A Study In Contrasts Montreal's Draft In Context

Friday and Saturday was the first oasis in the desert of hockey fan summer. With rumours and trades and picks and news to comment on, the draft added some optimism for those of us desperately wanting next season to end so we don’t have to call the Bruins Stanly Cup Champions any longer.

The draft was interesting for Habs fans. For those most optimistic of cheerleaders, each pick was a reason to celebrate, as usual. For those with feet a little closer to the ground, the Canadiens did OK – nothing more. Everything’s hunky-dory on this particular caravan route.

But like hockey games, what your own team does on a given night (day) is really only one part of the equation. Taking 35 shots is great but not if you let up 48 in doing it. So too the draft. In isolation the players we picked all sound great (like all prospects tend to), yet when we start to look at which prospects were left aside (all also getting good reviews) and what our chief rivals did on the very same day, the picture gets a little murkier.

My study in contrasts on this day pits our Montreal Canadiens against their closest neighbours, the Ottawa Senators.

Outwardly, the teams are in different situations at the end of this season. Ottawa in full rebuild. Montreal in a holding pattern waiting to contend. Ottawa still searching for a goalie. Montreal watching as Price garners many a Vezina (and Hart) vote.

But outward appearances can be deceiving and both teams also have other similarities.

Both, for instance, have high quality farm operations feeding them players. The Hamilton Bulldogs play to win and are perennial producers of players who now reflect that attitude. The Binghampton Senators, with their mix of AHL vets and Sens hopefuls just won the Calder Cup.

Both teams most intriguing prospect has emerged in the last two seasons at the back end. PK Subban in Montreal was a pleasant surprise from the second round of a recent draft. Erik Karlsson was the Sens most consistent player of the season.

Both teams, in the light of day, have a lot of trouble scoring goals. Montreal managed to post up respectable totals through the regular campaign, but even in late winter sometimes struggled to really score when it mattered and certainly weren’t burying teams. Ottawa scored the least goals in the whole NHL this last year. Neither team can really boast a sure-fire scoring phenom in the system to correct this problem short- or long-term.

So in terms of free agent needs, the teams stand apart. Ottawa needs much to hope to contend. Montreal seeks a piece or two. But in terms of needs five years from now, apart from Carey Price, the team needs don’t look all that different (though Carey Price is not some trivial piece). Interesting then that two general managers took such contrasting approaches to dealing with what could have at the outset been the same shopping list.


First round

Montreal: Nathan Beaulieu (D)
In every preview I read, Nathan Beaulieu went before pick #17. So, if scouts are to be trusted, and I suppose they must, Montreal picked the best player available. What’s more, Nathan played in the QMJHL and has a name that will have placated at least those Nationalist fans who don’t own a computer.

My personal view is that this was a safe pick. Perhaps too safe. As you know I’m not fond of picking defencemen in the first round, not because I don’t like defencemen (I do), rather because I think it’s harder to pry a scoring forward from a rival down the road.

Beaulieu may well turn out to be very good, but because Montreal will have PK Subban and Andrei Markov, he may be a luxury item. Trade him you say. Well, how much do you get for a defenceman who can score and play the back end? A second rounder if he’s as good as Wisniewski?

Ottawa: Mika Zibanejad (F), Stefan Noesen (F), Matt Puempel (F)
In every preview I read, Zibanejad and Noesen went lower than they were picked. And I explained why I didn’t favour Puempel before. If it were one pick from these vs. Beaulieu, 6 out of 10 scouts would have to say Montreal got better value (if they were true to their assessments). But on the whole, Ottawa’s first round was made better for continuity of strategy. Although I’m sure they’d like another partner for Erik Karlsson (and David Rundblad), they identified value in getting offensive players with skill and an actual knack for scoring (not a potential knack) and picked accordingly.

Between the three players, I think the Sens will have found two NHLers. I still think Noesen was the savviest pick of the draft.

Winner: Ottawa
It would have taken a lot for Montreal to outdraft Ottawa in Round 1 of this draft. Volume wasn’t in their favour. Ottawa didn’t slip, and Montreal played too safe in my opinion for this to be anything but an Ottawa victory.


