|
Post by statsman18 on May 29, 2015 15:09:57 GMT -4
What's sad here is you only defended one team. That I said had 5 17yo. 2 of which are now playing in the Mem Cup. I kept looking and found out that out of the last 6 years 4 teams had at lest one 17yo or 16yo that played either top 6 forwards or top 4 Defensemen. Now i didn't actually know this until you said what you did. Then I just looked and found out this info. The problem is you're talking about 17 year old players not 16 year old players ... There is a big difference - Shane Bowers at 17 could very possibly be considered the #2 Center on a contender after a full year in the league. Of the 16 year old group on these teams how many played a legit role in a team's top 6 forwards or top 4 on D? Actually it was very surprising how many there were. Last year you had Gauthier with VD who was maybe a 6-7 guy against Meloche for BC who was top 4 for sure. Then you go to 2012 and Cooper was a 3rd line there I know we're talking top 6 but still. Then 2010 huberdeau was top line guy with SJ who went to the league final. Then you have Sean couturier in 09 as a 2nd line guy with Drum.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on May 29, 2015 15:10:55 GMT -4
How is it sad? I used the most blatant example that we all know best. Take Drouin and Mackinnon away and 2 of Quebecs players are playing in their 1st Mem Cup. Everyone agrees with that. I don't know what players you're using for the other teams and don't care enough to look as it isn't going to change my opinion. As a contender you're not planning on a playoff run with a 16yr old #2 center. Especially since contenders rarely pick high the year before they content. I agree you can have 1 and be fine or else i'd be behind trading Dubois right now. But once you start gambling important spots like top 2 C or top 4 D on 16yr olds you're probably fighting a losing battle as a contender. It's one thing to draft a Bowers and have him end up there, it's a complete other situation to plan for him to be the #2 C. It sad because you cherry pick and take away players to make it right for you. But the fact is it happened. How good they are or not it happened and they were this age. None of them were 16 and playing the role of #2 center. That's a pretty important role on a hockey team looking to content for a championship. Every team has 16yr olds on the roster. That's not the argument. It's what role they're expected to play in the lineup.
|
|
|
Post by hal on May 29, 2015 15:32:57 GMT -4
Would have been more of a win if they didn't trade away their Drummondville pick. They don't do that they don't have Leblanc who helps nail down their top pairing. Gotta weigh good with bad here. "IF"......Jason Bell blossoms .....I don't think this trade could ever be considered a win .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2015 15:35:51 GMT -4
The problem is you're talking about 17 year old players not 16 year old players ... There is a big difference - Shane Bowers at 17 could very possibly be considered the #2 Center on a contender after a full year in the league. Of the 16 year old group on these teams how many played a legit role in a team's top 6 forwards or top 4 on D? Actually it was very surprising how many there were. Last year you had Gauthier with VD who was maybe a 6-7 guy against Meloche for BC who was top 4 for sure. Then you go to 2012 and Cooper was a 3rd line there I know we're talking top 6 but still. Then 2010 huberdeau was top line guy with SJ who went to the league final. Then you have Sean couturier in 09 as a 2nd line guy with Drum. Huberdeau wasn't top line guy in 2010 at 16 ... I think your a year on your stats ... Huberdeau's 16 year old season he finished 11th in team scoring Couturier was also not in D'ville's top 6 grouping either as a 16 year old Pretty sure Val D'or's top six were Mantha, Marcotte, Henley, Poudrier, Richard, Kubel
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on May 29, 2015 15:41:47 GMT -4
They don't do that they don't have Leblanc who helps nail down their top pairing. Gotta weigh good with bad here. "IF"......Jason Bell blossoms .....I don't think this trade could ever be considered a win . All we can hope to salvage now is that Leblanc is healthy next year and helps us to a playoff run to the league finals. Without that it's a clear win for SJ even if Bell stays as a bottom pairing PP specialist.
|
|
|
Post by emerz on May 29, 2015 17:56:33 GMT -4
Do we think we can win with the current core of guys next year is the question (LeBlanc, Leveille, Gosselin, Svecnikov, Lazarev, Bishop, Dubois), if so is Dumont willing to trade away a ton of the future to do it? Sure we could be an above average team for a few years but you really have to load up on top talent if you want to go all the way.
