|
Post by Smiley on Oct 31, 2009 15:54:59 GMT -4
I wonder where will be the Mooseheads rebuild next season and also the Titan rebuild... In the case of the Titan, if they moved the right players this summer and at the draft, they really could have a decent team next season. However, for the Moose, I believe you won't see the light at the end of the tunnel before 11-12. Thanks Captain Obvious! The Moose are going to finish last overall this year. So of course next year (2010-2011) they won't contend. The Moose are in year 1 of a true rebuild, so of course they are 2 years away.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Oct 31, 2009 16:00:55 GMT -4
The only player who would bring you anything near a top end future player is Knotek and as a Euro his market will be limited. The problem with your "complete rebuild" is you don't seem to realize the reason you only have 1 win is the same reason you can't really rebuild much more: You have no veterans. At least nothing that a contender will pay you top dollar for. I think you'll be very disappointed if you're expecting Cam to pull of miracles during the trade period. You hit the nail on the head with the no veteran part. Yea we have Grant, Knotek and Randall etc, but we don't have any veterans, or a group of vets, to hang our hat on this season to win us games. The top line has done a ton, and deserve a lot of credit, but they can only do so much. In the interview last night on Eastlink, Chris Donnolly put it a good way, saying this year we have a "perfect storm" haha. Funny, but true. Teams with a strong overage group and a veteran goalie, can mask and cover-up the fact you're a young, inexperienced, bad hockey team. There have been teams in the last couple years that have been worse then we are, on paper, yet they had solid 20's and in most cases a veteran goalie. Those 4 players can make a huge difference to a teams record at the end of a season. If you think back to the year we had Brine, Carnagie and MacDonald were our 20's, we had a respectable year, played .500 hockey with a young team. Well take one or 2 of those guys away from that team, and you have what we have this year. We just don't have the horses to take over from the young guys and win some games and keep things somewhat respectable. Same goes for a goalie. And I'm not saying this as a slight to Corbeil or Grondin. They're both playing hard and trying to help the team. But the fact remains, both are young, inexperienced and still trying to find their confidence at this level. To have 2 young goalies on a young team, with a young defense is lethal, and I think we're all witnessing that right now. I'm not sure how we got all of these things to line-up this way, but it's what we have. And unfortunately we don't have a ton of assests to move and make upgrades in the next couple months. Our improvements will have to wait till June and the draft. Heck Rimouski made a run to the Memorial Cup last year, and yet still have more pieces to move then we do!! As far as moves go, bringing up Kody Blois?? Come on!! For the trade period I'd like to see a forward or 2, preferably an 18 yr old with some experience in the league. We need some help now. We don't need a panic move, with stop-gap 19's, but we've got to find some stability. We have enough picks in the cupboard to take care of the 16 and 17 yr old spots on the team. We need some parts that can step in NOW. I was looking through some teams, and came across Victo. What's up with Bradley MacDonald?? Injured, not dressing?? He was a high pick with Gatineau, and after he was traded to Victo put up 7 pts in 11 games. Victo is off to a good start, and are a candidate to make some upgrades. What's the chances we bring in a guy like MacDonald?? Also I like the Brandon MacLean idea. 18 yr old, Former 1st rd pick, hasn't really produced, needs a change of scenary, from this area and wont cost a lot. Low risk, high reward type move. He's not gonna turn into a 30 goal guy, but he could be a guy who could help a 1-17 hockey team. Yeah, a Grant for example would be great for a contender but I honestly don't think Halifax can afford to lose more vets without compromising the development of the kids. If I were a Moose fan i'd be worried about a kid like Andrews not having much to look up to in his own room or on the ice. I doubt it'll hurt the kids individual talent but will he be able to naturally lead when expected without having much to learn from? As for how it happened, it all comes back to Patenaude's style of constantly moving picks combined with his inability to find the hidden gems he was so famous for early on to make up for it. It finally got to the point that he couldn't keep it up without sacrificing the teams well being and that was the point he fell in love with Brad Marchand.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2009 16:01:30 GMT -4
I wonder where will be the Mooseheads rebuild next season and also the Titan rebuild... In the case of the Titan, if they moved the right players this summer and at the draft, they really could have a decent team next season. However, for the Moose, I believe you won't see the light at the end of the tunnel before 11-12. Ummm in the case of the Titan ....... ahhh this is the Moose board and thanks for the 2011-2012 prediction, well no shit sherlock! thanks for the news flash! Fortunately Mooseheads fans will actually see the benefits of going through a true rebuild while you , if the Titan are still in Bathurst at the time, will still be watching a revolving door of kids since your GM has no clue wtf he is doing.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Oct 31, 2009 16:03:27 GMT -4
I wonder where will be the Mooseheads rebuild next season and also the Titan rebuild... In the case of the Titan, if they moved the right players this summer and at the draft, they really could have a decent team next season. However, for the Moose, I believe you won't see the light at the end of the tunnel before 11-12. Ummm in the case of the Titan ....... ahhh this is the Moose board and thanks for the 2011-2012 prediction, well no shit sherlock! thanks for the news flash! Fortunately Mooseheads fans will actually see the benefits of going through a true rebuild while you , if the Titan are still in Bathurst at the time, will still be watching a revolving door of kids since your GM has no clue wtf he is doing. You don't find rebuilding for 4 years to be a good plan? How about chsb's plan of having Pulis as a 1st line center next year? I can't see any flaws in that plan!