Second and third rounds

Montreal: 2 fourth round picks
Montreal traded their third rounder for two later picks. This is a great, great move. By round three teams are far apart on their assessments of the players and their own needs. Most times, one would be unlucky to just miss a player earmarked for a pick in the third round or later. Two for one is a bargain. Heads up from Gauthier.

Ottawa: Shane Prince (F), Nikita Filatov (F)
Offense, offense and more offense. Sticking to the script, Bryan Murray and his team delivered more on their mandate. Prince was 13th in OHL scoring with a jump of 58 points. A hometown 67 to boot, he was worth taking a chance on.

Filatov is different. He has issues and I can see why he would be available for a third rounder. But the Senators in their current form have nothing to lose on this trade. Their lineup last spring was an AHL team and Filatov won’t be anything but an improvement, regardless of how often he shows up for shifts. The upside of the trade being as huge as it is, it’s a win from the Senators standpoint.

Winner: Ottawa
Despite not yet drafting a single defender, Ottawa is running away from Montreal in this draft. Volume again is the main factor, but there are moves here that Montreal would have made if they could have been in the position. Gauthier did well, but like the 35 shot generating team, did he do enough in the lead up to this draft to make the most of the picks he had round 3 and up? Will we be fretting over how cheaply Filatov was when free agency lands us our eventual Pouliot replacement?


Fourth and fifth rounds

Montreal: Josiah Didier (D), Olivier Archambault (F), Magnus Nygren (D), Darren Dietz (D)
Finally a forward! Olivier Archambault is full of potential (apparently), but flags go up for veterans of two junior seasons whose profile still relies heavily on their AAA information. Other than Archambault, the picking was on message for the day for Gauthier too: “We could never have too many offensive defencemen”.

The thrill about Didier seems to be that he was ranked so low 6 months ago, that his 108 final ranking (where he was picked) was deemed a temporary stop on his way up. To me, it seems like another safe pick, one in the mold of Timmins’ safest. Didier isn’t even in college but will be, so his contract won’t be on the books and his name could easily go the way of Stejskal or Pateryn without an eyelash being batted. It seems to me like this is the way scouts like it.

I can be more positive about Nygren and Dietz. Nygren is already a playing pro. He shoots right and has clearly established himself at age 21 on a good team. He’s a safe pick in a way too, because at 21 one already knows more about him. But this kind of safe sits better with me vs. the ability to “sweep a pick under the rug” kind of safe.

Clearly the Canadiens were watching Duncan Siemens. The Dietz pick proves that. And, their homework on Siemens produced a pick. If I were a betting man, I’d put more money on Dietz to don the Habs sweater then any pick in this draft other than Beaulieu.

Ottawa: Jean-Gabriel Pageau (F), Fredrik Claesson (D)
Ottawa took a Swedish defender and a QMJHL forward too. Pageau was 16th in QMJHL scoring, but 3rd in the playoffs. The small Quebecois is also local to Ottawa (Gatineau) and represents another well-taken gamble for the Sens. Claesson is a defensive Dman (already), though a youngster and a 5-game pro. Not too worried about missing this Swede.

Winner: Draw
Ottawa scooped Montreal on Pageau and forced the much bigger Archambault gamble. For this Gauthier can be chastised, as he was a mere pick away from #96. But Montreal did better in getting Nygren, who has real credentials behind him already and did amazingly to get Dietz who I think is as good as 5th rounders get.


Sixth and seventh rounds

Montreal: Daniel Pribyl (F), Colin Sullivan (D)
Two picks and two totally different approaches.

In Pribyl, the Habs take a flyer on a raw prospect from a league and a country that is way out of favour with scouts and GMs. To me, Pribyl is a bit like Avtsin. One really can’t tell what the stats mean, but the package on paper looks great. With a sixth rounder, a team should be doing these things, so kudos to Gauthier and Timmins for surprising us all.

In Sullivan, the Habs gave their nod to scouting consensus. Sullivan was a highly-ranked, yet overlooked American. Another smoothe-skating offensive-minded D (these seem so common in the minors, where are they in the NHL?), Sullivan is another safe pick in my eyes.

I will say that Ondrej Palat was taken by the Lightning with the 208th pick. We’re talking 4th leading scorer in the QMJHL – 39 goals. I’d chalk Colin Sullivan as a massive waste for this reason alone.

