Prospect Info: Joshua Roy Part 2

[Lafleurs Guy]

We realistically have 3 bonafide top 6 players in Dach, Caufield and Suzuki (and even Dach has to prove he can remain healthy). There is not “too much talent” on the team for Roy to crack a spot one day. In fact, the spots are there for the taking.

There's a spot for him for sure. Slaf will also be (hopefully) used in the top six as well. Even then there's still another spot. Maybe Newhook for now.

Man I wish Roy was a speedster. That's the only thing really holding him back.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Doubt he makes the NHL with us.

Top 6 is pretty strong and setted for a while, but there is still one long term spot (Suzuki, Dach, Newhook, Slafkovksy, Caufield).

Then he is competing with players like RHP, Josh Anderson (4 contract years), Emil Heineman, Sean Farrell, Jared Davidson. All those players except Farrell are probably better suited for a middle/bottom six role than Roy.

Next year, maybe we sign Luke Tuch and there will be the 2024 draftees.

If we go on the trade or UFA market to acquire another forward talent then his chance are pretty much cooked in my humble opinion.

Roy is a lock to be a regular in the NHL and as at least a top 9 forward. I am not sure why you limit him to not being able to play in the bottom six as he is an exceptional defensive winger for his age. He will be an important part of our future imo.

 

[Jaynki]

Roy is a lock to be a regular in the NHL and as at least a top 9 forward. I am not sure why you limit him to not being able to play in the bottom six as he is an exceptional defensive winger for his age. He will be an important part of our future imo.

I am not limiting Roy to anything and i think its possible he ends up a 30 goals, top sixer.

But, i am a statistical and data type of guys.

Concerning Roy, i will simply state a rule : The overwhelming big majority of top six NHL players and top 3 defenseman are in the NHL in their D+3. Big time junior players graduate immediately. NCAA/European stars sign after 1, 2 season, not 3.

Roy is going the other way for now. His career is still obviously far from over but again statiscally speaking, he does not have the trajectory of a "lock". (I can be proven wrong in the immediate future if he is called up and stays.)

If he don't make the roster next year, its another bunch of draftees coming up and in contention for roster spot and if we go on the trade/ufa market for offensive help it will be even more tight. Statistically speaking, if Roy stagnate and and don't make the NHL next year, his NHL career is in jeopardy.

Same statistical principle why i am high on Slafkovsky, i know we are KK-Galchenyuk traumatised, but statistically speaking majority of prospects of Slaf caliber explode in their 2nd year. Those who did not (Galchenyuk, KK, Yakupov, Laf, Kakko) we know how it went. There are outlier like Dach. Laf and Kakko can prove to be outlier too, tho those two are one stagnant season away from losing a lot of perceived value.

On Slaf case, i am betting on upside and favourable breakout statistics.

On Roy, i am starting to be dubious of his futurewith us and wonder if we should be better using him as a trade bait along with picks to acquire top six talent. Its simply that odds are starting to balance out of favours.

 

[DAChampion]

I am not limiting Roy to anything and i think its possible he ends up a 30 goals, top sixer.

But, i am a statistical and data type of guys.

Concerning Roy, i will simply state a rule : The overwhelming big majority of top six NHL players and top 3 defenseman are in the NHL in their D+3. Big time junior players graduate immediately. NCAA/European stars sign after 1, 2 season, not 3.

I'm a statistical guy too, so I'll argue against this.

You're using a single stat / rule of thumb for what is a heavily multivariable process. Hockey players are not electrons and hockey teams are not alloys. There are a lot of variables, and so all rules of thumbs should be used with caution.

In the case of Roy I'll suggest the following reasons why he might

First of all he's a late developer. He wasn't drafted in the first round, and the team probably didn't plan on him being remotely ready at this time. If a first rounder had dominated the CHL for two years and Connor Bedard had called him the linemate that most impressed him, the team would have probably planned for him.

Second, it's an unusual situation in that roster is full ... of mediocre players. There are like 14 or 15 forwards, and only 4 of them are genuine top-sixers who should be entitled to spots (Monahan, Dach, Caulfield, Suzuki). So Roy will go down to the AHL because he doesn't go through waivers and he can develop in the AHL just fine as he will be facing a steep jump from the Q.

