Nathan Beaulieu

[HuGo Sham]

I did TSN's profiles, and once again co-published McKeen's draft rankings. I also scouted for the Habs for a couple of years.

No disrespect to Button or McGuire, but neither of them worked as a scout last year, and weren't picking apart player's games like scouts are paid to do. Pierre may very well not have seen Beaulieu play before the Memorial Cup...and when he is doing the colour on a junior game he is predominantly watching the puck and not the players as that's his job..as I said..when he's moving forward he is a very effective skater, but when he's skating backwards or pivoting...there is work to do. He is not horrible, but nor is he elite in his backwards skating, and he can certainly be beat at times by speed as his pivots need refining. Pierre would not be scouting that part of his game, he'd be watching the play.
As much as I respect Pierre's hard work I don't consider him to be an authority on draft prospects as he doesn't have time to scout them during the regular season since he's following the NHL.

I think Nathan's backwards skating and pivots will come. He moves well laterally with the puck and skates forward with the puck very well, so it's not like he's slow footed. He's done some growing over the past couple of years and is a pretty big boy...it often takes bigger guys a little longer to round out their entire game in terms of mobility.

so how do you project beaulieu at the NHL level?

 

[Grant McCagg]

and you're an authority who's opinion we should value and respect?

You're free to think whatever you like. I don't recall asking people to take my opinion as gospel. I have scouted professionally, so I would expect people to at least consider my viewpoints, but am certainly not demanding or expecting it.

 

[WreckItRask]

most of the alleged 'objective' *see negative* posts in the thread are from bruin and sen fans. what did you expect? lol

I'm not going to speak for anyone else, but my feelings about Beaulieu have nothing to do with who drafted him.

http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=33948613&postcount=58

Honestly, the only guy that I feel passionately against taking at #9 is Beaulieu. I just don't know enough about all the guys available to cast a vote for someone else (Brodin, etc), but I watched enough of Beaulieu to have some major concerns about him. He can't pivot one way, his defensive awareness is beyond questionable (I watched him lose his man in the neutral/defensive zone more than a handful of times), and he does an awful lot of one-handed stick waives defensively.

He's got a ton of offensive potential, and could be a good NHLer, but I just saw a lot about his game that I wasn't enamored with.

If you go to the Draft Watch threads on the Bruins board leading up to the draft, you'll find that Bruins fans were less than enamored with the idea that he might be the guy at 9. Has nothing to do with him being a Hab prospect.

 

[Scoutguy77]

Nate was a great pick at #17. I think he could have and perhaps should have gone 4-5 spots higher, but maybe Im biased as i feel the same about Jurco and Phillips and also think Tesink was a steal in the 6th round-

 

[Grant McCagg]

I also think Beaulieu was a great pick at 17th...Hab fans should not take ANY criticism of Nathan's game as a declaration that he was a poor choice. He has rare puck skills for a 6-3 defenceman.

 

[ruski17]

I also think Beaulieu was a great pick at 17th...Hab fans should not take ANY criticism of Nathan's game as a declaration that he was a poor choice. He has rare puck skills for a 6-3 defenceman.

Who would you compare Beaulieu to? What do you think his role will end up being? TSN compared him to Jack Johnson, I think that it's off because Beaulieu isn't as physical as Johnson.

 

[jmelm]

Count me among those B's fans petrified that they were going to draft Beaulieu. I was very vocal here leading up to the draft that I just don't think he's nearly as good as some wanted to believe, and I desperately wanted the Bruins to pass on him. Way too much one hand on the stick defense for this guy, way too many bad turnovers, and just not good enough defensively in my opinion.

Here's my thing...when it looked like the Bruins were going to take him, I desperately wanted to fall in love with his game, and I just couldn't make myself do it.

Well, I really don't think those concerns are well-founded. Let's examine the situation:

If Hamilton had been off the board when the Bruins picked (and I was just as shocked as Chiarelli & co. that he was available), I believe everyone just knew/realized that the Bruins were going to take a defenseman. In particular, the preference would have been for an offensive-type who could be a PP guy. So let's look at the options:

1) Ryan Murphy -- no question, the most skilled guy on the board. But if you have legitimate concerns about this guy playing 5-on-5 minutes or being poor defensively, there may be too much risk here at 9th overall.

