I was NOT a believer but Cole Caufield is the BEST Player from the 2019 Draft.

[Lafleurs Guy]

You're not 'engaging in hockey discourse'. You're diminishing real hockey results and replacing them with your imaginary what-if, and you're demanding we take it seriously. You're focused on what-if, luck, fluke, magical elves, whatever. That's not hockey talk, it's an emotional coping mechanism. That's what I see here – make-believe stories to help you cope with a result you didn't like.

And when the rest of us don't share your imaginary story, you move onto the next make-believe story – that we don't understand hockey.

If you want an actual hockey discussion, start with respect for actual hockey. That means acknowledging the legitimacy of hockey results, whether you like them or not. The playoffs aren't a random dart throw. The reality is the team that wins is almost always the better team, even if you dislike them.

Well said.

End of the day the - covid playoffs never should’ve happened - or whatever is just noise. We had the opportunity to see CC in the postseason and he did very well as a raw rookie in limited usage. There’s no foundation to say this guy can’t score in the playoffs. His history isn’t written yet and what little we’ve seen was very positive.

And that same coach misused him the following year and he wound up with one goal in like 40 games. It was a big reason the coach got fired. And when that coach was replaced CC immediately took off. And now after surgery and a season of sub ten shooting percentage in the aftermath - he’s back to pacing for 40+ goals again.

That’s what actually happened. It wasn’t imagined. It didn’t take place in an imaginary fictional world. I’m not sure why some people insist on taking fiction over fact. The man scored 48 in his next 82 after Ducharme. Yes, it was split between two seasons but that’s due to injury. Bottom line is that he’s a really productive goal scorer and some people can’t get over his size.

That’s why the Canadiens were able to steal him at 15th in the draft. He never should’ve been available at that point.

 

[viceroy]

If you ever saw Cournoyer in his prime in street clothes you'd see that he was no pushover. Enormous thighs, thick wrists and forearms which allowed him to rip shots even with the old wooden sticks.

Caufield has made a believer out of me. His consistency is the main thing. He is not up and down like some scorers. Speaks to a dedication to the game, both mentally and physically. I know he isn't much of a defensive player, but if you have a consistent scorer that's very valuable. You probably don't want a team full of them, or you'd have a lot of 10-9 games, but it's nice for a coach to look down the bench and have a 1st option for the PP and goal scoring situations.

Have you ever seen Cole Caufield? The kid's definitely short but he's ripped and stumpy. The one injury he had as an NHL'er was a nagging shoulder injury he finally had addressed. He's also pretty sound defensively and also become a decent playmaker.

He's not a water bug pond hockey type amigo. He's an elusive sniper with a bit of grit and defensive awareness oh and lotsa heart.

 

[LeProspector]

These guys have never seen a playoff game. How can you deem them playoff difference makers?

Never said anything about those guys, I was giving the guys I’d take over Caufield LMAOOOOOOOLL

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Never said anything about those guys, I was giving the guys I’d take over Caufield LMAOOOOOOOLL

Again, that’s not what people have an issue with. It’s posts like this that you’re being called out on.

Caufield is a small one dimensional player who, if he makes the playoffs he’ll be taken off the puck with ease on 5v5 with the more physical brand of hockey.

And when it’s pointed out that he’s already had success you backpedal and say he wasn’t a known commodity. Sorry but that’s nonsense. If he can come in and be productive as a raw rookie in limited minutes there’s no reason the believe he can’t produce going forward.

 

[LeProspector]

Again, that’s not what people have an issue with. It’s posts like this that you’re being called out on.



And when it’s pointed out that he’s already had success you backpedal and say he wasn’t a known commodity. Sorry but that’s nonsense. If he can come in and be productive as a raw rookie in limited minutes there’s no reason the believe he can’t produce going forward.

I’ve already given my reasoning why I believe that.

I’m not going to go in circles with you about this. Accept that I don’t like your favourite player as much as you do.

 

[Lshap]

Well I actually am as I said so, why would you say otherwise?

This is after all a hockey discussion board right?

How am I diminishing the results?

I'm stating something quite obvious and I gave the real world example if the Habs lost Suzuki and then lost a game 7 series where it would be an obvious question of "well we might have won that series if Suzuki had not been injured after playing 2 minutes in the first game"

This type of question comes up quite often here do you question it when it comes up or is it dependent on who is asking it?



