|
Post by SteveUL on Jan 7, 2016 10:26:29 GMT -4
It is an Irving business ... and every Irving business has to make money. Breaking even doesn't make it worth the risk of being in business. So if you get into the 3rd round again and get 6 to 10 home playoff gates then that adds to the bottom line (in theory ... some of our early round playoff gates can be pretty weak). The whole "being competitive every year" approach that Shannon has said is their model is a business approach ... and not necessarily what is best from a winning and losing standpoint. I find everybody tries to judge our moves based solely on whether or not they make us a contender, but that isn't the approach that this team is taking when making the decisions. Whether this approach works out for them in the long run ... or not ... remains to be seen. Having said that ... I'm not a fan of the moves they have made (so far). Bouchard looks like a younger Fortin ... Donaghey has not been very impressive yet ... I have no idea where Pickard/Richard fit in ... so Karabacek better be a lot better than his 15/16 numbers have shown so far. He had good numbers in Gat and then weaker numbers in BC where he played with a limited talent roster ... so I think he can be better here ... we'll see. That business plan caters to bringing in the casual fan more often but may not make the hard core fan happy...the fans that want a Presidents Cup and potentially Memorial cup. For me it is less about the strength of the team and more about the schedule right now that will bring me back. When they changed the schedule this season to have so many Saturday and Sunday afternoon games, I contacted Ryan Jenner and voiced my concern. I told him I'd give it a one year try, but have already missed about half of the afternoon games (especially when they are on TV). I won't be back next year as a STH if they keep the same type of schedule heavy with afternoon games. I am entertained by this season's team so I find I am getting good value for my money with the games I do go to. I've been through the ups and downs over the 20+ years of this franchise ... been through painful rebuilds and been through some very exciting teams ... and I have learned that I am far less interested in spending money on a team that loses more than it wins. I am not interested in spending three seasons trying to get back above 0.500 (winning more than you lose). I'll still support them and watch games ... but paying for a frustrating product is not entertaining and not good value for my money. Look at Saint John. They did it "right" several years and had three trips to the Prez Cup Final, Two Prez Cup Championships, and a Memorial Cup Championship to show for it. But since then they had three teams in a row that lost more games than they won (missed the playoffs one of those years), and this year are back to respectability, but still a year away from being a contender. Look at Halifax. They also did it "right" a few years back and had three strong seasons, including a Prez Cup championship and a Memorial Cup championship. But since that run of three seasons, they have lost more games than they won last year and this year, and will probably be in that boat again next year before seeing a resurgence from young talent coming of age. Two very good franchises ... doing things the "right" way ... and rewarded for it with the big prize. But once you have the prize, you spend 3 years in mediocrity before you become relevant again in the Q. Three years is a long time to wait. And then you can look other places and see other teams doing things "right" ... selling off veterans and stockpiling picks and young talent ... and they continue to wallow away in mediocrity year to year. Ask CB and Char fans how they like doing things "right". Many teams have done it "right" and got no further than we did last year. It isn't an exact science ... you can do it "right" and still not get the prize ... and spend three years licking your wounds before you can try again. I'd rather be a team that is part of the conversation every year ... and have the option of going "all in" when the time is right, or just riding out an entertaining season and see how far it gets you. I pay for 34+ nights/afternoons of hockey and I want to be entertained in every one of those games. There will always be nights where your team fails to show up, but for the most part you go home happy most nights. Going home frustrated most nights is not worth my money. Having said all that ... I am not happy with Shannon dumping off our 1st and 2nd rd picks every year. I still would like to see the league ban the trading of 1sts.
|
|
|
Post by Penguins23® on Jan 7, 2016 10:34:04 GMT -4
I've already commented on the schedule before the season began so I won't comment on that too much, I'm grateful the Cats gave me my money back before the season. You could have done the same.
As for losing and winning, to me that's not everything as a fan. I've seen boring wins just like I've seen entertaining losses. I don't mind rebuilding seasons as long as you have young players who have potential and who give it their all. If a team is working hard and shows signs of promise, I don't mind losing. That's a lot less frustrating than watching a talented team mail it in like we saw half the time at the end of Danny Flynn's tenure.
