Prospect Info: Logan Mailloux Part 3 The Only Hockey Talk Thread

[Beige Van]

Just curious, how does he compare to Beaulieu at the same age? In my brief viewings, he definitely has a better shot and seems to read the ice better? Beaulieu was a terrific skater in his early days. Both have a bit of snarl to their game as well?

 

[JadedRandom]

Just curious, how does he compare to Beaulieu at the same age? In my brief viewings, he definitely has a better shot and seems to read the ice better? Beaulieu was a terrific skater in his early days. Both have a bit of snarl to their game as well?

Beaulieu as a prospect vs. Mailloux had better skating (pivots, stride, edge, all was plain better), a more refined and much more consistent defensive game (although he did have his brain cramps even then), was slightly better in transition, and exhibited more effort each time on the ice for Saint-John than Mailloux did in the 2022-2023 season for London.

Mailloux has a MUCH better shot (his is borderline elite for a Dman as opposed to Beaulieu's slightly below-average shot), he seems to find shooting/passing lanes a lot easier, makes decisions a bit quicker when pressured, has better hands, and manipulates defenders with the puck on his stick in a way that Beaulieu can only dream of.

Mailloux is also quite a bit stronger/heavier than Beaulieu was in his junior days although both had similar-ish impacts physically at the Junior level given Beaulieu's higher aggressiveness.

Overall, I'd say that Nathan Beaulieu as a prospect would have been a safe-ish potential second-pairing guy. One who unfortunately failed to develop the offensive side of his game (and cleaning-up his decisions with the puck) enough to make it as a top-4 defenseman in the league. But he is still a very useful bottom-pairing defenseman to have, and a perennial true-NHLer.

Mailloux is much more gifted as a prospect but at the same time far from "safe" as opposed to Beaulieu. Mailloux's potential upside is massive, that of a true first-pairing defenseman in the Brent Burns mold. But there are very real chances he also doesn't manage to improve his defensive game enough to even be a long-term NHLer.

If we want to be any good and compete for the Stanley Cup in the coming years, we'll need some star power on defense, something we haven't had since Weber LTIRetired.

And so we will need guys like Hutson, Mailloux, Engstrom, the young guys that we already have in the NHL, anyone really, to develop well and become more than just competent defenders.

Right now, given how badly we need any sort of star defenseman on our team and the depth that we have at the position, I take Mailloux's potential upside way before I would take the "safe-ness" of a guy like Beaulieu.

So yeah, those would be the differences in my mind.

But anyways, that's it from me and have a nice day.

 

[Nico Cauzuki]

But a UFA like David Savard would also be a perfect partner for Hutson. Finding a perfect partner for Hutson onnthe bottom pair isn't a need of priority. And I hope we go BPA available anyways, regardless of need or position.

Having said that, the future score is much more set than the forward corps:

Guhle - Mailloux
Matheson - Barron
Hutson - Xhekaj
Harris - Kovacevic
Engstrom - Struble
Trudeau - Fairbrother
Nurmi, Tourigny, Norlinder, Beaudin

We have promising dmen in the system coming out of our ears.

Yea theres no way i would have Hutson playing third line minutes that kid will be a stud the pmd we havent had in years

 

[Sam de Mtl]

Yea theres no way i would have Hutson playing third line minutes that kid will be a stud the pmd we havent had in years

Karlson played his best hockey next to Methot. Players don't always need a star next to them. If Hutson has the steady partner he needs, he may be fine on a 2nd pair or even a 1st (although I doubt that).

I don't think we need to use a 5th overall pick to get Hutson a partner.

That being said, I have no problem with Reinbacher if he is the right pick there, but for his own merits and not because of how he may or may not fit with other players we have

 

[26Mats]

Yea theres no way i would have Hutson playing third line minutes that kid will be a stud the pmd we havent had in years

I'll count my chickens when they hatch.

I currently project him as a 1st unit pp guy. Hard to project him 5 v 5 though.

 

[Gustave]

Karlson played his best hockey next to Methot. Players don't always need a star next to them. If Hutson has the steady partner he needs, he may be fine on a 2nd pair or even a 1st (although I doubt that).

