Prospect Info: Emil Heineman

[Ezpz]

Hughes made a point of stating how important Heineman was to this deal. When you couple that with the fact that Calgary had just traded Bennett with Heineman as the main piece of their return it certainly provides a ton of credibility to Hughes statement.

Obviously when you ask a GM about any player that they acquire in a trade they are going to say something positive. In Heineman's case fans were underwhelmed because they didn't know who he was and he wasn't a 1st round pick.

There is overwhelming evidence that supports the fact that Hughes targeted Heineman and zero evidence that Heineman was a "toss in" so to arbitrarily label him as such seem to point to confirmation bias as the main culprit here.

The other possible viewpoint, which was certainly the prevailing one at the time Toffoli was dealt, is that Heineman was a "lesser" piece because he switched teams twice in a year, and in both cases as the secondary piece in the deal. The second round pick was considered the main piece in the deal for Sam Bennett at the time the trade broke--I distinctly remember Calgary fans moaning they traded Bennett for a 2nd rounder and a nothing prospect.

Regardless, there's no point in arguing about semantics. Heineman was not considered a top 10 prospect for us, and was largely seen as a throw-in by the fanbase; despite what Hughes said. We have no reason to trust anything that any GM says to the media, as they're always running an angle that is favourable to themselves.

Heineman has proven he's at least a notable prospect now. I'm not sure he's moved into the top 10 now (Though I would say the HFHabs list has already aged quite a bit in one month), but he certainly projects to be an NHL more so than a few who were previously ranked ahead of him. I still won't take any acquisition interview from Hughes as fact, just as I wouldn't for any other management personnel. No one would ever say "yeah he was just a toss in".

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

The other possible viewpoint, which was certainly the prevailing one at the time Toffoli was dealt, is that Heineman was a "lesser" piece because he switched teams twice in a year, and in both cases as the secondary piece in the deal. The second round pick was considered the main piece in the deal for Sam Bennett at the time the trade broke--I distinctly remember Calgary fans moaning they traded Bennett for a 2nd rounder and a nothing prospect.

Regardless, there's no point in arguing about semantics. Heineman was not considered a top 10 prospect for us, and was largely seen as a throw-in by the fanbase; despite what Hughes said. We have no reason to trust anything that any GM says to the media, as they're always running an angle that is favourable to themselves.

Heineman has proven he's at least a notable prospect now. I'm not sure he's moved into the top 10 now (Though I would say the HFHabs list has already aged quite a bit in one month), but he certainly projects to be an NHL more so than a few who were previously ranked ahead of him. I still won't take any acquisition interview from Hughes as fact, just as I wouldn't for any other management personnel. No one would ever say "yeah he was just a toss in".

You can't reference the collective opinion of a fan base as a source of empirical evidence as most fans are entirely clueless. The fact is that any fan who believed that Heineman was a "toss in" in both trades neatly fits into the clueless category.

There are plenty of fans who were happy with Heineman's inclusion and those fans are the fans that people should be paying attention to....not the drooling mob of zombies who feed off each other without regard for superior sources.

 

[Ezpz]

You can't reference the collective opinion of a fan base as a source of empirical evidence as most fans are entirely clueless. The fact is that any fan who believed that Heineman was a "toss in" in both trades neatly fits into the clueless category.

There are plenty of fans who were happy with Heineman's inclusion and those fans are the fans that people should be paying attention to....not the drooling mob of zombies who feed off each other without regard for superior sources.

Perhaps so, but he's pretty good for a toss in.

You don't need to search very far to find the opinions that Calgary fans had about losing him or the initial reaction of the fanbase--smart or not. I think it's a little too self-congratulatory to say one should pay attention to the fans who were happy; those same fans have been wrong just as often as they've been right. Information only takes you so far in projecting future success. Even those with superior sources, no one save their parents has any real information into what individual players attitudes or work ethics are like.

 

[DAChampion]

We've heard that from every GM though. I remember when Ian Schultz was a "piece they wanted" in the Halak trade.

And?