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Jan 7, 2016 10:51:18 GMT -4
I've already commented on the schedule before the season began so I won't comment on that too much, I'm grateful the Cats gave me my money back before the season. You could have done the same. As for losing and winning, to me that's not everything as a fan. I've seen boring wins just like I've seen entertaining losses. I don't mind rebuilding seasons as long as you have young players who have potential and who give it their all. If a team is working hard and shows signs of promise, I don't mind losing. That's a lot less frustrating than watching a talented team mail it in like we saw half the time at the end of Danny Flynn's tenure. I stuck the season out because I wanted to give the changes a chance. I have done that now ... and will tell Mr. Jenner that it isn't working for me so I won't be back next year (as a STH) if the schedule stays the same. I had a conversation with Mr. Jenner before the season started and I was ready to get my money back ... but chose to give it a chance. I too was frustrated by that last Flynn season ... and that was brought about by the year before trying to do it "right" ... selling Gormley for the big payoff ... but it didn't work out. Too many new faces that wanted to be somewhere else. That scenario you describe above about having young players showing promise ... it is a nice consolation ... but three years of that gets tiring.
|
|
|
Post by CrazyJoeDavola on Jan 7, 2016 11:21:00 GMT -4
I've already commented on the schedule before the season began so I won't comment on that too much, I'm grateful the Cats gave me my money back before the season. You could have done the same. As for losing and winning, to me that's not everything as a fan. I've seen boring wins just like I've seen entertaining losses. I don't mind rebuilding seasons as long as you have young players who have potential and who give it their all. If a team is working hard and shows signs of promise, I don't mind losing. That's a lot less frustrating than watching a talented team mail it in like we saw half the time at the end of Danny Flynn's tenure. I stuck the season out because I wanted to give the changes a chance. I have done that now ... and will tell Mr. Jenner that it isn't working for me so I won't be back next year (as a STH) if the schedule stays the same. I had a conversation with Mr. Jenner before the season started and I was ready to get my money back ... but chose to give it a chance. I too was frustrated by that last Flynn season ... and that was brought about by the year before trying to do it "right" ... selling Gormley for the big payoff ... but it didn't work out. Too many new faces that wanted to be somewhere else. That scenario you describe above about having young players showing promise ... it is a nice consolation ... but three years of that gets tiring. I think there is a balance too though. It doesn't have to be 3 awful years. Players can be moved in and out somewhat gradually over a couple years. Last year we partially sold to speed up a rebuild and though we finished 12th, the team was able to provide tons of entertainment and a memorable playoff run. This year we haven't had much to work with, but were competitive and close in many, if not most, losses - and had the added "excitement" of seeing us move some guys for great assets. We may lose, but seeing the young guys like Chainey and Somppi/Durandeau get key icetime the rest of the way will be fun too. I think there are many fans who enjoy watching what MIGHT be, just as much as watching a more competitive, top 8 team - especially if you know that top 8 team is unlikely to win the league title. Seeing the cupboards stocked with picks heading to the draft is excitement OFF the ice for the fan base. Having a "pretty good" team and a mediocre inventory of quality picks/youth for too many years does get boring. I think most fans watch the team waiting for that moment many favour them to win the league, and all the excitement that comes with the possible big trades to be elite. Doing it doesn't necessarily mean you will get 3 unrewarding years as a fan. As it was pointed out, sometimes you are less entertained by a good team than one at the bottom of the standings playing a lot of rookies - provided you see the light at the end of the tunnel in a rebuilding plan.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jan 7, 2016 11:32:35 GMT -4
Ask CB and Char fans how they like doing things "right". Many teams have done it "right" and got no further than we did last year. CB didn't do it right. Doing it right is using the picks to draft cornerstones of the rebuild. We drafted kids who refused to report. We flipped 1 of the 3 for a high return. Essentially pissed that return away by not drafting any other high caliber players. End result was trading for an entire defence and a #1 goaltender who some don't even consider a great #1. That doesn't even count what Joly and Carozza cost in terms of picks. When you consider Svechnikov was basically a free NHL 1st rounder as a 2nd round Euro pick and Bishop and Lazarev were both here due to being high picks and we had the huge windfall for Roy turn into Dubois, Leveille, plus more...CB was set to be a power house if any other proper drafting and developing was done. Instead, failed trades and a lack of depth on the blueline and up front has us at 20-22 after 42 games. How a team can trade so much and still have huge holes is mind blowing in a lot of ways. The asset management has been awful.
|
|
|
Post by moosefan1994 on Jan 7, 2016 12:51:03 GMT -4
That business plan caters to bringing in the casual fan more often but may not make the hard core fan happy...the fans that want a Presidents Cup and potentially Memorial cup. For me it is less about the strength of the team and more about the schedule right now that will bring me back. When they changed the schedule this season to have so many Saturday and Sunday afternoon games, I contacted Ryan Jenner and voiced my concern. I told him I'd give it a one year try, but have already missed about half of the afternoon games (especially when they are on TV). I won't be back next year as a STH if they keep the same type of schedule heavy with afternoon games. I am entertained by this season's team so I find I am getting good value for my money with the games I do go to. I've been through the ups and downs over the 20+ years of this franchise ... been through painful rebuilds and been through some very exciting teams ... and I have learned that I am far less interested in spending money on a team that loses more than it wins. I am not interested in spending three seasons trying to get back above 0.500 (winning more than you lose). I'll still support them and watch games ... but paying for a frustrating product is not entertaining and not good value for my money. Look at Saint John. They did it "right" several years and had three trips to the Prez Cup Final, Two Prez Cup Championships, and a Memorial Cup Championship to show for it. But since then they had three teams in a row that lost more games than they won (missed the playoffs one of those years), and this year are back to respectability, but still a year away from being a contender. Look at Halifax. They also did it "right" a few years back and had three strong seasons, including a Prez Cup championship and a Memorial Cup championship. But since that run of three seasons, they have lost more games than they won last year and this year, and will probably be in that boat again next year before seeing a resurgence from young talent coming of age. Two very good franchises ... doing things the "right" way ... and rewarded for it with the big prize. But once you have the prize, you spend 3 years in mediocrity before you become relevant again in the Q. Three years is a long time to wait. And then you can look other places and see other teams doing things "right" ... selling off veterans and stockpiling picks and young talent ... and they continue to wallow away in mediocrity year to year. Ask CB and Char fans how they like doing things "right". Many teams have done it "right" and got no further than we did last year. It isn't an exact science ... you can do it "right" and still not get the prize ... and spend three years licking your wounds before you can try again. I'd rather be a team that is part of the conversation every year ... and have the option of going "all in" when the time is right, or just riding out an entertaining season and see how far it gets you. I pay for 34+ nights/afternoons of hockey and I want to be entertained in every one of those games. There will always be nights where your team fails to show up, but for the most part you go home happy most nights. Going home frustrated most nights is not worth my money. Having said all that ... I am not happy with Shannon dumping off our 1st and 2nd rd picks every year. I still would like to see the league ban the trading of 1sts. The Mooseheads 2014-2015 regular season wasn't great but as a fan I did get to watch Ehlers play and the team almost made it to the 3rd round, would have if they had won either Game 3 or 4 down here against Moncton. Your team can do it right- but another team can also do what you are doing and do it better ( drafting), have better luck as far as players reporting, injuries at crucial times, getting or not getting sent back etc. I like what the Mooseheads have done - I know it will suck the next season or so but the thought of us drafting stars, perhaps superstars, will keep me coming back as I want to be entertained.