I don't think we need to use a 5th overall pick to get Hutson a partner.

That being said, I have no problem with Reinbacher if he is the right pick there, but for his own merits and not because of how he may or may not fit with other players we have

If there's one thing the Habs do well, it's the abiity to pro scout good defensive D-man, Alzner being an absolute blackhole of an exception. Chiarot, Hamrlik, Spacek, Cube (give or take), Eddy, Quintal, Gill, Savard, etc. I'm confident they'll fit that profile next to our jewel if need be.

Before anyone balks at the names above; the problem with them was that the mix usually wasn't up to par in the balance between those types and offensive types. They were counted on in a too great capacity for what they were, I'm aware

 

[26Mats]

If there's one thing the Habs do well, it's the abiity to pro scout good defensive D-man, Alzner being an absolute blackhole of an exception. Chiarot, Hamrlik, Spacek, Cube (give or take), Eddy, Quintal, Gill, Savard, etc. I'm confident they'll fit that profile next to our jewel if need be.

Before anyone balks at the names above; the problem with them was that the mix usually wasn't up to par in the balance between those types and offensive types. They were counted on in a too great capacity for what they were, I'm aware

I agree that the pro scouting if dmen was good. But that was a different management team. Bergevin in particular sid well in adding Petry, Edmundson, Chiarot and Savard to Markov and Subban, who he converted to Shea Weber.

 

[salbutera]

Just curious, how does he compare to Beaulieu at the same age? In my brief viewings, he definitely has a better shot and seems to read the ice better? Beaulieu was a terrific skater in his early days. Both have a bit of snarl to their game as well?

Mailloux made a very poor decision as a 17-year old, leading to a poor act, but has seemingly put in the effort (on & off the ice) to focus and improve.

Beaulieu was too busy in juniors trying to focus on doing keg-stands and never committed to improvement

 

[Fatbiggie]

I was impressed by him during the playoffs. Seems to be on the ice litteraly all the time.

He ‘ll defintely need to work on his D game as he’s often mesmerized by the puck and get out of position. Can’t wait to see where is development is going to lead him. Think he’ll play in the show, remains to be seen at which capacity.

Don’t agree about the no toolbox comments, he may have a smaller one but on the other hand the tools he’s carrying are so goddamn big that makes it tough to find an appropriate one

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Beaulieu as a prospect vs. Mailloux had better skating (pivots, stride, edge, all was plain better), a more refined and much more consistent defensive game (although he did have his brain cramps even then), was slightly better in transition, and exhibited more effort each time on the ice for Saint-John than Mailloux did in the 2022-2023 season for London.

Mailloux has a MUCH better shot (his is borderline elite for a Dman as opposed to Beaulieu's slightly below-average shot), he seems to find shooting/passing lanes a lot easier, makes decisions a bit quicker when pressured, has better hands, and manipulates defenders with the puck on his stick in a way that Beaulieu can only dream of.

Mailloux is also quite a bit stronger/heavier than Beaulieu was in his junior days although both had similar-ish impacts physically at the Junior level given Beaulieu's higher aggressiveness.

Overall, I'd say that Nathan Beaulieu as a prospect would have been a safe-ish potential second-pairing guy. One who unfortunately failed to develop the offensive side of his game (and cleaning-up his decisions with the puck) enough to make it as a top-4 defenseman in the league. But he is still a very useful bottom-pairing defenseman to have, and a perennial true-NHLer.

Mailloux is much more gifted as a prospect but at the same time far from "safe" as opposed to Beaulieu. Mailloux's potential upside is massive, that of a true first-pairing defenseman in the Brent Burns mold. But there are very real chances he also doesn't manage to improve his defensive game enough to even be a long-term NHLer.

If we want to be any good and compete for the Stanley Cup in the coming years, we'll need some star power on defense, something we haven't had since Weber LTIRetired.

And so we will need guys like Hutson, Mailloux, Engstrom, the young guys that we already have in the NHL, anyone really, to develop well and become more than just competent defenders.

