|
|
Post by qmaniac on Nov 1, 2009 23:42:24 GMT -4
We'll for the most part I'm enjoying them grow we haven't gotten blown out every game and they are working hard a win can't be too far away and finally within the next 2 weeks they play 5 at home bout time!!! Not to be negative, because we are all Moose fans on this board, however, it doesn't really matter what the scores are each game in the standings. A loss is a loss. We are 1-17-1-0. In your fantasy land we'd be 19-0-0. There is a difference in seeing the positives in things and being a homer. |
|
|
|
Post by MikeC on Nov 2, 2009 0:05:11 GMT -4
All he has to do is sign a player card and he can play. Teams have something like 31 player cards... I know there was a dispute at the time with Pardy and Antigonish but there hasnt been a situation like that since. Halifax right now only has one player signed as an affiliate...Jamie Bishop. But if they wanted to call up Myers, McGuigan, Boudreau, Lewis or Belanger all theyd have to do is sign them to a card. There are timelines that the Major Junior teams have to respect. I believe the first date is December 1st. Before December 1st, they can bring players up whenever they want. After December 1st, they need the permission from the lower team. I think the last time this came up was the year Halifax traded Duchesne. They called up Yetman on like Nov 30th or something and carried 3 goalies until Duchesne was traded. The next date is January 10. After January 10, if a player plays 5 games at a higher level, he can not return to the lower level. Also after January 10, JrA teams have to be down to something like 23 carded players or open cards. That's the main reason Antigonish wouldn't let Pardy go - They had no way to replace him in their lineup. |
|
|
|
Post by Murph on Nov 2, 2009 9:19:57 GMT -4
"Piss away" would imply he moved picks in deals that didn't pan out, and were essentially no-deals. That was rarely the case. More often than not, he got equal, or exceeded value in those deals. He definately traded away a lot of picks.... but didn't "piss away" very many. A lot of them were busts and some of the others were just players to fill holes, guys he could have found as FA's. Like what? What do you consider a lot? A lot just in general.... which there would of course would be, due to the sheer amount of deals he made. However the deals that worked out, far exceeded the ones that didn't. Mitch Hardy, Jens Dubreil, Woodman/Turgeon, Dilorenzo/Labelle, the rights to Brandon Reid..... those were wasted. But there are way more good deals out there. Daniel Sparre, Guillaume Lavallee, Dany Dallaire, Jeremy Duchesne, Louis Mandeville, JF Cyr, Jakub Voracek..... Every team and GM out there will make bad deals. Nobody wins all of them. But if you look at the amount of deals involving picks that busted out, over the 8.5 years, he had a pretty good track record. |
|
|
|
Post by sharrow on Nov 2, 2009 11:28:29 GMT -4
How about 3rd rounds picks for the like of Chaisson, Lund and Bona which helped to make it the worst D team in the league and how a bout the fact that he never drafted a goalie who was true #1, NEVER in 8 and half years some record for a key position on any successful team. The reason he kept trading draft picks to acquire players was because he and his scouting staff didn't have a clue about picking players via the draft, he was a league office person, he is back where he belongs pushing papers around and really V/P of hockey operations, this better be just a fancy title for doing nothing and if it isn't this leagues in big trouble.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Nov 2, 2009 11:42:18 GMT -4
A lot of them were busts and some of the others were just players to fill holes, guys he could have found as FA's. Like what? What do you consider a lot? A lot just in general.... which there would of course would be, due to the sheer amount of deals he made. However the deals that worked out, far exceeded the ones that didn't. Mitch Hardy, Jens Dubreil, Woodman/Turgeon, Dilorenzo/Labelle, the rights to Brandon Reid..... those were wasted. But there are way more good deals out there. Daniel Sparre, Guillaume Lavallee, Dany Dallaire, Jeremy Duchesne, Louis Mandeville, JF Cyr, Jakub Voracek..... Every team and GM out there will make bad deals. Nobody wins all of them. But if you look at the amount of deals involving picks that busted out, over the 8.5 years, he had a pretty good track record. It's not a matter of winning them all, it just made life hell for the guy coming in behind him because he acquired players on "credit" so to speak and did it over and over, even the Marchand trade. At this level you need to draft well to be successful, much like the NHL salary cap version. Halifax can no longer outspend 90% of the Q in terms of Euros and NCAA players. If you go 3-4 years missing nearly half your top 5 picks...well you guys are now seeing that at some point it catches up to you and makes for 2, maybe 3 painful years of hockey. |
|
|
|
Post by Murph on Nov 2, 2009 12:00:18 GMT -4