Thanks for the free pyshcoanalsisy but like msot things free it's not worth it as you have no idea on who I am and in order for me to cope I would need a dog in the race which I don't have as a Cancuks fan but more of a fan of hockey in general.

I don't look at the colour of the jersey when I make any comments or analysis's here.


I'm commenting on your reaction which is non sensical and if people think that there is no luck involved in hockey (I stated the difference in the shortened Covid year and the divisional realignments for the year after) and your calling it imaginary says more about you than me?

Sure go ahead and disagree but I'm stating things that actually happened and made a comment about it, that's imaginary in your eyes, like really?



As for the discussion why would you ay that I don't respect hockey that's just rubbish and unfounded and frankly I have no idea why you would say such a thing about someone you don't know, for what reason I won't speculate or personal with you and your last comment is the reality that I speak of, yes the team that wins the 4 games is the winner but it's not always the best team and sometimes teams take the opportunity of an advantage during a series, like a star player going down after playing 2 minutes in the opener.

I'll restate that i had no dog in the fight, I rarely do as I'm not that type of fan and I'd be care full accusing others of doing something when they don't actually do what you imply.

I have no idea if you want a serious discussion or not but your comments twice here indicate something else.

Anyways the whole discussion has gotten away from the initial point where a player on that team was termed impactful even though another Habs fan put him around 10th on that team which is more or less accurate and thus impactful loses it's meaning.

I've made the argument that CC wouldn't be in my top 5 in a redraft of all players right now going forward, you can agree or disagree but please refrain from bad faith accusations it's not helpful.

If you don't like being called out, don't accuse others of not understanding hockey.

If you don't like being told you don't respect hockey, don't disparage its results. Teams work damn hard to earn their victories. Diminishing their accomplishments by calling them lucky isn't talking hockey; it's a pouty denial of an outcome you don't like.

You can't claim to be giving real world examples when you reference things that never happened in the real world. Start a "What-If" thread if you want to explore imaginary outcomes. This thread isn't the place.

Randomness and luck in hockey is an interesting discussion. There was a thread about it not too long ago. Feel free to add your insights about luck over there. This thread isn't the place.

Apart from hijacking this thread with tangents listed above, you have every right to your opinion on Caufield, whether or not I disagree with it.

 

[Junohockeyfan]

I’ve already given my reasoning why I believe that.

I’m not going to go in circles with you about this. Accept that I don’t like your favourite player as much as you do.

We accept that your irrational hate for Habs players like Caufield cloud your judgement and result in alternative facts / falsehoods.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

I’ve already given my reasoning why I believe that.

You’ve backpedaled with unfounded claims when confronted with the facts. Not the same thing.

 

[wetcoast]

If you don't like being called out, don't accuse others of not understanding hockey.

If you don't like being told you don't respect hockey, don't disparage its results. Teams work damn hard to earn their victories. Diminishing their accomplishments by calling them lucky isn't talking hockey; it's a pouty denial of an outcome you don't like.

You can't claim to be giving real world examples when you reference things that never happened in the real world. Start a "What-If" thread if you want to explore imaginary outcomes. This thread isn't the place.

Randomness and luck in hockey is an interesting discussion. There was a thread about it not too long ago. Feel free to add your insights about luck over there. This thread isn't the place.

Apart from hijacking this thread with tangents listed above, you have every right to your opinion on Caufield, whether or not I disagree with it.

Sure whatever you got the like you wanted and totally distorted my argument and lets discuss luck but not here but all that being said I'm done with this side discussion we can all agree that CC isn't the best player from the draft.

After all the "facts" speak for themselves right?

But I'll look forward to you calling someone out when they speculate what CC might do positive in the future because you are consistent right?

But wait another just did just what you have an issue with me and you gave him a freaking like, the lack of consistency doesn't surprise me.

Well said.

End of the day the - covid playoffs never should’ve happened - or whatever is just noise. We had the opportunity to see CC in the postseason and he did very well as a raw rookie in limited usage. There’s no foundation to say this guy can’t score in the playoffs. His history isn’t written yet and what little we’ve seen was very positive.

And that same coach misused him the following year and he wound up with one goal in like 40 games. It was a big reason the coach got fired. And when that coach was replaced CC immediately took off. And now after surgery and a season of sub ten shooting percentage in the aftermath - he’s back to pacing for 40+ goals again.

That’s what actually happened. It wasn’t imagined. It didn’t take place in an imaginary fictional world. I’m not sure why some people insist on taking fiction over fact. The man scored 48 in his next 82 after Ducharme. Yes, it was split between two seasons but that’s due to injury. Bottom line is that he’s a really productive goal scorer and some people can’t get over his size.

The rant is par with your rant

That’s why the Canadiens were able to steal him at 15th in the draft.

Then instead of "accepting the facts" he says this?

Typical inconsistency and normally I wouldn't point it out but your condescending post kinda invites it.

He never should’ve been available at that point.

Personally I have no problem with it but your lack of consistency is glaring here.

Apply some nonsensical standard if you approve then don't when it doesn't fit your player or viewpoint.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Sure whatever you got the like you wanted and totally distorted my argument and lets discuss luck but not here but all that being said I'm done with this side discussion we can all agree that CC isn't the best player from the draft.

After all the "facts" speak for themselves right?

But I'll look forward to you calling someone out when they speculate what CC might do positive in the future because you are consistent right?

But wait another just did just what you have an issue with me and you gave him a freaking like, the lack of consistency doesn't surprise me.



The rant is par with your rant



Then instead of "accepting the facts" he says this?

Typical inconsistency and normally I wouldn't point it out but your condescending post kinda invites it.

Personally I have no problem with it but your lack of consistency is glaring here.

Apply some nonsensical standard if you approve then don't when it doesn't fit your player or viewpoint.

I have no idea what you're even arguing here.

 

[wetcoast]

I have no idea what you're even arguing here.

You went on a big rant agreeing with the other guy about imaginary things and only keeping it real then finished with this.

That’s why the Canadiens were able to steal him at 15th in the draft. He never should’ve been available at that point.

I don't really care in a vacuum but given your long rant and the other guys it's a bit hypocritical to not see the irony in your last sentence right?

Also another guy stating that he doesn't like small players in general in the playoffs because they tend to not do as well isn't signaling out CC, it's something that a lot of hockey people recognize.

Disagree but tone it down (directed more at the other guy but still).

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

You went on a big rant agreeing with the other guy about imaginary things and only keeping it real then finished with this.



I don't really care in a vacuum but given your long rant and the other guys it's a bit hypocritical to not see the irony in your last sentence right?

Also another guy stating that he doesn't like small players in general in the playoffs because they tend to not do as well isn't signaling out CC, it's something that a lot of hockey people recognize.

Disagree but tone it down (directed more at the other guy but still).

The covid stuff is noise. LShap rightly called it out. That's all there is to that.

The rest of my post was directed at the assertion that Caufield is too small to be successful. That hasn't been the case. The reality is that he's been written off his whole life because of his size and he's always managed to have success. Does that make him the best player in this draft? Absolutely not. That would be Hughes. But I think he certainly has the potential to be 2nd. We have to wait and see on that.

All that other stuff is noise. I couldn't care less about whether Carey Price led his team in a covid season. I don't care if you think the Canadiens didn't belong in the playoffs or not. It doesn't pertain to this discussion at all. All of this make believe stuff about the team not doing anything in a postseason that year is irrelevant noise and LShap was right to call it out.

The discussion is whether or not Caufield can legitimately be called the best in his draft. I don't see how any serious person can say so given that the draft included Jack Hughes. My personal opinion is that if you go by what's been done so far Seider is a clear 2nd and then there's a group of other players that CC is a part of.

My belief (and it is a belief not a statement of fact) is that Caufield will be the 2nd best player in this draft when it's all over. My belief is based on past performance and the circumstances in which he's found himself developing. When healthy under MSL he paces for around 45 goals per 82. That is... really good. And I think he will improve on that. If he does manage to start putting up 50 goal years then I'd say he's got a good argument for being second. But none of this has happened yet. It is speculation and conjecture. But at least it's on topic.

That other stuff is irrelevant noise and thread hijacking.

 

[Auston Marlander]

I like looking in the future as well. Clock is ticking for Mr.Marlander

At least our clock has batteries in it.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

At least our clock has batteries in it.

(Best before second round of 2025 playoffs)

 

[Auston Marlander]

(Best before second round of 2025 playoffs)

Maybe, better than expired 4 years ago (really 8 years ago with a power surge)

 

[Sasha Orlov]

The Montreal Carey Prices made the finals in an Asterix year.