Schultz might have been.

 

[SlafySZN]

He wasn’t a toss in.

The habs wanted to draft Heineman in the 2020 draft but was taken 43rd by Florida so they took Tuch with their 47th and then Mysak.

So i have no doubt they really wanted him in the Toffoli trade. They ask infos to their scouts in those situations before making a trade.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Perhaps so, but he's pretty good for a toss in.

You don't need to search very far to find the opinions that Calgary fans had about losing him or the initial reaction of the fanbase--smart or not. I think it's a little too self-congratulatory to say one should pay attention to the fans who were happy; those same fans have been wrong just as often as they've been right. Information only takes you so far in projecting future success. Even those with superior sources, no one save their parents has any real information into what individual players attitudes or work ethics are like.

The top professional experts in the game are often wrong but that is not the problem as they arrive at evidence based conclusions. The problem is that brainless fans express opinions on players that they have never seen play and base their opinion entirely on stats/draft position etc. The experts are right far more than the fans are and that is because they have done actual research including watching the player live (often for multiple seasons) and on video, speaking to coaches/ex coaches, teammates and other scouts. They also have at the very least a rudimentary understanding of the prospects family and upbringing.

Referencing/quoting the social media mob of knuckle draggers that follow each team is the equivalent of a certain orange blowhard who in the absence of evidence will resort to "people are saying" as a way to support baseless claims........this pattern is hardly novel.

 

[Ezpz]

The top professional experts in the game are often wrong but that is not the problem as they arrive at evidence based conclusions. The problem is that brainless fans express opinions on players that they have never seen play and base their opinion entirely on stats/draft position etc. The experts are right far more than the fans are and that is because they have done actual research including watching the player live (often for multiple seasons) and on video, speaking to coaches/ex coaches, teammates and other scouts. They also have at the very least a rudimentary understanding of the prospects family and upbringing.

Referencing/quoting the social media mob of knuckle draggers that follow each team is the equivalent of a certain orange blowhard who in the absence of evidence will resort to "people are saying" as a way to support baseless claims........this pattern is hardly novel.

I didn't quote anyone, I just said he looks more like a real prospect after seeing him play. Like I said, you're arguing semantics. Media nor fans were hyped on the guy when we acquired him, it's fair to call him a throw in. Most of his hype has come in the last week. There's no way Heineman was targeted over the first round pick or one of Calgary's top prospects. Gorges was a throw in in the Rivet trade, that doesn't mean he wasn't a good player.

 

[Scriptor]

Decent cash is what the Habs are made of. If that’s the only thing standing in the way of Heineman staying in North America, I imagine they can come to an agreement.

Maybe

Good player, still very young. Again, patience.
Another SHL season would not hurt him.

Developing a player shouldn't be about making choices that don't actively screw over the kid over those that actively help the kid progress.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

I didn't quote anyone, I just said he looks more like a real prospect after seeing him play. Like I said, you're arguing semantics. Media nor fans were hyped on the guy when we acquired him, it's fair to call him a throw in. Most of his hype has come in the last week. There's no way Heineman was targeted over the first round pick or one of Calgary's top prospects. Gorges was a throw in in the Rivet trade, that doesn't mean he wasn't a good player.

Hughes wanted a 1st round pick and a good prospect......he got exactly what he wanted therefore you can not call him a throw in. He was also the primary asset in the Bennett deal as you can't tell me with a straight face that a late 2nd round pick was the primary asset as opposed to a player who was the 12th pick of the 2nd round and on the rise. Heineman would easily be a 1st rounder in a redraft and as far as Hughes is concerned he received two 1st rounders for Toffoli.

Anyways.....you are right about one aspect that has this devolving into semantics and I don't see either position changing at this point.

 

[BaseballCoach]

I was thinking last night, Slaf better off playing first line minutes in Laval. Give his roster spot to Heinemann. Generally, once they get use to North American ice surface his game will come up another notch.