Point #2.5), Roy dominated the Q, a relatively weak junior league, so he can learn a lot by adapting to the AHL, it's a big jump. In contrast, when Reinbacher will have completed 2 years of dominating the Swiss league, there will not be an argument that he can learn a lot in the AHL.

Third, it might be a really nice environment in Laval. He's coming in with a lot of other young players like Struble, Mailloux, Mesar, etc, so they might have a lot of fun and grow together and be part of a future Habs core.

 

[montreal]

But, i am a statistical and data type of guys.

Concerning Roy, i will simply state a rule : The overwhelming big majority of top six NHL players and top 3 defenseman are in the NHL in their D+3. Big time junior players graduate immediately. NCAA/European stars sign after 1, 2 season, not 3.

what's big majority mean and where did you get your data from cause suggesting that top 3 blueliners are in the NHL at 20 seems very unlikely to me if you are saying what 60-80%?

 

[Jaynki]

I'm a statistical guy too, so I'll argue against this.

You're using a single stat / rule of thumb for what is a heavily multivariable process. Hockey players are not electrons and hockey teams are not alloys. There are a lot of variables, and so all rules of thumbs should be used with caution.

In the case of Roy I'll suggest the following reasons why he might

First of all he's a late developer. He wasn't drafted in the first round, and the team probably didn't plan on him being remotely ready at this time. If a first rounder had dominated the CHL for two years and Connor Bedard had called him the linemate that most impressed him, the team would have probably planned for him.

Second, it's an unusual situation in that roster is full ... of mediocre players. There are like 14 or 15 forwards, and only 4 of them are genuine top-sixers who should be entitled to spots (Monahan, Dach, Caulfield, Suzuki). So Roy will go down to the AHL because he doesn't go through waivers and he can develop in the AHL just fine as he will be facing a steep jump from the Q.

Point #2.5), Roy dominated the Q, a relatively weak junior league, so he can learn a lot by adapting to the AHL, it's a big jump.

Third, it might be a really nice environment in Laval. He's coming in with a lot of other young players like Struble, Mailloux, Mesar, etc, so they might have a lot of fun and grow together and be part of a future Habs core.

I 100% wholeheartedly agree with all the points you make.

But its a cold, hard facts that most of the NHL impact players (top six forward and top 3 D) have been NHL players in their D+3.

It changes nothing to the micro details of Roy and it also absolutely dont cap his career.

It simply puts him in a category where those who made it from this point, mainly have been depth players. There are outliers, Roy may be one. But from a pure statistical point of view, odds are just starting to balance out of favour and the more times pass without him breaking out, the more odds shift faster in defavour. Nothing alarming so far and early to throw the towel.

But considering this one macro rule, if we can acquire a top six talent for a package of Roy and picks. I would pull the trigger.

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

Ya my observation is most prospects outside of top picks at least have a cup of coffee in the AHL

 

[Jaynki]

what's big majority mean and where did you get your data from cause suggesting that top 3 blueliners are in the NHL at 20 seems very unlikely to me if you are saying what 60-80%?

Just from our team

NHLers D+3 :
Suzuki, Caufield, Newhook, Dach, Slaf, Monahan, Dvorak, Gallagher, were all NHLer D+3.

Josh Anderson is an outlier, impact player who made it D+4.

On defense Guhle D+3. Matheson D+4. Barron D+3. Savard D+4.

Its eerily similar with other teams.

Example the Leafs, Knies is an example of how a D+3 have to enter the league.

Tavares, Matthews, Marner, Nylander, Max Domi NHL D+3

Bertuzzi an impact player, outlier D+4.

Rielly D+3.

Its effectively less probant with defenseman but the trend is noticeable for forward.

D+4 is a major, major cutter both for forward and D.

So like i said, time is ticking for Roy because he is trending towards the Evans, Armia, Pezzetta category and its one year from becoming even tougher. There is still time but he needs a strong year. If he dont makes it next years his career is in jeopardy.

I think we should consider trading Roy if we can package him for an established top six talent.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

I am not limiting Roy to anything and i think its possible he ends up a 30 goals, top sixer.

But, i am a statistical and data type of guys.

Concerning Roy, i will simply state a rule : The overwhelming big majority of top six NHL players and top 3 defenseman are in the NHL in their D+3. Big time junior players graduate immediately. NCAA/European stars sign after 1, 2 season, not 3.

Roy is going the other way for now. His career is still obviously far from over but again statiscally speaking, he does not have the trajectory of a "lock". (I can be proven wrong in the immediate future if he is called up and stays.)

If he don't make the roster next year, its another bunch of draftees coming up and in contention for roster spot and if we go on the trade/ufa market for offensive help it will be even more tight. Statistically speaking, if Roy stagnate and and don't make the NHL next year, his NHL career is in jeopardy.

Same statistical principle why i am high on Slafkovsky, i know we are KK-Galchenyuk traumatised, but statistically speaking majority of prospects of Slaf caliber explode in their 2nd year. Those who did not (Galchenyuk, KK, Yakupov, Laf, Kakko) we know how it went. There are outlier like Dach. Laf and Kakko can prove to be outlier too, tho those two are one stagnant season away from losing a lot of perceived value.

On Slaf case, i am betting on upside and favourable breakout statistics.

On Roy, i am starting to be dubious of his futurewith us and wonder if we should be better using him as a trade bait along with picks to acquire top six talent. Its simply that odds are starting to balance out of favours.

I am not sure how you can be souring on Roy as he just keeps getting better and was easily our best rookie forward all summer. The only reason that he is not starting in the NHL is we currently have too many forwards and I think they would prefer to give Heineman a chance as he has played pro hockey and is two years older. There will be more room next season and perhaps later this season if/when injuries hit. He is a significantly better prospect than Davidson and Farrell who you incorrectly mentioned as better fits lower in the lineup.

Your methodology is incredibly flawed and to disregard the eye test which is the most important by an order of magnitude is just asking to be wrong.

TBH I would rather see Roy in the NHL and Slaf in the AHL because Roy is much smarter and works better with high IQ players. Now, Slaf could suddenly put it all together and make that thought look silly but from what I have seen so far that is not the case.

You are also forgetting that Roy was one of the youngest players in his draft class and many top six NHLers have spent time in the AHL.

I am not against using statistical trends such as you are but more on a macro level, to blindly apply them to an individual without context is plain wrong.

 

[Jaynki]

I am not sure how you can be souring on Roy as he just keeps getting better and was easily our best rookie forward all summer. The only reason that he is not starting in the NHL is we currently have too many forwards and I think they would prefer to give Heineman a chance as he has played pro hockey and is two years older. There will be more room next season and perhaps later this season if/when injuries hit. He is a significantly better prospect than Davidson and Farrell who you incorrectly mentioned as better fits lower in the lineup.

Your methodology is incredibly flawed and to disregard the eye test which is the most important by an order of magnitude is just asking to be wrong.

TBH I would rather see Roy in the NHL and Slaf in the AHL because Roy is much smarter and works better with high IQ players. Now, Slaf could suddenly put it all together and make that thought look silly but from what I have seen so far that is not the case.

You are also forgetting that Roy was one of the youngest players in his draft class and many top six NHLers have spent time in the AHL.

I am not against using statistical trends such as you are but more on a macro level, to blindly apply them to an individual without context is plain wrong.

Statiscally speaking, impact forward makes it D+3. See Matthew Knies for how an impact player enter his D+3. Its a statistical evidence.

There is nothing to argue here and the eye test or how you like him versus Slaf means nothing. Its simple maths. Its objectives, not subjectives. Our opinion means nothing here.

7/8 top six forward in the NHL were NHLers in their D+3. Roy fit in the 1/8. Whats flawed? Whats not true? Where does Roy suffer a prejudice?

So far Slaf is in a promising category and Roy is in a declining category.

Cold, hard fact.

 

[Frankenheimer]

We will be drafting and filling one of those spots at the 2024 Draft.

More likely is that we will be trading one of our many many D

 

[Frankenheimer]

Statiscally speaking, impact forward makes it D+3. See Matthew Knies for how an impact player enter his D+3. Its a statistical evidence.

There is nothing to argue here and the eye test or how you like him versus Slaf means nothing. Its simple maths. Its objectives, not subjectives. Our opinion means nothing here.

7/8 top six forward in the NHL were NHLers in their D+3. Roy fit in the 1/8. Whats flawed? Whats not true? Where does Roy suffer a prejudice?

