|
|
Post by hockeyfanatic on Nov 18, 2015 12:47:21 GMT -4
If I were Moncton I would go after a good 19 or 18 year old goalie (would make the biggest immediate impact , cost them the least IMHO), if they don't want to trade away to many picks or players. Yes the D could use some help (Sweeney out) but the new guy Kosack is a great skater , played D well, just looked a little lost trying to figure out Moncton's systems (will get better with some time with the team).
The D will get better with some playing time , they are pretty deep upfront unless you want to make some big trades ( I don't think they will).
If they decide to go for it they will need a top 2/3 D man , and a top faceoff /Shutdown guy with some speed and size, and a better goalie. I would target a Goalie if it was my call.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Nov 18, 2015 13:04:10 GMT -4
If I were Moncton I would go after a good 19 or 18 year old goalie (would make the biggest immediate impact , cost them the least IMHO), if they don't want to trade away to many picks or players. Yes the D could use some help (Sweeney out) but the new guy Kosack is a great skater , played D well, just looked a little lost trying to figure out Moncton's systems (will get better with some time with the team). The D will get better with some playing time , they are pretty deep upfront unless you want to make some big trades ( I don't think they will). If they decide to go for it they will need a top 2/3 D man , and a top faceoff /Shutdown guy with some speed and size, and a better goalie. I would target a Goalie if it was my call. The issue I have with that is that this is Sweeney's last year and Garland is 90% gone also, and the WC are not going all out to win. If you only tinker, you won't suck next year, but won't be a contender either. Taking Barbashev and Garland in back to back years, plus a lot of the core of the defense(Sweeney Johnston Klebansiyj Malatesta Tassi) moving on. I prefer a legit shot at a league title over being "half pregnant". |
|
|
|
Post by joehockey on Nov 18, 2015 13:30:15 GMT -4
If I were Moncton I would go after a good 19 or 18 year old goalie (would make the biggest immediate impact , cost them the least IMHO), if they don't want to trade away to many picks or players. Yes the D could use some help (Sweeney out) but the new guy Kosack is a great skater , played D well, just looked a little lost trying to figure out Moncton's systems (will get better with some time with the team). The D will get better with some playing time , they are pretty deep upfront unless you want to make some big trades ( I don't think they will). If they decide to go for it they will need a top 2/3 D man , and a top faceoff /Shutdown guy with some speed and size, and a better goalie. I would target a Goalie if it was my call. The issue I have with that is that this is Sweeney's last year and Garland is 90% gone also, and the WC are not going all out to win. If you only tinker, you won't suck next year, but won't be a contender either. Taking Barbashev and Garland in back to back years, plus a lot of the core of the defense(Sweeney Johnston Klebansiyj Malatesta Tassi) moving on. I prefer a legit shot at a league title over being "half pregnant". I think we will likely see something like last year where they tinker a bit and trade a few guys out who may not be part of the plan (Leger). I don't think Moncton has the assets to go for it fully this year and I doubt Irving would want to have a really bad team next year which would be the result of going for it. I doubt they go into the full out buying mode or selling off mode this year. |
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Nov 18, 2015 14:09:45 GMT -4
The issue I have with that is that this is Sweeney's last year and Garland is 90% gone also, and the WC are not going all out to win. If you only tinker, you won't suck next year, but won't be a contender either. Taking Barbashev and Garland in back to back years, plus a lot of the core of the defense(Sweeney Johnston Klebansiyj Malatesta Tassi) moving on. I prefer a legit shot at a league title over being "half pregnant". I think we will likely see something like last year where they tinker a bit and trade a few guys out who may not be part of the plan (Leger). I don't think Moncton has the assets to go for it fully this year and I doubt Irving would want to have a really bad team next year which would be the result of going for it. I doubt they go into the full out buying mode or selling off mode this year. They have two 1st round picks and 4-5 pretty attractive prospects they could move. It's not ideal as the cupboards are not deep, but it's doable. In an ideal world you make moves the last 2-3 years to give yourself more tradeable assets. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Nov 18, 2015 15:25:17 GMT -4
What year is the new rink slated to open? My guess would be September 2018?
