HF Habs: 2024 NHL Draft Thread

[HomaridII]

 

[Pompeius Magnus]

The expected safe PR answer, but it's nice to hear I guess.

 

[Bacchus1]

So, if Colorado beats Winnipeg, what is the range that their 1st round pick becomes? (Right now it is listed at 27th I think.)

Answered my own question: best case we get a 23rd, but the range seems to be 23-27th, but 23rd is highly unlikely:

Playoff Outcomes Could Help Canadiens Draft Hopes

The Montreal Canadiens own a good trade asset in the Winnipeg Jets’ 1st-round pick, and certain playoff outcomes could make that pick more interesting than initially thought. Since acquiring Winnipeg’s 1st-round pick in exchange for Sean Monahan in early February, general manager Kent Hughes has...

montrealhockeynow.com

 

[Hannibal]

Man i want Lindstrom.

There might be a scenario where we trade up with Anaheim if their guy is Yakemchuk.

Anyway, fingers crossed that we end up with Lindstrom.

 

[Weber Fan]

So, if Colorado beats Winnipeg, what is the range that their 1st round pick becomes? (Right now it is listed at 27th I think.)

Could be 27th to 23rd depending on which teams goes to semi

 

[The Last Red]

Man i want Lindstrom.

There might be a scenario where we trade up with Anaheim if their guy is Yakemchuk.

Anyway, fingers crossed that we end up with Lindstrom.

But, but . . . his back hurts.

 

[Gustave]

On Lindstrom; any inflation because he plays on the same team as McKenna?

Kinda like Strome playing on Erie with McDavid?

 

[sampollock]

Man i want Lindstrom.

There might be a scenario where we trade up with Anaheim if their guy is Yakemchuk.

Anyway, fingers crossed that we end up with Lindstrom.

DITTO

 

[Habs Icing]

That's my boy

Does your wife know?

 

[dcyhabs]

BPA is a fabrication. There is no such quantification. There is no measuring tape that makes it an exact science. That is the other problem with this thesis. It is a mantra that some people keep repeating, because they trust their peers who use the same language.

There isn't, and teams get it wrong all the time, but, at least in some drafts, there are a few top players that you don't skip no matter your depth. You don't pass on McDavid because your top 6 is good, and you are set at center.

Skipping Zadina made sense in retrospect in spite of some pretty confident draft ranking going in. Drafting KK for need looks pretty bad, though. In hindsight there just weren't any good C prospects worth taking with a high pick. "We need a C, take the best C available" was really not the way to go. It's fine in later rounds, but you can't do it at 3OA.

Once you are past the first dozen or so players it's a shot in the dark so talking about BPA isn't really relevant. Scouts are guessing at how the players compare in their draft year with even less idea of where those players will be in 2-5 years. The top 10-20 players have many more eyes on them, scouts still get it wrong, but less often every year.

The upcoming draft is going to be tough. There are a lot of good players 2-10 or 2-15 or whatever, and a fair amount of disagreement on how they stack up. The general consensus, though, is that some of the D could be really, really good. Good enough that passing on them for a good forward could be a really bad move. The habs have loads of D, but none have proven they can be competitive top pairing guys. If they think any of the D available are pretty clear #1 D prospects while the forwards still available probably top out second line it's an easy choice. It's not easy to trade surplus for need, though it happens, and you normally lose value, but it's better to lose value on your least valuable players than to miss out on a top guy whatever the position.

BPA is somewhat arbitrary, drafting for need is unrealistic. Hughes pretty clearly considers both and also how players will fit with the existing team. For the habs in particular it would be pretty tough to add more small players. It's likely that they will go for big guys, and that they will pass on LHDs later in the draft. At 1-7, though, it's likely that the habs will believe one player has significantly more potential than anyone else remaining, and, that high in the draft, they have to take that player even if it means increasing the logjam at one position or another. I doubt it's a year to trade down, either, some of the high picks are likely to be very good.

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

Nah, absolutely not. There was a lot of hockey concerns about Michkov taking him out of the top group.

Huh? Michkov was universally more highly regarded than Demidov.

 

[L4br3cqu3]

Huh? Michkov was universally more highly regarded than Demidov.

Wouldn't say more highly regarded, more like more talked about cause he was more polarizing. Demidov has been highly regarded for a while.

 

[salbutera]

Huh? Michkov was universally more highly regarded than Demidov.

Ahhh No

 

[Adam Michaels]

Man i want Lindstrom.

There might be a scenario where we trade up with Anaheim if their guy is Yakemchuk.

Anyway, fingers crossed that we end up with Lindstrom.

Him or Iginla for me. They're my two top forward picks. And if we stay at 5th, chances are we have the opportunity to select at least one of them. If we move back to 7th, who knows. They might be gone by then.

Lindstrom missed time to injury, but that profile is too desirable for teams to ignore. And Iginla's playoffs surely moved him up in some teams' rankings. And him going to the U18 Worlds could bump him up higher if he has a good tournament.

 

[SOLR]

Huh? Michkov was universally more highly regarded than Demidov.

No, not universally at all. There are scout comparisons of the 2 that go back 3-4 years ago, where some already preferred Demidov.

