a look back at the 05 draft

[MALKIN IS GOD !!!!!!*]

Don't forget Sauer also ....

You are going to need a bit more then Staal Sauer Sangunetti to stop Crosby Malkin & THE REAL STAAL ( Well other then Eric that is )

 

[Redwingsfan]

Most places rated Bouwmeester over Lehtonen if my memory serves me correctly. The Blue Jackets traded up to #1 in order to make sure they got Nash, as there was an overly complicated side deal where CLB/ATL/FLA would take Nash, Lehtonen, and Bouwmeester in that order.

Teams really shouldn't draft for need. Most prospects taken out of the top 5 are usually 3-4 years away from really making an NHL impact. What you need today will most likely be very different from what you need 3-4 years from now. Best strategy is to take the best player, or at least who you think is the best player and accumulate assets.

And really, who you think is the best player available might differ entirely from what an NHL team thinks is the best available player.

i agree with you on that. teams shouldn't draft because of need. but i still think columbus picked nash because they wanted to go with leclaire. and if bouwmeester was better then lehtonen why didn't atlante take him. they where not exactly packed with defence prospects at the time.

 

[Redwingsfan]

You are going to need a bit more then Staal Sauer Sangunetti to stop Crosby Malkin & THE REAL STAAL ( Well other then Eric that is )

nobody is trying to top anything. but staal malkin and crosby was picked #1, 2, and 2. marc staal was selected at #12 and sanguinetti was picked at #21.
and nobody said that the rangers was the team with the best propects.

 

[Redwingsfan]

You are going to need a bit more then Staal Sauer Sangunetti to stop Crosby Malkin & THE REAL STAAL ( Well other then Eric that is )

sorry thoght you said top not stop

 

[Buffalo87]

lehtonen is a goalie they take longer to develop. if atlanta had the #1 pick they would have taken lehtonen. lehtonen will prove himself this season i think. if he doesn't get injured.

Ok - so for the Thrashers maybe Lehtonen was CLEARLY the best player in that draft but many other teams probably thought differently.

 

[MrMastodonFarm*]

i have compared what i have seen of him vs. the other guys and he just doesn't look as good as the other guys. i could be wrong dought. just my opnion. i'm not saying he is a bust. but i just dont think he will make it in the nhl, but hopefully he proves me wrong.

I'd rather have you tell me what you see in his game, just his game to explain to be how he is "looking like a bust" to you.

 

[Redwingsfan]

Ok - so for the Thrashers maybe Lehtonen was CLEARLY the best player in that draft but many other teams probably thought differently.

yeah everyone has their opinion.

 

[Redwingsfan]

I'd rather have you tell me what you see in his game, just his game to explain to be how he is "looking like a bust" to you.

one thing is hi's offensive game. it sucks. he looks lost in the offensive sone.he has pretty good skating and he's physical play is good. but he doesn't look very smart out there makes a lot of bad decisions. thats why i think he will be stuck in the minors. i see he's downside as a ahl player trough he's entire career and he's upside as a 5-6 defender. but thats only my opionion. and keep in mind that i'm not a scout. hope thats good enough for you

 

[Brodeur]

if atlanta had the #1 pick they would have taken lehtonen.

I'm not sure why that means Lehtonen was the best player in the draft. In 2003, the top 4 teams all had different guys rated as #1 on their board.

 

[RUSqueelin*]

I'd rather have you tell me what you see in his game, just his game to explain to be how he is "looking like a bust" to you.

Pelech is an easy name to put bust beside. He's got a long way to go to grow into his body -it's possible, I think he has the heart and character to do it. Injuries have slowed his development a lot and he looked pretty awkward out there last year. Perhaps 4 years down the road, if he really improves, he can be a 4th or 5 dman in the NHL. But the odds are against him.

 

[Blades 0f Steel]

Well, i LOVE the Price pick as a Habs fan. Danis or Halak won't do it IMO and Price will be a stud, mark my words.

I believe Halak will be a starter in this league. He's got a bright future IMO, and leads the pack of underrated, under-hyped Hab prospects.

I didn't like the Price pick, and still have my doubts, but Melanson and Gainey must have seen something special in him...so, I reserve judgement.

*It's also worth noting that Carey Price used NHL regulation pads all year, when most of his competition wore the bigger ones

 

[Redwingsfan]

Pelech is an easy name to put bust beside. He's got a long way to go to grow into his body -it's possible, I think he has the heart and character to do it. Injuries have slowed his development a lot and he looked pretty awkward out there last year. Perhaps 4 years down the road, if he really improves, he can be a 4th or 5 dman in the NHL. But the odds are against him.

ty. i'm not saying he is definately going to be a bust. but he is the one in the first round i have the lowest believe in.

 

[Blades 0f Steel]

Teams really shouldn't draft for need. Most prospects taken out of the top 5 are usually 3-4 years away from really making an NHL impact. What you need today will most likely be very different from what you need 3-4 years from now. Best strategy is to take the best player, or at least who you think is the best player and accumulate assets.

Well, ideally, it should be both for need AND one of the best players available.

If you're a team without a bluechip defenceman, how could you pass one up even though your scouts are sold on a scoring winger? Asset management comes in to play there too, because you'd have to think: "If we pass on this defenceman now, who are we going to have to trade to get him later?"

 

[Brodeur]

Well, ideally, it should be both for need AND one of the best players available.

If you're a team without a bluechip defenceman, how could you pass one up even though your scouts are sold on a scoring winger? Asset management comes in to play there too, because you'd have to think: "If we pass on this defenceman now, who are we going to have to trade to get him later?"

The bolded statement is essentially what Anaheim did in regards to Ryan/JJ. Ideally you draft a guy that fits an organizational need, but really outside of the top 5 guys, you shouldn't pigeonhole yourself into looking to a position. Top 5 guys can usually make an NHL roster within three years, whereas a guy picked #23 will generally take longer.

In particular, I remember the Isles in 1997 when they had the #4 and #5 picks. For sure they would take at least one forward with the picks since they were pretty stacked on young defense [Lachance, Jonsson, Berard, McCabe] and had an obligatory goalie of the future [Fichaud]. They shocked everybody by not taking Daniel "Sure Thing" Tkaczuk or Sergei Samsonov and took Eric Brewer and Roberto Luongo. Those two picks didn't necessarily address a need in 1997, but obviously they made two good picks.

Especially with the new CBA when you really just don't know how long you can keep your current lineup together. Say for some reason Bryan Little had fallen to the Sharks' pick this year. Would their scouting staff be like "We have Thornton and Marleau already, let's pick a defenseman" or more likely "He's the highest rated guy still left on our list. Should we bypass the best available player just because of what position he plays?"

Generally speaking, the scouts make the pick, not the GM. The scouts' job is to draft the player who will be the best NHL player. It's the GM's job to put together a team. Easiest way to do that is to draft the best assets, regardless of position. You can usually use free agency to fill needs you have today. You use the draft to stockpile as much talent as possible.

 

[boredmale]

I'm not sure why that means Lehtonen was the best player in the draft. In 2003, the top 4 teams all had different guys rated as #1 on their board.

and you can make a good arguement for 3 of them

 

[Randall Graves*]

sometimes you draft on need. just think about 2002 kari lehtonen was clearly the best player in that draft, but the blue jackets passed on him because they had pascal leclaire. and this year riku helenius was not the best player available at #15 but tampa needed a goalie for the future.

No offense but the last 4 or 5 years the Anaheim scouting staff has a good record considering they haven't picked in the top 5 since 2001. I think Brule may have been a better pick because he's going to be ready to make an impact sooner, but people quickly forget Bobby Ryan was dominating the OHL, on a team that lacked offensive talent up until a leg injury. And considering his legs already needed work before it ruined his second half.

 

[DarthSather99]

You are going to need a bit more then Staal Sauer Sangunetti to stop Crosby Malkin & THE REAL STAAL ( Well other then Eric that is )

Oh, you must be talking about that guy Lundqvist. The Pens can have all the O they can get but if they don't have a D man who can defend and move the puck up to them, it is useless.

 

[gars59]

i justed wanted to look back at the first round of the 05 draft an give some comments on some of the selections. because i feel some of the where pretty bad. any feedback would be nice because i will probably not be right one every one.

