|
Post by mooseinfo on Jun 10, 2015 8:37:58 GMT -4
Is it a 55 man protected list? There are 54 players including Falkenham. I guess they are leaving a spot open for the import draft. Not positive on all the special list details but injured 20 yr old players ,for example, did not have to be dealt win until off injured list. Its like having a import in the NHL(or 1st round pick) and taking another as they are on special list. Mackinnon and Drouin were listed until this one came out. When invites are added to this team page they dont count until season starts and/or given/accept place with team. Edit: Protected list was 50 have not seen change to this.
|
|
|
Post by Gman on Jun 10, 2015 9:22:11 GMT -4
With the lack of depth up front, I wouldn't be against using a 3rd or a 4th to upgrade the third 20 year old. Ugh why piss away a 3rd or 4th round pick on a team which isn't going to do anything next year when they have guys in Leblanc and/or Bent who can fulfill the role and don't cost us anything? Just seems like a Patenaude move. Because A) 3rd or 4th isn't all that valuable. If you can get a decent OA you should (unless your goal for next year is to finish as low in the standings as possible) And B) because I'd rather not give ice time to Bent and Leblanc. They are mediocre players who should not be in the Q at 20. If they are, they are simply taking ice time away from players who have a chance to be better than them by season's end.
|
|
|
Post by nsvees on Jun 10, 2015 9:47:33 GMT -4
Ugh why piss away a 3rd or 4th round pick on a team which isn't going to do anything next year when they have guys in Leblanc and/or Bent who can fulfill the role and don't cost us anything? Just seems like a Patenaude move. Because A) 3rd or 4th isn't all that valuable. If you can get a decent OA you should (unless your goal for next year is to finish as low in the standings as possible) And B) because I'd rather not give ice time to Bent and Leblanc. They are mediocre players who should not be in the Q at 20. If they are, they are simply taking ice time away from players who have a chance to be better than them by season's end. I'm with this. I'd rather see the young players playing instead of 3rd/4th line 20 year olds who'd be better off playing in Junior A. There's no reason to have any 20 year olds after the trade deadline. Let the kids learn and play; it'll be better for their development.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jun 10, 2015 10:50:55 GMT -4
With the lack of depth up front, I wouldn't be against using a 3rd or a 4th to upgrade the third 20 year old. Ugh why piss away a 3rd or 4th round pick on a team which isn't going to do anything next year when they have guys in Leblanc and/or Bent who can fulfill the role and don't cost us anything? Just seems like a Patenaude move. That makes zero sense. 3rd and 4th's and tossed around like nothing at this level. If you can bring in a veteran to help show your youth the ropes for a few months that's a valuable investment in their future. You act as if a team like Halifax absolutely needs that draft pick and would have no way to acquire one on the draft floor if there was a player there they really wanted. You don't miss out on anything if you acquire a cheap 20 unless you severely mismanage all of your other assets.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jun 10, 2015 10:56:12 GMT -4
Because A) 3rd or 4th isn't all that valuable. If you can get a decent OA you should (unless your goal for next year is to finish as low in the standings as possible) And B) because I'd rather not give ice time to Bent and Leblanc. They are mediocre players who should not be in the Q at 20. If they are, they are simply taking ice time away from players who have a chance to be better than them by season's end. I'm with this. I'd rather see the young players playing instead of 3rd/4th line 20 year olds who'd be better off playing in Junior A. There's no reason to have any 20 year olds after the trade deadline. Let the kids learn and play; it'll be better for their development. No reason to have any 20's? I could not disagree more. It's not an EA Sports video game where the most assets gets you the best team necessarily. You could pick up a really good 20 in this league for a 4th or 5th rounder. Why would you NOT do that just to draft the 80th-90th best 15yr old when you've already made 3 or 4 picks in the top 60? When you really break it down, it's actually stupid to not try and have some veteran presence considering how easy it is to acquire mid round picks. Kids over playing at 16/17 can actually hurt their development. We've seen it with a few kids over the years. Look dynamite as rookies then plateau when there's no more ice time to give them as they get older. Easing them in behind some veterans is never a bad plan.
|
|
|
Post by Gman on Jun 10, 2015 11:12:28 GMT -4
Veteran presence is important. Look how the Edmonton Oilers are making out with all of their high draft picks but no one to teach and support them?
|
|
|
Post by moosefan1994 on Jun 10, 2015 13:48:46 GMT -4
My point is that the Mooseheads are clearly in rebuild mode or phase... Ehlers will not be back next year and there is a possibility Meier may not be back.
In the previous rebuilding phase ( from Jan 2009 after Patenaude was fired until the 2011 Q draft) Cam accumulated picks, a lot of them and didn't piss them away on short term additions to make the team more competitive. Take the 2010-2011 season for instance as this is the season right after WE, YES WE, the Mooseheads drafted Ciampini, Ashley, Ryan, Frk, Turbide, Desmarais and had other young players like Lewis, Hannay, Gelinas, Desjardins already on the team. 2 of our overagers, I can't remember the 3rd one right now, were Bety and Amyot and they were certainly not ideal OAs at the time but Cam went with them and avoided taking the short term shortcuts.
Now what did Cam do with all these picks which were accumulated in the 2011 draft? He was able to trade for
1) Move up for Drouin 2) Trade a 5th for Critchlow 3) Trade our Euro and a 4th, the pick the Mooseheads got for Garrett Clarke, for Grenier. 4) Trade players the Mooseheads had drafted because they had didnt just piss away picks years earlier for Mackinnon.
A year later at the 2012 draft Cam traded a 3rd and a 7th for Fournier which AT THAT TIME made perfect sense because they were on the verge of being a championship team.
|
|
|
Post by Y Ddraig Goch on Jun 10, 2015 13:52:52 GMT -4
My point is that the Mooseheads are clearly in rebuild mode or phase... Ehlers will not be back next year and there is a possibility Meier may not be back. In the previous rebuilding phase ( from Jan 2009 after Patenaude was fired until the 2011 Q draft) Cam accumulated picks, a lot of them and didn't piss them away on short term additions to make the team more competitive. Take the 2010-2011 season for instance as this is the season right after WE, YES WE, the Mooseheads drafted Ciampini, Ashley, Ryan, Frk, Turbide, Desmarais and had other young players like Lewis, Hannay, Gelinas, Desjardins already on the team. 2 of our overagers, I can't remember the 3rd one right now, were Bety and Amyot and they were certainly not ideal OAs at the time but Cam went with them and avoided taking the short term shortcuts. Now what did Cam do with all these picks which were accumulated in the 2011 draft? He was able to trade for 1) Move up for Drouin 2) Trade a 5th for Critchlow 3) Trade our Euro and a 4th, the pick the Mooseheads got for Garrett Clarke, for Grenier. 4) Trade players the Mooseheads had drafted because they had didnt just piss away picks years earlier for Mackinnon. A year later at the 2012 draft Cam traded a 3rd and a 7th for Fournier which AT THAT TIME made perfect sense because they were on the verge of being a championship team. So you're saying don't trade picks for players then use trading for Critchlow as an example?
|
|
|
Post by Citris on Jun 10, 2015 13:54:24 GMT -4
Veteran presence is important. Look how the Edmonton Oilers are making out with all of their high draft picks but no one to teach and support them? That's a fair point. What we do with our team and OA's this year is an interesting question, I wonder if they decide to sell at christmas or stand pat. We have 2 quality OAs already, Danny Moynihan is arguably the best center in the division, and I would say Brassard is the second best goalie behind McDonald... they could fetch a quality pick if teams are looking for an upgrade after a few days of training camp/christmas.
|
|
|
Post by moosefan1994 on Jun 10, 2015 14:03:25 GMT -4
My point is that the Mooseheads are clearly in rebuild mode or phase... Ehlers will not be back next year and there is a possibility Meier may not be back. In the previous rebuilding phase ( from Jan 2009 after Patenaude was fired until the 2011 Q draft) Cam accumulated picks, a lot of them and didn't piss them away on short term additions to make the team more competitive. Take the 2010-2011 season for instance as this is the season right after WE, YES WE, the Mooseheads drafted Ciampini, Ashley, Ryan, Frk, Turbide, Desmarais and had other young players like Lewis, Hannay, Gelinas, Desjardins already on the team. 2 of our overagers, I can't remember the 3rd one right now, were Bety and Amyot and they were certainly not ideal OAs at the time but Cam went with them and avoided taking the short term shortcuts. Now what did Cam do with all these picks which were accumulated in the 2011 draft? He was able to trade for 1) Move up for Drouin 2) Trade a 5th for Critchlow 3) Trade our Euro and a 4th, the pick the Mooseheads got for Garrett Clarke, for Grenier. 4) Trade players the Mooseheads had drafted because they had didnt just piss away picks years earlier for Mackinnon. A year later at the 2012 draft Cam traded a 3rd and a 7th for Fournier which AT THAT TIME made perfect sense because they were on the verge of being a championship team. So you're saying don't trade picks for players then use trading for Critchlow as an example? Go back and read my whole post to get the context of what I typed before you take a shot at what I said. But to be afir I'll put it in context for you- I am comparing where the Mooseheads are right now to the summers of 2009-2010 albeit a bit better situation. Because Cam stockpiled picks for a couple years he was able to use a pick on Critchlow in 2011 when it made more sense to do so than it would have in 2009 or 2010. Does that help?
