• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

2024 Draft

Eiserman's good. The issue with him is, all the shit he's able to get away with in the USNDP, and maybe even in college, might not translate if he's not trying to do anything else.

Boisvert compared him to a former prolific scorer out of the USNDP: Oliver Wahlstrom. Boisvert had him ranked 4th (I think, if not 4th then in the neighborhood of that) and ended up getting drafted 11th overall. In the end, Wahlstrom's not an NHL player because despite being a terrific shooter, he's not able to translate that skill into the NHL because of all his deficiencies.

That said, I think Eiserman's a much better talent than Wahlstrom. With Eiserman, it's all dependant on whether he's willing or not. If he's willing and gets the right coaching, he could be a serious player. But...
 
GGpX said:
Eiserman's good. The issue with him is, all the shit he's able to get away with in the USNDP, and maybe even in college, might not translate if he's not trying to do anything else.

Boisvert compared him to a former prolific scorer out of the USNDP: Oliver Wahlstrom. Boisvert had him ranked 4th (I think, if not 4th then in the neighborhood of that) and ended up getting drafted 11th overall. In the end, Wahlstrom's not an NHL player because despite being a terrific shooter, he's not able to translate that skill into the NHL because of all his deficiencies.

That said, I think Eiserman's a much better talent than Wahlstrom. With Eiserman, it's all dependant on whether he's willing or not. If he's willing and gets the right coaching, he could be a serious player. But...
Click to expand...
Can you write a post here without mentioning your cult leader?
 
LesCanadiens said:
Long time no see :). As promised, here are my top 32. I made a point of finding shift-by-shift or complete games for most of the top-16. Especially the top10, Lindstrom aside who is low only due to the back issue. This list, love it or hate it, is my personal opinion, not what I think will happen. I'm looking more at how I see them ranked in around 3-5 years in a redraft. Best of luck to the Habs tomorrow. BIG DAY!

  1. Celebrini
  2. Catton
  3. Buium
  4. Silayev
  5. Parekh
  6. Demidov*
  7. Sennecke
  8. Dickinson
  9. Iginla
  10. Levshunov
  11. Eiserman
  12. Lindstrom**
  13. Helenius
  14. Yakemchuk
  15. Connelly
  16. Nygar
  17. Lachenko
  18. Surin
  19. Chernyshov
  20. Stiga
  21. Solberg
  22. Greentree
  23. Hage
  24. Basha
  25. Laterneau
  26. Boisvert
  27. Artamonov
  28. Mews
  29. Freij
  30. Badinka
  31. Ritchie
  32. Beaudoin

*If not for 2 leg injuries and still not skating , I'd have him at #4.
And if he played KHL and was close to Michkov, I'd have him at #2

**If not for back injury (herniated disc + missing 1/2 season), I'd have him at #3
Click to expand...
Great job! I disagree with some placements, but nice work.
 
I went bucket to Nucket. After watching the big boys banging and Edmonton basically not being able to skate without somebody physically trying to pull them to the ice in the second half of game seven, I want to team of talented opportunistic thuggish apes.
 
LesCanadiens said:
Long time no see :). As promised, here are my top 32. I made a point of finding shift-by-shift or complete games for most of the top-16. Especially the top10, Lindstrom aside who is low only due to the back issue. This list, love it or hate it, is my personal opinion, not what I think will happen. I'm looking more at how I see them ranked in around 3-5 years in a redraft. Best of luck to the Habs tomorrow. BIG DAY!