The argument to play in Laval should not be based on minutes. Slaf won't play more than 18 minutes in Laval, and the way MSL runs his lines, won't play less than 14 minutes in MTL. If he is not overmatched, he will learn more in 14 minutes against NHLers than 18 minutes against players like Nate Schnarr or Alex Belzile.

So the reason to start Slaf in Laval is if he is not good enough to play for the Habs yet. There is no point to keeping him but not playing him.

 

[Habs10Habs]

You can't reference the collective opinion of a fan base as a source of empirical evidence as most fans are entirely clueless. The fact is that any fan who believed that Heineman was a "toss in" in both trades neatly fits into the clueless category.

There are plenty of fans who were happy with Heineman's inclusion and those fans are the fans that people should be paying attention to....not the drooling mob of zombies who feed off each other without regard for superior sources.

You arrogant POS.

Just because someone doesn't know every damn prospect in the league. Does not make them clueless.

As nice of a surprise that Heineman has been. What has he really proven? Every team has a Heineman or two.

 

[Naslundforever]

I already miss the guy

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

You arrogant POS.

Just because someone doesn't know every damn prospect in the league. Does not make them clueless.

As nice of a surprise that Heineman has been. What has he really proven? Every team has a Heineman or two.

Place your thumb back in your mouth and return to the nursery.

They are clueless because they express strong opinions on players that they don't know anything about. I am not clueless because I don't know anything about applying makeup but I would be clueless if I went on an Beautician's message board making absolute assertions about the relative quality of different eye liners without any evidence or experience with the product other than looking at the bottle.

I didn't know much about Heineman either other than he was a decent prospect at the time of the draft. Unlike the mob of bellyaching babies I took the time to watch him before establishing any opinion at all.

 

[Boss Man Hughes]

You arrogant POS.

Just because someone doesn't know every damn prospect in the league. Does not make them clueless.

As nice of a surprise that Heineman has been. What has he really proven? Every team has a Heineman or two.

The question is was Heineman include in 2 trades because those teams wanted to dump him. Or was he in the trade because it was the only way to complete the trade. And the logical assumption is that he has been included because he is a valuable commodity.
He was NOT a toss in. Whether Hughes felt he was acquiring a 1st, 2nd or 3rd line forward is the question.

 

[Habs10Habs]

Place your thumb back in your mouth and return to the nursery.

They are clueless because they express strong opinions on players that they don't know anything about. I am not clueless because I don't know anything about applying makeup but I would be clueless if I went on an Beautician's message board making absolute assertions about the relative quality of different eye liners.

Maybe you should put your head in a freezer, to help control the swelling.

You stated and I quote "The fact is that any fan who believed that Heineman was a "toss in" in both trades neatly fits into the clueless category."

If, in this case, you did not know anything about Heineman. What would you think?

1. He was traded with a 1st rd pick. Wasn't the main piece of the trade.
2. This is the 2nd time he's been traded in a short period of time.

What would be your first thought? Thinking he was a meh prospect isn't a total off the wall concept.

For the ones that you claim came out and slammed him right off the bat without any prior knowledge. I would say they were more ignorant than clueless. But as you included "any fan" that includes me.

When the trade first happened. I went to the Flames board, to see their general reaction. I don't recall seeing too many who were upset. Mostly comments like "Oh man, atleast we didn't lose Cary, Pelletier or a few others". So I came away with the opinion that he was an average prospect. It wasn't until I've had a chance to see him during training camp. That I've changed my mind.

Oh and I'm sure your make up is flawless. So I wouldn't worry.

 

[BaseballCoach]

Good player, still very young. Again, patience.
Another SHL season would not hurt him.

Burning an ELC year, and he still will not have played on the smaller ice surface. Why?

It is best to control his developjment, and if that means keeping him in Montreal until December 1st, no big deal. It's not like we have to sit a superstar to make room.

 

[Habs10Habs]

The question is was Heineman include in 2 trades because those teams wanted to dump him. Or was he in the trade because it was the only way to complete the trade. And the logical assumption is that he has been included because he is a valuable commodity.

