GDT: Rookie Tournament: Canadiens vs. Sabres (7PM ET on RDS.ca & YouTube)

[Gillings]

up until Hugo, Habs somehow thought they were raising talent locally like the 60s... it's going to take close to a decade to get a proper farm system locked and loaded.

add in a few generational goalies: Roy, Price, and Hart winner Theodore, plus Halak and to an extent Huet, the Habs relied on goaltending to make them a playoff team, but never a contender.

Rock solid goaltending and a few top 6 prospects to turn some of those turnovers into goals.. always an early exit and Hamrlik
Being our best Defensman beside bust knees markov

 

[417]

I have no idea how anybody could have thought that he had a chance. Kid played 150 games in the past 4 years. And he always struggled defensively despite being one of the tallest and biggest player. Kid has A LONG way to go.

I don't know if he has a LONG way to go…but he's also a late 1st round pick who hasn't played a ton of hockey.

If it takes him 2-3 years...i think that's normal.

 

[Whitesnake]

I don't know if he has a LONG way to go…but he's also a late 1st round pick who hasn't played a ton of hockey.

If it takes him 2-3 years...i think that's normal.

It then becomes a LONG way to whoever was already pencilling him a top 6 spot this year in Montreal.

 

[417]

It then becomes a LONG way to whoever was already pencilling him a top 6 spot this year in Montreal.

But why would someone, anyone, be so sure to pencil a guy into a lineup when he was a late 1st round pick who didn't play a ton of junior hockey?

We need to stop thinking OUR expectations, are what determines whether or not a player is developing at the right pace.

He will get to the NHL (hopefully) on HIS time, not ours.

He's a 2021 draft pick….if he's a full time NHL sometime in 2024-2025, I think that's a reasonable timeframe.

 

[Whitesnake]

But why would someone, anyone, be so sure to pencil a guy into a lineup when he was a late 1st round pick who didn't play a ton of junior hockey?

We need to stop thinking OUR expectations, are what determines whether or not a player is developing at the right pace.

He will get to the NHL (hopefully) on HIS time, not ours.

He's a 2021 draft pick….if he's a full time NHL sometime in 2024-2025, I think that's a reasonable timeframe.

Our expectations is often the mirror of the professionnals opinions though. There was a lot of hype about Mailloux. From the organization. Journalists. Supposed experts. That somehow, if Mailloux would not have had the story he had, he would have been top 15 (which frankly, I don't agree). So on talent alone, he's supposed to be all that. And is suppose to have the frame, the speed and the shot to somehow skip the regular steps to come in the NHL.

Where our own expectations fail is when we use 3 minutes of highlights on YouTube to indeed pencil a player in a starting lineup...see Norlinder. But aside from that, no hype, less expectations.

 

[LaP]

Our expectations is often the mirror of the professionnals opinions though. There was a lot of hype about Mailloux. From the organization. Journalists. Supposed experts. That somehow, if Mailloux would not have had the story he had, he would have been top 15 (which frankly, I don't agree). So on talent alone, he's supposed to be all that. And is suppose to have the frame, the speed and the shot to somehow skip the regular steps to come in the NHL.

Where our own expectations fail is when we use 3 minutes of highlights on YouTube to indeed pencil a player in a starting lineup...see Norlinder. But aside from that, no hype, less expectations.

Mailloux is a lot like Subban as a prospect minus the playing the "white" way thing. Good offensively. Lot of holes defensively. But Subban was more dominant offensively and was drafted in the 2nd round only. The narrative that Mailloux would have been drafted top 15 is extremely flawed. Guhle was drafted 16th and he was a much better prospect overall.

 

[417]

Our expectations is often the mirror of the professionnals opinions though. There was a lot of hype about Mailloux. From the organization. Journalists. Supposed experts. That somehow, if Mailloux would not have had the story he had, he would have been top 15 (which frankly, I don't agree). So on talent alone, he's supposed to be all that. And is suppose to have the frame, the speed and the shot to somehow skip the regular steps to come in the NHL.

I don't know, I don't think this really has anything to do with the developmental progress of the player though.

He's clearly talented, that's not the issue…hes just very raw and that's quite normal given how much he's played so far and that's why he going to play in Laval this year and I don't think anyone in the organization thought that's not exactly where he would be to start the season.

We should even be prepared to see him struggle in the AHL, in fact, expect it.

Where our own expectations fail is when we use 3 minutes of highlights on YouTube to indeed pencil a player in a starting lineup...see Norlinder. But aside from that, no hype, less expectations.

