HF Habs: The official 2023-2024 tank thread

[The Great Weal]

I can totally see the Hawks getting Celebrini. They get their brand new Toews/Kane combo after winning 3 cups since 2010.

 

[sandviper]

Well Habs are 2-pts out of a playoff spot ..

 

[ReHabs]

I can totally see the Hawks getting Celebrini. They get their brand new Toews/Kane combo after winning 3 cups since 2010.

They’ll have deserved it too. Focused on rebuilding. Didn’t take shortcuts. Added veteran leadership to keep steering right AND cut Perry loose when he misbehaved.

They wanted to tank and so far have succeeded.

The Habs aimed at “rebuilding the right way” (-Geoff Molson). Hopefully it works out!

 

[DAChampion]

They’ll have deserved it too. Focused on rebuilding. Didn’t take shortcuts. Added veteran leadership to keep steering right AND cut Perry loose when he misbehaved.

They wanted to tank and so far have succeeded.

The Habs aimed at “rebuilding the right way” (-Geoff Molson). Hopefully it works out!

That's not an adequately justified take in my opinion. If all Chicago does is win the lottery twice then they don't actually deserve much, and they won't achieve much either. The other moves will matter too and will calibrate what they "deserve".

 

[ReHabs]

That's not an adequately justified take in my opinion. If all Chicago does is win the lottery twice then they don't actually deserve much, and they won't achieve much either. The other moves will matter too and will calibrate what they "deserve".

Nobody “deserves” to win the lottery. I said it tongue-firmly-in-cheek because there is no deserve and it’s ultimately a big scam on the fans. “Keep us afloat until we get back to relevance… if ever”

Tanking for years on end is cynical and insanely stupid and anti-competitive.

 

[The Real Timo]

Well Habs are 2-pts out of a playoff spot ..

After his spa day Yoel will go on a tear and Habs will be sitting solid in the wild card spot by Xmas.

 

[Sorinth]

I can totally see the Hawks getting Celebrini. They get their brand new Toews/Kane combo after winning 3 cups since 2010.

But they'd still need to get their Keith, Seabrook, and all the other draft picks that played critical roles on at least one of championships like Byfuglien, Hjarlmrasson, Bickell, etc..

 

[rahad]

But they'd still need to get their Keith, Seabrook, and all the other draft picks that played critical roles on at least one of championships like Byfuglien, Hjarlmrasson, Bickell, etc..

Well... Kevin Korchinski (D) is playing at the nhl at 19 years old. I'm not saying he would end up as good as Keith. But a core of Bedard, Korchinski and maybe Celebrini is a solid core. Add Frank Nazar and Oliver Moore to the team in 2-3 years. Sometime, is all about luck. Chicago could have end up drafting #4-5 in 2023. They got lucky with Bedard.

 

[MarkovsKnee]

At least the Wild ans Sens are winning more.

Yeah, we need Calgary, Minnesota, Buffalo, Ottawa & Edmonton to pass us by season's end. That puts us at #6 draft wise.

Bottom 4 should be Chicago, Anaheim, San Jose & Columbus. That leaves Seattle as a team that maybe stays at #5, but also has the potential to catch us. I don't see us dropping below #5 unless we win the lottery. But, #5 is alright.

 

[Sorinth]

Well... Kevin Korchinski (D) is playing at the nhl at 19 years old. I'm not saying he would end up as good as Keith. But a core of Bedard, Korchinski and maybe Celebrini is a solid core. Add Frank Nazar and Oliver Moore to the team in 2-3 years. Sometime, is all about luck. Chicago could have end up drafting #4-5 in 2023. They got lucky with Bedard.

Not saying it's not a good core, but it takes a took a lot more then a couple great top picks to build the SC winning team(s). Maybe they'll do it again, if it happens they will probably have some 5th round pick who becomes a stud. So yeah it would very much depend on a huge amount of luck. And before someone chimes in to says they played the odds to get Bedard and Celebrini, the odds are <3%.

 

[The Great Weal]

But they'd still need to get their Keith, Seabrook, and all the other draft picks that played critical roles on at least one of championships like Byfuglien, Hjarlmrasson, Bickell, etc..

I mean ya, but getting their best pieces right away definitely helps a lot.

 

[NORiculous]

So it's too early to tell whether our picks are going to be stars or not but yet you feel comfortable enough to criticize them for those picks? You realize how dumb that is right, especially when one of those picks is still months away from even being selected

I don’t know if you do it on purpose or don’t understand subtleties… this is actually a recurring theme in your answers in general.

Is it too early to know what the Habs picks from the last two years will turn out to be, yes… but that doesn’t mean you can’t criticize a pick from the selection.

Let me give you an extreme example but if you get the concept, you will understand : the Habs draft you first overall. We don’t how good you will become… But it still a bad pick. It will still be criticized, etc.

Every tank faces the same problem, you get a few high picks and they comes in and quickly makes the team better but overall the team still sucks but other teams are now as bad or worse then you so you stop getting the very top picks and have to make do with picks that have dropped off significantly in value. And that's a situation that's hard to get out of.