I think that may play somewhat in the Cats' plans going forward ... Maybe buy a bit more than you would think this year, accept that the last couple of years at the Coliseum will be spent rebuilding / reloading, with the goal of icing a contending team when you hit the ice at the downtown centre.
|
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Nov 18, 2015 15:52:19 GMT -4
I think we will likely see something like last year where they tinker a bit and trade a few guys out who may not be part of the plan (Leger). I don't think Moncton has the assets to go for it fully this year and I doubt Irving would want to have a really bad team next year which would be the result of going for it. I doubt they go into the full out buying mode or selling off mode this year. They have two 1st round picks and 4-5 pretty attractive prospects they could move. It's not ideal as the cupboards are not deep, but it's doable. In an ideal world you make moves the last 2-3 years to give yourself more tradeable assets. I don't understand you. You want them to do a proper rebuild ... but you are ready to deal our 2016 firsts and prospects that we have in the system. I get your comment about "half pregnant" ... but that doesn't bother me. For me, it is less about winning a championship and more about having an entertaining product every year. I buy into 34 home games, plus many road games online, and I want a team that is entertaining. I'm not interested in sitting through 2 years of bottom feeding and getting spanked every night. I've done that before and it wasn't worth the money. I am very happy to hear (about a year ago) that the team approach is to be competitive every year, and just tinker as needed. If you run this as a business that is what you want. There will be years where you aren't as good as you hoped ... and there will be years where you are better than expected ... but you'll probably always be in the upper half of the league, and sometimes in a position to really contend. When you do get that close, you can spend a little to put you over the top. We aren't that close. We aren't as good as we were last year ... and that team last year was not a contender. Sure we could spend the assets to get significantly better this year, but you can do that and still lose and have nothing to show for the assets you spent. I'd rather tinker and see where it takes us ... and use those firsts next year and every year. I do want to win more championships, but I don't need one every 3 years. As long as we win once or twice per decade that is fine by me. But even if we don't win, as long as your team has a shot, and falls short, that can still be very rewarding. Would I sell Garland this year ... depends on the price. If they blow you away with a deal then obviously you have to give it serious consideration. But he will probably break the all time Wildcat record for points ... could return as a 20 YO (probably 25% chance) ... and will in all liklihood have his number retired here ... and sometimes that is worth holding onto. Many teams are realizing that if you want to keep the business viable then you have to change the approach to the "cycle of Jr hockey". You can't take two seasons off and let teams beat up on you ... you lose your fans and then have to win them back. If you give them a good product every year then you hold the fans. The smaller market teams face a fine line between success and failure financially, and can't afford 2 years in the basement while they rebuild to respectability. I'm all for banning the practice of trading 1st Rd draft picks ... like the WHL has done. That way each team is almost guaranteed to come back from the draft with at least one future star ... which lends itself to league parity. I'm also very much for banning the practice of trading players that have not yet finished highschool ... which should take them to the end of their 17 YO season before they can be traded. If the parents want their son traded for whatever reason, they can apply to the league and the league can drop the requirement for that player. I'm all for making each team a better business ... and giving the fans a better product ... every year. You can't account for bad scouting and poor decisions by a GM ... and you can't account for bad coaching. But if you take away the ability for a GM to make stupid decisions that hamstring his franchise for 2 or 3 years, then teams like Bathurst are probably more successful financially. I don't mind being "half pregnant". You have to balance the hockey side with the business side or one could bury the other. |
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Nov 18, 2015 15:59:17 GMT -4
What year is the new rink slated to open? My guess would be September 2018? I think that may play somewhat in the Cats' plans going forward ... Maybe buy a bit more than you would think this year, accept that the last couple of years at the Coliseum will be spent rebuilding / reloading, with the goal of icing a contending team when you hit the ice at the downtown centre. No, I think you have to hit the ice at the new facility with some momentum. You can't be coming off a rebuilding year and expect the fans to jump on board for a new rink ... where the ticket prices will probably be higher and we'll pay to park ... and walk a distance to do that. We are a good team this year in 15/16 ... entertaining. Next year we'll probably take a small step backward in 16/17 ... and then 17/18 should be better again ... with 18/19 being the year we move downtown and probably a stronger team. To do that we have to draft with our 1st every year until then to make sure we have some solid talent. |
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Nov 18, 2015 16:43:40 GMT -4