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Jan 7, 2016 13:38:44 GMT -4
I think there is a balance too though. It doesn't have to be 3 awful years. Players can be moved in and out somewhat gradually over a couple years. Last year we partially sold to speed up a rebuild and though we finished 12th, the team was able to provide tons of entertainment and a memorable playoff run. This year we haven't had much to work with, but were competitive and close in many, if not most, losses - and had the added "excitement" of seeing us move some guys for great assets. We may lose, but seeing the young guys like Chainey and Somppi/Durandeau get key icetime the rest of the way will be fun too. I think there are many fans who enjoy watching what MIGHT be, just as much as watching a more competitive, top 8 team - especially if you know that top 8 team is unlikely to win the league title. Seeing the cupboards stocked with picks heading to the draft is excitement OFF the ice for the fan base. Having a "pretty good" team and a mediocre inventory of quality picks/youth for too many years does get boring. I think most fans watch the team waiting for that moment many favour them to win the league, and all the excitement that comes with the possible big trades to be elite. Doing it doesn't necessarily mean you will get 3 unrewarding years as a fan. As it was pointed out, sometimes you are less entertained by a good team than one at the bottom of the standings playing a lot of rookies - provided you see the light at the end of the tunnel in a rebuilding plan. Personally, I agree with you wholeheartedly ... and I expect many if not most fans on here would also. The problem from a business perspective is that the die hard fan probably makes up 10-20% of the customer base ... The remainder do not follow the team and league nearly as closely ... a significant portion don't know whether their local team is made up of young or old players ... don't know what they have for draft picks (I suspect a significant portion likely wouldn't even know there is such thing as a draft) ... They have varying degrees of awareness of whether or not their team is "good" ... and if they perceive the team as "good", they are more likely to show up at the rink to check out a game ... if the team plays well and is entertaining, then they are more likely to return.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Jan 7, 2016 13:44:08 GMT -4
I think there is a balance too though. It doesn't have to be 3 awful years. Players can be moved in and out somewhat gradually over a couple years. Last year we partially sold to speed up a rebuild and though we finished 12th, the team was able to provide tons of entertainment and a memorable playoff run. This year we haven't had much to work with, but were competitive and close in many, if not most, losses - and had the added "excitement" of seeing us move some guys for great assets. We may lose, but seeing the young guys like Chainey and Somppi/Durandeau get key icetime the rest of the way will be fun too. I think there are many fans who enjoy watching what MIGHT be, just as much as watching a more competitive, top 8 team - especially if you know that top 8 team is unlikely to win the league title. Seeing the cupboards stocked with picks heading to the draft is excitement OFF the ice for the fan base. Having a "pretty good" team and a mediocre inventory of quality picks/youth for too many years does get boring. I think most fans watch the team waiting for that moment many favour them to win the league, and all the excitement that comes with the possible big trades to be elite. Doing it doesn't necessarily mean you will get 3 unrewarding years as a fan. As it was pointed out, sometimes you are less entertained by a good team than one at the bottom of the standings playing a lot of rookies - provided you see the light at the end of the tunnel in a rebuilding plan. Personally, I agree with you wholeheartedly ... and I expect many if not most fans on here would also. The problem from a business perspective is that the die hard fan probably makes up 10-20% of the customer base ... The remainder do not follow the team and league nearly as closely ... a significant portion don't know whether their local team is made up of young or old players ... don't know what they have for draft picks (I suspect a significant portion likely wouldn't even know there is such thing as a draft) ... They have varying degrees of awareness of whether or not their team is "good" ... and if they perceive the team as "good", they are more likely to show up at the rink to check out a game ... if the team plays well and is entertaining, then they are more likely to return. I think there are more than 10-20% that follow the team very close and know who the picks are and young players. It's still probably the minority...about 30-40% but more than we know.
|
|
|
Post by gameday on Jan 7, 2016 14:05:13 GMT -4
So 4 in the stands every night and 3 on the bench watching Garland take their minutes?
|
|
|
Post by eaglefan62 on Jan 7, 2016 14:28:17 GMT -4
I just had to jump in here and comment about Garland's minutes in a hockey game and who is running the bench on this team. I Attended a game in Moncton earlier this year and was quite surprised to see Garland pick his linemates for a power play. Then I thought, no, maybe I'm seeing things. So I specifically watched for that their last time in Sydney, Garland played about 5 of the last 6 minutes of the game. His line was on and came off, he stayed on for a total of about two and a half minutes. the nest stoppage in play, they changed lines and he wnet to the bench. the shovel crew came on for the 45 second break, Garland jumps over the boards,taps one of the 5 on the shoulder, and the kid goes off.Seems to me he is running this time. he'll get a big surprise at the pro level.
|
|
|
Post by gameday on Jan 7, 2016 14:36:31 GMT -4
I just had to jump in here and comment about Garland's minutes in a hockey game and who is running the bench on this team. I Attended a game in Moncton earlier this year and was quite surprised to see Garland pick his linemates for a power play. Then I thought, no, maybe I'm seeing things. So I specifically watched for that their last time in Sydney, Garland played about 5 of the last 6 minutes of the game. His line was on and came off, he stayed on for a total of about two and a half minutes. the nest stoppage in play, they changed lines and he wnet to the bench. the shovel crew came on for the 45 second break, Garland jumps over the boards,taps one of the 5 on the shoulder, and the kid goes off.Seems to me he is running this time. he'll get a big surprise at the pro level. They all take long shifts to make up for it. Almost all the goals scored against came at the end of minute and thirty long shifts or more.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Jan 7, 2016 14:43:26 GMT -4
I just had to jump in here and comment about Garland's minutes in a hockey game and who is running the bench on this team. I Attended a game in Moncton earlier this year and was quite surprised to see Garland pick his linemates for a power play. Then I thought, no, maybe I'm seeing things. So I specifically watched for that their last time in Sydney, Garland played about 5 of the last 6 minutes of the game. His line was on and came off, he stayed on for a total of about two and a half minutes. the nest stoppage in play, they changed lines and he wnet to the bench. the shovel crew came on for the 45 second break, Garland jumps over the boards,taps one of the 5 on the shoulder, and the kid goes off.Seems to me he is running this time. he'll get a big surprise at the pro level. I'm pretty sure Grland knows things will be quite different in the pros.