The Habs are a joke who always seem to be a year from making playoffs in a league where half the teams make the playoffs, talk about embarrassing.

As for the thread, no Caufield is not the best player from his draft, but he's a good B+ tier player. A better version of Tyler Ennis. If he's your guy, that's not a recipe for success.

The Leafs have won one playoff series in two decades and haven’t played in a Cup final since 1967

Please stop

You should not be talking about recipes for success

 

[Lshap]

Maybe, better than expired 4 years ago (really 8 years ago with a power surge)

Your point is off, but I actually appreciate the sharp sense of humour.

 

[wetcoast]

The covid stuff is noise. LShap rightly called it out. That's all there is to that.

The rest of my post was directed at the assertion that Caufield is too small to be successful. That hasn't been the case. The reality is that he's been written off his whole life because of his size and he's always managed to have success. Does that make him the best player in this draft? Absolutely not. That would be Hughes. But I think he certainly has the potential to be 2nd. We have to wait and see on that.

All that other stuff is noise. I couldn't care less about whether Carey Price led his team in a covid season. I don't care if you think the Canadiens didn't belong in the playoffs or not. It doesn't pertain to this discussion at all. All of this make believe stuff about the team not doing anything in a postseason that year is irrelevant noise and LShap was right to call it out.

The discussion is whether or not Caufield can legitimately be called the best in his draft. I don't see how any serious person can say so given that the draft included Jack Hughes. My personal opinion is that if you go by what's been done so far Seider is a clear 2nd and then there's a group of other players that CC is a part of.

My belief (and it is a belief not a statement of fact) is that Caufield will be the 2nd best player in this draft when it's all over. My belief is based on past performance and the circumstances in which he's found himself developing. When healthy under MSL he paces for around 45 goals per 82. That is... really good. And I think he will improve on that. If he does manage to start putting up 50 goal years then I'd say he's got a good argument for being second. But none of this has happened yet. It is speculation and conjecture. But at least it's on topic.

That other stuff is irrelevant noise and thread hijacking.

Okay you can speculate then it's okay, if others do it and back up there views it's noise.

This is how I have my top 6 guys from this draft going forward and I'll exclude goalies like Wolf who probably has a strong case.

1. Jack Hughes the only real limits on him being the best of this draft is health.

2. Seider solid MPG all situations Dman who might top out as a 50 point guy but all around brings so much and has 4 solid seasons already.

3. Harley excelled when Miro went down and has already had a solid season last year just hitting his stride here.

4. Bryam. has already had an excellent playoff run and has settled down into a very good Es scoring 2 way dman, health concerns seem to be past him.

5. LaCombe is really blossoming this year as well after a slow October and November solid MPG elite skating Dman showing more offense than expected.

6. Matt Boldy very consistent goal scorer and passer just solid and consistent 70ish point guy.

Next position player would be CC then somewhere mixed in would be Wolf and Knight as their stories are still unfolding.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Okay you can speculate then it's okay, if others do it and back up there views it's noise.

I stopped reading there.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Maybe, better than expired 4 years ago (really 8 years ago with a power surge)

I'm just joshing.

 

[wetcoast]

I stopped reading there.

Funny that you are on a discussion board then stopped reading and then had to post about it eh?

 

[shello]

Give me Hughes, Lacombe, Seider, Harley, Boldy over him without much thought.

Too small to be a difference maker come playoff time to have over those guys who are studs with size.

Takes like this is nuts to me when we’ve literally seen small players like MSL disprove this thought.

Granted Caufield isn’t Marty, but he is 4 goals away from being 2nd in the league in goals. The Habs hate is nuts

 

[LeProspector]

You’ve backpedaled with unfounded claims when confronted with the facts. Not the same thing.

Because it’s my opinion,

Takes like this is nuts to me when we’ve literally seen small players like MSL disprove this thought.

Granted Caufield isn’t Marty, but he is 4 goals away from being 2nd in the league in goals. The Habs hate is nuts

is it hate, or is it a preference to have #1 D, Jack Hughes, and a power winger over him?

I’m sorry I don’t like your favourite player as much as you do.

 

[Rockomax]

Hughes is still the #1 choice. Seider and Boldy are still in front too in my opinion.