The Oshawa Generals which are waiting in the mem cup finals made the following trades this year:
In: Matt Mistele, Jason DaSilva, Michael McCarron, Dakota Mermis, Brent Pedersen Out: Cliff Pu, Josh Sterk, Chase Pearson, Draft picks (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4 6, 10)
So they traded 6 2nd rounds picks, 5 3rd round picks, 3 4th round picks, a 6th, a 10th and some solid prospects.
The Kelowna Rockets, waiting in the semi-finals traded for: 1st round NHL picks, Leon Draisaitl and Josh Morrissey in exchange for: Import Kris Schmidli, defenceman Dalton Yorke, 1st round pick, 2nd round pick, 2 3rd round picks and 3 4th round picks as well as some prospects.
--
Not really sure where I'm going with this except that it seems quite a few people want us to keep our high picks this year, and that's fine but I if we do I don't see the team being strong enough to really go all in. We need more impact players at forward.
In addition to our 3 1sts this, 3 3rds this year, we have 3 3rd ands 2 4ths next year, how many are people okay with trading away? Personally I'm fine with just keeping one of our first this year and really going after the best available players with the other picks.
Just some thoughts, its clear the Oshawa Generals took their opportunity and seized it, weren't afraid of buying huge and were rewarded for it.
|
|
|
Post by goeagles on May 29, 2015 19:14:11 GMT -4
Without sounding negative there is no way this team wins with the core group you mentioned above. The forward group of Svechnikov. Lazerev, Bishop and Dubois needs two or three impact forwards. I think Svechnikov is going to tear it up next year and I think that Lazerev, Bishop and Dubois can play on a second line for a championship team but would rather see two proven offensive point producers with Svechnikov and two of the other 3 on a second line with the other on a third line. On defense I like what I have seen from Leblanc and Gosselin, Leveille had a huge year but you still need a true number one defenseman. One who controls the puck, can play 30 minutes and control every situation. This core group is good but not championship great in my opinion. If you look at Q teams in the finals the last couple of years, two very strong lines, 4 solid defenseman and consistent goaltending for the most part. I know there are exceptions, Halifax last year but Drouin and Ehlers kind of tip the scales but Val Dor, Rimoiski, Quebec, solid core. Not comparable to what we have. To get there Dumont will have to trade many of his assets he has right now.
|
|
|
Post by mooseinfo on May 29, 2015 19:27:35 GMT -4
Without sounding negative there is no way this team wins with the core group you mentioned above. The forward group of Svechnikov. Lazerev, Bishop and Dubois needs two or three impact forwards. I think Svechnikov is going to tear it up next year and I think that Lazerev, Bishop and Dubois can play on a second line for a championship team but would rather see two proven offensive point producers with Svechnikov and two of the other 3 on a second line with the other on a third line. On defense I like what I have seen from Leblanc and Gosselin, Leveille had a huge year but you still need a true number one defenseman. One who controls the puck, can play 30 minutes and control every situation. This core group is good but not championship great in my opinion. If you look at Q teams in the finals the last couple of years, two very strong lines, 4 solid defenseman and consistent goaltending for the most part. I know there are exceptions, Halifax last year but Drouin and Ehlers kind of tip the scales but Val Dor, Rimoiski, Quebec, solid core. Not comparable to what we have. To get there Dumont will have to trade many of his assets he has right now. He should start with this draft if not its going to be tougher, Xmas. You will know soon.