|
|
|
Post by howitzer on Oct 31, 2009 16:46:09 GMT -4
You hit the nail on the head with the no veteran part. Yea we have Grant, Knotek and Randall etc, but we don't have any veterans, or a group of vets, to hang our hat on this season to win us games. The top line has done a ton, and deserve a lot of credit, but they can only do so much. In the interview last night on Eastlink, Chris Donnolly put it a good way, saying this year we have a "perfect storm" haha. Funny, but true. Teams with a strong overage group and a veteran goalie, can mask and cover-up the fact you're a young, inexperienced, bad hockey team. There have been teams in the last couple years that have been worse then we are, on paper, yet they had solid 20's and in most cases a veteran goalie. Those 4 players can make a huge difference to a teams record at the end of a season. If you think back to the year we had Brine, Carnagie and MacDonald were our 20's, we had a respectable year, played .500 hockey with a young team. Well take one or 2 of those guys away from that team, and you have what we have this year. We just don't have the horses to take over from the young guys and win some games and keep things somewhat respectable. Same goes for a goalie. And I'm not saying this as a slight to Corbeil or Grondin. They're both playing hard and trying to help the team. But the fact remains, both are young, inexperienced and still trying to find their confidence at this level. To have 2 young goalies on a young team, with a young defense is lethal, and I think we're all witnessing that right now. I'm not sure how we got all of these things to line-up this way, but it's what we have. And unfortunately we don't have a ton of assests to move and make upgrades in the next couple months. Our improvements will have to wait till June and the draft. Heck Rimouski made a run to the Memorial Cup last year, and yet still have more pieces to move then we do!! As far as moves go, bringing up Kody Blois?? Come on!! For the trade period I'd like to see a forward or 2, preferably an 18 yr old with some experience in the league. We need some help now. We don't need a panic move, with stop-gap 19's, but we've got to find some stability. We have enough picks in the cupboard to take care of the 16 and 17 yr old spots on the team. We need some parts that can step in NOW. I was looking through some teams, and came across Victo. What's up with Bradley MacDonald?? Injured, not dressing?? He was a high pick with Gatineau, and after he was traded to Victo put up 7 pts in 11 games. Victo is off to a good start, and are a candidate to make some upgrades. What's the chances we bring in a guy like MacDonald?? Also I like the Brandon MacLean idea. 18 yr old, Former 1st rd pick, hasn't really produced, needs a change of scenary, from this area and wont cost a lot. Low risk, high reward type move. He's not gonna turn into a 30 goal guy, but he could be a guy who could help a 1-17 hockey team. Yeah, a Grant for example would be great for a contender but I honestly don't think Halifax can afford to lose more vets without compromising the development of the kids. If I were a Moose fan i'd be worried about a kid like Andrews not having much to look up to in his own room or on the ice. I doubt it'll hurt the kids individual talent but will he be able to naturally lead when expected without having much to learn from? As for how it happened, it all comes back to Patenaude's style of constantly moving picks combined with his inability to find the hidden gems he was so famous for early on to make up for it. It finally got to the point that he couldn't keep it up without sacrificing the teams well being and that was the point he fell in love with Brad Marchand. Yea Grant could fetch a decent return, and it could be tempting for Russell, but we need him. If we were to move him, we'd be having the same problem next year as we are right now with regards to veteran leadership. As for the losing, I'm sure it's frustrating and hard on the players, but as a fan, I'm not overly concerned with it and it's effect on the players long term. Rimouski has had some god aweful seasons in the past, but the players improve and eventually turned it around. By then the losing seasons are history and they're a winning club. Look at Drummondville 2 years ago. I think they had 10 wins that season, but the players lived through it and were fine. Yes they made moves for Masse and Riendeau, they brought in Kulikov, but guys like Vachon, Dumont, Lefebvre have all developed fine. It's not an ideal situation by any means, but I think long term the young guys will be fine.