|
|
|
Post by MikeC on Jun 10, 2015 14:06:51 GMT -4
I'm with this. I'd rather see the young players playing instead of 3rd/4th line 20 year olds who'd be better off playing in Junior A. There's no reason to have any 20 year olds after the trade deadline. Let the kids learn and play; it'll be better for their development. No reason to have any 20's? I could not disagree more. It's not an EA Sports video game where the most assets gets you the best team necessarily. You could pick up a really good 20 in this league for a 4th or 5th rounder. Why would you NOT do that just to draft the 80th-90th best 15yr old when you've already made 3 or 4 picks in the top 60? When you really break it down, it's actually stupid to not try and have some veteran presence considering how easy it is to acquire mid round picks. Kids over playing at 16/17 can actually hurt their development. We've seen it with a few kids over the years. Look dynamite as rookies then plateau when there's no more ice time to give them as they get older. Easing them in behind some veterans is never a bad plan. Not only the over playing part, but with the severe lack of depth, we're close to putting rookies in spots where they are doomed to fail. Not including Bent/Leblanc/Vuic, there are only 8 returning forwards (unless I'm missing someone). Meier - D. Moynihan - Fortier Watt - Crossley - Shewfelt C. Moynihan - King So there's room for 5-6 forwards. I think it's safe to say we'll have a new Import, and Durandeau and Putintsev are likely to make the team. So still room for 2-3. I don't think any of late round 16 year olds are likely to make the team. In previous years, they wouldn't even have been drafted. Maybe Dachysshyn if he reports. Blain-Dupuis? Vanier? Parker? Banville? That is a lot of rookies to work in. Another decent 20 year old would take some of the heat from them
|
|
|
Post by Y Ddraig Goch on Jun 10, 2015 14:15:49 GMT -4
So you're saying don't trade picks for players then use trading for Critchlow as an example? Go back and read my whole post to get the context of what I typed before you take a shot at what I said. But to be afir I'll put it in context for you- I am comparing where the Mooseheads are right now to the summers of 2009-2010 albeit a bit better situation. Because Cam stockpiled picks for a couple years he was able to use a pick on Critchlow in 2011 when it made more sense to do so than it would have in 2009 or 2010. Does that help? But being a young team it makes more sense to bring in a 20 for relatively cheap to ease those players in than go without. Burning a 4th/5th on an OA is a no brainer for someone who could play top 6 rather than stick with leblanc/Bent who really aren't that type of player or force someone to play there before they are ready. It makes more sense than it doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by moosefan1994 on Jun 10, 2015 14:20:14 GMT -4
No reason to have any 20's? I could not disagree more. It's not an EA Sports video game where the most assets gets you the best team necessarily. You could pick up a really good 20 in this league for a 4th or 5th rounder. Why would you NOT do that just to draft the 80th-90th best 15yr old when you've already made 3 or 4 picks in the top 60? When you really break it down, it's actually stupid to not try and have some veteran presence considering how easy it is to acquire mid round picks. Kids over playing at 16/17 can actually hurt their development. We've seen it with a few kids over the years. Look dynamite as rookies then plateau when there's no more ice time to give them as they get older. Easing them in behind some veterans is never a bad plan. Not only the over playing part, but with the severe lack of depth, we're close to putting rookies in spots where they are doomed to fail. Not including Bent/Leblanc/Vuic, there are only 8 returning forwards (unless I'm missing someone). Meier - D. Moynihan - Fortier Watt - Crossley - Shewfelt C. Moynihan - King So there's room for 5-6 forwards. I think it's safe to say we'll have a new Import, and Durandeau and Putintsev are likely to make the team. So still room for 2-3. I don't think any of late round 16 year olds are likely to make the team. In previous years, they wouldn't even have been drafted. Maybe Dachysshyn if he reports. Blain-Dupuis? Vanier? Parker? Banville? That is a lot of rookies to work in. Another decent 20 year old would take some of the heat from them I can see your point but instead of trading a pick for a marginal improvement on Leblanc or Bent especially when the Mooseheads already have them and don't have to give up a pick to keep them, why not bring in a FA or two, preferably 18 years old? The Mooseheads have done pretty well at this since Ducharme came here.
|
|
|
Post by mooseinfo on Jun 10, 2015 14:32:58 GMT -4
I guess i dont see the same poor 20s others do for the 3rd one. Both Leblanc and Bent bring a different element which, also being a year older, certainly can be useful to the Moose at this stage of building.
Not saying replacement could not be a good thing but better 20s are also going to get/want extra ice time.
Thats certainly something the D does not need reduced and training camp I feel is a better time to figure out what type of 20 works, especially a trade, as some return to teams. Rather they not upgrade this year.
|
|
|
Post by statsman18 on Jun 10, 2015 15:46:13 GMT -4
If you look at a team like Moncton they have a few 95. By the end of the training camp someone like maybe Bronson Beaton might be available. Hell he might even be a steel and Moncton might just want to dump him for a 6th or 7th rounder. Why not give him a go?
|
|