|
Post by mooseinfo on Nov 26, 2014 15:02:52 GMT -4
BC selling would hurt the market for sellers but if CB becomes a buyer that certainly could make up for it. Seems a bit of panic if so.
|
|
|
Post by theqprofessor on Nov 26, 2014 15:38:40 GMT -4
If the rumour is true, I would think Gregoire would be flipped to a 3rd team
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Nov 26, 2014 15:40:48 GMT -4
This was a waiver claim.
I think the big trade talk is overblown for now.
If this was a part of a trade we wouldn't have used waivers to acquire him.
|
|
|
Post by goeaglesgo on Nov 26, 2014 15:52:37 GMT -4
Why would you thinkgregoire would be flipped to a third team.
|
|
JPLAB
Draft Pick
Posts: 90
|
Post by JPLAB on Nov 26, 2014 15:53:50 GMT -4
Dubois et Lalonde pour cado ou Grégoire marathona Midget Messages: 2005 Date d'inscription: 02/07/2010 Sujet: Re: Joueurs interessants pour trades Aujourd'hui à 10:30 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dubois et Lalonde pour cado ou Grégoire Ce serait excellent. En passant pour ceux qui pensent que Cap-Breton ne fonceront pas cette année: ils ont 10 choix dans les 5 premières rondes 2015! Ils ne repêcheront jamais 10 joueurs et même si c'était le cas, ils ne peuvent n'habiller que 4 joueurs de 16 ans! That's what I said. Dubois + Lalonde for Cadorette OR Grégoire I would not trade Dubois for anyone. You have to build your team thru the draft. Add complimentary players via trade. Be patient.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Nov 26, 2014 16:06:48 GMT -4
That's what I said. Dubois + Lalonde for Cadorette OR Grégoire I would not trade Dubois for anyone. You have to build your team thru the draft. Add complimentary players via trade. Be patient. How long do you be patient while you have players like Svechnikov? Easy to say Dubois is good so don't trade him but you also need to recognize that you simply can't overlook the current core for the future. I don't see how you do not trade 1 to benefit the other trying to win and not piss off the fan base. IE trade Dubois this year or next to put a contender on the ice around Svechnikov or trade Svechnikov for younger players to build around Dubois. I suppose you can do nothing and lose Svechnikov after next year for no return. That's kind of a waste though and may send the wrong message to future big name Euros who may consider playing here. It's a tough call either way. I'm not saying you're wrong. I just don't think it's as simple as you're putting it.
|
|
|
Post by jamesnorris on Nov 26, 2014 16:56:08 GMT -4
How long do you be patient while you have players like Svechnikov? Easy to say Dubois is good so don't trade him but you also need to recognize that you simply can't overlook the current core for the future.I don't see how you do not trade 1 to benefit the other trying to win and not piss off the fan base. IE trade Dubois this year or next to put a contender on the ice around Svechnikov or trade Svechnikov for younger players to build around Dubois. I suppose you can do nothing and lose Svechnikov after next year for no return. That's kind of a waste though and may send the wrong message to future big name Euros who may consider playing here. It's a tough call either way. I'm not saying you're wrong. I just don't think it's as simple as you're putting it. The current core is the future. The only core players being lost are overagers Farrell & Darcy. All the rest are back. Why waste a top 16 year old on bringing in players to try to win from the bottom this season when that 16 year old seems like he'll be an impact 17 year old next season in his NHL draft year. It wouldn't be the first time a 17 year old played a top 6 role on a Championship team. If this time next year CB is playing like a contender, when a huge chunk of their core are in their 19 year old season, and they're looking for a piece to put them over the top then I'd understand the argument in trading a 16 year old for a significant piece. But right now I don't get it at all & it would seem like an impatient panic move.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Nov 26, 2014 17:01:01 GMT -4
Why would you thinkgregoire would be flipped to a third team. Here's a good scenario for it: Team A is hosting the Mem Cup. Has mainly future to offer in deals. Team B has a star 19yr old it wants to move. Team A wants that player but their assets don't match the needs of Team B. Team C has the assets team B wants and wants team A's futures so team C moves it's youth to team B and trades the star 19 to team A and team C gets the futures from team A. So CB moves youth and picks for Gregoire and Cadorette. Then moves Gregoire to Quebec for Donaghey and Graves at the draft. For a recent example of something similar look no further then the Gelinas, Legace, Roy deal.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Nov 26, 2014 17:06:03 GMT -4
How long do you be patient while you have players like Svechnikov? Easy to say Dubois is good so don't trade him but you also need to recognize that you simply can't overlook the current core for the future.I don't see how you do not trade 1 to benefit the other trying to win and not piss off the fan base. IE trade Dubois this year or next to put a contender on the ice around Svechnikov or trade Svechnikov for younger players to build around Dubois. I suppose you can do nothing and lose Svechnikov after next year for no return. That's kind of a waste though and may send the wrong message to future big name Euros who may consider playing here. It's a tough call either way. I'm not saying you're wrong. I just don't think it's as simple as you're putting it. The current core is the future. The only core players being lost are overagers Farrell & Darcy. All the rest are back. Why waste a top 16 year old on bringing in players to try to win from the bottom this season when that 16 year old seems like he'll be an impact 17 year old next season in his NHL draft year. It wouldn't be the first time a 17 year old played a top 6 role on a Championship team. If this time next year CB is playing like a contender, when a huge chunk of their core are in their 19 year old season, and they're looking for a piece to put them over the top then I'd understand the argument in trading a 16 year old for a significant piece. But right now I don't get it at all & it would seem like an impatient panic move. You're only moving a Dubois for players for next year as well. I agree he can play in a top 6 role on a solid team next year and in that case the discussion is then moving a different top 6 forward for other help. The current core is 18. The future for that group is next year. It's not panic to look at the situation and believe that cashing out on Dubois now may get you players who can help turn this around and return next year on a contender. I agree it is panic to move him for an expiring asset. I've yet to see that recommended or suggested by anyone though so it's kind of a moot point.
