HF Habs: 2022 HF Habs Prospect Rankings #5

[Harry Kakalovich]

Do we have a definition of what best means...
- most chance of being impactful in the NHL
- most chance of being impactful in the organization
- most upside
- most complete

the answer may very well define. I think as an example that Heinement has most chance of making the team then Roy does it mean he is a better player?

Having said that, I do think Harris needs to be the next one.

Retrospect is 20/20. If Heineman plays ten years as a bottom 6 NHLer and Roy never scores a point in the AHL or NHL before playing hockey in China, then Heineman is the better prospect.

Until then, it's all a crapshoot. I agree with you about Harris though. I have been voting him since #3. I think he could be a good one.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

If he stays at 5’8, this is what he’s up against... There hasn’t been a star D at that height for the past 40 years in the NHL.

Exactly,

It is a fun pick and may require some outside the box thinking to make it work but our more excitable Habs brethren have worked themselves into a very delusional frenzy.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Retrospect is 20/20. If Heineman plays ten years as a bottom 6 NHLer and Roy never scores a point in the AHL or NHL before playing hockey in China, then Heineman is the better prospect.

Until then, it's all a crapshoot. I agree with you about Harris though. I have been voting him since #3. I think he could be a good one.

I think the easiest way to assign value is to ask yourself what each players trade value is. I take Heineman all day over Roy as he is a sure bet to play in the NHL and has legitimate top 6 upside but is more likely middle 6. Roy still has a very high bust potential but has a chance to be a top six forward.....if he can't play in the top 6 then he likely won't play and he still has serious work to do on his skating to get there.

 

[Harry Kakalovich]

I think the easiest way to assign value is to ask yourself what each players trade value is. I take Heineman all day over Roy as he is a sure bet to play in the NHL and has legitimate top 6 upside but is more likely middle 6. Roy still has a very high bust potential but has a chance to be a top six forward.....if he can't play in the top 6 then he likely won't play and he still has serious work to do on his skating to get there.

I have been voting Harris since Guhle because of a few reasons:
- He did very well over his 4 NCAA seasons and was very highly praised as perhaps the best or one of the best defensemen in the NCAA (pretty high regards)
- The Romanov trade to me is a sign the Habs brass value Guhle and Harris quite highly
- I think Harris could be a full-time NHLer this year and I think he could have top-4 upside.

That's my thinking, but I like most of the prospects being voted too. I'm a bit higher on Ylonen than Heineman because I think he's a bit closer to the NHL, I like Barron (although I'm not sure he'll make the team out of camp), I like Farrell, I like Roy, Mesar, Mailloux etc - I like all of them - it's pretty exciting group of prospects.

 

[Team_Spirit]

I old enough to remember people shitting on the fans for loving and hyping PK Subban right away after his 1st camp.

Voting Hutson again next round.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I think the easiest way to assign value is to ask yourself what each players trade value is. I take Heineman all day over Roy as he is a sure bet to play in the NHL and has legitimate top 6 upside but is more likely middle 6. Roy still has a very high bust potential but has a chance to be a top six forward.....if he can't play in the top 6 then he likely won't play and he still has serious work to do on his skating to get there.

Joshua Roy is a French-Canadian drafted by Montreal who just had an amazing season.

The fanbase would rightfully expect an offer they couldn't refuse to see him traded right now.

I know this isn't your point, but I think he's even more valuable to Montreal than any other team because of this.

I know I want to see the story play out in our backyard, for better or for worse.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Joshua Roy is a French-Canadian drafted by Montreal who just had an amazing season.

The fanbase would rightfully expect an offer they couldn't refuse to see him traded right now.

I know this isn't your point, but I think he's even more valuable to Montreal than any other team because of this.

Even if true that doesn't change his trade value, teams aren't going to offer more because he is french.

To be clear, I am glad to have him and love the progression that he made this season......I just think that he is overhyped relative to his potential to bust.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Even if true that doesn't change his trade value, teams aren't going to offer more because he is french.

To be clear, I am glad to have him and love the progression that he made this season......I just think that he is overhyped relative to his potential to bust.