|
|
|
Post by Murph on Oct 31, 2009 21:52:13 GMT -4
You hit the nail on the head with the no veteran part. Yea we have Grant, Knotek and Randall etc, but we don't have any veterans, or a group of vets, to hang our hat on this season to win us games. The top line has done a ton, and deserve a lot of credit, but they can only do so much. In the interview last night on Eastlink, Chris Donnolly put it a good way, saying this year we have a "perfect storm" haha. Funny, but true. Teams with a strong overage group and a veteran goalie, can mask and cover-up the fact you're a young, inexperienced, bad hockey team. There have been teams in the last couple years that have been worse then we are, on paper, yet they had solid 20's and in most cases a veteran goalie. Those 4 players can make a huge difference to a teams record at the end of a season. If you think back to the year we had Brine, Carnagie and MacDonald were our 20's, we had a respectable year, played .500 hockey with a young team. Well take one or 2 of those guys away from that team, and you have what we have this year. We just don't have the horses to take over from the young guys and win some games and keep things somewhat respectable. Same goes for a goalie. And I'm not saying this as a slight to Corbeil or Grondin. They're both playing hard and trying to help the team. But the fact remains, both are young, inexperienced and still trying to find their confidence at this level. To have 2 young goalies on a young team, with a young defense is lethal, and I think we're all witnessing that right now. I'm not sure how we got all of these things to line-up this way, but it's what we have. And unfortunately we don't have a ton of assests to move and make upgrades in the next couple months. Our improvements will have to wait till June and the draft. Heck Rimouski made a run to the Memorial Cup last year, and yet still have more pieces to move then we do!! As far as moves go, bringing up Kody Blois?? Come on!! For the trade period I'd like to see a forward or 2, preferably an 18 yr old with some experience in the league. We need some help now. We don't need a panic move, with stop-gap 19's, but we've got to find some stability. We have enough picks in the cupboard to take care of the 16 and 17 yr old spots on the team. We need some parts that can step in NOW. I was looking through some teams, and came across Victo. What's up with Bradley MacDonald?? Injured, not dressing?? He was a high pick with Gatineau, and after he was traded to Victo put up 7 pts in 11 games. Victo is off to a good start, and are a candidate to make some upgrades. What's the chances we bring in a guy like MacDonald?? Also I like the Brandon MacLean idea. 18 yr old, Former 1st rd pick, hasn't really produced, needs a change of scenary, from this area and wont cost a lot. Low risk, high reward type move. He's not gonna turn into a 30 goal guy, but he could be a guy who could help a 1-17 hockey team. Yeah, a Grant for example would be great for a contender but I honestly don't think Halifax can afford to lose more vets without compromising the development of the kids. If I were a Moose fan i'd be worried about a kid like Andrews not having much to look up to in his own room or on the ice. I doubt it'll hurt the kids individual talent but will he be able to naturally lead when expected without having much to learn from? As for how it happened, it all comes back to Patenaude's style of constantly moving picks combined with his inability to find the hidden gems he was so famous for early on to make up for it. It finally got to the point that he couldn't keep it up without sacrificing the teams well being and that was the point he fell in love with Brad Marchand. I won't argue Patenaude's pention for trading picks for proven players, that was his thing. He felt it better to trade for a proven player, than risk an uproven pick. However, Marchand wasn't Patenaude's deal. He wasn't his boy. He wanted to go a different direction, and it ultimately cost him his job. The guy doesn't give you 7-8 years of quality GM work, and then all the sudden forget how to do the job the last 18 months. There were other factors at play, and IMO, he's not ultimately responsible for the mess that Russell inherited.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2009 22:10:59 GMT -4
Yeah, a Grant for example would be great for a contender but I honestly don't think Halifax can afford to lose more vets without compromising the development of the kids. If I were a Moose fan i'd be worried about a kid like Andrews not having much to look up to in his own room or on the ice. I doubt it'll hurt the kids individual talent but will he be able to naturally lead when expected without having much to learn from? As for how it happened, it all comes back to Patenaude's style of constantly moving picks combined with his inability to find the hidden gems he was so famous for early on to make up for it. It finally got to the point that he couldn't keep it up without sacrificing the teams well being and that was the point he fell in love with Brad Marchand. I won't argue Patenaude's pention for trading picks for proven players, that was his thing. He felt it better to trade for a proven player, than risk an uproven pick. However, Marchand wasn't Patenaude's deal. He wasn't his boy. He wanted to go a different direction, and it ultimately cost him his job. The guy doesn't give you 7-8 years of quality GM work, and then all the sudden forget how to do the job the last 18 months. There were other factors at play, and IMO, he's not ultimately responsible for the mess that Russell inherited. Okay if you are going to say that Marcel Patenaude is NOT ultimately responsible for the mess that Russell has inherited could you please elaborate on why you feel this way because from where I sit and I assume quite a few other fans may feel the same way it appears that Marcel is very responsible for the mess that the Mooseheads are in right now.
|
|
|
Post by lalalaprise on Oct 31, 2009 23:04:37 GMT -4
I won't argue Patenaude's pention for trading picks for proven players, that was his thing. He felt it better to trade for a proven player, than risk an uproven pick. However, Marchand wasn't Patenaude's deal. He wasn't his boy. He wanted to go a different direction, and it ultimately cost him his job. The guy doesn't give you 7-8 years of quality GM work, and then all the sudden forget how to do the job the last 18 months. There were other factors at play, and IMO, he's not ultimately responsible for the mess that Russell inherited. Okay if you are going to say that Marcel Patenaude is NOT ultimately responsible for the mess that Russell has inherited could you please elaborate on why you feel this way because from where I sit and I assume quite a few other fans may feel the same way it appears that Marcel is very responsible for the mess that the Mooseheads are in right now. There was a deal in place for Halifax to get Claude Giroux for less than Marchand....but Smith vetoed it and wanted Marchand instead. Like Murph said...you cant be a good GM for 8 years and than pick Marchand over Giroux, let alone when you factor in the cost difference. But, it was time for a change, so im not saying Marcel shouldnt have been fired, but the Marchand deal wasnt his call.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Oct 31, 2009 23:05:06 GMT -4
I won't argue Patenaude's pention for trading picks for proven players, that was his thing. He felt it better to trade for a proven player, than risk an uproven pick. However, Marchand wasn't Patenaude's deal. He wasn't his boy. He wanted to go a different direction, and it ultimately cost him his job. The guy doesn't give you 7-8 years of quality GM work, and then all the sudden forget how to do the job the last 18 months. There were other factors at play, and IMO, he's not ultimately responsible for the mess that Russell inherited. Okay if you are going to say that Marcel Patenaude is NOT ultimately responsible for the mess that Russell has inherited could you please elaborate on why you feel this way because from where I sit and I assume quite a few other fans may feel the same way it appears that Marcel is very responsible for the mess that the Mooseheads are in right now. Patenaude could get away with pissing away picks when Halifax was one of the very few that could pull off the NCAA bluff, now it's pretty common so they need the extra picks because they have had some busts(Greer MacAskill etc).
|
|
|
Post by freddy on Oct 31, 2009 23:10:01 GMT -4
I do agree that Marcel for seven to eight years was very successful but the trade for Brad Marchant was his down fall and he had to be responsible for the team Cam Russell took over and this season as well BUT I have to give credit to Cam's drafting in June with out some of the moves we would be even worst if that is possible..I hope he will be able to pull another rabbit from his bag of tricks in next trade period and not hurt our future either..We need two scorers to make up another line..I think we can get some scoring by trading off a few of our 19 year olds and both 20 's too and even trade off Thomas if needed and maybe even Mac Donald too..We need two lines of scorers that can score 15-20 goals each for the season..
|
|
|
Post by thecaptain on Oct 31, 2009 23:59:08 GMT -4
There is an 18 yr old in the MJAHL named Nick Huard who is having a strong season. Just named to team canada east in World Jr A Challenge. Might be Lewiston property but he is a good player...played 51 games in the league last yr for a couple bad teams. As for Bahm, take your pick of 20 yr olds in the MJAHL. I bet some of them would produce more offence than him which is what the team is really lacking. (Mickey MacDonald in Bridgewater or Dana Fraser in Truro would be good candidates to come up. Both sound hockey players defensively who can produce some offense. MacDonald almost made Dalhousie last yr I am told and Fraser attended an OHL camp a few yrs back and did well.) Andrew Langan another 18 yr old, late cut from Sea Dogs this yr who are pretty deep up front. And while Blois may or may not be a Q goalie....there has been nothing to prove to me that Corbeil is either. I would call up Blois or Collier and give them a start. To me, as long as your not tinkering with your young guys, why not bring in some different older guys to audition? Stoddard, Bahm, Brunet, Metcalfe, are not going to be here next yr so imagine if someone was called up and played better than them....wouldnt that be terrible! We might win another game! Same with the goalies. If one was called up and they actually stood on their head imagine that! I like rebuilding but as a paying customer I also like to see a win more than once every 10-15 games.
