|
|
Post by countryboy on Dec 9, 2007 9:30:07 GMT -4
If we deal with the Moose and Morrison is involved, I'd love to see Pridham come back this way as a 20.
He'd obviously a step down, but he's smart, quick and effective.... I think he'd be a good mentor for younger players who'd have expanded roles in the 2nd half of the season.
cb
|
|
reggiedunlop7
Blue-Chip Prospect
It's sunny and warm outside...not hockey weather
Posts: 346
|
Post by reggiedunlop7 on Dec 9, 2007 11:17:02 GMT -4
I love Pridham....great natural talent. From the first time he stepped on the ice with the Abbies I knew he wasn't long for Jr A. Problem is bringing back a 20-year-old doesn't address our concerns which many have had for next season in that we need players aged 17-18 coming our way.
Plus Colby's ankle injury continues to limit him to some degree. Even he's admitted that it has hampered his season so far. Definitely a trade I would not make.
If Mo goes I say keep the 2 other 20's (Walker and Gallant) to provide the leadership and use that spot for an 18 yr old.
We have 8 19-year-olds....Lafleur, Gervais, Lessard, Latal, Main, Lachaine, Locke and Paynter.
You can only keep 3 of these guys next season as 20's....who do you keep?
Personally I'd like to see Main, Lachaine and Lessard.
The others could be moved and with Main and Lessard you still have two experienced D-men or in Main's case if we acquire another solid D, a very realiable forward.
Latal was pretty much told by Phoenix that he woudln't be playing junior next season (ala Grags)
Lafleur will probably be traded if not at Christmas then probably at the draft.
Gervais, Locke and Paynter - Love their play and what each brings to the table, but someone has to go...strictly a numbers game with them.
|
|
|
|
Post by wingman on Dec 9, 2007 15:04:07 GMT -4
If we deal with the Moose and Morrison is involved, I'd love to see Pridham come back this way as a 20. He'd obviously a step down, but he's smart, quick and effective.... I think he'd be a good mentor for younger players who'd have expanded roles in the 2nd half of the season. cb If the purpose of trading Morrison is so we can get something in return for him because this is his last season, what would be the point of getting in return another 20 year old who is gone after this season too. I know it certainly doesn't make sense in a 1-for-1 trade but even in a package I think I would be getting players back who are playing at least next season too because if not, why trade Morrison away. Another thing to consider when selling someone like Morrison is that if you take a 20 yr old in return and 2 weeks later they get a long term injury, it's not a good return on trading away your star player. The only way it would make sense in taking a 20 yr old would be if he was a throw-in and Pridham is no throw-in on a deal. If I was a team that was gearing up for the playoffs I would consider adding someone like Pridham, but not when you are wanting to build long term which is the reason why you are trading Morrison away in the first place. |
|
|
|
Post by countryboy on Dec 9, 2007 22:38:36 GMT -4
Yeah.... in no way did I mean a 1 for 1. As far as trade value, Morrison is our ace and we need to maximize that asset.
I was thinking in context if a deal involving Morrison included Pridham on the way back here.
To add a 20 like Morrison, Hfx would need to drop one of Pridham, Pelletier or Swan. At least at face value, Pridham is most likely to be moved (ignoring Swan's injury history and the fact that Pelletier has performed a little below expectations thus far).
Moose fans are talking about the possibility of bringing in Bernier between the pipes. If that's the case, Pelletier gets cut loose.
My mentality is that you carry your 3 20 y/o's, even in a rebuild mode, for leadership and example for the young players to follow. If we move Morrison/Walker/Gallant, I'd like to see an at minimum average 20 y/o to take their place in a leadership role.
cb
|
|
|
|
Post by peifan on Dec 10, 2007 8:42:52 GMT -4
I heard yesterday at the game a trade was in place with BC for a goal scorer and a goalie but didnt hear what was coming back...............Just what I heard
|
|
|
|
Post by Sébastien on Dec 10, 2007 9:56:53 GMT -4
Taken from radoter.com
To Quebec:
Lafleur, Lessard
To PEI:
Mickael Audette, Christophe Poirier and a pick
|
|
|
|
Post by bois on Dec 10, 2007 10:33:19 GMT -4
Taken from radoter.com To Quebec: Lafleur, Lessard To PEI: Mickael Audette, Christophe Poirier and a pick No chance Why would we acquire a marginal 19 y/o and a kid not even playing in the Q for two of our top tradeable assets? |
|
|
|
Post by P-O on Dec 10, 2007 10:37:48 GMT -4
Indeed
Makes no sense.
|
|
reggiedunlop7
Blue-Chip Prospect
It's sunny and warm outside...not hockey weather
Posts: 346
|
Post by reggiedunlop7 on Dec 10, 2007 10:42:18 GMT -4
Christophe Poirier
Right Wing, 4 goals, 14 points, 25 PIM
He's an '88, so turns 20 next year.
Mickael Audette
Goaltender, Drafted by the Remps 5th round in the 2007 QMJHL Entry Draft.
Playing with Magog in the Qubec Midget AAA
1110.33 mins
11 wins 7 losses
0.902 save %
2.70 GAA
Weird deal if it's true. Poirier doesn't seem like a big goal scorer, but perhaps he's not seeing the ice time in Quebec. Might be another Lachaine looking to break out.
As far as Audette, why get another goalie? Only reason I can fathom is that with Gelinas at 18 with two more years left and Mosher with 3 left this kid could be in the wings at 16 waiting or possibly taking over down the road.
Losing Lessard and not getting a D back in return hurts the defence in my mind, but that could be done because another trade is in the works with a d-man involved.
Of course how realible is Radoter?
Gives us somethig to chew over I guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by P-O on Dec 10, 2007 10:49:59 GMT -4
Audette was the last goalie to be cut from the U17 camp. He is behind CLermont and Bellavance-Roy.
Patrick gave uyp a lot to draft him. He has size, he his impressive and the best goalie in the AAA
|
|
|
|
Post by Krang7 on Dec 10, 2007 10:51:56 GMT -4
Not to mention that Quebec is pretty set in goal with Desfosses playing the way he has this season. And I can't see the Remps making the trade in hopes that they will both be back as 20s next season, since the Marchand deal reportedly involves 2 20 year olds going to Quebec for picks at the draft.
It just doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.
|
|
reggiedunlop7
Blue-Chip Prospect
It's sunny and warm outside...not hockey weather
Posts: 346
|
Post by reggiedunlop7 on Dec 10, 2007 10:54:32 GMT -4
If Roy gave up a lot to get him then I'm curious why let him go, but then again he probably sees something in Lafleur and I'm sure Antoine would love to work with Patrick.
Even with Lafleur struggling, if Roy could get him turned around then he would give the Remps an excellent 1-2 combo in goal for a playoff run.
Interesting indeed....8 days until the floodgates open.
|
|
|
|
Post by P-O on Dec 10, 2007 10:56:40 GMT -4
I doubt Patrick wanna have a 17 yo in the net next season.
|
|
|
|
Post by Krang7 on Dec 10, 2007 10:58:21 GMT -4
No, but there's no guarantee Lafleur will even be back next season.
|
|
|
|
Post by P-O on Dec 10, 2007 10:58:50 GMT -4
To be honest with ya, I don't like Lafleur.
I'd pay more for Riopel ou D'Orso
|
|