Ottawa: Darren Kramer (F), Max McCormick (F), Jordan Fransco (D), Ryan Dzingel (F)
A big guy, a couple of scoring USHLers and a decent WHL defender. These are late round picks, but in Dzingel, it feels like the Senators gambled again and may come away with something. Consider that Dzingel in his second year in the USHL scored 23 goals and 67 points (one may remember a certain Habs first rounder scoring 21 goals and 63 points in the same league to rave reviews).

Winner: Montreal
Despite missing a big opportunity with the 7th round pick (Palat), the Habs still kept their tradition of making interesting and daring picks in the late rounds. By that, of course, I mean Pribyl. Of all 6 players selected by Montreal and Ottawa, he’s the only one we’d really expect to see in a prominent role. Ottawa meanwhile filled in the blanks, opting for slightly less flashy options to balance their first few rounds.


Overall draft: Montreal vs. Ottawa

Ottawa came out of Draft 2011 with a better crop than Montreal did. Part of this was due to volume and earlier picks. However, this isn’t the whole story. By sticking to a single strategy (and a sound one in my opinion) of picking for the rarest commodity – scorers – Ottawa came away from draft day with a stable of names from which a reasonable person could see two or three legitimate scorers emerging. Montreal on the other hand may have picked the third member of the new Big Three, but with what we know of contracts and current depth charts at best would only have picked up a 5th and 6th Dman as well as some trade chips.

Archambault and Pribyl were the Habs gamble to try and fill in gaps left by Maxwell, Trunev, Sergei, Grabovski and others in the offensive depth chart, but they really do pale when stacked beside Zibanejad, Noesen, Puempel, Prince, Pageau, etc.


So that’s it Habs fans. I think our team had an average draft. There was no Fischer pick or Tanguay trade to mar the face of it, but nor did the Habs make great strides to get ahead of their rivals for 2015.

There’s nothing wrong with average. And average can sure up the foundation, as it surely will. But to constantly look at everything in isolation when teams like the Senators (and others) are making real noise on draft day belies the nature of this league.


The next oasis in this desert is free agency, I hope we get a better spot to take a drink…

Canadiens Draft Primer

The draft is in a few days and the Canadiens need to be ready. Not that Pierre Gauthier couldn’t do this on his own, but just in case he does use this blog as his last minute cramming site, we thought it prudent to put a little effort into a preview for him.

As you know, we already highlighted the lessons that the Canadiens and their crack team need to take from their own draft history, combined with that of their rivals. Just in case they don’t have time to read that, we’ll just post the most important message here:
Don’t, for goodness sake, take another defensive defender in the first round!

That out of the way, we can get down to the serious business of the draft. The way I look at it, there are about 5 categories of players to look at for the first round of this draft (No it isn’t C, RW, LW, …). The categories come from off the top of my head painstaking research I have done into drafting over the past decade.

The first category of possible draftees are those that we’ll call Subban substitutes. They aren’t called Subban subs because they will all be as good as Subban – what do you think I’m that good at scouting I can predict NHL readiness from watching a bit of junior? No, they are called Subban subs because the only way we’ll be drafting these players is if we trade PK Subban (or someone of his stature) to the team ahead of us in line who would otherwise take one of them.

The second group of players are aptly called NAFWOPs or Not Available for Weber or Pouliot. Trading the players fans see as expendable may get something, but not these guys. It probably wouldn’t take a Subban to move up, but for all intents and purposes, the Habs aren’t getting a sniff of these NAFWOPs either.

The third category is consensus early picks. These players are highly rated by the media who either a) just watched the Bruins win the Cup and concluded that only a team exactly like the Bruins will ever in again or b) waited until the last minute and couldn’t figure out how to integrate North American and European and Skater and Goalie lists. These are big forwards who scored a lot of goals in the CHL (the minimum cut off for a lot is slipping these days, some guys here scored 20ish). These are players that should be available when the Canadiens pick because a) the media don’t have NHL jobs and b) Brian Burke can’t make all the picks.

The fourth category is the McGuire stunners. These players don’t get mentioned for some reason or another. See category three for media excuses, add drinking while compiling the list. In my opinion, the more stunned Pierre McGuire is by the pick, the better the pick probably is. The Blubbering Blusterer is no clairvoyant.