|
|
|
Post by statsman18 on May 29, 2015 21:47:09 GMT -4
Actually it was very surprising how many there were. Last year you had Gauthier with VD who was maybe a 6-7 guy against Meloche for BC who was top 4 for sure. Then you go to 2012 and Cooper was a 3rd line there I know we're talking top 6 but still. Then 2010 huberdeau was top line guy with SJ who went to the league final. Then you have Sean couturier in 09 as a 2nd line guy with Drum. Huberdeau wasn't top line guy in 2010 at 16 ... I think your a year on your stats ... Huberdeau's 16 year old season he finished 11th in team scoring Couturier was also not in D'ville's top 6 grouping either as a 16 year old Pretty sure Val D'or's top six were Mantha, Marcotte, Henley, Poudrier, Richard, Kubel Huberdeau 100% was top line guy in the playoffs of 2011. He didn't start the year there I know but he ended it there. And as for VD's group last year I said Gauthier was 6-7 guy. He jumped back and forth from the 2nd and 3rd line. Couturier I can't actually remember just knew he had a underwhelming year over all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2015 21:53:29 GMT -4
Huberdeau wasn't top line guy in 2010 at 16 ... I think your a year on your stats ... Huberdeau's 16 year old season he finished 11th in team scoring Couturier was also not in D'ville's top 6 grouping either as a 16 year old Pretty sure Val D'or's top six were Mantha, Marcotte, Henley, Poudrier, Richard, Kubel Huberdeau 100% was top line guy in the playoffs of 2011. He didn't start the year there I know but he ended it there. And as for VD's group last year I said Gauthier was 6-7 guy. He jumped back and forth from the 2nd and 3rd line. Couturier I can't actually remember just knew he had a underwhelming year over all. Which is great because in 2011 he was a 2nd year player ... He was a rookie (16) in 2009-10
|
|
|
Post by statsman18 on May 29, 2015 22:07:57 GMT -4
Huberdeau 100% was top line guy in the playoffs of 2011. He didn't start the year there I know but he ended it there. And as for VD's group last year I said Gauthier was 6-7 guy. He jumped back and forth from the 2nd and 3rd line. Couturier I can't actually remember just knew he had a underwhelming year over all. Which is great because in 2011 he was a 2nd year player ... He was a rookie (16) in 2009-10 Ok then it was that year. He played with Peterson and Hoffman. The 2011 year he was 17 and got MVP of the playoff and Mem cup. But in 2010 they lost to Moncton and he was on the top line then.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2015 22:41:36 GMT -4
Which is great because in 2011 he was a 2nd year player ... He was a rookie (16) in 2009-10 Ok then it was that year. He played with Peterson and Hoffman. The 2011 year he was 17 and got MVP of the playoff and Mem cup. But in 2010 they lost to Moncton and he was on the top line then. Actually that was Stanislav Galiev that played with Petersen and Hoffman ... The point is you don't go into a season and plan for this to happen - Saint John didn't draft Huberdeau with the intention that he was gonna fill such an important role on the team even though it ended up that way. So you're willing to gamble with a 16 year old kid as 2C on a contending team ... No problem we'll just agree to disagree on this philosophy
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2015 11:33:18 GMT -4
Using MacKinnon and Drouin as examples of guys who make immediate impacts is a poor example, in so much that teams rarely (if ever) end up with picks #1 and #2 in the same draft. It becomes exponentially a bad example when said players go #1 and #3 in their NHL draft year.
|
|
|
Post by Jacques Strap on May 30, 2015 11:49:53 GMT -4
Which is great because in 2011 he was a 2nd year player ... He was a rookie (16) in 2009-10 Ok then it was that year. He played with Peterson and Hoffman. The 2011 year he was 17 and got MVP of the playoff and Mem cup. But in 2010 they lost to Moncton and he was on the top line then. Hey I will finish that for you, Mem orial Cup. Five more keystrokes. Nobody cares what the Memorial Cup stands for anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on May 30, 2015 13:06:52 GMT -4
Ok then it was that year. He played with Peterson and Hoffman. The 2011 year he was 17 and got MVP of the playoff and Mem cup. But in 2010 they lost to Moncton and he was on the top line then. Hey I will finish that for you, Mem orial Cup. Five more keystrokes. Nobody cares what the Memorial Cup stands for anymore. Why does someone abbreviating a word mean anything in terms of what they believe it stands for? I find it hilarious that the people who complain about that abbrevation always manage to come off an infinitely more smug and arrogant then the people they are criticizing for doing those same things. Every single person here knows what a Canadian hockey fan means when they say or type Mem Cup. Its not a slight to anyone, it is referencing a damn sporting championship and is not at all a slight to the meaning of that championship. I think we should be more pissed at organizers gauging real fans from seeing the games and charging 3 figures for single games then about fans on the fucking internet not typing 'orial' at the end of a word. Hard for real people to care about the meaning of a championship they cant even afford to take their family out to without missing a mortgage payment.
|
|