Silayev, Lindstrom, Catton, Iginla, Parekh, Eiserman

[Runner77]

I don't know when this forum got infested with MOAR Size guys. Thought we were past that when Bergevin left. Size is important as part of the mix but it isn't a disqualifying metric when you're as skilled as Keller is.

Literally no one in here wants to add size just to add size.

It’s all all about optimizing asset mix and how the NHL as a copycat league, pays special attention to the blueprint of Stanley Cup finalists. Last year’s finalists were heavy, big-sized teams. No disparaging epithet thrown about in here will change that.

 

[Kaladin]

Literally no one in here wants to add size just to add size.

It’s all all about optimizing asset mix and how the NHL as a copycat league, pays special attention to the blueprint of Stanley Cup finalists. Last year’s finalists were heavy, big-sized teams. No disparaging epithet thrown about in here will change that.

Multiple posts over the last few pages within this thread that specifically cite "too little", "too small" etc. casting aspersions over how they'd fare in the playoffs etc. Clearly recency bias is a thing.

I highlighted in my message size is an important part of the mix but it's dumb to dismiss skilled players simply over size. That's what it seems like people are doing. If you have bigger players elsewhere in Dach, Slaf etc. you can afford a Keller type. In fact you should welcome him with open arms when we're as starved offensively as we are.

Iginla. He will likely be more useful in the playoffs than Catton.

Cause of size right? That's all your basing it on lol.

 

[Kaladin]

I consider Reinbacher as a legit top 2 dman. In the range of Seider. I pick Seider in front of Keller. Even if Keller would be our 3/4th best forward. Keller is also 6 years older than Reinbacher. When Reinbacher will be on his prime at 25 years old, Keller will be at 31….

A kid that hasn't even played in the NHL is not a legit top 2 dman. At this point it's just projections. I hope he can become that obviously as a Habs fan but who knows at this point. If Reinbacher becomes the equivalent of a Seider obviously I wouldn't trade that for Keller.

But there is a lot of hopes and dreams in your assessment right now. If you proposed a trade for Reinbacher for Keller in the main forum you'd be laughed out of the thread. I can't be the only one that see's that?

 

[Runner77]

Multiple posts over the last few pages within this thread that specifically cite "too little", "too small" etc. casting aspersions over how they'd fare in the playoffs etc. Clearly recency bias is a thing.

I highlighted in my message size is an important part of the mix but it's dumb to dismiss skilled players simply over size. That's what it seems like people are doing. If you have bigger players elsewhere in Dach, Slaf etc. you can afford a Keller type. In fact you should welcome him with open arms when we're as starved offensively as we are.


Cause of size right? That's all you’re basing it on lol.

Adding a Keller falls within the ambit of optimizing asset mix.

Caveat for me is I would not pass on an elite player because of size but would otherwise be mindful of it as an attribute among others.

It’s unfortunate that the NHL is working with a different set of rules in the playoffs and players taking a lot of liberties don’t end up paying for them and those are generally committed by the bigger sized types. Teams are thus inclined to not want to be on the receiving end of that in the playoffs.

As for your quote of @The Last Red, I hadn’t seen it. Don’t know if he was after size alone but that’s up to him to clarify.

 

[Kaladin]

Adding a Keller falls within the ambit of optimizing asset mix.

Caveat for me is I would not pass on an elite player because of size but would otherwise be mindful of it as an attribute among others.

It’s unfortunate that the NHL is working with a different set of rules in the playoffs and players taking a lot of liberties don’t end up paying for them and those are generally committed by the bigger sized types. Teams are thus inclined to not want to be on the receiving end of that in the playoffs.

As for your quote of @The Last Red, I hadn’t seen it. Don’t know if he was after size alone but that’s up to him to clarify.

Fair response thanks. I think where I struggle with that reasoning is it kind of precludes you from ever betting on say a Catton that could be a elite player one day but we have no way of knowing now. So do we reserve ourselves to only drafting smaller guys if they are top 2/3 picks? Where do you draw the line I guess?

When you're trading for mature players your reasoning makes sense. In the context of a draft I'm worried it limits our chances at drafting elite players in the first place in the quest for safer floors/bigger size. If we're okay with that exchange then fair enough. And yes you can be more open to smaller guys in lower rounds but you diminish your chances at a star obviously.

 

[Runner77]

Fair response thanks. I think where I struggle with that reasoning is it kind of precludes you from ever betting on say a Catton that could be a elite player one day but we have no way of knowing now. So do we reserve ourselves to only drafting smaller guys if they are top 2/3 picks? Where do you draw the line I guess?

When you're trading for mature players your reasoning makes sense. In the context of a draft I'm worried it limits our chances at drafting elite players in the first place in the quest for safer floors/bigger size.

I think we’d need to see a small-sized team win a cup to change the mindset of NHL management.

In terms of drafting, if all else is equal or reasonably similar, GMs will generally opt for the player with greater size. I think it is possible to land that rare player with size and high skill when selecting early in a draft (Kirby Dach and Slaf, for instance) and where you can secure them, it allows you greater flexibility with your other additions.

And where your BPA is a small skilled player, no point reaching for the lesser skilled bigger player — you take what the draft is gifting you and find other ways to optimize your roster. Dallas is a good example of that as they always seem to find great players late.

 

[Habs]

I have the feeling, if both of Lindstrom and Demidov are been pick in front of our pick, Iginla is ours.

then the phones are ringing like crazy from Calgary, and you have to wonder what they are willing to give.

 

[le_sean]

then the phones are ringing like crazy from Calgary, and you have to wonder what they are willing to give.

Not enough for me to ignore the absolute pleasure I’d have wearing a Habs Iginla jersey in front of Calgary fans.

 

[Garbageyuk]

I consider Reinbacher as a legit top 2 dman. In the range of Seider. I pick Seider in front of Keller. Even if Keller would be our 3/4th best forward. Keller is also 6 years older than Reinbacher. When Reinbacher will be on his prime at 25 years old, Keller will be at 31….

Lol what? Keller would legitimately be our best forward, along with Suzuki. He’s clearly better than literally everyone else on the team.

 

[The Last Red]

Adding a Keller falls within the ambit of optimizing asset mix.

Caveat for me is I would not pass on an elite player because of size but would otherwise be mindful of it as an attribute among others.

It’s unfortunate that the NHL is working with a different set of rules in the playoffs and players taking a lot of liberties don’t end up paying for them and those are generally committed by the bigger sized types. Teams are thus inclined to not want to be on the receiving end of that in the playoffs.

As for your quote of @The Last Red, I hadn’t seen it. Don’t know if he was after size alone but that’s up to him to clarify.

Of course it was not size alone. DR projects, hopefully, as a big, minute eating top pairing right D. I'm willing to wait and see if he becomes that before I trade him for a talented but small wing. I'd trade Logan M. for Keller in a New York minute, obviously.

Lol what? Keller would legitimately be our best forward, along with Suzuki. He’s clearly better than literally everyone else on the team.

That doesn't mean it's worth trading Reinbacher for him.

 

[Hins77]

Lol what? Keller would legitimately be our best forward, along with Suzuki. He’s clearly better than literally everyone else on the team.

Slaf made 50 pts at 19 years old. Suzuki was playing in the OHL at that age. I take Slaf over keller any Day of the week… slaf, Suzuki, Keller, caufield

 

[Garbageyuk]

Slaf made 50 pts at 19 years old. Suzuki was playing in the OHL at that age. I take Slaf over keller any Day of the week… slaf, Suzuki, Keller, caufield

We’re talking about right now. You said Keller would be the 4th best forward on the team. That isn’t remotely true. Keller posted a better season last year than anyone on the Habs in the last 31 years.

 

[Habs]

Not enough for me to ignore the absolute pleasure I’d have wearing a Habs Iginla jersey in front of Calgary fans.

I agree ! Screw em !

 

[The Last Red]

We’re talking about right now. You said Keller would be the 4th best forward on the team. That isn’t remotely true. Keller posted a better season last year than anyone on the Habs in the last 31 years.

It’s a low bar.

 

[Garbageyuk]

It’s a low bar.

That’s besides the point.

 

[The Last Red]

That’s besides the point.

It’s not.

 

[Garbageyuk]

It’s not.

It is.

 

[Jabba11]

GIVE ME ZEEEEEEVVVVV BUUUUIIIIUUUUM

or Sam Dickinson

 

[Habssince89]

We’re talking about right now. You said Keller would be the 4th best forward on the team. That isn’t remotely true. Keller posted a better season last year than anyone on the Habs in the last 31 years.

but at the rate of development of our top line guys, all of them will match/surpass Keller as soon as next season. Keller has better numbers on paper, but he's not in a tier above Suzuki/CC/Slaf

 

[1909]

Could or should Habs trade pick #5 + Mailloux + ??? FOR Ducks’ pick #3 and Zegras ?

 

[Garbageyuk]

but at the rate of development of our top line guys, all of them will match/surpass Keller as soon as next season. Keller has better numbers on paper, but he's not in a tier above Suzuki/CC/Slaf

Extremely bold claim, considering none of them have ever come anywhere near what Keller posted. For the record, you just claimed that all three of them will post 86 points or better next season.

 

[Habssince89]

Extremely bold claim, considering none of them have ever come anywhere near what Keller posted. For the record, you just claimed that all three of them will post 86 points or better next season.

For the record, Nick Suzuki getting 80+ next year is expected. Would stand to reason that the wingers get a great bump from that. Then you have to look at the insane growth rate of Slaf. He's going to be even better next year with another year of training and filling out his body. All I was saying was that they would be in the same ballpark as Keller. Never claimed what you're saying

 

[Garbageyuk]

All I was saying was that they would be in the same ballpark as Keller. Never claimed what you're saying

all of them will match/surpass Keller as soon as next season.

 

[Habssince89]

@Garbageyuk the word match is key there. I'm just saying that our big 3 wouldn't be playing second fiddle to Keller if he came to MTL. Keller would be simply added to that group. There's not enough of a gulf between Keller and the rest for me to consider him on a level beyond our big guys. Makes no sense.

 

[Garbageyuk]

@Garbageyuk the word match is key there. I'm just saying that our big 3 wouldn't be playing second fiddle to Keller if he came to MTL. Keller would be simply added to that group. There's not enough of a gulf between Keller and the rest for me to consider him on a level beyond our big guys. Makes no sense.

You said they will all “match/surpass”. That implies that they will all hit at least 86 points. If they don’t hit 86 points, they aren’t matching what he’s done. And Keller would definitely bump Caufield off the top line. Stop being such a homer.