The fifth and final category is the red flags. This category is entirely determined by me and based on that thorough research I mentioned. The players are unpickable by the Canadiens for reasons of position, over-rating or the fact they have already resorted to the strategy that all slow and non-innovative players take when in a jam – they abandon their reason for being a hockey player by becoming a defensive machine before they even get a sniff of pro hockey.


Subban subs
Not worth spending too much time on these guys really. Primarily because the caliber of prospect that must be traded to get this player is more than likely to be a better prospect on odds than the draft pick himself.
The list here consists of Ryan Nugent-Hopkins, Adam Larsson, Gabriel Landerskog, Jonathan Huberdeau, Sean Couturier, Dougie Hamilton, Ryan Strome and Ryan Murphy.

If any of these players were to be available without trade, or through a cheaper trade, I’d be all for adding them to the fold. Landerskog and Strome fit the bill of what the Canadiens (or any team) could use, Couturier and Huberdeau would be organizational gems, Nugent-Hopkins and Larsson are the kind of guys you make room for, and Hamilton and Murphy are a cut above their peers from the back line (with Murphy being the one I'd go for).


NAFWOPs
Mika Zibanejad, Sven Bartschi, Joel Armia, Mark McNeill all have a lot in common. All forwards. All fit the profile of a scoring forward who may succeed at NHL level. All unlikely to be available by the time the Canadiens pick.

These are the kinds of 9-15 draft picks that make one ask why the Canadiens made the playoffs if they were only going to be stifled in the first round. They make one ask that because players of their scoring ability and general quality are gone at pick 17 if all goes according to plan.

The good news is the NHL is rife with general managers who think their secret revelation is a new and unidentified way to win it all (Thomas Hickey, #4 overall, LA). Usually these GMs win the draft picks above #14 year on year.

So let’s play the game. Let’s say one of these four players slips through the table because someone opts for that 7’ guy and someone wants to impress Pierre McGuire.

If I had my choice for the player to fall to 17, I think I’d go with Joel Armia. Sure, his work ethic is being questioned by the media who watched him play one game at a tournament with lesser players than he, but he put up 18 goals in the Finnish League at age 17 and that’s got to count for something. And, remember how the Habs lost 3 OT games to Boston with Horton and Ryder spoiling the fun. How about this quote then:

"You might have to look for him during some shifts, but then, suddenly, he scores the winner."

Goalscorers sometimes need to disappear to do their thing. I certainly wouldn't mind empty shifts if goals flowed freely.

I also think Nathan Beaulieu will be gone by all accounts by pick 17. If he fell to that point, the Canadiens would take him, but it might serve them better to trade down if that happens, even if it brings on the annual wrath of RDS.

Consensus mid-teens

Mark Scheifele
Look, I understand why mock drafts take this guy. There are a lot of lists and he’s high on most. To that I would ask why? In my opinion, he gets points for points, points for being big, points for being a center, and dare I say, points for being from the OHL.

Looking deeper though, despite claims he was on a talentless team, Scheifele still racked up way more assists than goals. 75 points is no OHL record and with the ice time he got, I consider the 22 goals a red flag. I also read that 11 of his goals came down a stretch at the end. While to some that would mean he picked it up in clutch games, one must remember there were no clutch games for Barries, so he actually picked it up in meaningless games. Not one for me.

The Hockey Writers call him the safe pick. Safe picks are for rounds 3/4 in my honest opinion...

Matt Puempel
Small in stature, one gets the idea Puempel got his points for actual play rather than the potential of a big guy.34 goals wasn’t something that turned heads in past seasons, but this season it seems high for the CHL. This worries me somewhat as 34 is closer to 20 than it is to 50. Still, from all accounts he makes his living from scoring goals, but still makes time to get assists. Like Scheifele, he played on a pretty awful team, however, and with a hip injury that raises other questions doesn’t get my nod.

Brandon Saad
Not sold on Brandon either for some reason. He's already garnering comments about his two-way game, which might not be a flag with 40 goals under his belt. With 27, it starts to sound like a bit of an excuse. That said, I could be way wrong about this guy.