Agreed but again, that's a “we” problem…it shouldn't be a reflection of the player’s progress.

 

[badfish]

Florian Xhekaj is funny, he looks like Arber, he has got some attitude like Arber, mixes it up after every whistle like Arber, but I'm always thrown off by how skinny he is. Imagine he goes on the same growth curve as Arber and ends up 220 lbs and 6'4? Thats awesome size for a guy who, if he makes it, is mostly likely to contribute in a physical/grinding bottom six role.

Edit: wrong GDT. It's pre-season for posters as well.

 

[Jaynki]

Mailloux is a lot like Subban as a prospect minus the playing the "white" way thing. Good offensively. Lot of holes defensively. But Subban was more dominant offensively and was drafted in the 2nd round only. The narrative that Mailloux would have been drafted top 15 is extremely flawed. Guhle was drafted 16th and he was a much better prospect overall.

Not even close

 

[Skip Bayless]

Florian Xhekaj is funny, he looks like Arber, he has got some attitude like Arber, mixes it up after every whistle like Arber, but I'm always thrown off by how skinny he is. Imagine he goes on the same growth curve as Arber and ends up 220 lbs and 6'4? Thats awesome size for a guy who, if he makes it, is mostly likely to contribute in a physical/grinding bottom six role.

Edit: wrong GDT. It's pre-season for posters as well.

I was impressed by his mobility and puck protection, has got some good hands along the boards. Just a big guy that plays big, just like his big bro.

 

[dackelljuneaubulis02]

Mailloux is a lot like Subban as a prospect minus the playing the "white" way thing. Good offensively. Lot of holes defensively. But Subban was more dominant offensively and was drafted in the 2nd round only. The narrative that Mailloux would have been drafted top 15 is extremely flawed. Guhle was drafted 16th and he was a much better prospect overall.

Not at all. PK was hardly a 2nd round talent in hindsight.

Guhle could end up going much higher in a re-draft.

Mailloux's size, skating skill combo is a top 15 talent all day long. Even with the defensive holes.

Hard to say what Mailloux could've done had he played more. I'd probably still give the edge to PK but pure offence wise? Not by much.

 

[ZUKI]

*Pulls the goalie when Papa John's line is on the ice*

It's training camp for the coaches too I guess. It dosen't matter but still it felt weird lol

It’s one prospect, exhibition game…..essentially a pick up game with talented teenagers. I agree lots of our guys looked lost and unprepared but that’s mostly on the coaches and a lack of preparation. Now part of that is due to the nature of rookie camps but anyone who understands short term tourneys knows hockey fundamentals and positional play is usually the KPI’s your looking for. we should not be surprised it’s the same as last year with this coaching group…when you think about it, same thing the last number of years. Unfortunately we have no player development specialists and if we keep hiring Hab‘s alumni posing as development coaches we’ll get what we alway got.
On a positive note we had kids who looked good and at the top of that group is Reinbacker he has a strong foundation of skills.

seriously, these are kids coming from different teams, different leagues, different countries and that are playing together for the first time…It isn’t about winning a game, it isn’t about playing a system .

The first reason they are all there is to have a first contact. With each other players, with the personal, the facilities, with the ice, the city.

You give too much impacts to an event that is absolutely meaningless. They are kids having fun and a taste of where they are in their development

 

[Miller Time]

To be honest Mesar over Kulich is starting to look like when Boston got Pasta and we got Scherbak, except at least we didn't even have the chance to pick Pastrnak. Are Czech players underscouted or undervalued again?

Where would you place Kulich, today, in a re-draft?

Aside from SJ who also passed on him after we took Mesar, the impression I get is that Kulich is trending towards being a top-15, perhaps even top-10 talent from 2022.

It's still very early, but if he does end up being a Pastarnak-like talent, there are over a dozen teams that will have "missed" on their evaluation as well.

Not so sure that reflects the failure of any one scouting department so much as a player who made a big positive pivot a bit after being drafted.... won't be the first, or last time this happens, yet many around here act like it's an indictment of our entire draft approach.

And this despite us getting Hutson, Beck, Engstrom, Davidson & Nurmi in that same draft... all players that also would go higher if a re-draft occured today.

So odd...

 

[SOLR]

Where would you place Kulich, today, in a re-draft?

Aside from SJ who also passed on him after we took Mesar, the impression I get is that Kulich is trending towards being a top-15, perhaps even top-10 talent from 2022.

It's still very early, but if he does end up being a Pastarnak-like talent, there are over a dozen teams that will have "missed" on their evaluation as well.

Not so sure that reflects the failure of any one scouting department so much as a player who made a big positive pivot a bit after being drafted.... won't be the first, or last time this happens, yet many around here act like it's an indictment of our entire draft approach.

And this despite us getting Hutson, Beck, Engstrom, Davidson & Nurmi in that same draft... all players that also would go higher if a re-draft occured today.

So odd...

Problem is: in this case the bias for Mesar was transparently connected to Slaf.

 

[WinterLion]

Where would you place Kulich, today, in a re-draft?

Aside from SJ who also passed on him after we took Mesar, the impression I get is that Kulich is trending towards being a top-15, perhaps even top-10 talent from 2022.

It's still very early, but if he does end up being a Pastarnak-like talent, there are over a dozen teams that will have "missed" on their evaluation as well.

Not so sure that reflects the failure of any one scouting department so much as a player who made a big positive pivot a bit after being drafted.... won't be the first, or last time this happens, yet many around here act like it's an indictment of our entire draft approach.

And this despite us getting Hutson, Beck, Engstrom, Davidson & Nurmi in that same draft... all players that also would go higher if a re-draft occured today.

So odd...

Thank you. Now if only those people also had the attention span to read this.

 

[Miller Time]

Problem is: in this case the bias for Mesar was transparently connected to Slaf.

- is that directly quoted anywhere? Asking sincerely as I've never seen or read that.

- 2022 draft class seemed to have lots of different rankings... Mesar was anywhere from late teens to 36th. So is it not fair to say that 26th overall was not a reach at all? (I saw Kulich as high as 14 & as low as 40... by none other than Bob McKenzie)

- you may disagree, but I see the logic of drafting players that have pre-established chemistry as a net positive assuming you aren't overly reaching to make it happen... transitioning to a new country is tough for anyone, let alone a teen. Nothing wrong with adding a favourable variable to the mix.


Mesar was described as a high risk high reward prospect with elite level skill. Using a late 1st on a player like that, especially with a "safer" pick in Beck a few spots later was perfectly fine with me.

I don't think 14 months is nearly enough time to dismiss him as a bust, he still has the same top 6 potential he had a year ago, perhaps with further clarity that his path to the NHL is that or nothing.

 

[SOLR]

- you may disagree, but I see the logic of drafting players that have pre-established chemistry as a net positive assuming you aren't overly reaching to make it happen... transitioning to a new country is tough for anyone, let alone a teen. Nothing wrong with adding a favourable variable to the mix.

I've been making significant business decisions all my life, and I have yet to see a situation where confirmation bias doesn't overcome a group. This is why I purposely keep a few very disagreeable advisors around, and I don't mix them up with the zeitgeist.

Hockey guys are no management pros; they've rarely studied management. They are more likely to fall to these effects.

 

[Miller Time]

I've been making significant business decisions all my life, and I have yet to see a situation where confirmation bias doesn't overcome a group. This is why I purposely keep a few very disagreeable advisors around, and I don't mix them up with the zeitgeist.

Hockey guys are no management pros; they've rarely studied management. They are more likely to fall to these effects.

Not sure what you consider "studying management", but I think your assessment is way off. I know a lot of successful pro sport management leaders & have rarely met any who aren't methodical students of leadership & management.

Getting an MBA does not mean being good at management & lots of people with decades of experience are terrible at it. Just ask blockbuster, blackberry, yahoo et.

As for the hockey world, Bergevin types are increasingly the exception, not the rule. I don't think your assessment of Hughes holds up.

There's a reason why the best corporate environments both mimic and seek to learn from the best sport excellence cultures... and recruit heavily from those ranks.

Managing people and relationships under pressure is exactly what the best sport leaders excel at. I think we are seeing lots of signs that this group is shaping up to be one of the better ones.

 

[Captain Mountain]

I've been making significant business decisions all my life, and I have yet to see a situation where confirmation bias doesn't overcome a group. This is why I purposely keep a few very disagreeable advisors around, and I don't mix them up with the zeitgeist.

Hockey guys are no management pros; they've rarely studied management. They are more likely to fall to these effects.

What an entertaining way to display bias while accusing others to of being susceptible to bias.

Even if we ignore on-the-job training, every front office in the NHL has multiple guys who have formally studied management.