I agree that it is hard to get out of. That is one important reason why high ceilings are important in this critical phase. Because they become harder and harder to get. So a focus on high ceiling is important.

It's why every success story involving tank required a huge amount of luck because those teams didn't just draft their superstars with tank picks they all drafted at least 1 superstar outside of their tank picks. And since we can't replicate that kind of draft luck it's not really something we should try to model.

Drafts have lots of players. Some turn out incredibly well and others fail. But funny enough, when a strong scouting teams finds and develop a player that becomes a gem, most of the time they can replicate it with more players if it wasn’t pure luck.

s for the team going for lower ceiling players I completely disagree with your assessment. Slaf was the highest ceiling player in his draft class, and of all the contenders for going 1st OA he was probably close to the riskiest not the safest.

I never said Slafkovsky had that much lower ceiling. Sticking to forwards to keep this simple, he did have a lower ceiling then Cooley and Wright but he brought a lot of other things which made him interesting enough.

For Reinbacher he also wasn't the "safe" pick, your making an assumption that because he is projected to be good defensively that must mean he doesn't have high offensive upside which simply isn't the case. I think one of the pre-draft scouting reports said it best "If you do hear his name picked top-10 in June don't think it's because the team that selects him is playing it safe, it's quite the opposite. The team that drafts Reinbacher top-10 will be one that isn't afraid to dream big, to bet on upside, and to work with their development team"

Again, I don’t know if you are doing this on purpose but you twist stuff up.

Like I said, Hughes said himself that Reinbacher has a lower ceiling then a #1 D. I am merely repeating what he said, so I am not sure what you are arguing about.

It was pretty unanimous that Reinbacher had a higher floor then most, making him a safer pick to reach the NHL. But he « probably » doesn’t have a high top ceiling making him a risky pick as a top pick.

It comes back to what you were saying yourself, the longer you wait to harder it gets to get a top pick. Not going with the highest ceiling is a risk, even if he is a safe pick to make the NHL.

I’ll stop here but I could go on. There are layers of shade of grey in discussions. I gave you two clear examples of where you wrongfully turn it into a binary choice.

 

[Sorinth]

I don’t know if you do it on purpose or don’t understand subtleties… this is actually a recurring theme in your answers in general.

Look in the mirror bud.

Is it too early to know what the Habs picks from the last two years will turn out to be, yes… but that doesn’t mean you can’t criticize a pick from the selection.

Let me give you an extreme example but if you get the concept, you will understand : the Habs draft you first overall. We don’t how good you will become… But it still a bad pick. It will still be criticized, etc.

We do know how good I would be as an NHL player, the answer is terrible. Criticizing the team for taking the top ranked prospect is always dumb and there's no equivalency with your example.

I never said Slafkovsky had that much lower ceiling. Sticking to forwards to keep this simple, he did have a lower ceiling then Cooley and Wright but he brought a lot of other things which made him interesting enough.

If most scouts thought they had higher ceilings then they would've been the consensus top ranked player. You act like your opinions are the one and only truth and then when things don't go as you think they should you invent reasons. Rather then accept that the team thought Slafkovksky was the best player available you play make believe and pretend like they actually thought Cooley was the best player but didn't choose him. It's complete nonsense.

Again, I don’t know if you are doing this on purpose but you twist stuff up.

Like I said, Hughes said himself that Reinbacher has a lower ceiling then a #1 D. I am merely repeating what he said, so I am not sure what you are arguing about.

It was pretty unanimous that Reinbacher had a higher floor then most, making him a safer pick to reach the NHL. But he « probably » doesn’t have a high top ceiling making him a risky pick as a top pick.

It comes back to what you were saying yourself, the longer you wait to harder it gets to get a top pick. Not going with the highest ceiling is a risk, even if he is a safe pick to make the NHL.

I’ll stop here but I could go on. There are layers of shade of grey in discussions. I gave you two clear examples of where you wrongfully turn it into a binary choice.

Perfect example here, you assume your opinion of Reinbacher's ceiling is the one and only truth and that everybody must agree with that view, and then invent a reason that they went with him instead of someone else. Oh they must have wanted a safe pick because they were afraid, there's no thought to the idea that maybe they thought he had both a high floor and a high ceiling and that's why he was rated so highly by them.

And Hughes never even said he had a lower ceiling then a #1 D, and it's quite ironic that you accuse me of missing subtleties and turn things into black and white/binary and miss the shades of grey. Re-watch that clip of Hughes and he provides a lot of context on his D2 comment which you seem to have missed completely.

In fact the very next question in that press conference his answer was "On our list he was right there in terms of [how] we rank players in terms of their potential ... if we felt there was a better pick we would have taken them" Not sure how you can hear that and come to the conclusion that they thought someone else had higher potential and went with Reinbacher because of his floor.

 

[Gravity]

I can totally see the Hawks getting Celebrini. They get their brand new Toews/Kane combo after winning 3 cups since 2010.

I legit see the Hawks winning the cup again before the Habs do.

 

[McGees]

Starting a gofundme to hire a witch to curse the Hawks, who’s in?