|
|
|
Post by lirette on Jan 7, 2016 15:06:20 GMT -4
I am not going to bother getting in arguments with the people who cant see past their hate of a 19 year old kid to argue with any sort of logic but I will put a couple statements/questions out there for these same people to think about.
1. Where is this team in the standings today without Garland? Lots had the Cats to finish in the bottom half of the division this season 2. If the Cats win a championship it will very likely be due to Garland. If they dont it will be because they did not make the correct moves to surround him with a supporting cast to take on the other top teams(ie: a goaltender who can steal a win). Hockey is not a sport where you can win based on one player but Garland at times almost changes that argument.
It actually baffles me after watching this kid for 3 seasons people can continue to make the same arguments about his game yet he continues to deliver results. Please continue to come here with your entertaining tall tales of Garland practically putting a suit on and coaching the team himself, they are hilarious, I've watched him at home for over 100 home games sitting near the Cats bench, im well aware of his personality.
Seems like people would be happier with a team full of third line Danny Flynn grinders instead of watching , for my money , the most entertaining player Ive watched in my 15 years following the team.
|
|
|
Post by Blackcat on Jan 7, 2016 15:16:07 GMT -4
I am not going to bother getting in arguments with the people who cant see past their hate of a 19 year old kid to argue with any sort of logic but I will put a couple statements/questions out there for these same people to think about. 1. Where is this team in the standings today without Garland? Lots had the Cats to finish in the bottom half of the division this season 2. If the Cats win a championship it will very likely be due to Garland. If they dont it will be because they did not make the correct moves to surround him with a supporting cast to take on the other top teams(ie: a goaltender who can steal a win). Hockey is not a sport where you can win based on one player but Garland at times almost changes that argument. It actually baffles me after watching this kid for 3 seasons people can continue to make the same arguments about his game yet he continues to deliver results. Please continue to come here with your entertaining tall tales of Garland practically putting a suit on and coaching the team himself, they are hilarious, I've watched him at home for over 100 home games sitting near the Cats bench, im well aware of his personality. Seems like people would be happier with a team full of third line Danny Flynn grinders instead of watching , for my money , the most entertaining player Ive watched in my 15 years following the team. Good post, Garland has been worth the price of my season tickets the last three years.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Jan 7, 2016 15:26:07 GMT -4
I am not going to bother getting in arguments with the people who cant see past their hate of a 19 year old kid to argue with any sort of logic but I will put a couple statements/questions out there for these same people to think about. 1. Where is this team in the standings today without Garland? Lots had the Cats to finish in the bottom half of the division this season 2. If the Cats win a championship it will very likely be due to Garland. If they dont it will be because they did not make the correct moves to surround him with a supporting cast to take on the other top teams(ie: a goaltender who can steal a win). Hockey is not a sport where you can win based on one player but Garland at times almost changes that argument. It actually baffles me after watching this kid for 3 seasons people can continue to make the same arguments about his game yet he continues to deliver results. Please continue to come here with your entertaining tall tales of Garland practically putting a suit on and coaching the team himself, they are hilarious, I've watched him at home for over 100 home games sitting near the Cats bench, im well aware of his personality. Seems like people would be happier with a team full of third line Danny Flynn grinders instead of watching , for my money , the most entertaining player Ive watched in my 15 years following the team. I have no issue with Garland(and I don't think that was aimed at me). However, I think it will be hard to win with so much centered around one guy, that's why I was hoping for Meier or Timshov for another line. That way you don't have to play Garland on two lines(which won't work at playoff time). Garland has his flaws but he's been a HUGE part of where the cats are, so the positives far outweigh the negatives.
|
|