Sure. That's why Montreal should keep him, since teams won't overpay.

I'm 50/50 on Roy. Many a times people looked at a prospect and said "He lacks X, Y, Z; he'll never make it". Then the prospect proceeded to make it.

 

[Sam de Mtl]

Our prospect pool is hard to pick apart at that rank. A lot of high upside guys with question marks.

Roy is a nice piece here as his development is already a bit further, Mailloux is a high upside, high pick, but player so little it makes it hard to vote for him yet. Mesar is my pick here, but it's very close with the above two.

Hutson has not reached this level yet for me. I would have Harris above him as he is already an NHL player.

 

[JoelWarlord]

The fact that Hutson has a 56-1 advantage over Beck and a 56-28 advantage over Mesar is an embarrassment for the fanbase of the most iconic hockey franchise on the planet.......you would think that they would be more knowledgeable. This poll's integrity closer resembles a facebook data phishing poll than a poll of informed voters.

I agree that Mesar and Beck should be ahead of Hutson but those guys being behind Hutson in this poll doesn't necessarily mean that the majority opinion on the board is Hutson > Mesar/Beck. It could just mean that there is a chunk of voters who are very high on Hutson while the Mesar/Beck voters are mostly backing Roy at the moment and will be voting for Mesar then Beck in the next polls.

You act like size doesn't matter.....if that is the case please list your top six NHL dmen over the last 30 years under 5'9"

If he stays at 5’8, this is what he’s up against... There hasn’t been a star D at that height for the past 40 years in the NHL.

It matters but Spurgeon, Krug, and Grzelcyk are all good players in the NHL right now at 5'9", Ellis, Girard, Hughes are listed at a generous 5'10", and so on. Francis Bouillion stuck around at 5'8", and even Marc Andre Bergeron carved out a role at 5'8 with no NHL tools beyond his shot. It is certainly a factor and it's why a player this skilled was available at 62, but I think listing a height cutoff to say he's a huge long-shot to make it is a stretch with how skilled and productive he was in his draft year. The difference between 5'9" and 5'8" is pretty minimal and there's been a decent cohort of 5'9ish dmen in the last little while.

In the cap era Gionta was the only good 5'7" forward for a long time (and I guess Desharnais) and then Debrincat and Caufield were both drafted within 3 years of each other. Sometimes these things just happen in waves when players with off the charts skill find a way to be productive as smaller players. I just don't find it particularly convincing that in the long run Lane Hutson will be giving up anything meaningful in his physical game to Torey Krug, Matt Grzelcyk, or Sam Girard.

 

[Harry Kakalovich]

I agree that Mesar and Beck should be ahead of Hutson but those guys being behind Hutson in this poll doesn't necessarily mean that the majority opinion on the board is Hutson > Mesar/Beck. It could just mean that there is a chunk of voters who are very high on Hutson while the Mesar/Beck voters are mostly backing Roy at the moment and will be voting for Mesar then Beck in the next polls.


It matters but Spurgeon, Krug, and Grzelcyk are all good players in the NHL right now at 5'9", Ellis, Girard, Hughes are listed at a generous 5'10", and so on. Francis Bouillion stuck around at 5'8", and even Marc Andre Bergeron carved out a role at 5'8 with no NHL tools beyond his shot. It is certainly a factor and it's why a player this skilled was available at 62, but I think listing a height cutoff to say he's a huge long-shot to make it is a stretch with how skilled and productive he was in his draft year. The difference between 5'9" and 5'8" is pretty minimal and there's been a decent cohort of 5'9ish dmen in the last little while.

In the cap era Gionta was the only good 5'7" forward for a long time (and I guess Desharnais) and then Debrincat and Caufield were both drafted within 3 years of each other. Sometimes these things just happen in waves when players with off the charts skill find a way to be productive as smaller players. I just don't find it particularly convincing that in the long run Lane Hutson will be giving up anything meaningful in his physical game to Torey Krug, Matt Grzelcyk, or Sam Girard.

Personally I think it's fine that people are high on Hutson. I mean, this is an opinion poll, let people have their opinions, right? I get that it's a little bizarre that people are higher on Hutson than Beck or Mesar, but Beck is a little vanilla and Hutson is flashy. We'll have more info on those players next year, right now it's all guesswork more or less.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Sure. That's why Montreal should keep him, since teams won't overpay.

I'm 50/50 on Roy. Many a times people looked at a prospect and said "He lacks X, Y, Z; he'll never make it". Then the prospect proceeded to make it.

Very true....on the flip side, many, many more times people said a prospect will never make it due to "X,Y,Z" and they did not make it.

I am also split on Roy but probably could not assign a percentage to it. I look forward to seeing if he can build on last season's positive trajectory. I mostly want to see him put in the off season work to continue improving his skating, strength and conditioning.

 

[Sam de Mtl]

I think the easiest way to assign value is to ask yourself what each players trade value is. I take Heineman all day over Roy as he is a sure bet to play in the NHL and has legitimate top 6 upside but is more likely middle 6. Roy still has a very high bust potential but has a chance to be a top six forward.....if he can't play in the top 6 then he likely won't play and he still has serious work to do on his skating to get there.

Everyone has a different interpretation of what makes a prospect better than another. It is a very subjective exercice.

Your point of view is valid, but I would say that sometimes prospects with more trade value are less valuable to a team than a prospect with lower value. In a team like the Habs who badly need star players, but have a lot of prospects who could become middle line players, a guy with higher upside and less likelihood to reach it will be more valuable because he has the potential to make the other guys fall in the right chair and transform the team.

In a team with star players, they will value more the high likelihood to be an NHL player over the high potential, as it will give them cheap depth to keep on competing throughout the years.

With that in mind, the top prospects ranking would differ quite a lot from one scenario to the next.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

I agree that Mesar and Beck should be ahead of Hutson but those guys being behind Hutson in this poll doesn't necessarily mean that the majority opinion on the board is Hutson > Mesar/Beck. It could just mean that there is a chunk of voters who are very high on Hutson while the Mesar/Beck voters are mostly backing Roy at the moment and will be voting for Mesar then Beck in the next polls.


It matters but Spurgeon, Krug, and Grzelcyk are all good players in the NHL right now at 5'9", Ellis, Girard, Hughes are listed at a generous 5'10", and so on. Francis Bouillion stuck around at 5'8", and even Marc Andre Bergeron carved out a role at 5'8 with no NHL tools beyond his shot. It is certainly a factor and it's why a player this skilled was available at 62, but I think listing a height cutoff to say he's a huge long-shot to make it is a stretch with how skilled and productive he was in his draft year. The difference between 5'9" and 5'8" is pretty minimal and there's been a decent cohort of 5'9ish dmen in the last little while.

In the cap era Gionta was the only good 5'7" forward for a long time (and I guess Desharnais) and then Debrincat and Caufield were both drafted within 3 years of each other. Sometimes these things just happen in waves when players with off the charts skill find a way to be productive as smaller players. I just don't find it particularly convincing that in the long run Lane Hutson will be giving up anything meaningful in his physical game to Torey Krug, Matt Grzelcyk, or Sam Girard.

I am aware that more posters may have their votes tied up elsewhere, but there is a good chance that Hutson will also take a chunk of the votes that are currently going to Roy.

We can't use forwards as a comparison to Hutson as that truly is apples to oranges and a player like Bouillon is not a comparison as he was an absolute tank and one of the strongest pound for pound players to ever play the game imo. It is true that there have been effective dmen at 5'9" but that clearly seems to be the cut off as there has not been a single 5'8" dman in the league in the last 40 years who would justify naming Hutson as a better prospect than many of our current prospects. There has to be a cutoff somewhere and given the small number of top 5'9" top dmen and the absolute absence of any top 5'8" dmen certainly supports the case against Hutson being a top prospect.

As I stated earlier, I think the real thought behind drafting him was rolling the dice on a late growth spurt. I am in total agreement that Hutson was worth picking at 62 because if he grows another inch or more his chances greatly increase. Let's not gloss over the fact that he has a tiny frame and is extremely skinny, he doesn't even fill out his shin pads.