2) Duncan Siemens -- great player, but almost a pure defensive defenseman who does not expect to be a significant offensive contributor of PP guy. So doesn't really fit the Bruins' needs.

3) Oscar Klefbom -- this fast-rising prospect was ranking in or near the top 10 by some scouts. But there are also some risks to his game, and perhaps there was just wasn't a large enough sample-size of this player and/or other concerns that would make the Bruins pass at #9.

4) Connor Murphy -- could be the steal of the draft, but there was a ton of risk with a small sample size & injury concerns. Like with Klefbom, probably too much risk at #9.

5) Jamie Oleksiak -- Could be the next Tyler Myers, could also be the next Hall Gill. I figured Boston got to see a ton of this kid because he played locally, so they would make the right decision on this player whether they took him or passed on him. He would have been a pick to consider at #9.

6) Jonas Brodin -- a very sensible choice if Hamilton was gone.

7) Nathan Beaulieu -- along with Brodin, an extremely sensible choice at #9. I also think he is an extremely SAFE pick. His upside is high-end top-2 Dman, and his down side is a very high-end #3 guy who can be a great offensive & puck-moving Dman who can run your power play. The only risk or question in his game, IMO, is whether he will be a legit #1 guy or if he will be more of a #2 or #3. I think he's an extremely safe bet to play in the NHL and also to make an impact there -- and in the not-too-distant future.

So as you can see, Beaulieu would have been a very sensible selection, along with Brodin, if Hamilton was gone.

One other thing: remember hearing a brief rumor during the draft -- around the time pick #6 or #7 was happening -- that Nashville was going to trade Ryan Ellis to Boston for #9? I know it was just a rumor, but it makes too much sense to be ignored and would fit the need for both teams extremely well. Boston could have got one of the top-5 drafted prospects in the game with an incredible pedigree who could step in THIS season and make an impact, especially on their PP.

NSH would have got a chance to draft a guy like Couturier (who may also be ready to step in very soon) or another high-end forward prospect. And I think we all know it's only a matter of time before they trade one of their good young D-men or D-prospects for some help up front. But when Couturier was selected and/or when Hamilton was available, the Bruins couldn't pass up Hamilton and made the right selection, and that potential deal was dead.

So again, if Hamilton wasn't available, any one of Ellis, Brodin or Beaulieu --or maybe Ryan Murphy -- would have been a good choice.

Make sense?

 

[WreckItRask]

Well, I really don't think those concerns are well-founded. Let's examine the situation:

If Hamilton had been off the board when the Bruins picked (and I was just as shocked as Chiarelli & co. that he was available), I believe everyone just knew/realized that the Bruins were going to take a defenseman. In particular, the preference would have been for an offensive-type who could be a PP guy. So let's look at the options:

1) Ryan Murphy -- no question, the most skilled guy on the board. But if you have legitimate concerns about this guy playing 5-on-5 minutes or being poor defensively, there may be too much risk here at 9th overall.

2) Duncan Siemens -- great player, but almost a pure defensive defenseman who does not expect to be a significant offensive contributor of PP guy. So doesn't really fit the Bruins' needs.

3) Oscar Klefbom -- this fast-rising prospect was ranking in or near the top 10 by some scouts. But there are also some risks to his game, and perhaps there was just wasn't a large enough sample-size of this player and/or other concerns that would make the Bruins pass at #9.

4) Connor Murphy -- could be the steal of the draft, but there was a ton of risk with a small sample size & injury concerns. Like with Klefbom, probably too much risk at #9.

5) Jamie Oleksiak -- Could be the next Tyler Myers, could also be the next Hall Gill. I figured Boston got to see a ton of this kid because he played locally, so they would make the right decision on this player whether they took him or passed on him. He would have been a pick to consider at #9.

6) Jonas Brodin -- a very sensible choice if Hamilton was gone.