They have two 1st round picks and 4-5 pretty attractive prospects they could move. It's not ideal as the cupboards are not deep, but it's doable. In an ideal world you make moves the last 2-3 years to give yourself more tradeable assets. I don't understand you. You want them to do a proper rebuild ... but you are ready to deal our 2016 firsts and prospects that we have in the system. I get your comment about "half pregnant" ... but that doesn't bother me. For me, it is less about winning a championship and more about having an entertaining product every year. I buy into 34 home games, plus many road games online, and I want a team that is entertaining. I'm not interested in sitting through 2 years of bottom feeding and getting spanked every night. I've done that before and it wasn't worth the money. I am very happy to hear (about a year ago) that the team approach is to be competitive every year, and just tinker as needed. If you run this as a business that is what you want. There will be years where you aren't as good as you hoped ... and there will be years where you are better than expected ... but you'll probably always be in the upper half of the league, and sometimes in a position to really contend. When you do get that close, you can spend a little to put you over the top. We aren't that close. We aren't as good as we were last year ... and that team last year was not a contender. Sure we could spend the assets to get significantly better this year, but you can do that and still lose and have nothing to show for the assets you spent. I'd rather tinker and see where it takes us ... and use those firsts next year and every year. I do want to win more championships, but I don't need one every 3 years. As long as we win once or twice per decade that is fine by me. But even if we don't win, as long as your team has a shot, and falls short, that can still be very rewarding. Would I sell Garland this year ... depends on the price. If they blow you away with a deal then obviously you have to give it serious consideration. But he will probably break the all time Wildcat record for points ... could return as a 20 YO (probably 25% chance) ... and will in all liklihood have his number retired here ... and sometimes that is worth holding onto. Many teams are realizing that if you want to keep the business viable then you have to change the approach to the "cycle of Jr hockey". You can't take two seasons off and let teams beat up on you ... you lose your fans and then have to win them back. If you give them a good product every year then you hold the fans. The smaller market teams face a fine line between success and failure financially, and can't afford 2 years in the basement while they rebuild to respectability. I'm all for banning the practice of trading 1st Rd draft picks ... like the WHL has done. That way each team is almost guaranteed to come back from the draft with at least one future star ... which lends itself to league parity. I'm also very much for banning the practice of trading players that have not yet finished highschool ... which should take them to the end of their 17 YO season before they can be traded. If the parents want their son traded for whatever reason, they can apply to the league and the league can drop the requirement for that player. I'm all for making each team a better business ... and giving the fans a better product ... every year. You can't account for bad scouting and poor decisions by a GM ... and you can't account for bad coaching. But if you take away the ability for a GM to make stupid decisions that hamstring his franchise for 2 or 3 years, then teams like Bathurst are probably more successful financially. I don't mind being "half pregnant". You have to balance the hockey side with the business side or one could bury the other. That approach is ok short term, but we saw in Halifax before they got MacKinnon and Drouin(by sucking for a few years), their attendance was dropping and dropping plus interest was wavering. Once you get to 2020 and you haven't won in 10 years or even reached the finals, fans slowly stop showing up, especially if you can't find the next "Garland" because you draft relatively late every year. I have no issue avoiding the bad rebuild where a team is terrible for 2 years and struggles to get back on top(see Bathurst and PEI last few years). BUT before you can get to that point, you need well stocked cupboards, the Cats have been running on half their top 5-6 round picks and with no 1st rounder for 4-5 years. It's nice to get a Garland in round 6 and the Klimas as FA's and get a great trade in Sweeney, but without the strong base of 10-12 homegown early round picks to build around or with(by trade)it's really hard to truly contend. The last few years, the Cats are surviving on late round steals, FA's and strong Euros. It's not a completely sustainable formula. I think with a big market with deep pockets, you can have the strong cycles without the terrible rebuilds if managed properly and draft picks are not thrown away... |
|
|
|
Post by Penguins23® on Nov 18, 2015 16:49:49 GMT -4
I'm all for banning the practice of trading 1st Rd draft picks ... like the WHL has done. That way each team is almost guaranteed to come back from the draft with at least one future star ... which lends itself to league parity. I'm also very much for banning the practice of trading players that have not yet finished highschool ... which should take them to the end of their 17 YO season before they can be traded. If the parents want their son traded for whatever reason, they can apply to the league and the league can drop the requirement for that player. I would be all for this but it's the OHL that prevents first round picks from being traded not the WHL. The result is that you see a lot more picks traded. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised to see 2025 2nd round picks traded at Christmas. |
|
|
|
Post by Arnold Slick on Nov 18, 2015 17:33:16 GMT -4
