The David Conte & Lou Draft complaint thread

Tundra

Registered User
Oct 20, 2005
10,363
1,375
Stop using ambiguous terms like "legitimate scoring threats"

Is Henrique a legitimate scoring threat?

Reid just blew away Henrique's goals per game in Albany. Reid just scored 22 goals in 56 games to Adams 25 in 73 games both in their first year pro...so what are you basing your opinion on?

Boucher will score goals in this league and there is no question in my mind about that.

Henrique has more tools in his tool bag than Boucher does. He can create offense on his own and get into scoring areas. Reid is smallish and not the fastest guy. Sure, Reid can score when he is allowed time and space in the OHL, but he's simply not talented enough to do this at the next level. The jury is still out.. I think at best he's a third line wing that can steal some PP time. Could I be wrong though? Absolutely. But I just don't see it.
 
Last edited:

JimEIV

Registered User
Feb 19, 2003
66,231
28,591
Smallish and not as many tools in his tool bag? This is Marc Staal when he met the smallish Boucher

 

devilsblood

Registered User
Mar 10, 2010
29,648
11,890
At least give it time before you criticize the picks.

I have no problem with early criticism but at least be reasonable, and I think we have seen a fair amount of unreasonable criticism.

The idea that Chatham may not have even been drafted, for example.
 

Brodeur

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
26,117
15,766
San Diego
Its not the actual players that are getting criticized. Its the thought process and philosophy behind the pick's by the team's brass, or lack there of.

Thought the philosophy was take the best player available? I wanted a forward at #41 as much as everybody else, but if they can explain that they simply liked Josh Jacobs that much better than the remaining forwards, I can live with that. Sure, we could take a home run swing in the 6th instead of a checking line guy, but how many guys would we constitute as a home run at that point?

Again, please if you're going to criticize the picks, please post who you would have taken instead. I'm not saying you're wrong, but it's easy to criticize when your name isn't attached to anything.
 

Devils Army

Rebuild Over.
Feb 3, 2014
3,863
853
New Jersey
Smallish and not as many tools in his tool bag? This is Marc Staal when he met the smallish Boucher



I completely forgot he sometimes hits people, just like Henrique, when people are in Henrique's way he bulldozes them down just like that

While Boucher is more of a skill player, i think he will fit in to Pete's system pretty decently
 

glenwo2

LINDY RUFF NEEDS VIAGRA!!
Oct 18, 2008
52,069
24,355
New Jersey(No Fanz!)
Thought the philosophy was take the best player available? I wanted a forward at #41 as much as everybody else, but if they can explain that they simply liked Josh Jacobs that much better than the remaining forwards, I can live with that. Sure, we could take a home run swing in the 6th instead of a checking line guy, but how many guys would we constitute as a home run at that point?

Again, please if you're going to criticize the picks, please post who you would have taken instead. I'm not saying you're wrong, but it's easy to criticize when your name isn't attached to anything.

Problem is that Conte's "best player available" wasn't really the Best Player Available. :sarcasm:
 

Brodeur

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
26,117
15,766
San Diego
Problem is that Conte's "best player available" wasn't really the Best Player Available. :sarcasm:

I wanted Barbashev at #30, but I also realize that him and Quenneville are in the same ballpark. Again, it's easy to sit back with our access to public lists and criticize. Put the names down of who you wanted and we can revisit this in a couple years. I did that exercise in the original draft thread and can admit that I missed just as badly in most cases.
 

glenwo2

LINDY RUFF NEEDS VIAGRA!!
Oct 18, 2008
52,069
24,355
New Jersey(No Fanz!)
I wanted Barbashev at #30, but I also realize that him and Quenneville are in the same ballpark. Again, it's easy to sit back with our access to public lists and criticize. Put the names down of who you wanted and we can revisit this in a couple years. I did that exercise in the original draft thread and can admit that I missed just as badly in most cases.

Barbashev and JQ in the same ballpark? :huh:

Explain that, please.
 

JimEIV

Registered User
Feb 19, 2003
66,231
28,591
I completely forgot he sometimes hits people, just like Henrique, when people are in Henrique's way he bulldozes them down just like that

While Boucher is more of a skill player, i think he will fit in to Pete's system pretty decently
Boucher showed a lot in his first 23 games...I was very please with what I saw...and 7 points (2 goals 5 assist) in his first stint wasn't too shabby either. That is a 25 point pace as a 20 year old.. Parise had 32 points as a 21 year old...