I don't want to go on about Hutson too much because it will give the impression that I didn't like the pick which couldn't be further from the truth. I simply think people are being ridiculous by putting him above Mesar and Beck from the same draft and a player like Harris who is a lock imo opinion to be a quality pmd in the NHL. Harris may only end up being a 3rd pairing dman but he might be a good one.

 

[Treb]

The fact that Hutson has a 56-1 advantage over Beck and a 56-28 advantage over Mesar is an embarrassment for the fanbase of the most iconic hockey franchise on the planet.......you would think that they would be more knowledgeable. This poll's integrity closer resembles a facebook data phishing poll than a poll of informed voters.

Due to the size of the fanbase it is inevitable that there will be a loud mob of uniformed, rabid posters but it is still disappointing to see the smart ones marginalized by a message board equivalent of the zombie apocalypse.

Did Hutson hit on your sister or something? You being so repulsed by the opinion of people in a prospect ranking is strange.

Hutson is a grand slam attempt with 2 outs.

Mesar and Beck are more like a double/triple.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Voted Roy. But Mailloux might be the right answer here.

 

[Riggins]

Looks like Hutson will go next but the Habs just drafted Mesar and Beck way ahead of him. The hype train is going wild after those development camp clips.

The fact Mailloux isn't 80%+ here is baffling.

No one knows how good or bad he is. He literally just played 12 OHL games. All we know is he can skate and shoot but not sure if he can actually play defence.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Did Hutson hit on your sister or something? You being so repulsed by the opinion of people in a prospect ranking is strange.

Hutson is a grand slam attempt.

Mesar and Beck are way safer but lower upside.

Is Hutson your sister?

You are acting like I have not repeatedly said that I like the pick. I do not believe that he necessarily has higher upside than either Mesar or Beck if he doesn't grow some more. Both Mesar and Beck are far more likely to play higher in the lineup as even best case scenarios have Hutson as someone you hide on your 3rd pairing but use on the PP.

People need to chill with the overly defensive responses....I like the kid and was happy when his name was called, I apparently am just much more realistic than most and want to see more before I proclaim the 62nd pick in the draft better than two players who went much higher.

 

[Treb]

Is Hutson your sister?

You are acting like I have not repeatedly said that I like the pick. I do not believe that he necessarily has higher upside than either Mesar or Beck if he doesn't grow some more. Both Mesar and Beck are far more likely to play higher in the lineup as even best case scenarios have Hutson as someone you hide on your 3rd pairing but use on the PP.

People need to chill with the overly defensive responses....I like the kid and was happy when his name was called, I apparently am just much more realistic than most and want to see more before I proclaim the 62nd pick in the draft better than two players who went much higher.

You literally called 50% or so of the voters here an embarrassment to the fanbase (and " a loud mob of uniformed, rabid posters "), so I find it utterly hilarious that you're telling people to chill.

There's no problem in having Mesar and Beck ahead of Hutson and you may probably be right.

However, there is a problem just coming in and insulting everyone and then wondering why people are being defensive.

 

[JoelWarlord]

We can't use forwards as a comparison to Hutson as that truly is apples to oranges and a player like Bouillon is not a comparison as he was an absolute tank and one of the strongest pound for pound players to ever play the game imo. It is true that there have been effective dmen at 5'9" but that clearly seems to be the cut off as there has not been a single 5'8" dman in the league in the last 40 years who would justify naming Hutson as a better prospect than many of our current prospects. There has to be a cutoff somewhere and given the small number of top 5'9" top dmen and the absolute absence of any top 5'8" dmen certainly supports the case against Hutson being a top prospect.

For sure. I'm old enough to remember Bouillion so I of course wasn't making a comparison between the two players other than to say there's been 5'8 guys that stick around. Hutson won't ever have Bouillion's strength, but he might be an anomaly in another area of the game that allows him to stick around at a smaller stature.