 

[The Great Weal]

I legit see the Hawks winning the cup again before the Habs do.

It's largely luck. Their fanbase probably lost their minds last year calling their team self sabotaging idiots to win that game against the Pens and getting a point in OT to move them out of last place. Then when we tanked for the 2018 draft, Carolina out of nowhere got the 2nd lottery spot. Arizona's been bottom of the league for how long now yet they haven't had a top 2 pick. If the Hawks draft well then sure, but if they don't they got A LOT of work to do.

 

[DAChampion]

Criticizing the team for taking the top ranked prospect is always dumb and there's no equivalency with your example.

I want to second this. We should evaluate scouts on how they do when there is no consensus or when they break consensus, not how they do when there is a consensus. If it's the consensus that's wrong, then the issue is more likely with one of league-wide scouting failures, bad luck, or poor development.

For the 2022 draft, the consensus was a two-way tie between Slafkovsky and Wright. Of course it's possible that some third rounder ends up the best player in the draft, but it really came down to Slafkovsky and Wright.

And at this point, it looks like the Habs made the right decision.

 

[WeThreeKings]

I legit see the Hawks winning the cup again before the Habs do.

Maybe, don't see why anyone could say that with confidence. Bedard isn't McDavid, he may not even be Draisatl, yet a team can't win with both of them.. so thinking just because Chicago won one lottery in a good year will make them better cup contenders than us down the line.. I don't see it.

 

[Gravity]

Maybe, don't see why anyone could say that with confidence. Bedard isn't McDavid, he may not even be Draisatl, yet a team can't win with both of them.. so thinking just because Chicago won one lottery in a good year will make them better cup contenders than us down the line.. I don't see it.

Bedard, Moore, Korchinski, Nazar, + multiple high picks in upcoming years. I think by the time they contend, they'll be in a better position to do so as they've committed to the tank.

We may be in a position to contend sooner but not to win a cup. We just don't have the horses (at least not yet) and it seems we're moving towards middle ground where we won't get those pieces. Chicago outside of Bedard doesn't have those pieces either but they're well on their way to drafting them. Doesn't hurt that Bedard is a helluva talent on his own.

 

[WeThreeKings]

Bedard, Moore, Korchinski, Nazar, + multiple high picks in upcoming years. I think by the time they contend, they'll be in a better position to do so as they've committed to the tank.

We may be in a position to contend sooner but not to win a cup. We just don't have the horses (at least not yet) and it seems we're moving towards middle ground where we won't get those pieces. Chicago outside of Bedard doesn't have those pieces either but they're well on their way to drafting them. Doesn't hurt that Bedard is a helluva talent on his own.

We will see, Korchinski isn't better than most of our defense prospects. I wouldn't even call Moore definitively better than Beck. Nazar might not even be better than Roy.

They may draft high again, but how many years can they draft high when Bedard is scoring near 100 pts a year?

They may actually accelerate out early and never get the depth needed.

 

[Gravity]

We will see, Korchinski isn't better than most of our defense prospects. I wouldn't even call Moore definitively better than Beck. Nazar might not even be better than Roy.

They may draft high again, but how many years can they draft high when Bedard is scoring near 100 pts a year?

They may actually accelerate out early and never get the depth needed.

I think it's easier to fill and acquire the necessary depth than it is the core talent pieces we need up front. However, let's see indeed.

 

[WeThreeKings]

I think it's easier to fill and acquire the necessary depth than it is the core talent pieces we need up front. However, let's see indeed.

You'd think, but there's a lot of teams that can't get it done. Toronto and Edmonton have more than enough core talent pieces up front.

 

[Gravity]

You'd think, but there's a lot of teams that can't get it done. Toronto and Edmonton have more than enough core talent pieces up front.

That's somewhat fair. I think Toronto had sufficient depth on multiple occasions but they're just mentally soft. Oilers have no goaltending but even then are starting to storm back. They're close to a cup final.

 

[WeThreeKings]

That's somewhat fair. I think Toronto had sufficient depth on multiple occasions but they're just mentally soft. Oilers have no goaltending but even then are starting to storm back. They're close to a cup final.

We will see, I think they'll get exposed again when things crunch.

Not to say I don't think core forward talent isn't important, we need another piece at a high offensive value but I've come to appreciate how important depth and defense is to winning it all.

 

[Riggins]

Yeah, we need Calgary, Minnesota, Buffalo, Ottawa & Edmonton to pass us by season's end. That puts us at #6 draft wise.

Bottom 4 should be Chicago, Anaheim, San Jose & Columbus. That leaves Seattle as a team that maybe stays at #5, but also has the potential to catch us. I don't see us dropping below #5 unless we win the lottery. But, #5 is alright.

The good news is that of teams we are currently battling with, here are their number of games remaining against the four worst teams in the league (SJ/CHI/CBJ/ANA):

Montreal: only 4 games left
Philly: 5
Arizona: 7
Buffalo: 8
Ottawa: 8
Nashville: 8
St. Louis: 9
Minnesota: 9
Calgary: 10
Edmonton: 10
Seattle: 11