Prospect Info: David Reinbacher

[Naslundforever]

I tried to create a thread to compare Reinbacher to other prospects so posters like you would be able to focus on discussing Reinbacher in the Reinbacher thread, and not hear about other prospects in that thread. And you still complained.

I was happy about the thread! It got closed for some reason.

I wrote I would put the thread on ignore but only because I did not want to do it with this one; sry I came off pissy probably.

 

[Hins77]

You can also find great D later in the draft (Keith, Josi, Petry, Vlasic etc...)

I respect your thought process about taking a risk on skill+size combo at the top of the draft, even if i disagree for the most part.

I wouldn't trade Slaf for 2 Michkov's at this point, since he's shown us what he can do and in my opinion he's not a scratch ticket anymore, even if he hasn't reached his apex yet. If Michkov was part of the same draft as his, i probably would have picked Michkov instead and might be regretting it right about now.

I prefer to see a management fills their holes with 1st round pick instead of praying on 2nd round pick/7th round pick they become something valuable.
Those are bonus. Gallagher was a Bonus. But, as management, you cannot only rely on those pick for fill the holes you have in the depth chart.
And when we say, trade are possible if you have a surplus. Yeah, but the reality is teams know you have a surplus. Nashville try to sell Askarov since a long time ago. They arent able to find their price. Buffalo drafted a lot of smallish winger and now they want to trade them. They received a 3rd line center for Savoie….
This is not that easy to pick every player consider BPA without thinking about the depth chart. Cause at one point, you can be stuck with your surplus/ or don’t get the price you want.

 

[26Mats]

I was happy about the thread! It got closed for some reason.

I wrote I would put the thread on ignore but only because I did not want to do it with this one; sry I came off pissy probably.

All good.

Yeah, I thought it would have both allowed those that want to discuss Reinbacher, a huge prospect of ours, to do so. And also allow those that become obsessed with a prospect, only for us to pass on him, to have their space to assess management's draft decisions. Oh well, I can understand how it's offensive to some to have a section of our board discussing other teams prospects, when there is a lot to discuss about our players and team.

 

[admiralcadillac]

You're contradicting yourself. No one remembers Keith, they remember the team defense.

No one remembers Keith or Toews for the offense, or even Hossa, it's Kane that lead the bus. He's called prime time for a reason.

I absolutely remember Keith Seabrook Hjalmarsson being on the ice 100% of the time of their cups.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

I don't think Ovechkin or Sergachev are a fair comparison to either guys.

Reinbacher was drafted for the defensive and transition part of the game which is a more important part of winning than an offense only small winger. Ekholm had more of an impact for Edmonton than Panarin did for the Rangers, as an example.

A lot of the league thought Reinbacher was BPA over Michkov, hence the appetite to try to trade up for Reinbacher, and none to get up to secure Michkov.

I don’t think it’s that simple. Patrick Kane, Martin St Louis… they were two of the best players in the game. I wouldn’t say they’re not as valuable as a puck moving defender. Both are prime reasons why their teams won cups. So I wouldn’t make the blanket statement that small wingers aren’t as valuable, particularly if he’s a goal scorer.

Now to the debate on BPA. A few points here. First, BPA is usually not certain at the time a player is drafted. People like to look back after a draft and criticize clubs for not getting BPA when in fact that’s what they thought they were getting.

Secondly, the objective is to build the best club. 20 years from now Michkov may well be considered the BPA from that draft but that doesn’t necessarily mean he’s the right pick for us. You have to consider position scarcity and need. We needed a stud RD. They’re not easy to find. We probably wouldn’t have got one in this year’s draft for example. On the flipside, we already have some small skilled wingers. The need for one was far less pressing.

It’s one thing to reach for a player - that often can blow up in your face - but RB doesn’t seem like a reach. He addresses a need at a position of scarcity. I wasn’t happy the day we made the pick but I’m happy with it now.

We’ll have to see though. It’s way too early to declare that we made the right or wrong choice. We may well end up regretting not taking Mich. But at least I understand the rationale as to why we went the other way.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Except if you're drafting in the top 3 (and even then), BPA in the eyes of the fans and amateur scouts is almost always a smallish winger

Then, when these get traded, they fetch low returns to the consternation of most online communities as we saw with Savoie. Smallish 1st line wingers are generally available through trade (Fiala recently) for prices that aren't that steep, large 1st pair RD, almost never

Depends on the player.

You think Patrick Lane would’ve fetched a low return in his prime? You act make generalizations when you’re talking about elite players. I get the argument that in general small wingers aren’t as valuable but what matters are results. If Michkov were to become an elite scorer then he has tremendous value whether he’s big or not.