1. sidney crosby. nothing to say
2. bobby ryan. how could they pass on jack johnson they did not have pronger and niedermayer when they made this pick.
3. jack johnson. they where probably amazed by the facts that he was still available.
4. benoit pouliot. nice pick
5. carey price. i hate this pick. gilbert brule was still there and they did not take him
i dont understand that
6. gilbert brule. steal!!!!
7. jack skille. another nice pick.
8. devin setoguchi. how could they take setoguchi over kopitar
9. brian lee. i like this pick. considerin the amazing defence the senators have they could afford to take a risk on lee who i think will be a homerun.
10. luc bourdon. very nice. ecspesialally now with jovanovski gone. bourdon will soon be ready for nhl action maybe even this season.
11. anze kopitar. another steal.
12. marc staal. i cant believe he dropped this far. the rangers have some quality defence prospects in staal and sanguinetti.
13. marek zagrapan. i see him as a little bit of a risk, but i hope this ends up as a good selection.
14. sasha pokulok. i dont now very much about him, but i think he whent too high. he could be good for the capitals dought. they need some defence that can shut the oponents down.
15. ryan o'marra. great pick.
16. alex bourret. i think this will be a homerun. just look at his development.
http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php3?pid=00070696
17. martin hanzal. ok pick. small risk, but mcardle or bergfors would have been better i think.
18. ryan parent. good pick should be solid.
19. jakub kindl. the red wings team needs some young talent. great pick. whent later then i would have thought.
20. kendall mcardle. nice pick. did also have to wait a little to long for him.
21. tuukka rask. great pick.
22. matt lashoff. ok pick. nice development this season.
23. niklas bergors. could be THE steal of the draft.
24. t.j. oshie. very nice pick. he had a great season with north dakota
25. andrew cogliano. i dont really now. i kind of wanted stoa on this one.
26. matt pelech. looks like a future bust.
27. joe finley. ok pick. caplitals sure was looking for defence on this draft.
28. matt niskanen. looks good.
29. steve downie. great pick. could be an amazing power forward
30. valdimir mihalik. i dont know. doesn't look to good.

how could pouliot a nice pick , but carey price a bad pick , imo brule ,kopitar and many other own pouliot


14. sasha pokulok. i dont now very much about him, but i think he whent too high. he could be good for the capitals dought. they need some defence that can shut the oponents down.

you should hate the pick because parent was still on th board ....

 

[RUSqueelin*]

how could pouliot a nice pick , but carey price a bad pick , imo brule ,kopitar and many other own pouliot

true, Pouliot doesn't compare to Brule. This might look bad in a few years. Pouliot was a risky pick and I haven't seen anything in the OHL which would indicate he's worthy of a 1st rounder never mind better than Brule. Most Sudbury fans would probably agree with me.

 

[Blades 0f Steel]

In particular, I remember the Isles in 1997 when they had the #4 and #5 picks. For sure they would take at least one forward with the picks since they were pretty stacked on young defense..

Not the best example, seeing as how NYI exchanged Luongo for Depietro and Samsonov would have been fine for the Isles...but in the case of Luongo, sometimes the BPA is head-and-shoulders above the rest to your scouts. Then it's clearly obvious who to draft.

That's why I partially agree with you. Sometimes, however, it's pretty close and that's when you need to draft for needs.

 

[CaptCrunch]

Well... Although I believe you had to be in the meetings to get the full story, I'm going to take a few lucky guess...

The Habs has shown in last draft that they were not adverse to drafting by need. With an astounding 4 defensemen and 2 centers taken, I believe the scouting staff was on a mission to fill the pipeline with specific positions.

Its actually not such a bad idea. While you don't draft someone because you just lost an NHL regular, I think its wise to consider the talent that's coming up the pipeline before going at the draft table.

With hindsight, I believe they would have been better by drafting Bourdon or Staal, not Brule. But at the 2005 draft, the Canadiens were in a position where they were counting on a franchise goaltender. The Theodore emergeance of 2002-2003 was still fresh on everyone's mind. Don't forget also that our last 2 cups were won on the back of an HOF goaltender.

They probably looked in their pipeline and failed to see an emerging goaltending stud. I know Serge Savard used to like building teams from the backend to the frontend: goaltending=> defense=> center=> wings. Theodore was considered the "stud" goalie in the system since they drafted him in 1994. So, what do you do if you draft 5th overall and you fail to see a token goalie in your pipeline?