Right now, given how badly we need any sort of star defenseman on our team and the depth that we have at the position, I take Mailloux's potential upside way before I would take the "safe-ness" of a guy like Beaulieu.

So yeah, those would be the differences in my mind.

But anyways, that's it from me and have a nice day.

Beaulieu is and always was terrible defensively and is not currently an NHL defenceman on anything other than a bad team. He never was a true top 4 defender as he was given chances in Montreal due to being a highish 1st round pick with a great physical skill set but never proved that he was competent. He then went to play for the tire fire in Buffalo where he was awfuI and was traded for a 6th round pick to Winnipeg. He never cut it as a regular in Winnipeg despite the Jets having a terrible D corps as he spent the majority of his time as a healthy scratch and injured over four seasons before being dumped to the Pens for a 7th round pick where he never played a game. Finally he signs a 850 000 with Anaheim where he is healthy scratched again at times and even sent to the AHL for a 4 game stint....and this is on the worst team in the NHL. So no, Nathan Beaulieu was never a legitimate top 4 dman in the NHL and he certainly is not a very useful bottom pairing NHler. He was at best a 6/7th dman in his prime if he was deployed properly and is currently a 7th/Ahler on any team other than the very worst teams in the league.

I agree that Beaulieu was a smoother skater with better edges than Mailloux but you said that his shot was below average and that is not true at all. Beaulieu had a good shot but just like his skating he is/was too dumb to take advantage of it. Just because he was given opportunity that his play did not merit while in Montreal does not mean that he was ever a true top 4 NHL dman, it just means that Montreal made a mistake in drafting him and made a bigger mistake by giving him a role that he had no chance to succeed in because his brain lags so far behind his feet. He was overrated on a stacked Sea Dogs team and some scouts knew that which is why he slipped to us. I was fooled as well although I never loved the kid but it looked like we might have got a steal when he dropped to us.

I agree that I would take Mailloux over Beaulieu but it turns out that the notion that Beaulieu was a safe pick at 17th OA was incorrect. I don't consider a safe pick to be a player that never proves himself to be competent and never is able to hold down a full time job after exhausting his pedigree privilege with the team that drafted him and is eventually dumped for the 68th pick in an NHL entry draft before he hits 25.

 

[Kimota]

interesting quote (en Français) from Dale Hunter, from a RC article today...

Si je compare avec van Bouchard qu’on a eu ici, lui avait besoin de prendre de la force. Mailloux est un peu plus comme John Carlson. Un très gros monsieur qui mange la glace. Il est… très gros. Physiquement, il est prêt. Après ça, il s’agit de voir comment il va s’adapter.

Article also discussed his hockey IQ not being the problem, but his tendency to try to do too much on the ice, thinking he's unstoppable - which won't work in the NHL

I will have to disagree with the future coach of the Quebec Nordiques a bit. Mailloux has a greater potential physically than Carlsson.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

Beaulieu is and always was terrible defensively and is not currently an NHL defenceman on anything other than a bad team. He never was a true top 4 defender as he was given chances in Montreal due to being a highish 1st round pick with a great physical skill set but never proved that he was competent. He then went to play for the tire fire in Buffalo where he was awfuI and was traded for a 6th round pick to Winnipeg. He never cut it as a regular in Winnipeg despite the Jets having a terrible D corps as he spent the majority of his time as a healthy scratch and injured over four seasons before being dumped to the Pens for a 7th round pick where he never played a game. Finally he signs a 850 000 with Anaheim where he is healthy scratched again at times and even sent to the AHL for a 4 game stint....and this is on the worst team in the NHL. So no, Nathan Beaulieu was never a legitimate top 4 dman in the NHL and he certainly is not a very useful bottom pairing NHler. He was at best a 6/7th dman in his prime if he was deployed properly and is currently a 7th/Ahler on any team other than the very worst teams in the league.

I agree that Beaulieu was a smoother skater with better edges than Mailloux but you said that his shot was below average and that is not true at all. Beaulieu had a good shot but just like his skating he is/was too dumb to take advantage of it. Just because he was given opportunity that his play did not merit while in Montreal does not mean that he was ever a true top 4 NHL dman, it just means that Montreal made a mistake in drafting him and made a bigger mistake by giving him a role that he had no chance to succeed in because his brain lags so far behind his feet. He was overrated on a stacked Sea Dogs team and some scouts knew that which is why he slipped to us. I was fooled as well all though I never loved the kid but it looked like we might have got a steal when he dropped to us.