How about 3rd rounds picks for the like of Chaisson, Lund and Bona which helped to make it the worst D team in the league and how a bout the fact that he never drafted a goalie who was true #1, NEVER in 8 and half years some record for a key position on any successful team. The reason he kept trading draft picks to acquire players was because he and his scouting staff didn't have a clue about picking players via the draft, he was a league office person, he is back where he belongs pushing papers around and really V/P of hockey operations, this better be just a fancy title for doing nothing and if it isn't this leagues in big trouble. What do you consider a "true #1". Joanthan Boutin and Jason Churchill were both #1's in this league, even if you don't consider Yetman a "true #1". If by "true #1", you mean a top 5 goaltender, then no he didn't. But there are more than 5 teams in the league. There are more than 5, #1 goalies. Lund was turing into a stud until his injury. How can you blame him for that? Didn't he turn Chaisson around into a 5th? Not exactly a blown 3rd rounder, when you factor in what came back down the road. |
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Nov 2, 2009 12:06:04 GMT -4
How about 3rd rounds picks for the like of Chaisson, Lund and Bona which helped to make it the worst D team in the league and how a bout the fact that he never drafted a goalie who was true #1, NEVER in 8 and half years some record for a key position on any successful team. The reason he kept trading draft picks to acquire players was because he and his scouting staff didn't have a clue about picking players via the draft, he was a league office person, he is back where he belongs pushing papers around and really V/P of hockey operations, this better be just a fancy title for doing nothing and if it isn't this leagues in big trouble. What do you consider a "true #1". Joanthan Boutin and Jason Churchill were both #1's in this league, even if you don't consider Yetman a "true #1". If by "true #1", you mean a top 5 goaltender, then no he didn't. But there are more than 5 teams in the league. There are more than 5, #1 goalies. Lund was turing into a stud until his injury. How can you blame him for that? Didn't he turn Chaisson around into a 5th? Not exactly a blown 3rd rounder, when you factor in what came back down the road. I've never heard the words "Lund" and "stud" in the same sentence, unless "is not a" was in between them.  What a reach. |
|
|
|
Post by Murph on Nov 2, 2009 12:15:27 GMT -4
Like what? What do you consider a lot? A lot just in general.... which there would of course would be, due to the sheer amount of deals he made. However the deals that worked out, far exceeded the ones that didn't. Mitch Hardy, Jens Dubreil, Woodman/Turgeon, Dilorenzo/Labelle, the rights to Brandon Reid..... those were wasted. But there are way more good deals out there. Daniel Sparre, Guillaume Lavallee, Dany Dallaire, Jeremy Duchesne, Louis Mandeville, JF Cyr, Jakub Voracek..... Every team and GM out there will make bad deals. Nobody wins all of them. But if you look at the amount of deals involving picks that busted out, over the 8.5 years, he had a pretty good track record. It's not a matter of winning them all, it just made life hell for the guy coming in behind him because he acquired players on "credit" so to speak and did it over and over, even the Marchand trade. At this level you need to draft well to be successful, much like the NHL salary cap version. Halifax can no longer outspend 90% of the Q in terms of Euros and NCAA players. If you go 3-4 years missing nearly half your top 5 picks...well you guys are now seeing that at some point it catches up to you and makes for 2, maybe 3 painful years of hockey. Except the mess the team was in, isn't solely because of the trading of picks over the course of 8 years. For one, the Marchand deal was huge. Two 1sts, and a 3rd gone. That wasn't his deal though, so you can't hang that on him. Smith wanted Marchand for financial reasons, and because he thought Marchand and Giroux were even players.... which certainly wasn't the case. That deal had huge implication as to the mess were were in last year. Another problem, wasn't even with the trading of picks. It was bad drafting. Cichy, MacAskill, Daniel Smith..... they had picks then, they just didn't make smart decisions. Ultimately, Patenaude is responsible for that..... however it doesn't play into the theory that all his trading of picks hamstrung the franchise. There was also his relucatance to sell off Brine, Carnegie, Cabana. I don't know who's call that was, but that hurt the team too. It's not only having picks, but knowing when to sell, is a big part of staying competitive. Nobody can win every year, so you have to know when it's not your year. Now Halifax is in a strong position with regards to picks. Patenaude has a hand in that as well, by turning Logan MacMillian into 4 picks. Patenaude made some mistakes with regards to picks, but nobody was complaining (except Gman) when the team was a top team for 6 of 7 years (5 of those Patenaude's doing). The guy gets shit on for how he finished up. However the two biggest factors in that IMO, were the failure to sell in 2006 and the Marchand deal. I know for sure the Marchand deal was a Bobby Smith call, and I have a feeling Smith played a big role in the 2006 situation as well, but I can't say for sure. Thankfully for Halifax fans, Bobby Smith appears to be steering the team in the right direction, and is giving Russell some rope. Something I don't think Patenaude got very much of.... or at least as much as he should have. |