You draft a goalie.

I don't like drafting a goalie that high. Everyone knows it takes an eternity for a prospect at that position to emerge. So much polish and maturity is needed to put together the final product that a lot can happen along the line.

As an armchair gm (!), I'd really like the Habs to pick at least 1 goalie every year (even if its with your last pick) and let them simmer a bit. I'd like it much better if they reserve their high picks for players that are a bit quicker to mature, i.e., that are more predictable.

However, I'm not the Habs, so I can only guess that they took the opportunity to draft what they saw as being a rare talent.

Just for reference, here are the goalies that were taken top 10 from 1990-2000:


2000 Rick Dipietro (NYI), Brent Kahn (CAL)
1999 Brian Finley (NAS)
1997 Roberto Luongo (NYI)
1994 Jamie Storr (LA)
1993 Jocelyn Thibault (QUE)

Here are the goalies that were taken from 11-30 of the first round (1990-2000):

1999 Maxime Ouellet (PHI, no22), Ari Ahonen (NJ, no27)
1998 Patrice Desrochers (PHO, no14), Mathieu Chouinard (OTT, no15)
1997 Mika Noronen (BUF, no21), Jean-Francois Damphousse (NJ, no 24)
1996 Craig Hillier (PIT, no23)
1995 Jean-Sebastien Giguere (HART, no13), Martin Biron (BUF, no 16), Brian Boucher (PHI, no22), Marc Denis (COL, no25)
1994 Eric Fichaud (TOR, no16), Evgeni Ryabchikov (BOS, no21), Dan Cloutier (NYR, no 26)
1990 Trevor Kidd (CAL, no11), Martin Brodeur (NJ, no20)

What about goalies that were taken later? (known names...)

2000 Ilya Briozgalov (44th), Mikael Tellqvist (70th), Roman Cechmanek (171st), Henrik Lundqvist (205th),
1999 Alex Auld (40th), Jan Lasak (65th), Sebastien Caron (86th), Ryan Miller (138th), Martin Prusek (164th)
1998 Philippe Sauvé (38th), Jason Labarbera (66th), Andrew Raycroft (135th), Antero Niittymaki (168th)
1997 David Aebischer (161st)
1996 Mathieu Garon (44th), Robert Esche (139th)
1995 Jean-Sebastien Aubin (76th), Miikka Kiprusoff (116th), Chris Mason (122nd)
1994 Jose Theodore (44th), Marty Turco (124th), Tim Thomas (217th), Johan Hedberg (218th), Evgeni Nabokov (219th), Tomas Vokoun (226th), John Grahame (229th)
1993 Kevin Weekes (41st), Tommy Salo (118th), Patrick Lalime (156th), Manny Legace (188th)
1992 Jim Carrey (32nd), Manny Fernandez (52nd), Nikolai Khabibulin (204th)
1991 Jamie McLennan (48th), Chris Osgood (54th), Steve Shields (101st)
1990 Felix Potvin (31st), Mike Dunham (53rd), Roman Turek (113rd), Corey Schwab (200th)

Although there are a ton of goalies that don't work out after the 1st round, picking a top 10 goalie overall doesn't always work out...

 

[HuskyFlames]

i have compared what i have seen of him vs. the other guys and he just doesn't look as good as the other guys. i could be wrong dought. just my opnion. i'm not saying he is a bust. but i just dont think he will make it in the nhl, but hopefully he proves me wrong.

And how much ahve you really seen of him? The guy had some big injuries early on which set him back. Since being drafted he has been improving quite a bit. To the point the top team last year (London Knights) wanted his services to further improve their team. The guy is a HUGE shut down defenseman with a wicked mean streak. Little to no offense, but that doesn't bother me at all. The guy has top 4 potential, not top pairing but top 4. He looked quite solid at the Flames prospect camp as well.

 

[nuckfan insk]

i justed wanted to look back at the first round of the 05 draft an give some comments on some of the selections. because i feel some of the where pretty bad. any feedback would be nice because i will probably not be right one every one.