I agree that I would take Mailloux over Beaulieu but it turns out that the notion that Beaulieu was a safe pick at 17th OA was incorrect. I don't consider a safe pick to be a player that never proves himself to be competent and never is able to hold down a full time job after exhausting his pedigree privilege with the team that drafted him and is eventually dumped for the 68th pick in an NHL entry draft before he hits 25.

Bold of you to take the player who’s career you haven’t seen over the player’s you have already seen.

 

[Boss Man Hughes]

Bold of you to take the player who’s career you haven’t seen over the player’s you have already seen.

If the veteran player has no toolbox and the prospect does it's an easy choice.

 

[DAChampion]

But Beaulieu could fight !

 

[Belial]

But Beaulieu could fight !

In the bars!

 

[CHwest]

If there's one thing the Habs do well, it's the abiity to pro scout good defensive D-man, Alzner being an absolute blackhole of an exception. Chiarot, Hamrlik, Spacek, Cube (give or take), Eddy, Quintal, Gill, Savard, etc. I'm confident they'll fit that profile next to our jewel if need be.

Before anyone balks at the names above; the problem with them was that the mix usually wasn't up to par in the balance between those types and offensive types. They were counted on in a too great capacity for what they were, I'm aware

Totally different management personnel. Good Lord you went back a few years.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Beaulieu had no shot whatsoever

ridiculous comparison on that fact alone

 

[DinosaurBones]

Skating (straight line): Mailloux
Skating (east-west/edges): Slight Beaulieu
Skating (Backwards): Tie
Shot: Majorly Mailloux
Hitting: Mailloux
Aggression: Beaulieu
O-Instincs: Mailloux
D-Instincs: Beaulieu

Personally at the same age I like Mailloux better as I feel the holes in his game are easier to work on than the holes in Beaulieu's game. Both have/had attritbutes to be excited about.

 

[jrom]

But Beaulieu could fight !

I know it was a jest but Mailloux is physical and got into fights this year. Unclear if he will be able to be that physical vs pros (a bit like Guhle).

 

[themilosh]

I'll count my chickens when they hatch.

I currently project him as a 1st unit pp guy. Hard to project him 5 v 5 though.

Once again #26 is the voice of reason.
He's not going to see the ice in the last 5 min of a game with a 1 goal lead.

Beaulieu had no shot whatsoever

it was a saucer pass!

 

[themilosh]

Totally different management personnel. Good Lord you went back a few years.

always thaught Murray Baron was a great pick up. well we all know how that ended.

 

[1909]

Skating (straight line): Mailloux
Skating (east-west/edges): Slight Beaulieu
Skating (Backwards): Tie
Shot: Majorly Mailloux
Hitting: Mailloux
Aggression: Beaulieu
O-Instincs: Mailloux
D-Instincs: Beaulieu

Personally at the same age I like Mailloux better as I feel the holes in his game are easier to work on than the holes in Beaulieu's game. Both have/had attritbutes to be excited about.

You forgot their off ice behaviours...

 

[Gustave]

Totally different management personnel. Good Lord you went back a few years.

Very true

I just wanted to show that throughout the years and management teams (I think I covered from Houle to Bergy), the Habs as a whole could always be successful at finding these types. Maybe it continues with Hugo

 

[BehindTheTimes]

If the veteran player has no toolbox and the prospect does it's an easy choice.

My point was, he’s not really going out on a limb there. Everyone would say the same thing if they think Logan can even be an everyday dman. I think it’s obvious he can and will be.

There’s some work to do and the missed development time made me nervous, but he’s got enough skill it won’t matter.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Bold of you to take the player who’s career you haven’t seen over the player’s you have already seen.

Bold of me to gamble on a player who might be good over one that we know was never good?????

Either you do not know what "bold" means or your statement is based on egregiously flawed logic.