 

[Mrb1p]

On Lindstrom; any inflation because he plays on the same team as McKenna?

Kinda like Strome playing on Erie with McDavid?

Not really no. He played with Basha more, who's also very good but he's going to play with very good players here too.

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

No, not universally at all. There are scout comparisons of the 2 that go back 3-4 years ago, where some already preferred Demidov.

You can always find an outlier opinion if you really want to, but this screams revisionist to me

 

[WeThreeKings]

No, not universally at all. There are scout comparisons of the 2 that go back 3-4 years ago, where some already preferred Demidov.

Yes, Michkov just got god like status through the draft process because he did some stuff at 16, no one watched him much after that and once the Habs passed both Habs fans who wanted Michkov and fanbases who hate the Habs all declared him as good as Bedard.

Demidov has been talked about for awhile, just like Michkov was and there's always been a debate on who is better. Demidov just never got to tear up a WJC or a U18 to get the mainstream hype that comes from being on television.

 

[waitin425]

Yes, Michkov just got god like status through the draft process because he did some stuff at 16, no one watched him much after that and once the Habs passed both Habs fans who wanted Michkov and fanbases who hate the Habs all declared him as good as Bedard.

Demidov has been talked about for awhile, just like Michkov was and there's always been a debate on who is better. Demidov just never got to tear up a WJC or a U18 to get the mainstream hype that comes from being on television.

We really are missing out by not having Russia at the WJHC. Last year, would have been insane when Bedard tore it up, if Michkov happened to be playing in it.

We also would have been treated to Demidov this year, and I think have a far better gage on his talents when compared to Canadian/US talent that we seem to have the most knowledge about.

With any luck, we draft Demidov and get to watch him somehow this upcoming WJHC, before he arrives summer 25.

 

[The Last Red]

At 1-7, though, it's likely that the habs will believe one player has significantly more potential than anyone else remaining, and, that high in the draft, they have to take that player even if it means increasing the logjam at one position or another.

Agree with your post except for that part. They don't "have to." And at no lower than 7, they can draft a forward who is, for lack of a better description, "good enough" to pass over maybe a more highly regarded left D, like Buium or Dickinson, for instance. They're not going to draft a left D with their first pick. Leshunov or Parehk? Maybe.

 

[Deebs]

Does your wife know?

Yes....we made him

 

[waitin425]

That draft sim is so fun. Just did one. Had the 5th pick. Traded back to 9th. Then made a whole bunch of trades to score the 10th and 18th. Based on the randomness of the rankings on that site, I ended up with.....

9th - Lindstrom
10th - Buium
18th - Iginla
198th - Kaden Pitre - C
210th - Samuel Kupec - LD
217th - Marko Bilic - G

 

[SOLR]

You can always find an outlier opinion if you really want to, but this screams revisionist to me

That's just because you think it's an outlier opinion; it's not at all. Do your homework before labelling folks revisionists.

I will add to that further, Ryabkin (top 3-4 next year) has been in that conversation as well because he's a center and centers are more valuable.

 

[absolute garbage]

If we decided at #5, we want a big 6ft6 Center, so we take Dean Letourneau (ranked mid 20s NA), as an example, that would def not be BPA, but who knows he could turn out to be one of the best players in the draft (in hindsight).

According to you and some rankings. If the scouting team decided he's the BPA, then he would be the pick on their list.

So are you against drafting the "BPA" now?

IF they think a D man like Buium is the best player at #5 though, and will just be much better than any of the forwards available.. it is what it is IMO, and that's fine. Our D pool looks full but nothing ever really goes according to plan with prospects, and trades are also a thing.

Yeah, but when people talk about BPA they generally don't mean picking someone who is not the highest rated guy on their list. They talk about making the list in a way that makes sense for them.

So as an example, if we say that the team is debating about Buium, Levshunov, Demidov and Lindstrom, and they conclude that these guys are roughly in the same "tier", that they all will become really good players and it's impossible to say who ends up being the best, and they also conclude that there's a high positional need for forward right now, then they're just going to make the list in a way where the forwards are rated above the defensemen. That way they will take the forward as long he's available, and it's going to be the "BPA" pick. And it makes perfect sense too.

 

[Kent Nilsson]

According to you and some rankings. If the scouting team decided he's the BPA, then he would be the pick on their list.

So are you against drafting the "BPA" now?


Yeah, but when people talk about BPA they generally don't mean picking someone who is not the highest rated guy on their list. They talk about making the list in a way that makes sense for them.

So as an example, if we say that the team is debating about Buium, Levshunov, Demidov and Lindstrom, and they conclude that these guys are roughly in the same "tier", that they all will become really good players and it's impossible to say who ends up being the best, and they also conclude that there's a high positional need for forward right now, then they're just going to make the list in a way where the forwards are rated above the defensemen. That way they will take the forward as long he's available, and it's going to be the "BPA" pick. And it makes perfect sense too.

No. BPA means every player being ranked in a vacuum regardless of need.

Drafting Tij Iginla would make more sense than Zeev Buium, for the Montreal Canadiens from an organizational standpoint, in 2024. But if the scouts came to consensus they like Buium better but the team still goes Iginla, then they didn’t go BPA.