|
|
|
Post by Murph on Nov 2, 2009 12:17:55 GMT -4
What do you consider a "true #1". Joanthan Boutin and Jason Churchill were both #1's in this league, even if you don't consider Yetman a "true #1". If by "true #1", you mean a top 5 goaltender, then no he didn't. But there are more than 5 teams in the league. There are more than 5, #1 goalies. Lund was turing into a stud until his injury. How can you blame him for that? Didn't he turn Chaisson around into a 5th? Not exactly a blown 3rd rounder, when you factor in what came back down the road. I've never heard the words "Lund" and "stud" in the same sentence, unless "is not a" was in between them. What a reach. Spoken like an uniformed outsider. Lund was a bust in PEI, no question. But he finally appeared to be on track as an 18 year old, and had played his way into the top 4, only injuries derailed him. I never said he was a stud. I said he "was turning into one" only injuries cut him short before he could full fill his potential. Lots of Halifax fans will agree with that.... people that actually got the chance to see him play as an 18 year old, unlike yourself. |
|
|
|
Post by Gman on Nov 2, 2009 12:43:45 GMT -4
It's not a matter of winning them all, it just made life hell for the guy coming in behind him because he acquired players on "credit" so to speak and did it over and over, even the Marchand trade. At this level you need to draft well to be successful, much like the NHL salary cap version. Halifax can no longer outspend 90% of the Q in terms of Euros and NCAA players. If you go 3-4 years missing nearly half your top 5 picks...well you guys are now seeing that at some point it catches up to you and makes for 2, maybe 3 painful years of hockey. ...but nobody was complaining (except Gman) when the team was a top team for 6 of 7 years (5 of those Patenaude's doing). Huh? Firstly, your definition of "top team" and mine must be really different. By my calculations, they had 3 top 5 teams during Patenaude's time here. Two of them were successful by way of the now illegal boomerang trade, and one was a total clusterfuck which BARELY finished top 5 despite the wealth of talent. Second, when Patenaude was let go, I made a post outlining the predicament he put the franchise in. Was it not factual? You listed off the bad trades he made, but failed to mention just how bad they were by giving the details of how those players were acquired. A lot of top 3 round picks were pissed away to acquire those guys. Even the "good" trades he made certainly didn't come cheaply. Ask yourself, and be honest. Did Patenaude get good value on any of his trades besides the following? Dallaire Lavallee Duchesne (see a pattern here?) Brine Voracek I can't think of any other trade he made where he came out on top in terms of getting good value from it. Trading a 1st and 2nd+ for Sparre and Beaulieu hardly qualifies as a good trade. That's simply spending for talent. |
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Nov 2, 2009 12:45:00 GMT -4
It's not a matter of winning them all, it just made life hell for the guy coming in behind him because he acquired players on "credit" so to speak and did it over and over, even the Marchand trade. At this level you need to draft well to be successful, much like the NHL salary cap version. Halifax can no longer outspend 90% of the Q in terms of Euros and NCAA players. If you go 3-4 years missing nearly half your top 5 picks...well you guys are now seeing that at some point it catches up to you and makes for 2, maybe 3 painful years of hockey. Except the mess the team was in, isn't solely because of the trading of picks over the course of 8 years. For one, the Marchand deal was huge. Two 1sts, and a 3rd gone. That wasn't his deal though, so you can't hang that on him. Smith wanted Marchand for financial reasons, and because he thought Marchand and Giroux were even players.... which certainly wasn't the case. That deal had huge implication as to the mess were were in last year. Another problem, wasn't even with the trading of picks. It was bad drafting. Cichy, MacAskill, Daniel Smith..... they had picks then, they just didn't make smart decisions. Ultimately, Patenaude is responsible for that..... however it doesn't play into the theory that all his trading of picks hamstrung the franchise. There was also his relucatance to sell off Brine, Carnegie, Cabana. I don't know who's call that was, but that hurt the team too. It's not only having picks, but knowing when to sell, is a big part of staying competitive. Nobody can win every year, so you have to know when it's not your year. Now Halifax is in a strong position with regards to picks. Patenaude has a hand in that as well, by turning Logan MacMillian into 4 picks. Patenaude made some mistakes with regards to picks, but nobody was complaining (except Gman) when the team was a top team for 6 of 7 years (5 of those Patenaude's doing). The guy gets shit on for how he finished up. However the two biggest factors in that IMO, were the failure to sell in 2006 and the Marchand deal. I know for sure the Marchand deal was a Bobby Smith call, and I have a feeling Smith played a big role in the 2006 situation as well, but I can't say for sure. Thankfully for Halifax fans, Bobby Smith appears to be steering the team in the right direction, and is giving Russell some rope. Something I don't think Patenaude got very much of.... or at least as much as he should have. Do you know for a fact that it was Smith that wanted Marchand or are you just making up your own theory because it fits your argument? You can't jusy blame Smith when Patenaude screws up and give him credit when he does something good, ultimately he is the GM and what happens is on his watch. |