So far Slaf is in a promising category and Roy is in a declining category.

Cold, hard fact.

You’re whole approach is antithetical to statistical analysis which draws from massive data sets across time, not cherry picking a few examples.

And for all we know he will be on the team at the start of season once the paper moves for cap puzzle are completed. We won’t know who made the cut until after those moves are done.

 

[Jaynki]

You’re whole approach is antithetical to statistical analysis which draws from massive data sets across time, not cherry picking a few examples.

And for all we know he will be on the team at the start of season once the paper moves for cap puzzle are completed. We won’t know who made the cut until after those moves are done.

Roy will make the team? He did not even survived the first cuts.

 

[morhilane]

Roy will make the team? He did not even survived the first cuts.

Nobody survived the first cut this year. The Habs decided to cut everyone who didn't play in the NHL last season outside the RDs fighting for the last dmen spot with Barron (Mailloux, Norlinder and Lindstrom).

Heineman is an exception at forwards, but the Habs were going to keep him in the NHL last year before he injured himself during camp.

 

[Jaynki]

Nobody survived the first cut this year. The Habs decided to cut everyone who didn't play in the NHL last season outside the RDs fighting for the last dmen spot with Barron (Mailloux, Norlinder and Lindstrom).

Heineman is an exception at forwards, but the Habs were going to keep him in the NHL last year before he injured himself during camp.

Heineman, Andersson and Maillet survived the first cut and there is still one forward to cut. These two looks like the first call up but i would argue thats bound to change.

I doubt Heineman was making the team last year.

Also, this year he is indeed an exception. Roy had to be this exception, he was not.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Just from our team

NHLers D+3 :
Suzuki, Caufield, Newhook, Dach, Slaf, Monahan, Dvorak, Gallagher, were all NHLer D+3.

Josh Anderson is an outlier, impact player who made it D+4.

On defense Guhle D+3. Matheson D+4. Barron D+3. Savard D+4.

Its eerily similar with other teams.

Example the Leafs, Knies is an example of how a D+3 have to enter the league.

Tavares, Matthews, Marner, Nylander, Max Domi NHL D+3

Bertuzzi an impact player, outlier D+4.

Rielly D+3.

Its effectively less probant with defenseman but the trend is noticeable for forward.

D+4 is a major, major cutter both for forward and D.

So like i said, time is ticking for Roy because he is trending towards the Evans, Armia, Pezzetta category and its one year from becoming even tougher. There is still time but he needs a strong year. If he dont makes it next years his career is in jeopardy.

I think we should consider trading Roy if we can package him for an established top six talent.

Gallagher played 36 games in the AHL in his D+3. Nylander had 86 pro games in Sweden and 75 AHL games under his belt before making the Leafs lineup.

You are mistakenly trying to make a linear comparison between teams/players in entirely different situations. You are disregarding draft pedigree which certainly plays a role in expediting a prospects opportunities at the NHL level. You are also disregarding the fact that some of these players spent significant time in the AHL or other pto leagues prior to their D+3. I have no doubt that Roy would have made the same Arizona lineup that Domi and Dvorak did as a D+3 as well.....context matters.

Using Mathews and Tavares as comparatives is just disingenuous. Why not hold him up against Mario, McDavid, Crosby and Bedard while you are at it.

Roy is an extremely young D+3 with no professional experience trying to make a club with 14 proven NHL forwards ahead of him.To act like him spending time in the AHL is an indictment on his future as an NHLer is preposterous.

As you admitted, you could be proven wrong but it is irrelevant whether you end up being wrong or right in this instance as you are not even making an attempt to actually scout the player. I agree that such statistics can be cause for cynicism but that is only before you actually watch the prospect. Applying this methodology blindly is not only uninteresting, it is just a terrible way to form a meaningful opinion on individual prospects.

 

[Frankenheimer]

Roy will make the team? He did not even survived the first cuts.

I'm saying he could yes, unless you think the fact Maillet staying on the team beyond Roy is a meaningful fact that shows Maillet is higher on the pecking order. There's a lot of calculations beyond depth chart at the moment given the LTIR puzzle.