 

[Ezpz]

I know someone who went to the game a few days go and got pictures with some of the guys. One of them was Heinemen, who was a bit taller than him, and the person I know is 6'2 or 6'3 (granted there could be some slouching/angling going on and this guy has probably lost an inch with age). So I think he's grown a bit from his draft-reported height. Probably closer to 6'3 than 6'2 at this point as he's about the same amount taller than this guy than his son is, who is 6'3.

He's also pretty thick for a hockey player. Much bigger arms than you would expect.

 

[Rapala]

- is that directly quoted anywhere? Asking sincerely as I've never seen or read that.

- 2022 draft class seemed to have lots of different rankings... Mesar was anywhere from late teens to 36th. So is it not fair to say that 26th overall was not a reach at all? (I saw Kulich as high as 14 & as low as 40... by none other than Bob McKenzie)

- you may disagree, but I see the logic of drafting players that have pre-established chemistry as a net positive assuming you aren't overly reaching to make it happen... transitioning to a new country is tough for anyone, let alone a teen. Nothing wrong with adding a favourable variable to the mix.


Mesar was described as a high risk high reward prospect with elite level skill. Using a late 1st on a player like that, especially with a "safer" pick in Beck a few spots later was perfectly fine with me.

I don't think 14 months is nearly enough time to dismiss him as a bust, he still has the same top 6 potential he had a year ago, perhaps with further clarity that his path to the NHL is that or nothing.

I'm not sure why anyone would claim nationality was a factor when in reality it was familiarity. It's like saying Burke made all those moves to get the twins because they were both Swedes. But I'm not in love with the player. I'm looking hard for a redeeming quality and can't find it.

 

[Miller Time]

I'm not sure why anyone would claim nationality was a factor when in reality it was familiarity. It's like saying Burke made all those moves to get the twins because they were both Swedes. But I'm not in love with the player. I'm looking hard for a redeeming quality and can't find it.

Yup... that's a nice way of putting it.

I don't know why some have trouble simply owning their opinion of the player, as you just did, without having to build these silly narratives.

Not liking a player's game, or not believing in their potential to make it is perfectly sound on its own as a subjective opinion. So many around here try, and fail, to equate their personal opinion to some objective fact that simply isn't there. Makes for piss poor takes then get get all upset when that's pointed out .

 

[SOLR]

Not sure what you consider "studying management", but I think your assessment is way off. I know a lot of successful pro sport management leaders & have rarely met any who aren't methodical students of leadership & management.

Getting an MBA does not mean being good at management & lots of people with decades of experience are terrible at it. Just ask blockbuster, blackberry, yahoo et.

As for the hockey world, Bergevin types are increasingly the exception, not the rule. I don't think your assessment of Hughes holds up.

There's a reason why the best corporate environments both mimic and seek to learn from the best sport excellence cultures... and recruit heavily from those ranks.

Managing people and relationships under pressure is exactly what the best sport leaders excel at. I think we are seeing lots of signs that this group is shaping up to be one of the better ones.

"My assessment is way off." Have you even looked at the numbers? There are very few MBAs around these parts (not that I'm a fan of MBAs at all). Many ex-hockey players with little academic or professional managerial experience of any kind. It's a world where "room leaders" are way too often assumed to be good "managerial leaders." Are you telling me that you would think there was one good manager around in the Bergevin area? Right now, 15+ teams are in a Bergevin-like management background situation and looking at the rest; you can count 1 or 2 credible managers (not sure they are good either). This is often 1 or 2 out of a management team of 30. Total league-wise must be below 5%, particularly in scouting ranks.

Agents tend to run circles around teams on many things and this is one of the reasons.

 

[Miller Time]

"My assessment is way off." Have you even looked at the numbers? There are very few MBAs around these parts (not that I'm a fan of MBAs at all). Many ex-hockey players with little academic or professional managerial experience of any kind. It's a world where "room leaders" are way too often assumed to be good "managerial leaders." Are you telling me that you would think there was one good manager around in the Bergevin area? Right now, 15+ teams are in a Bergevin-like management background situation and looking at the rest; you can count 1 or 2 credible managers (not sure they are good either). This is often 1 or 2 out of a management team of 30. Total league-wise must be below 5%, particularly in scouting ranks.

Agents tend to run circles around teams on many things and this is one of the reasons.

I see a lot of assumptions and a very poor metric used to make your assessment... that's a very dubious approach to evaluating anything, not the kind of approach I equate to high business acumen, but that's just my opinion.