  1. Celebrini
  2. Catton
  3. Buium
  4. Silayev
  5. Parekh
  6. Demidov*
  7. Sennecke
  8. Dickinson
  9. Iginla
  10. Levshunov
  11. Eiserman
  12. Lindstrom**
  13. Helenius
  14. Yakemchuk
  15. Connelly
  16. Nygar
  17. Lachenko
  18. Surin
  19. Chernyshov
  20. Stiga
  21. Solberg
  22. Greentree
  23. Hage
  24. Basha
  25. Laterneau
  26. Boisvert
  27. Artamonov
  28. Mews
  29. Freij
  30. Badinka
  31. Ritchie
  32. Beaudoin

*If not for 2 leg injuries and still not skating , I'd have him at #4.
And if he played KHL and was close to Michkov, I'd have him at #2

**If not for back injury (herniated disc + missing 1/2 season), I'd have him at #3
Click to expand...
Ela malaka, reading this list put me on the IR
 
GGpX said:
Eiserman's good. The issue with him is, all the shit he's able to get away with in the USNDP, and maybe even in college, might not translate if he's not trying to do anything else.

Boisvert compared him to a former prolific scorer out of the USNDP: Oliver Wahlstrom. Boisvert had him ranked 4th (I think, if not 4th then in the neighborhood of that) and ended up getting drafted 11th overall. In the end, Wahlstrom's not an NHL player because despite being a terrific shooter, he's not able to translate that skill into the NHL because of all his deficiencies.

That said, I think Eiserman's a much better talent than Wahlstrom. With Eiserman, it's all dependant on whether he's willing or not. If he's willing and gets the right coaching, he could be a serious player. But...
Click to expand...

My concern is completely different. He doesn’t seem to even have enough IQ to make plays at the USHL level, so I just don’t see how he’ll be suddenly able to start making plays that the higher level. Just read this for example.

For me, the most alarming aspect in Eiserman’s case is that I don’t consider his on-ice intelligence to be very high. I don’t see a player able to create offense for himself, nor for his teammates.

Let’s talk about his playmaking. The American goal-scorer remains a young player with a lot of talent, so, of course, in a certain sample of games, we will be able to find some good passes. On the other hand, the biggest constant in this facet is, for me, that he attempts a lot of ‘Hope Plays’. Risky plays where he just sends the puck into a dangerous area and hopes for the best. In his case, a lot of behind the back passes.

He also makes a lot of mistakes when making drop passes. This is explained by three things; his inability to correctly read the trajectory of his teammates as well as the position of his opponents, a timing fault as well as a problem with execution.


Limitations in the playmaking department of a scorer can be excused if, on the other hand, the player can create golden opportunities for himself. Alas, this is not the case for Eiserman. I kept these arguments in reserve when I talked about the quality of his shooting. But for my part, I did not see Eiserman gain the dangerous zones by himself in possession of the puck. The majority of shots that follow a puck possession on his part correspond of shots coming from very far from the outside. No matter how good his shot is, he won’t be able to beat NHL goalies from these places.

Additionally, Eiserman tries to force a lot of pucks through, when there simply is no opening.

For me, he is a goal scorer who is dependent on his teammates and who must be fed by them. On the one hand, it is normal for the player to play within his strengths and to simply park himself in an advantageous position to take advantage of his greatest quality, especially during powerplays. On the other hand, I will take the criticism a little further by saying that at equal strength, Eiserman does not present himself sufficiently in dangerous locations, remaining rather inside one of the face-off circles. I wonder what he will do when the game gets tighter in the playoffs. He is capable of jumping on loose pucks, he just doesn’t do it regularly.


He was one of the players with the highest turnover rate in my viewing this season. This can be explained by his inability to properly read the play in front of him as discussed previously.

However, the bigger problem lies in a lack of intelligence within Eiserman’s finesse game. This may sound odd, but to me, a proper display of puck handling is supposed to also demonstrates intelligence: the player eliminates a variable in order to open up a passing or a shooting lane, the player buys time to wait for teammate reinforcement, etc. More importantly, the player who wants to showcase his talent must be able to read his opponents; their body alignments, their angle of approach, their eyes, etc. In Eiserman’s case, every time he attempts a finesse play, his eyes are glued straight to the puck, not taking any information from his opponent in the process. In Eiserman’s case, there is no purpose and intention intentions behind stickhandling, other than trying to be flashy. As with his shots and passes, the American player does not seem to be able to properly detect openings (or lack thereof). It’s a bit the same thing when he tries to make his way to the net when we observe him leaning on his shoulder prematurely. Also, among junior players, I always like to watch the defender’s play when a dangle was executed. Sometimes a spectacular play is just the result of a defenseman who is not of caliber and the translatability of these plays is simply not possible for the NHL. In Eiserman’s case, every time he tries a dangle and it doesn’t work, I watch the defenders play and it’s astonishing to see how easy it looks for them. There is no manipulation beforehand so they just have to extend their stick to pokechek him.