|
|
|
Post by canbeer on Nov 2, 2009 13:04:10 GMT -4
...but nobody was complaining (except Gman) when the team was a top team for 6 of 7 years (5 of those Patenaude's doing). Huh? Firstly, your definition of "top team" and mine must be really different. By my calculations, they had 3 top 5 teams during Patenaude's time here. Two of them were successful by way of the now illegal boomerang trade, and one was a total clusterfuck which BARELY finished top 5 despite the wealth of talent. Second, when Patenaude was let go, I made a post outlining the predicament he put the franchise in. Was it not factual? You listed off the bad trades he made, but failed to mention just how bad they were by giving the details of how those players were acquired. A lot of top 3 round picks were pissed away to acquire those guys. Even the "good" trades he made certainly didn't come cheaply. Ask yourself, and be honest. Did Patenaude get good value on any of his trades besides the following? Dallaire Lavallee Duchesne (see a pattern here?) Brine Voracek I can't think of any other trade he made where he came out on top in terms of getting good value from it. Trading a 1st and 2nd+ for Sparre and Beaulieu hardly qualifies as a good trade. That's simply spending for talent. Sheppard got the Moose a 2nd rd pick. Saulnier and a 6th rd pick got Corsi. Cormier (20) and a 4th rd pick got a 2nd and 3rd. MacMillan got good return. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Nov 2, 2009 13:18:46 GMT -4
What do you consider a "true #1". Joanthan Boutin and Jason Churchill were both #1's in this league, even if you don't consider Yetman a "true #1". If by "true #1", you mean a top 5 goaltender, then no he didn't. But there are more than 5 teams in the league. There are more than 5, #1 goalies. But over an 8 year period, we are talking much more than 5 guys ... probably not 40 guys, as some guys would be top 5 for multiple seasons (but not that many) ... so lets say that over 8 years, 25 goalies came through the league that would have been considered top-5 at some point in their careers ... if none of them were drafted by Patenaude, then to me that represents below average performance ... was it because he couldn't identify good goalies? Probably not, because he did well stealing a few guys in trades ... In all likelihood, he probably just didn't place as much importance on drafting a goalie as some teams do ... because he figured he could get one somewhere else on the cheap later on ... sometimes that worked out (Lavallee, Duchesne), other times he got caught with his pants down (the Pelletier/Yetman combo on a top team comes to mind) ... |
|
|
|
Post by sharrow on Nov 2, 2009 13:25:45 GMT -4
His resume is tainted with high picks that didn't even show up which to me indicates that very little was done to find the intentions of these players prior to the drafts and by the way Murph name me a D-man that was drafted by him in the eight years besides Sharrow & Picard, now we have no quality goaltenders and a couple of defencemen drafted over EIGHT (8). Do you really want to continue defending this guy. HELL even Johnny Cochrane wouldn't take this case.l
|
|
|
|
Post by Gman on Nov 2, 2009 13:29:26 GMT -4
Huh? Firstly, your definition of "top team" and mine must be really different. By my calculations, they had 3 top 5 teams during Patenaude's time here. Two of them were successful by way of the now illegal boomerang trade, and one was a total clusterfuck which BARELY finished top 5 despite the wealth of talent. Second, when Patenaude was let go, I made a post outlining the predicament he put the franchise in. Was it not factual? You listed off the bad trades he made, but failed to mention just how bad they were by giving the details of how those players were acquired. A lot of top 3 round picks were pissed away to acquire those guys. Even the "good" trades he made certainly didn't come cheaply. Ask yourself, and be honest. Did Patenaude get good value on any of his trades besides the following? Dallaire Lavallee Duchesne (see a pattern here?) Brine Voracek I can't think of any other trade he made where he came out on top in terms of getting good value from it. Trading a 1st and 2nd+ for Sparre and Beaulieu hardly qualifies as a good trade. That's simply spending for talent. Sheppard got the Moose a 2nd rd pick. Saulnier and a 6th rd pick got Corsi. Cormier (20) and a 4th rd pick got a 2nd and 3rd. MacMillan got good return. Yes those were good. When Patenaude was "selling" he actually made decent trades... it's when he was trying to fill holes or take a chance on players that he often failed (Labelle/Dilo/Hardy/Dubreil/Woodman, etc {notice most of this fleecing came at the hands of Gatineau?}) |
|