And none of this addresses the fact your so-called "statistical analysis" is deeply flawed. I'm not saying your biased sample might not prove correct, in the end, but you would minimally need to include all of the top 6 forwards from all 30+ teams over a 5 or 10 year window to get a legitimate trend on the matter.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Statiscally speaking, impact forward makes it D+3. See Matthew Knies for how an impact player enter his D+3. Its a statistical evidence.

There is nothing to argue here and the eye test or how you like him versus Slaf means nothing. Its simple maths. Its objectives, not subjectives. Our opinion means nothing here.

7/8 top six forward in the NHL were NHLers in their D+3. Roy fit in the 1/8. Whats flawed? Whats not true? Where does Roy suffer a prejudice?

So far Slaf is in a promising category and Roy is in a declining category.

Cold, hard fact.

I would love to see you actually back up these stats with "cold hard facts"

The fact that you believe that a player who is showing a steady upward trajectory is declining while the player who is stagnating is elevating is bonkers.

edit: after a quick browse through NHL lineups it is entirely evident that this "7/8 top six forward in the NHL were NHLers in their D+3" is utter nonsense and you entirely made it up. Both Calgary and Dallas (the first two obvious teams that came to mind and the only ones I even looked at) had 3 of their top four scoring forwards fall outside of your "cold, hard facts". That is 6 right off the bat which means that I would only have to find 18 more on 32 teams to conform with your claim lol.......it is not worth my time to even take this further.

 

[Frankenheimer]

You are disregarding draft pedigree which certainly plays a role in expediting a prospects opportunities at the NHL level.

This would definitely need to be a variable in an actual statistical analysis. There would certainly be a correlation.

 

[Frankenheimer]

I would love to see you actually back up these stats with "cold hard facts"

The fact that you believe that a player who is showing a steady upward trajectory is declining while the player who is stagnating is elevating is bonkers.

*A meteor on a direct trajectory to planet earth, visible to the naked eye, causing massive tsunamis*

According to my statistical model, only 0,001% meteors actually hit earth, so nothing to worry about people.

 

[morhilane]

Heineman, Andersson and Maillet survived the first cut and there is still one forward to cut. These two looks like the first call up but i would argue thats bound to change.

I doubt Heineman was making the team last year.

Also, this year he is indeed an exception. Roy had to be this exception, he was not.

Andersson and Maillet didn't survive the first cut. They were playing in the 2nd game of a back-to-back where none-waivers eligible players were loaned right after the game. Andersson and Maillet shows as waived today because waivers are processed at 2pm ET by the NHL.

And Heineman was making the team last year, Habs were going to keep him and play him long enough (10 weeks if I remember correctly) so they could assign him to the AHL if needed. He was injured so they had to send him back home.

Heineman was drafted in 2020,
Roy was drafted in 2021 and was one of the youngest in his draft year. He's only 8 months older than Slafkovsky.

By your own logic, Heineman needs to the make the team this year...

 

[Destopcorner]

Heineman, Andersson and Maillet survived the first cut and there is still one forward to cut. These two looks like the first call up but i would argue thats bound to change.

I doubt Heineman was making the team last year.

Also, this year he is indeed an exception. Roy had to be this exception, he was not.

Andersson and Maillet being late cut was only because they played during that night's game. You believe they are first on the callup list because of that cold hard fact? Ain't it funny...

There is no room for Roy right now. Simple as that. He couldn't have done better during the camp. Still our most talented and intelligent prospect, he's only 20 and his understanding of the game os years ahead of anyone even more Slaf who's all tools and pedigree for now.

Roy will tear it up someday and that D3 stats means nothing in his case. It's all about situation.

 

[DAChampion]

Do you all think that NHL pre-season competition exceed AHL-level competition?

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Do you all think that NHL pre-season competition exceed AHL-level competition?

AHL is more competitive but it is also much more structured and familiarity is fostered so players can be much more productive in the AHL while not having produced in NHL pre-season. Very little can be gleaned from pre season in the vast majority of cases.

 

[Jaynki]

By your own logic, Heineman needs to the make the team this year...

By my own logic, i don't expect Heineman to be a top six forward. (He could). I could see him in the Armia role tho(depth.)

If he cant establish himself as a regular NHLer this season(D+4), his NHL career is in jeopardy.

Until Roy has a big year, its where he is trending.