Duncan Siemens, Jonas Brodin, Oscar Klefbom, Joe Morrow
I’m sure these guys are all fine fellows and even better defenders. But unless someone in the organization thinks they’d be passing up the next Lidstrom or Niedermayer, I’d advise a pass on this group of Dmen. The Habs need to keep Subban around and hopefully can revitalize Markov. These have to be their bets. Together with a commitment to Weber who has shown good promise, I don’t see the need to abandon hope on finding a scorng forward to take and ever so slightly safer bet based on consensus.

McGuire stunners

Stefan Noesen
This guy isn't on mmost lists, simply because they only go to pick #30. But in a year where so many 25-30 goal guys are in the running, it's a bit of a puzzle how a relatively big OHLer with 34 goals and a 69 point jump for the season wouldn't pip some of the former favourites. Let's just accept he rose from nowhere and some in the rankings racket like to save face more than they like to be objective.

34 goals in 68 games. 77 points. Up from 3 goals last season. Noesen comes from Dallas, so he might not be under their radar. But if he slips to the Canadiens #17, he should get consideration. At the very least the team should insinuate they are going to take him to the Big D and see if Nieuwendyk coughs anything up.

Daniel Catenacci
From all reports, Catenacci translates to speed. The most generous comparisons liken him to Mike Cammalleri because of his speed, his attitude and his stature. After a second playoffs watching Camms, I'd sign another one of him up if I could.

Alexander Khokhlachev

"The first thing that jumps out about Khokhlachev’s game is his heart."

A comment like that and 34 goals in his first OHL season, I'm certain this is a classic Russian shy-away. The Canadiens have a chance to be a bit of Russian hub with Markov, Emelin, Kostitsyn and Avtsin. Why not take advantage of the rest of the NHL's reluctance. This guy played in North America already. What more could he have done to prove he wanted to be in the NHL?

Nikita Kucherov
If you don't ever finish low enough to get a high pick, you have to take a chance to get a superstar. Kucherov represents a home run swing. The guy absolutely dominated the MHL, he smashed scoring recoreds at the recent U18 champs, he has potential to be something quite special offensively. I don't think the Canadiens have much to lose by swinging big this year, because at #17 they are already looking at guys that could only muster 20-some goals in junior anyway. If Kucherov is on the radar for this pick, it might be wise, however, to turn the pick into two and take him lower when he'll likely still be available due to his recent KHL: signing.

Tyler Biggs
I'm a bit loathe to put another American college bound kid. We've seen our fair share of these already. But Biggs is legit. He is Big, as his name suggests, and he has a knack for scoring Big goals, if not enormous numbers of them. He has to be on the list for completeness, but he wouldn't be my first choice from these.


Red flags

Boone Jenner
For me his improvement from one year to the next wasn't very impressive and it really does raise the question about how one thinks he'll suddenly become NHL 20-goal material.

Zack Phillips, Tomas Jurco
Good teams put up good amounts of goals and are populated by many high point-getters. But it's a scouts job to pick out the straw that stirs the drink. In Saint John, it seems like it was probably Huberdeau. Not to mention Simon Despres and Stanislav Galiev. I'd be wary of totals from these two forwards that may well deflate when they lose their catalysts.

Jamieson Oleksiak
He's 6'7". Let's admit not all tall guys turn out to be Chara. Some turn out to be Andy Sutton -- if you're even that lucky.

Ty Rattie
Seems like 4th fiddle on his team with some pretty crazy top end talent. Buyer beware.

Brett Ritchie
I know you can't teach size. But can one really teach a 20-goal OHL player to do it at the NHL. I know there are cases where it's been done. But have the Habs really learned nothing from Turner Stevenson, Jason Ward.

Central Scouting Rankings

Has anyone else ever wondered why the Central Scouting Bureau seems to be able to compile data from multiple leagues on either side of the Atlantic, but seem incapable of evaluating North American and European talent on the same list?

It seems to me there's as much variety between playing in the Czech junior league and the KHL as there is between the Czech junior league and the USHL. Maybe that's just me.

It certainly has always made the task of previewing a draft very interesting, as relative ranks often seem almost dreamt up.

I guess it creates a need for interpreters and speculators like us bloggers and Bob McKenzie, so I'll not complain any further.