It could be either way. He could be included in because he was a valuable commodity. Highly regarded by the team trading for him. Or it could be because both teams didn't think too highly of him.

It's logical now. But in not knowing the player at the time of the trade. It left it open to the first one being a possibility.

 

[PavelBrendl]

You arrogant POS.

Just because someone doesn't know every damn prospect in the league. Does not make them clueless.

As nice of a surprise that Heineman has been. What has he really proven? Every team has a Heineman or two.

A team trades for a prospect that a large part of the fanbase doesn’t know.

It takes 30 seconds to write a post claiming some random, unfounded opinion based on a “vibe”, whatever tf people base that shit on.

It takes 15 minutes to look at numbers and watch/read a scouting report from his draft year and a little footage since then, and write a post with your thoughts on what info you have.

The air of authority with which most people indulge in option 1 is staggering, and a hell of a lot of that went on when Heineman was acquired.

Those who put in the 15 minutes knew very well that Heineman was being a highly undervalued piece of the trade by this fanbase.

No need to call anyone an arrogant POS.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

My interactions are on this thread are starting to feel like the pigeon playing chess meme.

Heineman is a good prospect and was insisted upon in two trades where the GM publicly identified him as the main asset......but instead of just being happy that we have him the people that knew nothing about him and crapped on him are still moving goalposts to support their initial incorrect assertion. Why is it so hard to admit that you are/were wrong about him and learn from your mistakes. I have made a ton of poor decisions in my life but I always use it as a learning experience and am grateful to those who have helped to correct my course. Unfortunately the human ego is too strong for many to over come and we are left defending emeperical evidence with those who choose not to acknowledge it.

Perhaps my choice of words is not always conducive to civil discourse but I am of the belief that to engage in compromise from a position of empirical truth is to be complicit in the emboldening of poor behaviour that places personal bias/groupthink before evidence.

 

[Habs10Habs]

A team trades for a prospect that a large part of the fanbase doesn’t know.

It takes 30 seconds to write a post claiming some random, unfounded opinion based on a “vibe”, whatever tf people base that shit on.

It takes 15 minutes to look at numbers and watch/read a scouting report from his draft year and a little footage since then, and write a post with your thoughts on what info you have.

The air of authority with which most people indulge in option 1 is staggering, and a hell of a lot of that went on when Heineman was acquired.

Those who put in the 15 minutes knew very well that Heineman was being a highly undervalued piece of the trade by this fanbase.

No need to call anyone an arrogant POS.

I would have had no problem with what the poster stated. There are a lot of blow hards who come out and try to state fact. When they don't have a clue what they're talking about. My issue is where the poster states that any person who felt Heineman was a "toss in" was clueless.

I did spend more than 15 mins on the Calgary board. Reading over different reactions. The majority I read showed me that they didn't really care about the loss of Heineman. They were more grateful that they didn't lose one of their more valuable prospects. It wasn't until a couple of days later, when I had more time. That I looked into him closer. I still wasn't overly impressed, but still happy with the trade. Now that I've gotten to see him as a Hab. I like him, and can see where some of our fans were very happy with the trade.

As for the POS comment. I dislike anyone who tries to come across as better than someone else. You can get your point across without being a dick.

 

[Habs10Habs]

My interactions are on this thread are starting to feel like the pigeon playing chess meme.

Heineman is a good prospect and was insisted upon in two trades where the GM publicly identified him as the main asset......but instead of just being happy that we have him the people that knew nothing about him and crapped on him are still moving goalposts to support their initial incorrect assertion. Why is it so hard to admit that you are/were wrong about him and learn from your mistakes. I have made a ton of poor decisions in my life but I always use it as a learning experience and am grateful to those who have helped to correct my course. Unfortunately the human ego is too strong for many to over come and we are left defending emeperical evidence with those who choose not to acknowledge it.

Perhaps my choice of words is not always conducive to civil discourse but I am of the belief that to engage in compromise from a position of empirical truth is to be complicit in the emboldening of poor behaviour that places personal bias/groupthink before evidence.