7) Nathan Beaulieu -- along with Brodin, an extremely sensible choice at #9. I also think he is an extremely SAFE pick. His upside is high-end top-2 Dman, and his down side is a very high-end #3 guy who can be a great offensive & puck-moving Dman who can run your power play. The only risk or question in his game, IMO, is whether he will be a legit #1 guy or if he will be more of a #2 or #3. I think he's an extremely safe bet to play in the NHL and also to make an impact there -- and in the not-too-distant future.

So as you can see, Beaulieu would have been a very sensible selection, along with Brodin, if Hamilton was gone.

One other thing: remember hearing a brief rumor during the draft -- around the time pick #6 or #7 was happening -- that Nashville was going to trade Ryan Ellis to Boston for #9? I know it was just a rumor, but it makes too much sense to be ignored and would fit the need for both teams extremely well. Boston could have got one of the top-5 drafted prospects in the game with an incredible pedigree who could step in THIS season and make an impact, especially on their PP.

NSH would have got a chance to draft a guy like Couturier (who may also be ready to step in very soon) or another high-end forward prospect. And I think we all know it's only a matter of time before they trade one of their good young D-men or D-prospects for some help up front. But when Couturier was selected and/or when Hamilton was available, the Bruins couldn't pass up Hamilton and made the right selection, and that potential deal was dead.

So again, if Hamilton wasn't available, any one of Ellis, Brodin or Beaulieu --or maybe Ryan Murphy -- would have been a good choice.

Make sense?

I think you missed my point a bit. I'm not denying that Beaulieu had more than an outside of chance of being drafted at #9 if Hamilton was off the board. In fact, if you read my next post I linked to a thread on the Bruins board leading up to the draft that had some pretty tapped in Bruins posters indicating the Bruins interest in Beaulieu at #9. My point (as a fan), was that when it was becoming apparent that he might be the guy at that spot I started paying special attention to his games at the Memorial Cup with the hopes that I could get excited about him as a prospect...and I just couldn't. Hit talent is unquestionable, but I just think he's got some holes in his game that would concern me as a #9 overall pick (defensive awareness, jam, turnovers, etc).

I'll fully admit that Beaulieu has the raw tools to become a Ryan Whitney type defenseman in the NHL. I also think that he the BPA at #17, and think the Habs made a solid pick there. But I just have some concerns with how his overall game is going to translate when he starts playing against men. I am, by no means, making a claim that he's a bad prospect or was a bad pick at #17. I am saying, however, that my opinion on him was formulated far before the draft, and was the result of actually watching him play rather than taking someone else's opinion of him.

 

[Bjorn Le]

A guy whose absoulute lowest upside is a high end #3 would have went top 10 probably top 3 or 5. Not even Larssons lowest upside is a high end #3. I could understand if everyone expected him to go that high but lets be honest most people would have been shocked if Beaulieu went at #9, above the defensemen who did end up going before him.

Most people think Scheifele was a reach at 7, I think Beaulieu would have been a bigger reach if Boston took him over some of the other defensemen avaiable (That's assuming if Hamilton had gone before)

 

[bruinsfan46]

PK Subban was chosen in the 2nd Round.
IMO, Subban should have been selected TOP 5 overall or TOP 8 overall that draft year (2007).
http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl2007e.html

I'll trust ''jmelm'' (sounds like a professional scout,imo) who has seen Beaulieu play in many games and has no bias VS the opinion of ''bruinsfan46''. Thank-you very much.


Beaulieu may one day prove that he could/should have been selected in the TOP 9 or TOP 10 of the 2011 Draft (instead of 17th). Time will tell... and I'm sure ''bruinsfan46'' will be ecstatic for the Habs and Beaulieu if he does become a successful NHL dman one day.

LOL I'm biased because I don't have a ridiculously high opinion of Bealieu like jmelm does. jmelm is describing the type of guy that would have went top three, I'll trust the opinions of the scouts and GMs of 16 NHL teams that passed on Bealieu allowing him to drop to 17 over one HF Boards poster who has a crazy high opinion (downside of a #3? LOL) of Bealieu based on watching a few games online to see his team's former first rounder. Comparing Bealieu to Subban is stupid, Subban took off after getting drafted 43rd overall, Bealieu hasn't played a meaningful game since being drafted.