I'm not saying Boucher could be Parise but this is a player we have here.
 

glenwo2

LINDY RUFF NEEDS VIAGRA!!
Oct 18, 2008
52,069
24,355
New Jersey(No Fanz!)
Boucher showed a lot in his first 23 games...I was very please with what I saw...and 7 points (2 goals 5 assist) in his first stint wasn't too shabby either. That is a 25 point pace as a 20 year old.. Parise had 32 points as a 21 year old...

I'm not saying Boucher could be Parise but this is a player we have here.

You think he'll be called up along with Matteau this season?
 

Brodeur

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
26,117
15,766
San Diego
Barbashev and JQ in the same ballpark? :huh:

Explain that, please.

2nd line upside, two way games. I liked Barbashev since he had the tag of being the Russian Bo Horvat early in the season. Felt like a lot of the forwards this year didn't project to be anything higher than 2nd line types.
 

Emperoreddy

Show Me What You Got!
Apr 13, 2010
130,530
76,108
New Jersey, Exit 16E
Does anyone have ESPN insider?
How did they grade/rank our draft?

A C. They thing we got talent especially considering where we picked but maybe could of gotten a bit more. Seems there guys are not to high on Jacobs.

Also that we are old but it's going to take patience and more then one draft and a 30th pick to refuel with youth.

They gave similar grades to Chicago Detroit Philly and Colorado to name a few. (As well as Ottawa and the Rags but they didn't have a first round pick.)
 

Benedict Parisechuk

Army of Pandolfo's
Apr 5, 2013
8,371
1
Chicago, IL
Thought the philosophy was take the best player available? I wanted a forward at #41 as much as everybody else, but if they can explain that they simply liked Josh Jacobs that much better than the remaining forwards, I can live with that. Sure, we could take a home run swing in the 6th instead of a checking line guy, but how many guys would we constitute as a home run at that point?

Again, please if you're going to criticize the picks, please post who you would have taken instead. I'm not saying you're wrong, but it's easy to criticize when your name isn't attached to anything.

I'm not even going to pretend to know anything about these kids or the ones we passed up but it just seems like Lou Conte always value grinders higher than players with actual skill and who could potentially step into the top 6. They took no risks whatsoever in this draft. They just played it safe and added to there army of Zubrus'. That is absolutely not what we needed.
 

GeNeXt

Registered User
Jul 5, 2012
1,369
710
I saw guys mentioning it last night about Lou and Conte modeling after the Kings/Bruins/Hawks.

Those teams have some elite talent, and then a lot of size, speed, two-way play, and grit to fill out the line-up. That's how we've drafted these past few years.

Matteau, Johnson, Thomson, Black, Bell, Chatham, Quenneville, Pietila, Kujawinski, Kerfoot etc.

You throw in some guys that can blossom into skill players Boucher, Wood, Dudek, Coleman, Gavrus, etc.

If any three or four of these guys develop into an NHLers, you have a core to build with. If the team sucks next year, then we get the elite talent that we lack that can help bring it all together. If we can't draft that elite player, then the market is always there to sign/trade for someone.
 

MichaelJ

Registered User
May 20, 2013
7,874
766
How the board was laid out, I would've gone with Karlsson. Considering that he went late in the third, that "pick" is already looking craptastic.

Should've been

30 - Quenneville
41 - Cornel
71 - Karlsson

Young, big-bodied forwards who play defense, play tough, and have developing offensive games. Plus, we'd have extra depth at every F position with a C, RW, and LW.
 

glenwo2

LINDY RUFF NEEDS VIAGRA!!
Oct 18, 2008
52,069
24,355
New Jersey(No Fanz!)
Should've been

30 - Quenneville
41 - Cornel
71 - Karlsson

Young, big-bodied forwards who play defense, play tough, and have developing offensive games. Plus, we'd have extra depth at every F position with a C, RW, and LW.

I bet Lou and Conte thought they were referring to a University instead of an actual player. :laugh:
 

NJD1982

Registered User
Mar 31, 2007
2,936
3
Would love to see Matteau play some center for Boucher. They both need a full season in Albany.
 

MadDevil

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 10, 2007
33,880
23,841
Bismarck, ND
I'm not even going to pretend to know anything about these kids or the ones we passed up but it just seems like Lou Conte always value grinders higher than players with actual skill and who could potentially step into the top 6. They took no risks whatsoever in this draft. They just played it safe and added to there army of Zubrus'. That is absolutely not what we needed.

Yes, but had we swung for the fences and missed, you know damn well people would be in here blasting them for not taking a forward who might have a better chance of at least making it to the NHL. And it's not like there were surefire top six forwards on the board that we passed on. It seemed like the forwards left were projected to be more middle/bottom six forwards.

We won't really know for a few years whether this draft was the disaster some people think it was. Of course certain people will find guys we didn't take and complain about it anyway.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad