is that if I'm drafting 5th overall, I'm going low risk and going for home run talent and skill something that Reinbacher is far from

https://x.com/talk_canadiens/status/1729211369004896658?s=46

I don’t know if this was posted but this stuff is kind of concerning.

 

[Canadienna]

Going for both low risk and a homerun swing in the same pick is as close to a mutually exclusive venture as you are going to find as GM of an NHL team. These are called generational prospects who are generally not available at 5 OA.

I said so at the time, but the idea that Michkov was high-risk was faulty in my opinion.

Michkov was that low-risk, high upside pick that fell in our lap at 5. Imo, a player like Reinbacher carries a lot more "risk" (in terms of becoming an impact player).

The probability of Michkov becoming a star NHLer is significantly higher than the probability of Reinbacher becoming a star NHLer (obviously, in my opinion). That is why Michkov was lower risk.