I'm not going to speak for anyone else, but my feelings about Beaulieu have nothing to do with who drafted him.

http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=33948613&postcount=58



If you go to the Draft Watch threads on the Bruins board leading up to the draft, you'll find that Bruins fans were less than enamored with the idea that he might be the guy at 9. Has nothing to do with him being a Hab prospect.

This. I know Habs fans and Leafs fans think that since they're the centre of the hockey universe everything is about them but it's actually not. Bruins fans flat out didn't want Bealieu at nine and were down on the kid long before he became Canadiens' property. Just like I don't not think highly of Jarred Tinordi sucks because he's Habs' property, I don't think highly of him because I'm a Knights season ticket holder and seen a lot of him.
And to be clear I don't think Bealieu is a bad prospect, I think he was the BPA at 17th. He just isn't a sure thing future top four NHL defenseman like some are suggesting.

 

[Mr. Hab]

Well, I really don't think those concerns are well-founded. Let's examine the situation:

If Hamilton had been off the board when the Bruins picked (and I was just as shocked as Chiarelli & co. that he was available), I believe everyone just knew/realized that the Bruins were going to take a defenseman. In particular, the preference would have been for an offensive-type who could be a PP guy. So let's look at the options:

1) Ryan Murphy -- no question, the most skilled guy on the board. But if you have legitimate concerns about this guy playing 5-on-5 minutes or being poor defensively, there may be too much risk here at 9th overall.

2) Duncan Siemens -- great player, but almost a pure defensive defenseman who does not expect to be a significant offensive contributor of PP guy. So doesn't really fit the Bruins' needs.

3) Oscar Klefbom -- this fast-rising prospect was ranking in or near the top 10 by some scouts. But there are also some risks to his game, and perhaps there was just wasn't a large enough sample-size of this player and/or other concerns that would make the Bruins pass at #9.

4) Connor Murphy -- could be the steal of the draft, but there was a ton of risk with a small sample size & injury concerns. Like with Klefbom, probably too much risk at #9.

5) Jamie Oleksiak -- Could be the next Tyler Myers, could also be the next Hall Gill. I figured Boston got to see a ton of this kid because he played locally, so they would make the right decision on this player whether they took him or passed on him. He would have been a pick to consider at #9.

6) Jonas Brodin -- a very sensible choice if Hamilton was gone.

7) Nathan Beaulieu -- along with Brodin, an extremely sensible choice at #9. I also think he is an extremely SAFE pick. His upside is high-end top-2 Dman, and his down side is a very high-end #3 guy who can be a great offensive & puck-moving Dman who can run your power play. The only risk or question in his game, IMO, is whether he will be a legit #1 guy or if he will be more of a #2 or #3. I think he's an extremely safe bet to play in the NHL and also to make an impact there -- and in the not-too-distant future.

So as you can see, Beaulieu would have been a very sensible selection, along with Brodin, if Hamilton was gone.

One other thing: remember hearing a brief rumor during the draft -- around the time pick #6 or #7 was happening -- that Nashville was going to trade Ryan Ellis to Boston for #9? I know it was just a rumor, but it makes too much sense to be ignored and would fit the need for both teams extremely well. Boston could have got one of the top-5 drafted prospects in the game with an incredible pedigree who could step in THIS season and make an impact, especially on their PP.

NSH would have got a chance to draft a guy like Couturier (who may also be ready to step in very soon) or another high-end forward prospect. And I think we all know it's only a matter of time before they trade one of their good young D-men or D-prospects for some help up front. But when Couturier was selected and/or when Hamilton was available, the Bruins couldn't pass up Hamilton and made the right selection, and that potential deal was dead.

So again, if Hamilton wasn't available, any one of Ellis, Brodin or Beaulieu --or maybe Ryan Murphy -- would have been a good choice.

Make sense?

Makes a lot of sense. Thanks for your time/opinions/details/info.

I'm very excited about Beaulieu!! (very!!). Beaulieu's maybe 2 years away from wearing the Bleu, Blanc, Rouge! yeehah!! Can't wait!! (patience is a virtue!).



p.s.: as for comparisons...I like the Keith Yandle and Jack Johnson comparisons.