Speculation: If Habs win 2OA or 3OA lottery

[habsfan891]

#reporterchris

If the draft lottery proposal outlined in tonight's NHL memo becomes reality:
-- Detroit would be guaranteed No. 1 or No. 2 overall
-- Ottawa could do no worse than owning No. 3 AND No. 4
-- New Jersey, Buffalo, Montreal and Chicago couldn't jump beyond No. 2/3/4/5, respectively

As i said in the draft thread this helps nobody but Ottawa and Detroit theres no way the other 7 teams in the top ten let this go through

 

[Deebs]

As i said in the draft thread this helps nobody but Ottawa and Detroit theres no way the other 7 teams in the top ten let this go through

Ottawa is laughing all the way to the bank

 

[habsfan891]

Ottawa is laughing all the way to the bank

Am i understanding it to mean that even if we win the lottery we only get 4th pick what a f***ing joke.

 

[LeProspector]

I think this is fair, it rewards the truly awful teams in the NHL. MTL is making the playoffs next year so we really don’t need a top 3 pick. We’ll just be a mediocre team for the next 5-6 years.

 

[Big Empty]

Why the f*** would the NHL implement this new system. Why not just use the current system? It makes no difference. What the f*** kind of league is this? Holding a draft before the end of the year, what a joke.

 

[TT1]

Byfield

 

[Kaiden Ghoul]

The German kid and then Drysdale... I'm not sold on Byfield at 3... 4 no problem but not top 3

 

[BLONG7]

Ottawa is laughing all the way to the bank

Proper style rebuild.....that being said, they never seem to be able to keep the kids they draft once they are stars.

Does it really matter where we draft? With MB at the helm, we have drafted 3rd overall twice...and it has produced what exactly?

Byfield sure looks like a stud, but..............gotta feeling we draft 8-9 anyhow.

 

[sharks9]

#reporterchris

If the draft lottery proposal outlined in tonight's NHL memo becomes reality:
-- Detroit would be guaranteed No. 1 or No. 2 overall
-- Ottawa could do no worse than owning No. 3 AND No. 4
-- New Jersey, Buffalo, Montreal and Chicago couldn't jump beyond No. 2/3/4/5, respectively

On one hand, picking 4th would be great because we're guaranteed one of Byfield, Stutzle, or Drysdale, but on the other hand winning the lottery and only moving p to 4th would piss me off because it means if this year was normal we would've gotten Lafreniere.

 

[habsterr]

1. Byfield
2. Stutzle
3. Drysdale

 

[Koivu11]

So we don’t get to host the draft and also get screwed out of a chance to draft Lafreniere? Nice.

I’m sure Molson will be happy to let this go through since he seems like the type of guy with no backbone.

 

[BLONG7]

So we don’t get to host the draft and also get screwed out of a chance to draft Lafreniere? Nice.

I’m sure Molson will be happy to let this go through since he seems like the type of guy with no backbone.

He is busy behind the scenes counting his cash....as we know, nothing else matters.

 

[habsfan891]

Shouldnt we change this title to who will Montreal pick if we win 4th overall considering thats the best we can get if this moronic lottery plan is allowed through

 

[The Little Viking]

Shouldnt we change this title to who will Montreal pick if we win 4th overall considering thats the best we can get if this moronic lottery plan is allowed through

The NHL's plan is only under consideration at this point, therefore #1 #2 #3 are still on the table.

My top 4:
1) Lafreniere
2) Stutzle
3) Raymond
4) Byfield

Drysdale looks great but at 5'11, he might be another Mete. Not high enough to be in my top 4.

 

[NobleSix]

#reporterchris

If the draft lottery proposal outlined in tonight's NHL memo becomes reality:
-- Detroit would be guaranteed No. 1 or No. 2 overall
-- Ottawa could do no worse than owning No. 3 AND No. 4
-- New Jersey, Buffalo, Montreal and Chicago couldn't jump beyond No. 2/3/4/5, respectively

Hard to believe that is actually a real proposal from the league and not some half-baked thread idea on the main board.

 

[CanadienShark]

The NHL's plan is only under consideration at this point, therefore #1 #2 #3 are still on the table.

My top 4:
1) Lafreniere
2) Stutzle
3) Raymond
4) Byfield

Drysdale looks great but at 5'11, he might be another Mete. Not high enough to be in my top 4.

5'11 isn't small. If he were 5'7, I could get your concern. He may be slightly under average, but players with his skill, skating, and IQ find ways to be effective.

 

[kgboomer]

Why the f*** would the NHL implement this new system. Why not just use the current system? It makes no difference. What the f*** kind of league is this? Holding a draft before the end of the year, what a joke.

They way the NHL is going to try to save everything, they're going to finish the playoff when the Jr teams training camp have started.

 

[The Little Viking]

5'11 isn't small. If he were 5'7, I could get your concern. He may be slightly under average, but players with his skill, skating, and IQ find ways to be effective.

Mete had similar tools, stats going in his draft year. Not saying Drysdale isn't a great prospect but the size aspect is enough to put him behind the top 4, who are elite in my books. Drysdale is a solid #5

 

[The Great Weal]

Mete had similar tools, stats going in his draft year. Not saying Drysdale isn't a great prospect but the size aspect is enough to put him behind the top 4, who are elite in my books. Drysdale is a solid #5

If they were similar in their draft years, one wouldn't be drafted in the 4th round while the other gets drafted in the top 5.

 

[The Little Viking]

If they were similar in their draft years, one wouldn't be drafted in the 4th round while the other gets drafted in the top 5.

Puljujarvi and Juolevi were drafted top 5 as well

 

[The Great Weal]

Puljujarvi and Juolevi were drafted top 5 as well

How does comparing 2 top 5 drafted players equal to a top 5 player and a 4th rounder? You aren't talking about their post draft performance, you are talking about at the moment. Also, your concern is mostly with Drysdale's size which doesn't really explain anything.

 

[The Little Viking]

How does comparing 2 top 5 drafted players equal to a top 5 player and a 4th rounder? You aren't talking about their post draft performance, you are talking about at the moment. Also, your concern is mostly with Drysdale's size which doesn't really explain anything.

You were making the point that Drysdale is superior to Mete, simply because he is (projected) to be drafted top 5 vs the 4th round. Juolevi and Puljujarvi are proof that where they are picked has no bearing on anything. The game is played on the ice.

Like I said, Drysdale's size is a factor whether you put much weight on it or not. I chose to

 

[Scriptor]

You were making the point that Drysdale is superior to Mete, simply because he is (projected) to be drafted top 5 vs the 4th round. Juolevi and Puljujarvi are proof that where they are picked has no bearing on anything. The game is played on the ice.

Like I said, Drysdale's size is a factor whether you put much weight on it or not. I chose to

Please, Mete is not an impact D. He doesn't have the ceiling to become one either. Drysdale shares Mete's speed ( the latter's only high end skill) but, has plenty more to show off. He sees the ice well and can make tape to tape passes through traffic or three quarters of the way up the ice.

He still has a high ceiling. Because other players busted has absolutely no bearing on that current reality.

 

[The Great Weal]

You were making the point that Drysdale is superior to Mete, simply because he is (projected) to be drafted top 5 vs the 4th round. Juolevi and Puljujarvi are proof that where they are picked has no bearing on anything. The game is played on the ice.

Like I said, Drysdale's size is a factor whether you put much weight on it or not. I chose to

You are all over the place. The discussion was comparing Drysdale before he got drafted to Mete before he got drafted. How can you not factor in that one is likely going to be drafted top 5 while the other went in the 4th round? I'm not saying that Drysdale will undoubtedly be better than Mete(although it's hard to see how he won't, he's got a lot more and better tools), but draft position is a pretty big factor when comparing players before they got drafted. Especially when the difference is that large. That's why Juolevi and Puljujarvi makes no sense as they were both drafted highly.

Drysdale COULD be another Mete(highly unlikely), but he is undoubtedly better when you compare Mete's pre-draft to Drysdale's. Everyone develops differently, but at the same age, Drysdale is infinitely better with a better resume.

 

[The Little Viking]

You are all over the place. The discussion was comparing Drysdale before he got drafted to Mete before he got drafted. How can you not factor in that one is likely going to be drafted top 5 while the other went in the 4th round? I'm not saying that Drysdale will undoubtedly be better than Mete(although it's hard to see how he won't, he's got a lot more and better tools), but draft position is a pretty big factor when comparing players before they got drafted. Especially when the difference is that large. That's why Juolevi and Puljujarvi makes no sense as they were both drafted highly.

Drysdale COULD be another Mete(highly unlikely), but he is undoubtedly better when you compare Mete's pre-draft to Drysdale's. Everyone develops differently, but at the same age, Drysdale is infinitely better with a better resume.

Try re reading my posts. I didn't say Drysdale = Mete, I said that he might turn out to be only as good as Mete and consequently I discounted his draft value slightly to put him behind my top 4.

I brought up Juolevi and Puljujarvi to counter your point that Drysdale is a top 5, while Mete was a 4th rounder and therefore they cannot be compared.

Bye.