1. sidney crosby. nothing to say
2. bobby ryan. how could they pass on jack johnson they did not have pronger and niedermayer when they made this pick.
3. jack johnson. they where probably amazed by the facts that he was still available.
4. benoit pouliot. nice pick
5. carey price. i hate this pick. gilbert brule was still there and they did not take him
i dont understand that
6. gilbert brule. steal!!!!
7. jack skille. another nice pick.
8. devin setoguchi. how could they take setoguchi over kopitar
9. brian lee. i like this pick. considerin the amazing defence the senators have they could afford to take a risk on lee who i think will be a homerun.
10. luc bourdon. very nice. ecspesialally now with jovanovski gone. bourdon will soon be ready for nhl action maybe even this season.
11. anze kopitar. another steal.
12. marc staal. i cant believe he dropped this far. the rangers have some quality defence prospects in staal and sanguinetti.
13. marek zagrapan. i see him as a little bit of a risk, but i hope this ends up as a good selection.
14. sasha pokulok. i dont now very much about him, but i think he whent too high. he could be good for the capitals dought. they need some defence that can shut the oponents down.
15. ryan o'marra. great pick.
16. alex bourret. i think this will be a homerun. just look at his development.
http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php3?pid=00070696
17. martin hanzal. ok pick. small risk, but mcardle or bergfors would have been better i think.
18. ryan parent. good pick should be solid.
19. jakub kindl. the red wings team needs some young talent. great pick. whent later then i would have thought.
20. kendall mcardle. nice pick. did also have to wait a little to long for him.
21. tuukka rask. great pick.
22. matt lashoff. ok pick. nice development this season.
23. niklas bergors. could be THE steal of the draft.
24. t.j. oshie. very nice pick. he had a great season with north dakota
25. andrew cogliano. i dont really now. i kind of wanted stoa on this one.
26. matt pelech. looks like a future bust.
27. joe finley. ok pick. caplitals sure was looking for defence on this draft.
28. matt niskanen. looks good.
29. steve downie. great pick. could be an amazing power forward
30. valdimir mihalik. i dont know. doesn't look to good.

i was very suprised at setoguchi at #8 and same with ryan at #2. mcardle went a little early, but looks to be a good 3rd liner. rask ws a very good pick, brule was a steal, pelech looks like a wrong choice.staal and bourdon were great picks(i wish people would stop comparing them). bergfors looks to be a steal at 23. i think skille and setoguchi at #7 and 8 were reaches and really dont think much of skille so far. mihalik at 30 is way to early to tell,. he is probably 5 years from the nhl if he ever makes it. a pretty strong draft though

 

[Whitesnake]

And then the ''Let's bash the Habs'' are back again.....Can't understand why Habs with Price get it and no word on Ryan or even better Pouliot.

If those Habs bashers that keep saying that Brule is as great as any other FORWARDS chosen that year, what makes Anaheim or Minnesota not as bad as the Habs. Just because Price was picked 1 spot before??? Habs took Price 'cause they thought he was a star goalie and do not think they'll be able to pick another him like him in future years 'cause of their rankings, you know we don't have the luxury to finish amongst the bottom 5 each years......And by the way, I know that most great goalies could be picked in other rounds than the 1st round but again, they thought that Price would be more valuable than Brule. Hated the pick then to be honest, but again to be honest didn't think Brule was the one we needed, either Kopitar, Bourdon or Staal were my choices but by trading down around 10.

As far as Rask goes, well he did looked good and then got traded to another team than THE team of the universe so automatically we begin to see some flaws about his game, like he did gave 4 goals out of 48, before he would've made 44 saves, now he did let 4 pass by.....go figure.....Maybe we should trade Price just to see his value skyrocket.....

Anyway, the Habs bashing begins to be ridiculous, we didn't own the first 5 picks that year.....

 

[Eb0la11]

true, Pouliot doesn't compare to Brule. This might look bad in a few years. Pouliot was a risky pick and I haven't seen anything in the OHL which would indicate he's worthy of a 1st rounder never mind better than Brule. Most Sudbury fans would probably agree with me.

LOL, what are you talking about he shows nothing worthy of a first rounder. Just cause his stats arent huge? I mean 35 goals in 51 games... thats pretty good if you ask me.

This kids rare combination of size speed and skills is second to none other than crosby in the draft. Thats what made him a first rounder, his potential is phenomonal, its just a matter of if he can bring it all together. His biggest concern is obviously his temper, something Lemaire should easilly correct.