|
|
|
Post by prague55 on Nov 1, 2009 0:31:50 GMT -4
Excellent post captain . The Mooseheads brass , although heading in the right direction , certainly have not had all the right answers , to date , otherwise their record would not stand at 1-17-1 . There is nothing wrong with tinkering a bit with your lineup , especially with players that would probably cost you nothing or very little . Cape Breton gave Horyl a chance from Truro, and he has been a good player for them . Auditioning a couple players, for 5- 10 games , like Fraser for forward or Collier in goal , would be a no lose situation . It would show fans at least the team was willing to try a couple of things, without sacrificing the development of the team. If one or both did not work out, you still have your existing players, and are no worse off . However , if one or both play well or better than expected, you then would have improved the depth of your hockey club without giving away anything . And certainly in these 2 players cases, being locals, certainly could not hurt with the attendance aspect as well .
|
|
|
Post by lirette on Nov 1, 2009 0:32:58 GMT -4
There is an 18 yr old in the MJAHL named Nick Huard who is having a strong season. Just named to team canada east in World Jr A Challenge. Might be Lewiston property but he is a good player...played 51 games in the league last yr for a couple bad teams. As for Bahm, take your pick of 20 yr olds in the MJAHL. I bet some of them would produce more offence than him which is what the team is really lacking. (Mickey MacDonald in Bridgewater or Dana Fraser in Truro would be good candidates to come up. Both sound hockey players defensively who can produce some offense. MacDonald almost made Dalhousie last yr I am told and Fraser attended an OHL camp a few yrs back and did well.) Andrew Langan another 18 yr old, late cut from Sea Dogs this yr who are pretty deep up front. And while Blois may or may not be a Q goalie....there has been nothing to prove to me that Corbeil is either. I would call up Blois or Collier and give them a start. To me, as long as your not tinkering with your young guys, why not bring in some different older guys to audition? Stoddard, Bahm, Brunet, Metcalfe, are not going to be here next yr so imagine if someone was called up and played better than them....wouldnt that be terrible! We might win another game! Same with the goalies. If one was called up and they actually stood on their head imagine that! I like rebuilding but as a paying customer I also like to see a win more than once every 10-15 games. You have to realize the difference between JR A and the Q. It's been posted many times on many different boards but brett gallant was top 5 in scoring in JR A last year. That should be enough of a hint that offensive players in junior A are not necessarily offensive in the Q.
|
|
|
Post by freddy on Nov 1, 2009 3:58:35 GMT -4
Honest if we can get two scorers and only really give up one major role player in Thomas we will win some games and not hurt our youth development but will better the efforts of players and team to fans for sure your right the fans would love more than one win in 15 games.. Also if we can trade off our 20's for draft choices or for 18 year olds we will be in better shape to add three 20 year olds to finish season that can score goals even 15-20 each for rest of year..Also would have two good scoring lines ...Maybe even three if Cam can work some Mircles...Go Moose Go!!!
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Nov 1, 2009 6:59:07 GMT -4
Honest if we can get two scorers and only really give up one major role player in Thomas we will win some games and not hurt our youth development but will better the efforts of players and team to fans for sure your right the fans would love more than one win in 15 games.. Also if we can trade off our 20's for draft choices or for 18 year olds we will be in better shape to add three 20 year olds to finish season that can score goals even 15-20 each for rest of year..Also would have two good scoring lines ...Maybe even three if Cam can work some Mircles...Go Moose Go!!! What two scorers are you going to acquire and what are you willing to spend to get them? Trading your youth would be foolish ... and you don't have vets that anyone wants enough to give up a young player who can contribute offensively now. One move you may want to consider, with your stockpile of good young d-men, is dangling a kid like Bishop for a young (16-17-18)forward ... it seems like he isn't quite as good as advertised, and the emergence of Hannay and Lewis makes him even more expendable ... maybe you could find a team with a logjam of good young forwards and a lack of depth on defense that may be willing to make a deal.
|
|