 

[Michelangelo]

Except if you're drafting in the top 3 (and even then), BPA in the eyes of the fans and amateur scouts is almost always a smallish winger

Then, when these get traded, they fetch low returns to the consternation of most online communities as we saw with Savoie. Smallish 1st line wingers are generally available through trade (Fiala recently) for prices that aren't that steep, large 1st pair RD, almost never

Or can also get them through free agency as we've seen recently with Dougie Hamilton and Alex Pietrangelo

Same with Brett Pesce this summer, who coincidentally was Pronman's NHL comparable for Reinbacher

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Yes casuals remember that. People who actually understand the complexities of hockey know that Kane was not the most important piece. If you believe that to be the case, you must not realize how playoff hockey is played. It's a game of mitigating mistakes. Whoever creates the most mistakes lose. A perfect example of this is game 5 of the 2021 final. What lost the Habs the game, the forwards or the mistake that Staal and chiarot made in theie own zone?

Kane won 1 conn symthe out of 3. That's telling. Also telling that in Tampa's wins, the great kucherov lost the xonn symthes to a D and a goalie. Now normally they will go to forwards for point totals but it's the D men and goalie who control the games outcome

I think Kucherov should’ve won at least one Smythe. I don’t care how they voted, sometimes they get it wrong. Kucherov not winning isn’t really evidence of him not being a key reason for those cups. He was probably the best player over the two runs.

 

[MoneyManny]

yeah, you are right about d-men in general, but a rhd with size, skating and skill is still a premium. if reinbacher shows slafkovsky like growth next year, you'd be against mičkov - reinbacher trade as well

You're 100% correct. I really hope Reinbacher makes me eat my words tbh. I don't want to see him fail.

 

[MoneyManny]

Good job not talking about my first paragraph, then using 5 more to address my 2nd. Anyhow .

You didn't say he was guaranteed superstar HOF, I was wrong. You actually said you'd happily bet he was over Reinbacher. Just like any Habs fan would. So that's ~33% of the only paragraph you responded too. Again, anyhow , none of that matters because this entire discussion was about Habs management and drafting and how your BS assumptions of which player has the better future are your continued weapon on who's the smarter poster.

Again, you miss the entire point.

I don't know who will have the best future. I don't have a crystal ball, i have no idea. Neither do you or Reinbacher himself. I'm just some goofball Habs fan talking crap on an oldschool forum.

But if i was forced to put money on either, it wouldn't be on Reinbacher and i BELIEVE that a lot of fans are blindsided by positional value and give it too much importance in scouting a prospect vs actual hockey talent.

I apologize for my earlier comment, i felt attacked and responded in kind. Could you please stop being aggressive as i am not your enemy?

 

[HuGo Burner Acc]

I think Kucherov should’ve won at least one Smythe. I don’t care how they voted, sometimes they get it wrong. Kucherov not winning isn’t really evidence of him not being a key reason for those cups. He was probably the best player over the two runs.

My overall point is a star forward isn't as important as a star defenceman in the overall outcome of games. Even goaltending look at this year. McDacid and Draisaitl are both top 5 Fs in the league yet Edmonton only went as far in games as Skinner allowed them to.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

My overall point is a star forward isn't as important as a star defenceman in the overall outcome of games.

Gretzky, Lemieux…

As always it depends on who you’re talking about. And I don’t agree that blueliners are more important or vice versa. You need a good mix of players.

Even goaltending look at this year. McDacid and Draisaitl are both top 5 Fs in the league yet Edmonton only went as far in games as Skinner allowed them to.

Skinner wasn’t the reason they didn’t win. Drai (probably hurt) didn’t produce down the stretch.

 

[MoneyManny]

I prefer to see a management fills their holes with 1st round pick instead of praying on 2nd round pick/7th round pick they become something valuable.
Those are bonus. Gallagher was a Bonus. But, as management, you cannot only rely on those pick for fill the holes you have in the depth chart.
And when we say, trade are possible if you have a surplus. Yeah, but the reality is teams know you have a surplus. Nashville try to sell Askarov since a long time ago. They arent able to find their price. Buffalo drafted a lot of smallish winger and now they want to trade them. They received a 3rd line center for Savoie….
This is not that easy to pick every player consider BPA without thinking about the depth chart. Cause at one point, you can be stuck with your surplus/ or don’t get the price you want.

How do you draft to fill the holes though? How do you realistically and logically plan specific player profiles years in advance with possibly the worst prospect turnout in pro sports?

Players like Pacioretty for example. Advertised as a big, physical playmaking winger, ended up being a soft goal scorer. And that's one of our better developed prospects in the last 20 years.