I don't understand you. You want them to do a proper rebuild ... but you are ready to deal our 2016 firsts and prospects that we have in the system. I get your comment about "half pregnant" ... but that doesn't bother me. For me, it is less about winning a championship and more about having an entertaining product every year. I buy into 34 home games, plus many road games online, and I want a team that is entertaining. I'm not interested in sitting through 2 years of bottom feeding and getting spanked every night. I've done that before and it wasn't worth the money. I am very happy to hear (about a year ago) that the team approach is to be competitive every year, and just tinker as needed. If you run this as a business that is what you want. There will be years where you aren't as good as you hoped ... and there will be years where you are better than expected ... but you'll probably always be in the upper half of the league, and sometimes in a position to really contend. When you do get that close, you can spend a little to put you over the top. We aren't that close. We aren't as good as we were last year ... and that team last year was not a contender. Sure we could spend the assets to get significantly better this year, but you can do that and still lose and have nothing to show for the assets you spent. I'd rather tinker and see where it takes us ... and use those firsts next year and every year. I do want to win more championships, but I don't need one every 3 years. As long as we win once or twice per decade that is fine by me. But even if we don't win, as long as your team has a shot, and falls short, that can still be very rewarding. Would I sell Garland this year ... depends on the price. If they blow you away with a deal then obviously you have to give it serious consideration. But he will probably break the all time Wildcat record for points ... could return as a 20 YO (probably 25% chance) ... and will in all liklihood have his number retired here ... and sometimes that is worth holding onto. Many teams are realizing that if you want to keep the business viable then you have to change the approach to the "cycle of Jr hockey". You can't take two seasons off and let teams beat up on you ... you lose your fans and then have to win them back. If you give them a good product every year then you hold the fans. The smaller market teams face a fine line between success and failure financially, and can't afford 2 years in the basement while they rebuild to respectability. I'm all for banning the practice of trading 1st Rd draft picks ... like the WHL has done. That way each team is almost guaranteed to come back from the draft with at least one future star ... which lends itself to league parity. I'm also very much for banning the practice of trading players that have not yet finished highschool ... which should take them to the end of their 17 YO season before they can be traded. If the parents want their son traded for whatever reason, they can apply to the league and the league can drop the requirement for that player. I'm all for making each team a better business ... and giving the fans a better product ... every year. You can't account for bad scouting and poor decisions by a GM ... and you can't account for bad coaching. But if you take away the ability for a GM to make stupid decisions that hamstring his franchise for 2 or 3 years, then teams like Bathurst are probably more successful financially. I don't mind being "half pregnant". You have to balance the hockey side with the business side or one could bury the other. That approach is ok short term, but we saw in Halifax before they got MacKinnon and Drouin(by sucking for a few years), their attendance was dropping and dropping plus interest was wavering. Once you get to 2020 and you haven't won in 10 years or even reached the finals, fans slowly stop showing up, especially if you can't find the next "Garland" because you draft relatively late every year. I have no issue avoiding the bad rebuild where a team is terrible for 2 years and struggles to get back on top(see Bathurst and PEI last few years). BUT before you can get to that point, you need well stocked cupboards, the Cats have been running on half their top 5-6 round picks and with no 1st rounder for 4-5 years. It's nice to get a Garland in round 6 and the Klimas as FA's and get a great trade in Sweeney, but without the strong base of 10-12 homegown early round picks to build around or with(by trade)it's really hard to truly contend. The last few years, the Cats are surviving on late round steals, FA's and strong Euros. It's not a completely sustainable formula. I think with a big market with deep pockets, you can have the strong cycles without the terrible rebuilds if managed properly and draft picks are not thrown away... Attendance was dropping in Halifax because the team was absolutely horrible for three straight years, which was a result of poor decisions (trading for Marchand when their D wasn't very good) in their big "go for it" year. Not really comparable to anything going on in Moncton right now. |
|
|
|
Post by downthemiddle on Nov 18, 2015 20:48:16 GMT -4
would have to look back but I think attendance started dropping a bit even before then so i think that's what captain is referring to, like the 06-07 & 07-08. Just going by memory tho so that could be wrong
|
|
|
|
Post by npsh on Nov 19, 2015 0:17:30 GMT -4
" ... where the ticket prices will probably be higher and we'll pay to park ... and walk a distance to do that."
This comment kinda struck me because I do believe there will be a net effect on game attendance in the next couple of years with the Team migration to this new facility especially if Cats are or will be basement dwellers for those initial years
|
|
|
|
Post by WellDone on Nov 21, 2015 15:41:02 GMT -4
With all the talk about upgrading the goaltending keep in mind that Dupre currently ranks 7th league wide in save percentage. It's not a high save percentage league when you look at everyone's numbers.
|
|
|
|
Post by yesisaiditfirst on Nov 21, 2015 17:47:01 GMT -4
The ideal time for the Wildcats to have all th pieces together for a serious run is the year after the new downtown cage opens. The first year that place will be such a novelty that it will pack itself with fans...but the following year is the one that they want to really establish as a dominant team in the Q. Good thing is 2019/20 your 19 year olds are all 15 right now..so its a good time to design how to do it in the two upcoming drafts.
I cant wait for that new rink...
|
|
|
|
Post by WildcatMapleLeafs on Nov 22, 2015 12:27:33 GMT -4
Brendan Burke is now with the London Knights.
We really missed out here. This is a player that would have had a huge impact instantly.
|
|