I get that forwards are different but I'm not really comparing the two positions so much as the truism of a certain height cutoff. For 15 years Gionta was the only 5'7" forward to be any good and then in a 3 year span two more joined the NHL. I'm just wary of pointing to the existing cohort of players in the NHL and using that to argue a cut-off, especially given how many 5'9-5'11 dmen are in the league with virtually no physical game to speak off. He doesn't have to have Francis Bouillion's strength if he can just get to Matt Gryzelcyks' level of strength for example.

As I stated earlier, I think the real thought behind drafting him was rolling the dice on a late growth spurt. I am in total agreement that Hutson was worth picking at 62 because if he grows another inch or more his chances greatly increase. Let's not gloss over the fact that he has a tiny frame and is extremely skinny, he doesn't even fill out his shin pads.

Absolutely!

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

You literally called 50% or so of the voters here an embarrassment to the fanbase (and " a loud mob of uniformed, rabid posters "), so I find it utterly hilarious that you're telling people to chill.

There's no problem in having Mesar and Beck ahead of Hutson and you may probably be right.

However, there is a problem just coming in and insulting everyone and then wondering why people are being defensive.

Fair enough

 

[Kennerback]

It matters but Spurgeon, Krug, and Grzelcyk are all good players in the NHL right now at 5'9", Ellis, Girard, Hughes are listed at a generous 5'10", and so on. Francis Bouillion stuck around at 5'8", and even Marc Andre Bergeron carved out a role at 5'8 with no NHL tools beyond his shot. It is certainly a factor and it's why a player this skilled was available at 62, but I think listing a height cutoff to say he's a huge long-shot to make it is a stretch with how skilled and productive he was in his draft year. The difference between 5'9" and 5'8" is pretty minimal and there's been a decent cohort of 5'9ish dmen in the last little while.

In the cap era Gionta was the only good 5'7" forward for a long time (and I guess Desharnais) and then Debrincat and Caufield were both drafted within 3 years of each other. Sometimes these things just happen in waves when players with off the charts skill find a way to be productive as smaller players. I just don't find it particularly convincing that in the long run Lane Hutson will be giving up anything meaningful in his physical game to Torey Krug, Matt Grzelcyk, or Sam Girard.

Hutson is the flashiest and most exciting prospect. I’d much rather watching him than most prospects in the pool. I’m super excited we drafted him. But he has more hurdles than many others as he’ll really be a unique case if he breaks out in the NHL if he doesn’t grow. Even a trailblazer. NHL are more accepting of Wingers that size because their job requirements doesn’t require boxing out Ovechkin, Matthews or Barkov from the front of the net.

 

[NotProkofievian]

Everyone has a different interpretation of what makes a prospect better than another. It is a very subjective exercice.

Your point of view is valid, but I would say that sometimes prospects with more trade value are less valuable to a team than a prospect with lower value. In a team like the Habs who badly need star players, but have a lot of prospects who could become middle line players, a guy with higher upside and less likelihood to reach it will be more valuable because he has the potential to make the other guys fall in the right chair and transform the team.

In a team with star players, they will value more the high likelihood to be an NHL player over the high potential, as it will give them cheap depth to keep on competing throughout the years.

With that in mind, the top prospects ranking would differ quite a lot from one scenario to the next.

I agree. And this is a message board, hot takes is what we do here. I saw multiple undrafted players in people's first rounds this year (Gazizov and Kvochko were popular choices).

 

[ChesterNimitz]

If he stays at 5’8, this is what he’s up against... There hasn’t been a star D at that height for the past 40 years in the NHL.

Star? Hutson will make and play in the NHL. An achievement that many of the other supposedly higher ranked prospects will not equal.

 

[Catanddogguitarrr]

Whats he gonna be then? I hope he's ranked outside your top 15 if you believe that, cause if hes not a top 6er, hes AHL.

They're all very young and early to determine exactly. But Barron is a top prospect, Mailloux is interresting enough, Farrell is nice, Hutson makes me wanna see more with my eyes, he's on my radar. Roy at 19 is a kid, listen, that Roy had caca dans sa couche 17 years ago, time will tell with Joshua, Joshua is not last of his class in lhjmq, he's more like the best one at 19y.