I can't speak for everyone who were underwhelmed with the trade. I was actually happy with just the 1st rd pick. Even if my original opinion of Heineman was that he was an average prospect. I've personally come out and stated that I underestimated the value we received. He hasn't proven he's a slam dunk yet. But I have been impressed with what I've seen of him with the Habs so far.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

It could be either way. He could be included in because he was a valuable commodity. Highly regarded by the team trading for him. Or it could be because both teams didn't think too highly of him.

It's logical now. But in not knowing the player at the time of the trade. It left it open to the first one being a possibility.

It isn't either way though because both GM's publicly identified him as a main piece. Hughes very clear in stating how Calgary did not want to give up Heineman who was undisputedly the primary asset in the Bennett trade.

It takes alot of intellectual dishonesty to take the opposite stance which is demonstrated by using social media forums as a higher standard of evidence than a statement from the actual GM. You are also ignoring the large group of fans who supported the acquisition, like anything the bulk of knowledge is contained within the minority and it is no different here.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

I would have had no problem with what the poster stated. There are a lot of blow hards who come out and try to state fact. When they don't have a clue what they're talking about. My issue is where the poster states that any person who felt Heineman was a "toss in" was clueless.

I did spend more than 15 mins on the Calgary board. Reading over different reactions. The majority I read showed me that they didn't really care about the loss of Heineman. They were more grateful that they didn't lose one of their more valuable prospects. It wasn't until a couple of days later, when I had more time. That I looked into him closer. I still wasn't overly impressed, but still happy with the trade. Now that I've gotten to see him as a Hab. I like him, and can see where some of our fans were very happy with the trade.

As for the POS comment. I dislike anyone who tries to come across as better than someone else. You can get your point across without being a dick.

It never occurred to you that wasting 15 minutes of your life looking for facts on a grossly biased and uninformed message board was a bad idea. The fact that this is your first option tells me all that I need to know......I suggest you use the ignore feature on me as my evidence based opinions won't interest you.

 

[dinodebino]

It never occurred to you that wasting 15 minutes of your life looking for facts on a grossly biased and uninformed message board was a bad idea. The fact that this is your first option tells me all that I need to know......I suggest you use the ignore feature on me as my evidence based opinions won't interest you.

Gotta admit, and knowing the poster, getting on @Habs10Habs ’ bad side is a rare feat. I mean, there isn’t a nicer poster here than this guy. You accomplished something I have not seen on this forum since Michel Therrien got fired the first time!

 

[Habs10Habs]

It isn't either way though because both GM's publicly identified him as a main piece. Hughes very clear in stating how Calgary did not want to give up Heineman who was undisputedly the primary asset in the Bennett trade.

It takes alot of intellectual dishonesty to take the opposite stance which is demonstrated by using social media forums as a higher standard of evidence than a statement from the actual GM. You are also ignoring the large group of fans who supported the acquisition, like anything the bulk of knowledge is contained within the minority and it is no different here.

Since I heard about the trade long before HuGo's comments. I didn't have that information to go on. When a trade happens involving a player or prospect I don't know. I automatically go to the board we're receiving the player from. In this case Calgary.

When I did hear HuGo's comments, I did feel better. But as I said earlier, that was after hearing about the trade. It wasn't until later did I find out that he was initially traded from Florida to Calgary.

On our board, it seemed the initial reaction was "Who?". With a few posters, I'll include you, who seemed happy with getting Heineman in the trade.

So to try and end this here. My reaction to the trade was inconclusive because A I didn't know the player. B I didn't have access to the quotes from Hughes and the Calgary GM when he obtained him. I just went with what I knew, and what I had read.

To semi quote Michael Jordan "You included me when you said "all fans" and I took it personal"

Gotta admit, and knowing the poster, getting on @Habs10Habs ’ bad side is a rare feat. I mean, there isn’t a nicer poster here than this guy. You accomplished something I have not seen on this forum since Michel Therrien got fired the first time!

lol...Sorry, I'm always crabby when my wife is late with dinner.