So not only do we need to overcome the low odds of any prospect becoming an impact player, but we need to also focus on very specific traits that may or may not exist for the player in the NHL years down the line? Which Ivy league school has the PHD in hockeyology?

For me that's like putting all your chips on red vs putting all your chips on a single number.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

Goodness… I just did and some rando just told me to get over myself.

I’m making a point the Reinbacher thread has been rendered useless, which is sad I’m actually interested in this player.

edit - Pretty sure mods have rules about posting anything at all btw. Heck it even turned into Wright vs Cooley vs Slaf again. sucks.

I am interested in the player too, but he’s not doing anything right now. It’s summer time, we can only talk about last season and what he’s done to date so much. Everything has been said already.

For the record, I was initially disappointed in the pick, because I wanted a forward, however, I like Reinbacher. I think he’s going to be a key cog for a decade or more. I just think we were more starved for offense.

 

[Andrei79]

Why did we pick Slaf over two RD and two potential 1Cs?

If anything, the Slaf pick reinforces his post about player scarcity. It's again a very scarce profile of player, moreso than anyone in that draft.

 

[Mrb1p]

If anything, the Slaf pick reinforces his post about player scarcity. It's again a very scarce profile of player, moreso than anyone in that draft.

Not really since David Jiricek is a RD and a full inch taller. By that definition he would've been the scarcity pick.

I don't really care about either pick but people who are dishonest annoy me a bit

 

[billy piton]

Not really since David Jiricek is a RD and a full inch taller. By that definition he would've been the scarcity pick.

I don't really care about either pick but people who are dishonest annoy me a bit

from positional standpoint wright made most sense, but they obviously didn't like his attitude and also acquired dach 15 minutes later. potential top pairing rhd wth size came the following year. can't have them all at once, but thought process seems sound.

 

[HuGo Burner Acc]

Gretzky, Lemieux…

As always it depends on who you’re talking about. And I don’t agree that blueliners are more important or vice versa. You need a good mix of players.

I mean you just named two generational players out of like 5 ever. Also Edmonton proved right after that they didn't need Gretzky to win a cup...because they were a dynasty. Yes you need a good mix but it's possible for one position to be more important than another.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

I mean you just named two generational players out of like 5 ever.

Right, to illustrate how silly it is to say blueliners are more valuable. They aren’t.

You measure players based on their talent, not their position. Is Jaromir Jagr any less valuable because he’s a winger? Hell no.

Also Edmonton proved right after that they didn't need Gretzky to win a cup...because they were a dynasty. Yes you need a good mix but it's possible for one position to be more important than another.

Irrelevant to the discussion and they had Messier.

 

[Mrb1p]

from positional standpoint wright made most sense, but they obviously didn't like his attitude and also acquired dach 15 minutes later. potential top pairing rhd wth size came the following year. can't have them all at once, but thought process seems sound.

The picks are fine to me I don't really care, I like all the players. It's the people hellbent on defending every single thing HuGo does with lies and asinine arguments like the one above that annoy me.

 

[Boss Man Hughes]

The picks are fine to me I don't really care, I like all the players. It's the people hellbent on defending every single thing HuGo does with lies and asinine arguments like the one above that annoy me.

Nothing wrong with his argument. They took Slaf because they felt he had the right character and was at least equal in talent to Wright. Same as Reinbacher- Michkov.

 

[Mrb1p]

Nothing wrong with his argument. They took Slaf because they felt he had the right character and was at least equal in talent to Wright. Same as Reinbacher- Michkov.

It's not the argument hes making. He's making the argument of scarcity.

 

[MTL Dirty Birdy]

Depends on the player.

You think Patrick Lane would’ve fetched a low return in his prime? You act make generalizations when you’re talking about elite players. I get the argument that in general small wingers aren’t as valuable but what matters are results. If Michkov were to become an elite scorer then he has tremendous value whether he’s big or not.

In all fairness, Kane was an uncontested first overall pick. Michkov was skipped over by six teams. I don’t understand why we’re comparing them.

 

[Andrei79]

Not really since David Jiricek is a RD and a full inch taller. By that definition he would've been the scarcity pick.

I don't really care about either pick but people who are dishonest annoy me a bit

A 6'3" 235lbs 18 year old skilled forward is pretty much unheard of. He's not dishonest, the type of profile Slaf has is very unique.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

In all fairness, Kane was an uncontested first overall pick. Michkov was skipped over by six teams. I don’t understand why we’re comparing them.

We're not. I'm simply pointing out that small fowards can be just as valuable as big puck moving blueliners. It's all in who's being compared. One isn't automatically better than the others.