|
Post by jimmy on Jan 10, 2017 13:12:47 GMT -4
Some good points in this thread - jumping in late, I don't think it is fair to combine two issues in the same debate - one being 16 y/o's choosing where they want to play, the other being OAs playing out the string. The 16 y/o generally is looking to either play close to home, or for a big market.The 20 y/o - different can of worms. For kids who don't envision pro being in their future the following year, it is understandable that they don't want to uproot for a few months at the tail end of their Q career ... that said, if there is something in it for them, like a trade to a contender, then they usually will. IMO, Plante not wanting to go to Baie Comeau is because they are a last place team, and not the market size. Odds are had he been traded to Rouyn Noranda, he would have gone gladly (not saying he wouldn't still have had mixed feelings leaving Rimouski) for a shot to win it all.
My big question in all of this, is why are the Drakkar, sitting in 17th place, bothering to trade anything of substance for an OA? Why not go with the guys they have, or, if they have an opening or a desperate need, pick up someone on the cheap late in the trade period or on waivers? Did they really think ANY 20 y/o was going to be excited to report to Baie Comeau for the end of their junior career on a last place team going nowhere, where they knew no one? Imagine the uproar on the Cats board had Shannon made this trade ... he would have been lynched (and rightly so).
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Jan 10, 2017 13:16:57 GMT -4
This type of thing has been going on for years now, players refusing to reoprt here or report there. In some cases, the kid genuinely has no interesting in playing in the Q while others just use the NCAA card as a ploy to get where they want.The league does provide a ompensatory pick to a team whose draft pick does not show, but it doesn't seem to have cahnged things very much. Maybe the league shoukd play hardball with these kids the same way the NCAA does with kids loosing their eligibility. If a kid is drafted and fails to report, he then becomes ineligible to play in the Q, end of story. As a league, if you do that, you just shoot yourself in the foot. Lots of kids not wanting to play in unilingual French cities would opt out...then jump to the OHL or WHL...or NCAA. The Q is trying to lure more high end kids, not less.
|
|
|
Post by chootoi on Jan 10, 2017 13:25:08 GMT -4
In the case of Mackinnon, I think you need to weigh the superstar vs the sum of the return assets if you are a small market team. If Mackinnon reports to BC, you have a superstar to fill the building for 2 years (GREAT!), but do you have the assets to build a championship team around him? You could argue that some of the chips they got helped them build those teams that went to the finals. I believe one of the picks may even have been Meloche who in turn nabbed them Joly and also Gatineau's first in 2017. Mackinnon is long out of the league but BC is still seeing rewards from it.
|
|
|
Post by bois on Jan 10, 2017 13:32:08 GMT -4
Some good points in this thread - jumping in late, I don't think it is fair to combine two issues in the same debate - one being 16 y/o's choosing where they want to play, the other being OAs playing out the string. The 16 y/o generally is looking to either play close to home, or for a big market.The 20 y/o - different can of worms. For kids who don't envision pro being in their future the following year, it is understandable that they don't want to uproot for a few months at the tail end of their Q career ... that said, if there is something in it for them, like a trade to a contender, then they usually will. IMO, Plante not wanting to go to Baie Comeau is because they are a last place team, and not the market size. Odds are had he been traded to Rouyn Noranda, he would have gone gladly (not saying he wouldn't still have had mixed feelings leaving Rimouski) for a shot to win it all. My big question in all of this, is why are the Drakkar, sitting in 17th place, bothering to trade anything of substance for an OA? Why not go with the guys they have, or, if they have an opening or a desperate need, pick up someone on the cheap late in the trade period or on waivers? Did they really think ANY 20 y/o was going to be excited to report to Baie Comeau for the end of their junior career on a last place team going nowhere, where they knew no one? Imagine the uproar on the Cats board had Shannon made this trade ... he would have been lynched (and rightly so). yep this sums up my thoughts exactly
