|
Post by chsb on Sept 1, 2008 13:19:49 GMT -4
The Titan have at center: Faille Pulis Sénécal Lambke now playing center Jean-Boulianne Malouin Côté If they want to make room for the younger ones, they might have to move one of these. I could easily see Sénécal being traded. What does this have to do with this discussion? Billy just wrote that the Cats lacked depth at center. So.....aren't we in a trading period right now?
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Sept 1, 2008 13:31:37 GMT -4
What does this have to do with this discussion? Billy just wrote that the Cats lacked depth at center. So.....aren't we in a trading period right now? Depth of established Q players...not fringe guys. I Senecal could not do the job of #1 center better than Cameron.
|
|
|
Post by catnut on Sept 1, 2008 13:34:00 GMT -4
But those 5th-7th centres are not better than ours.
|
|
|
Post by buckybuckbuck on Sept 1, 2008 14:10:20 GMT -4
Reading this discussion I'm glad I didn't go to as many of the training camp games as I did last year as I would be truely baffled right now. Every player shows the reason they are asked to camp. I will say I am very impressed with this camp and especially the drafts.
I have a bend towards hoping to see the new young guys get spots. The veterans were a last place team last year. Expecting the same old team as last year to be much better is just stupid.
I do have to feel for Flynn as he picks the Defense
Voynov,Barberio, Savard, Dimitryk, and Gormley are probably safe bets
Boyle, Downe, Jodoin, Bell, Paul and Cadet are all in a fight for two spots. Every one of these I think could and maybe should play Q. Bell and Cadet may need another year but the others are ready. I like Jodoin and Downe myself but I have been impressed with the rest at times as well. I find Taite Paul could play somewhere if not here but he's an instigator so I wouldn't trade him to our division. Maybe he should be on the team? I don't know.
|
|
|
Post by Arnold Slick on Sept 1, 2008 14:14:38 GMT -4
I have a bend towards hoping to see the new young guys get spots. The veterans were a last place team last year. Expecting the same old team as last year to be much better is just stupid. There's something called "progression" and it may very well happen with some of the returning players
|
|
1fan
Blue-Chip Prospect
Posts: 428
|
Post by 1fan on Sept 1, 2008 14:31:52 GMT -4
I have a bend towards hoping to see the new young guys get spots. The veterans were a last place team last year. Expecting the same old team as last year to be much better is just stupid. There's something called "progression" and it may very well happen with some of the returning players Sure, but if you are 18-19 years old and have progressed to now be as good as a 16-17 year old rookie...who you gonna pick? Who has better upside? I think they will also have to seek a balance of age groups with a few 16-17's sticking and the rest returning to MAA. I think what he's trying to say is status quo is a poor idea with the quality of our draft.
|
|
|
Post by buckybuckbuck on Sept 1, 2008 14:31:59 GMT -4
I have a bend towards hoping to see the new young guys get spots. The veterans were a last place team last year. Expecting the same old team as last year to be much better is just stupid. There's something called "progression" and it may very well happen with some of the returning players I guess I'll say if the vet is only as good as the rookie than I'd pick a rookie. I won't bother hashing over which vets I'm talking about as each has been mentioned already. Maybe we could agree that Vets must earn their spots.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Sept 1, 2008 14:43:18 GMT -4
There's something called "progression" and it may very well happen with some of the returning players I guess I'll say if the vet is only as good as the rookie than I'd pick a rookie. I won't bother hashing over which vets I'm talking about as each has been mentioned already. Maybe we could agree that Vets must earn their spots. Some of them will. I think most returnees have a spot guaranteed. The only vets that I can see on the bubble are Brenton and Stevens. This is for 2 reasons...1-you can't have a team full of rookies, experience is needed 2-most of the veterans have already proven to be productive Q regulars(12 of the 14 IMHO).
|
|
|
Post by buckybuckbuck on Sept 1, 2008 15:05:03 GMT -4
I guess I'll say if the vet is only as good as the rookie than I'd pick a rookie. I won't bother hashing over which vets I'm talking about as each has been mentioned already. Maybe we could agree that Vets must earn their spots. Some of them will. I think most returnees have a spot guaranteed. The only vets that I can see on the bubble are Brenton and Stevens. This is for 2 reasons...1-you can't have a team full of rookies, experience is needed 2-most of the veterans have already proven to be productive Q regulars(12 of the 14 IMHO). I agree with the two vets that you mentioned but I am impressed with the depth of maturity of players like Noseworthy, Tremblay and others. I don't think they would be disheartened as they learn and play some older teams. The long run we are much further ahead next year by keeping them as not.
|
|