One aspect that I find to have been overestimated in Eiserman, especially at the start of the season since the criticism against him had not yet started, is his play in the corners and along the boards. The player was presented to us as a scorer who could himself take possession of the disc and who could almost display a certain identity as a power forward. For my part, I have difficulty seeing such an outcome in his case since I do not see a player who wins the majority of his one-on-one battles in the USHL. It is therefore very difficult for me to extrapolate frequent success in the NHL. Also, although Eiserman is a relatively ‘young’ player for his draft, being only two weeks away from being in the 2025 draft, he is already listed at 196 lbs at 6’0. He won’t really be able to add more weight to his frame.
Click to expand...
 
Habspatrol said:
Great job! I disagree with some placements, but nice work.
Click to expand...
Thanks, HP. It was interesting to watch some of these guys in depth. I saw things a bit unexpected for some players (Levshunov for eg) and as expected for others (Salayev for ex). My dark horse later pick is Ondrej Becher. An overrager with PG. I pray we find a way to pick him after the 1st round. I truly think he's a star.

And I especially watched more and more of Catton to try and talk myself out of placing him 2nd. I couldn't. He easily is top-3 for ceiling IMO. So skilled, smart and creative. And his work ethic and drive is just the final straw for my placement. If he didn't have the latter 2, I'd have him a few spots lower at least.
 
Last edited:
LesCanadiens said:
Thanks, HP. It was interesting to watch some of these guys in depth. I saw things a bit unexpected for some players (Levshunov for eg) and as expected for others (Salayev for ex). My dark horse later pick is Orej Becher. An overrager with PG. I pray we find a way to pick him after the 1st round. I truly think he's a star.

And I especially watched more and more of Catton to try and talk myself out of placing him 2nd. I couldn't. He easily is top-3 for ceiling IMO. So skilled, smart and creative. And his work ethic and drive is just the final straw for my placement. If he didn't have the latter 2, I'd have him a few spots lower at least.
Click to expand...
I like Buium....

I think he might become the best dmen when we look back in 5 year (God willing)....

Feels like every forward has a question mark around #5......if Buium is available, i think management takes him over Iginla or Lindstrom

BPA at #5 might be a dmen.....
 
GrandWazoo said:
My concern is completely different. He doesn’t seem to even have enough IQ to make plays at the USHL level, so I just don’t see how he’ll be suddenly able to start making plays that the higher level. Just read this for example.
Click to expand...

He's so hard to peg. You watch him and you just know no matter what, he's as close to a lock to score at will on the PP. That one-timer is fn unreal. But yeah, the rest of his game is spotty at best. But he also has some ego and swagger that makes me pause and think he'll find a way to be a star player.
 
Rolex said:
I like Buium....

I think he might become the best dmen when we look back in 5 year (God willing)....

Feels like every forward has a question mark around #5......if Buium is available, i think management takes him over Iginla or Lindstrom

BPA at #5 might be a dmen.....
Click to expand...
He's fun to watch. No real weaknesses except maybe for size/strength. But he seems to hold his own. I was betting he'd find a way to contain bigger NHL forwards using positioning and smarts. Great player for sure.
 
We don't have a Hedman or Makar in the pipeline....

Everyone says we have lots of dmen....but none of them are studs....

If the BPA is a dmen, don't force the pick on needs (forwards) if they are not the BPA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top