|
|
|
Post by gocapebreton on Nov 26, 2014 17:06:09 GMT -4
Maybe the great GM should have made a deal with Hache last year. You didn't need a crystal ball to see that they would not get out of the first round. If these guys warrant this in return, certainly Hache and Darcy last year could have set them up for this year. This team just can't seem to hang onto many high end draft picks. It' nice to win, but there's just no way that Dubois should be on the table. If this run, like others in the past, does not pan out they will be back to square one with a few years of boring hockey. They still need to address the defence, and picking up another 17 year old with six games experience doesn't cut it. How much are they going to pay for that?
|
|
|
Post by jamesnorris on Nov 26, 2014 17:10:02 GMT -4
You're only moving a Dubois for players for next year as well. I agree he can play in a top 6 role on a solid team next year and in that case the discussion is then moving a different top 6 forward for other help. The current core is 18. The future for that group is next year. It's not panic to look at the situation and believe that cashing out on Dubois now may get you players who can help turn this around and return next year on a contender. I agree it is panic to move him for an expiring asset. I've yet to see that recommended or suggested by anyone though so it's kind of a moot point. The suggestion of Grégoire (an expiring asset) in a trade for Dubois is in this thread...
|
|
|
Post by emerz on Nov 26, 2014 17:13:28 GMT -4
Maybe the great GM should have made a deal with Hache last year. You didn't need a crystal ball to see that they would not get out of the first round. If these guys warrant this in return, certainly Hache and Darcy last year could have set them up for this year. This team just can't seem to hang onto many high end draft picks. It' nice to win, but there's just no way that Dubois should be on the table. If this run, like others in the past, does not pan out they will be back to square one with a few years of boring hockey. They still need to address the defence, and picking up another 17 year old with six games experience doesn't cut it. How much are they going to pay for that? I don't mind not trading Hache last year at all, he was mentoring Lalonde and Bell all year, we still got a 1st, 2nd, 4th? and Gauthier for Carrier and Leduc. Doubt anyone was willing to pony up the price for Hache.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Nov 26, 2014 17:28:10 GMT -4
Maybe the great GM should have made a deal with Hache last year. You didn't need a crystal ball to see that they would not get out of the first round. If these guys warrant this in return, certainly Hache and Darcy last year could have set them up for this year. This team just can't seem to hang onto many high end draft picks. It' nice to win, but there's just no way that Dubois should be on the table. If this run, like others in the past, does not pan out they will be back to square one with a few years of boring hockey. They still need to address the defence, and picking up another 17 year old with six games experience doesn't cut it. How much are they going to pay for that? With all due respect, trading Hache just gives us more assets. We might already have too many. I know some won't be able to comprehend how you can have too many but I believe that when you have too many draft picks you inevitably end up hurting development of some due to the log jam or making trades to fill holes where you overpay for the asset because of what you have. I think keeping Hache for the stretch drive was a fine decision to make at the time, especially after cashing out on Carrier.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Nov 26, 2014 17:30:41 GMT -4
You're only moving a Dubois for players for next year as well. I agree he can play in a top 6 role on a solid team next year and in that case the discussion is then moving a different top 6 forward for other help. The current core is 18. The future for that group is next year. It's not panic to look at the situation and believe that cashing out on Dubois now may get you players who can help turn this around and return next year on a contender. I agree it is panic to move him for an expiring asset. I've yet to see that recommended or suggested by anyone though so it's kind of a moot point. The suggestion of Grégoire (an expiring asset) in a trade for Dubois is in this thread... Should have clarified as suggested by anyone who has seen Dubois play regularly this year. If I go on the Halifax board and say Ehlers is worth a 3rd round pick it doesnt mean all fans think that's a suggested return. And the trade also included a #1 goaltender that you conveniently left out of that deal, but continue to fight your battle I guess.
|
|
JPLAB
Draft Pick
Posts: 90
|
Post by JPLAB on Nov 26, 2014 17:33:06 GMT -4
How long do you be patient while you have players like Svechnikov? Easy to say Dubois is good so don't trade him but you also need to recognize that you simply can't overlook the current core for the future.I don't see how you do not trade 1 to benefit the other trying to win and not piss off the fan base. IE trade Dubois this year or next to put a contender on the ice around Svechnikov or trade Svechnikov for younger players to build around Dubois. I suppose you can do nothing and lose Svechnikov after next year for no return. That's kind of a waste though and may send the wrong message to future big name Euros who may consider playing here. It's a tough call either way. I'm not saying you're wrong. I just don't think it's as simple as you're putting it. The current core is the future. The only core players being lost are overagers Farrell & Darcy. All the rest are back. Why waste a top 16 year old on bringing in players to try to win from the bottom this season when that 16 year old seems like he'll be an impact 17 year old next season in his NHL draft year. It wouldn't be the first time a 17 year old played a top 6 role on a Championship team. If this time next year CB is playing like a contender, when a huge chunk of their core are in their 19 year old season, and they're looking for a piece to put them over the top then I'd understand the argument in trading a 16 year old for a significant piece. But right now I don't get it at all & it would seem like an impatient panic move. Yes, that is my feeling as well. At the draft the prices will be lower anyway. Time and experience will turn us into contenders.
|
|