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Jan 10, 2017 13:38:36 GMT -4
Jim Parker @winstarparker · 1h1 hour ago
No #Spitfires deal yet, but LaSalle #Vipers have signed 20-year-old defenceman Jack Van Beokel, who was with Val-d'Or #Foreurs of #QMJHL
|
|
|
Post by moosefan1994 on Jan 10, 2017 14:00:41 GMT -4
In the case of Mackinnon, I think you need to weigh the superstar vs the sum of the return assets if you are a small market team. If Mackinnon reports to BC, you have a superstar to fill the building for 2 years (GREAT!), but do you have the assets to build a championship team around him? You could argue that some of the chips they got helped them build those teams that went to the finals. I believe one of the picks may even have been Meloche who in turn nabbed them Joly and also Gatineau's first in 2017. Mackinnon is long out of the league but BC is still seeing rewards from it. The two first BC got for Mackinnon from Halifax were Alexis Vanier and Meloche so the Drakkar are still benefitting from the deal.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jan 10, 2017 14:28:19 GMT -4
This type of thing has been going on for years now, players refusing to reoprt here or report there. In some cases, the kid genuinely has no interesting in playing in the Q while others just use the NCAA card as a ploy to get where they want.The league does provide a ompensatory pick to a team whose draft pick does not show, but it doesn't seem to have cahnged things very much. Maybe the league shoukd play hardball with these kids the same way the NCAA does with kids loosing their eligibility. If a kid is drafted and fails to report, he then becomes ineligible to play in the Q, end of story. OK let's discuss that route. A) How do you handle free agents B) What determines not reporting? Is it playing USHL, Jr A, Midget? C) If you're Baie-Comeau and draft the kid #1 overall that becomes ineligible how is your fan base benefitting from a 5th overall the following season? What if that player doesn't show either. Then the next year you use another 1st on a kid that doesn't show? That's now 3 highly touted kids purposely made ineligible by a team. Who is that benefiting: The players? No. The fans? No. The team? No. The league? No. The teams that play against Baie-Comeau? Absolutely because what's left after 3 straight years of wasting picks? I used this somewhat extreme example because a team recently did pick kids in round 1 3 straight years that had no intention on ever showing up. Who benefited from that decision other then the competition of that franchise?
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jan 10, 2017 14:30:35 GMT -4
Some good points in this thread - jumping in late, I don't think it is fair to combine two issues in the same debate - one being 16 y/o's choosing where they want to play, the other being OAs playing out the string. The 16 y/o generally is looking to either play close to home, or for a big market.The 20 y/o - different can of worms. For kids who don't envision pro being in their future the following year, it is understandable that they don't want to uproot for a few months at the tail end of their Q career ... that said, if there is something in it for them, like a trade to a contender, then they usually will. IMO, Plante not wanting to go to Baie Comeau is because they are a last place team, and not the market size. Odds are had he been traded to Rouyn Noranda, he would have gone gladly (not saying he wouldn't still have had mixed feelings leaving Rimouski) for a shot to win it all. My big question in all of this, is why are the Drakkar, sitting in 17th place, bothering to trade anything of substance for an OA? Why not go with the guys they have, or, if they have an opening or a desperate need, pick up someone on the cheap late in the trade period or on waivers? Did they really think ANY 20 y/o was going to be excited to report to Baie Comeau for the end of their junior career on a last place team going nowhere, where they knew no one? Imagine the uproar on the Cats board had Shannon made this trade ... he would have been lynched (and rightly so). I didn't want to get into comparing the 20's and 16's which is why I said that the overage situations have nothing to do with big/small market teams. Hell you can argue that even Roy wasn't that because he went to the Cape Breton Quebec based equivalent basically. But I still respect his ability to have that decision and do what's best for his 16yr old self. I wouldn't have put my future in the hands of MA Dumont either no matter of the market size.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jan 10, 2017 14:31:39 GMT -4
This type of thing has been going on for years now, players refusing to reoprt here or report there. In some cases, the kid genuinely has no interesting in playing in the Q while others just use the NCAA card as a ploy to get where they want.The league does provide a ompensatory pick to a team whose draft pick does not show, but it doesn't seem to have cahnged things very much. Maybe the league shoukd play hardball with these kids the same way the NCAA does with kids loosing their eligibility. If a kid is drafted and fails to report, he then becomes ineligible to play in the Q, end of story. As a league, if you do that, you just shoot yourself in the foot. Lots of kids not wanting to play in unilingual French cities would opt out...then jump to the OHL or WHL...or NCAA. The Q is trying to lure more high end kids, not less. I look forward to seeing how he would address free agents. The people hating the system think change is so easy and obvious. It's impossible. Unless you want a 6 team league I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jan 10, 2017 14:34:32 GMT -4
In the case of Mackinnon, I think you need to weigh the superstar vs the sum of the return assets if you are a small market team. If Mackinnon reports to BC, you have a superstar to fill the building for 2 years (GREAT!), but do you have the assets to build a championship team around him? You could argue that some of the chips they got helped them build those teams that went to the finals. I believe one of the picks may even have been Meloche who in turn nabbed them Joly and also Gatineau's first in 2017. Mackinnon is long out of the league but BC is still seeing rewards from it. Exactly. Proper management of the asset meant that who wouldn't report didn't matter in the long run. So the franchises stability post-MacKinnon being drafted was in the hands of management. Not the players or the fans. Would MacKinnon as a great player have sold more seats then say 2 more rounds of playoffs? Is there more to take as a fan from 1 superstar or 1 long playoff run to the league finals? The more it's discussed the more you start to see why the league does nothing. There's no issue. The issue is the teams and how they do business. You can't control the decisions of poor decision makers. All you can do is stop letting them make decisions.
|
|
|
Post by sc74 on Jan 10, 2017 15:07:06 GMT -4
After Antoine Dufort-Plante and Danyck Calgaro, Vincent Lavoie is the third player to not report/leave the Drakkar in less than a week. Lavoie was in his 3rd season with BC.
BC released Lavoie so he will be able to play Junior A. They didn't do the same with Dufort-Plante though. They put him on their final roster so he won't be able to play elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by buckybuckbuck on Jan 10, 2017 17:23:26 GMT -4
Here's the best part, every year some stacked team leaves after 4 games in the first round. It seems to happen every year for what ever reason. The league is very balanced this year and it will probably happen again. Who's it going to be? Great contest for later. Every year a stacked team gets swept in round 1? Has a top 4 or 5 team ever been swept in round 1? Round 2 tends to be where bigger upsets happen I would think. VD last year, Wildcats at least once 2006-2007 and a couple of years ago, Chi has 2005-2006, Cape Breton has once I think 2009-2010 or twice.... maybe not always 4 but 5 and not even 6 or 7. It happens every year. It will happen again this year.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Jan 10, 2017 17:31:18 GMT -4
Every year a stacked team gets swept in round 1? Has a top 4 or 5 team ever been swept in round 1? Round 2 tends to be where bigger upsets happen I would think. VD last year, Wildcats at least once 2006-2007 and a couple of years ago, Chi has 2005-2006, Cape Breton has once I think 2009-2010 or twice.... maybe not always 4 but 5 and not even 6 or 7. It happens every year. It will happen again this year. The WC were swept by Victo a few years back after the Danault trade, but I wouldn't say they were stacked. Had a shaky D and Dubeau had a so so year in nets.
|
|
|
Post by bois on Jan 10, 2017 17:35:52 GMT -4
Happens every year he says
Posts about series ten years ago to support his claim he says
Val dor loaded up couple years back last year was not there year
|
|
|
Post by aquilae on Jan 10, 2017 17:39:59 GMT -4
The Océanic being dumped by the Olympiques in 2013 was quite the upset. Rimouski finished with 91 points - just three points shy of clinching the East Division. Hull finished with 63 points.
|
|