Toggle sidebar

Prospect Info: Josh Brook II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tyson

Tyson

Registered User
Mar 1, 2007
45,348
62,334
Texas
It will be interesting if Brook can replicate Cale Fleury’s rookie season stats. I am still not convinced he is a better prospect than Fleury or Juulsen.
 
montreal

montreal

Go Habs Go
Mar 21, 2002
57,560
40,539
www.youtube.com
Tyson said:
It will be interesting if Brook can replicate Cale Fleury’s rookie season stats. I am still not convinced he is a better prospect than Fleury or Juulsen.
Click to expand...

Fleury had the goals but struggled in his own end, Brook will likely have a lot more assists then goals but I doubt he struggles as much in his own end although if he's paired up with Ouellet then it certainly won't be easy as the Ouelett Fleury pairing was a nightmare defensively.

Juulsen is better defensively then either of them but doesn't have the mobility, speed, skating, or puck rushing/moving abilities that Brook and Fleury have. Brook doesn't have the physical game that Fleury and Juulsen have, both can really dish some big hits but Brook will take the body.
 
Hins77

Hins77

Registered User
Apr 2, 2013
3,824
3,395
montreal said:
No one knows how a player will continue to improve or not, that's why you don't see many top prospects get traded before turning pro as it's just too risky. If Brook turns into a top 4 down the road, that's very valuable so the problem is that it's unlikely you get the same value for him now to make it worth the risk.
Click to expand...
No thats sure. And i wouldnt trade him for a old player. But if a team need to create space on cap and it could bring us a nice player. Why not
 
Mrb1p

Mrb1p

PRICERSTOPDAPUCK
Dec 10, 2011
88,599
54,695
Citizen of the world
Hins77 said:
No thats sure. And i wouldnt trade him for a old player. But if a team need to create space on cap and it could bring us a nice player. Why not
Click to expand...
Why not? Because Josh Brook could very well be our best defender in two years. Youre going to give up that chance for a "nice" player?;
 
  • Like
Reactions: jaffy27
Hins77

Hins77

Registered User
Apr 2, 2013
3,824
3,395
Mrb1p said:
Why not? Because Josh Brook could very well be our best defender in two years. Youre going to give up that chance for a "nice" player?;
Click to expand...
Nice player, like a damn good player. Ottawa trade mark stone for branstrom. I would trade a suzuki for a Taylor Hall signed right now
 
  • Like
Reactions: Goldenhands
Hins77

Hins77

Registered User
Apr 2, 2013
3,824
3,395
Andrei79 said:
Sergachev got us Drouin. Not sure what anyone expects MB to be able to get us for Brook.
Click to expand...
I would add him in a package like quantity vs quality. We got tatar,suzuki for paciorrety. Vegas got stone for branstrom and picks. Vancouver got miller for a first and couple things. I don’t think is value is big alone, but with a guy like Drouin or tatar/byron/petry. We could get something good imo
 
Andrei79

Andrei79

Registered User
Jan 25, 2013
15,153
26,983
Hins77 said:
I would add him in a package like quantity vs quality. We got tatar,suzuki for paciorrety. Vegas got stone for branstrom and picks. Vancouver got miller for a first and couple things. I don’t think is value is big alone, but with a guy like Drouin or tatar/byron/petry. We could get something good imo
Click to expand...

If you feel he's the same level of prospect as Brannstrom, then why would you trade him ? A follow up question would be, if you feel GMs evaluate him as such, then why the discrepancy ? Was it his showing the all-important rookie tournament ?
 
Hins77

Hins77

Registered User
Apr 2, 2013
3,824
3,395
Andrei79 said:
If you feel he's the same level of prospect as Brannstrom, then why would you trade him ? A follow up question would be, if you feel GMs evaluate him as such, then why the discrepancy ? Was it his showing the all-important rookie tournament ?
Click to expand...
I don’t think he is as good as branstrom. Im just telling that some team need to make some space and a guy like brook (low paid and young) can be interessting
 
Andrei79

Andrei79

Registered User
Jan 25, 2013
15,153
26,983
Hins77 said:
I don’t think he is as good as branstrom. Im just telling that some team need to make some space and a guy like brook (low paid and young) can be interessting
Click to expand...

Well, that's the example you keep bringing up. That and Taylor Hall, neither being cap moves.
 
TT1

TT1

Registered User
May 31, 2013
23,699
6,168
Montreal
montreal said:
Fleury had the goals but struggled in his own end, Brook will likely have a lot more assists then goals but I doubt he struggles as much in his own end although if he's paired up with Ouellet then it certainly won't be easy as the Ouelett Fleury pairing was a nightmare defensively.

Juulsen is better defensively then either of them but doesn't have the mobility, speed, skating, or puck rushing/moving abilities that Brook and Fleury have. Brook doesn't have the physical game that Fleury and Juulsen have, both can really dish some big hits but Brook will take the body.
Click to expand...

Juulsen is better defensively because of his positioning, decision making and stronger board work. That said, he still gets walked around at least once a game like a pylon because of his weak skating/edgework. He always gets beat by speed so even tho defensive play is his strong suit he still has weaknesses in that area as well. Fleury will be a solid top 4 in 3-4 years.

Fleury has the tools to work on and improve his defensive play. He mainly needs to work on his decision making and use his partner more, he overcomplicates his life.
 
Last edited:
Habs Icing

Habs Icing

Formerly Onice
Jan 17, 2004
19,556
11,234
Montreal
Hins77 said:
Yeah brook had a tough tournament at 20 years old. He had a tough WJC last winter. Cale fleury was better imo and a guy like Erik Bransstron were very good during tournament and he is younger. So i won’t say that Brook is a flop, but if Bergevin can reach a pretty good player for him in a package, it could be not a bad decision.
Click to expand...
Hey Gauthier, why are you telling us to treat Brook like you treated McDonaugh? Shouldn't you be on the Blackhawks board?
 
montreal

montreal

Go Habs Go
Mar 21, 2002
57,560
40,539
www.youtube.com
TT1 said:
Juulsen is better defensively because of his positioning, decision making and stronger board work. That said, he still gets walked around at least once a game like a pylon because of his weak skating/edgework. He always gets beat by speed so even tho defensive play is his strong suit he still has weaknesses in that area as well. Fleury will be a solid top 4 in 3-4 years.

Fleury has the tools to work on and improve his defensive play. He mainly needs to work on his decision making and use his partner more, he overcomplicates his life.
Click to expand...

Juulsen certainly needs to improve his mobility and skating, which is easier then Fleury improving his decision making. I'm not sold on either as anything more then bottom pairing D's unless those issues are fixed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Estimated_Prophet
Hins77

Hins77

Registered User
Apr 2, 2013
3,824
3,395
azcanuck said:
Lots of posters in such a hurry to trade our good prospects. Give them some time to marinate a little.
Click to expand...
The problem is a value can fall down very quick. So. There is some club who let theirs young players very quick and receveu something good, but if we are waiting to much like we did with tinordi, scherback, leblanc. They are gonna go on waivers
 
Mrb1p

Mrb1p

PRICERSTOPDAPUCK
Dec 10, 2011
88,599
54,695
Citizen of the world
Hins77 said:
The problem is a value can fall down very quick. So. There is some club who let theirs young players very quick and receveu something good, but if we are waiting to much like we did with tinordi, scherback, leblanc. They are gonna go on waivers
Click to expand...
And if we wait to trade Petry for too long well end up with Brook as a bust and paying 8 millions to a 35 years old Petry.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom