|
|
Post by berner on Dec 2, 2019 21:31:07 GMT -4
The rebuild starts after the championship run. This is year 3. The team should be showing more promise at this point. Dixon out and Cowan in (for now) is a huge plus for this team. That first year was a complete write off, barely any picks or players to trade. IMO doesn’t count as Year 1 of the rebuild because they had no picks or players to trade to do anything with. It’s a hard reset and year 0. You will have a very hard time convincing me that a year in which we traded our best player for 5 draft picks, 3 of which have turned into Jeremie Poirier, Brady Burns, and Joshua Roy (and the other two TBD in 2020) is not Year 1 of our rebuild. |
|
|
|
Post by iraca on Dec 2, 2019 21:38:31 GMT -4
In terms of comparing records we started two years ago with 16 and 17 year olds. That makes it year 2 now. Also, amazing how so many were complaining about the coaching staff and now seem thrilled that we have the same coaching staff minus one.
|
|
|
|
Post by berner on Dec 2, 2019 22:02:42 GMT -4
In terms of comparing records we started two years ago with 16 and 17 year olds. That makes it year 2 now. Also, amazing how so many were complaining about the coaching staff and now seem thrilled that we have the same coaching staff minus one. We’re in the third year of building towards our next championship. I don’t even follow the argument now so I give up on that second year/third year business. People are thrilled because the perceived problem behind the bench, who also happened to be the one calling all the shots, has been removed. |
|
|
|
Post by ysj28 on Dec 2, 2019 22:04:55 GMT -4
In terms of comparing records we started two years ago with 16 and 17 year olds. That makes it year 2 now. Also, amazing how so many were complaining about the coaching staff and now seem thrilled that we have the same coaching staff minus one. We’re in the third year of building towards our next championship. I don’t even follow the argument now so I give up on that second year/third year business. People are thrilled because the perceived problem behind the bench, who also happened to be the one calling all the shots, has been removed. And now the one that is calling the shots was the defensive coach - arguably our biggest downside so far this year. |
|
|
|
Post by scotiahockey on Dec 2, 2019 22:35:09 GMT -4
That first year was a complete write off, barely any picks or players to trade. IMO doesn’t count as Year 1 of the rebuild because they had no picks or players to trade to do anything with. It’s a hard reset and year 0. You will have a very hard time convincing me that a year in which we traded our best player for 5 draft picks, 3 of which have turned into Jeremie Poirier, Brady Burns, and Joshua Roy (and the other two TBD in 2020) is not Year 1 of our rebuild. To me, last season is the first year of your rebuild because that’s when all your 16 year olds came into the league. That 1st season where you traded all those guys was a sell off to get picks, with nobody on the roster that was going to be expected to be around when the team became good again. I don’t know how you can call that year 1 of the rebuild. It was a tear down season to set yourself up to enter a rebuild. It was going to be a lost season, everyone and their dogs knew it. It’s year 2 of the rebuild for me (season 3) and next season is the year that they better take a big step forward if they expect to compete when the 02 born players are 19. This team is on pace for roughly 59 points, a 27 point improvement over last season but yet it seems to be all doom and gloom on these boards. You’d think they were going into their 3rd straight sub 40 point season with how fed up some people are. |
|
|
|
Post by berner on Dec 2, 2019 22:36:23 GMT -4
We’re in the third year of building towards our next championship. I don’t even follow the argument now so I give up on that second year/third year business. People are thrilled because the perceived problem behind the bench, who also happened to be the one calling all the shots, has been removed. And now the one that is calling the shots was the defensive coach - arguably our biggest downside so far this year. Then for those concerned about the defensive coaching, wouldn’t this new role for said coach have high potential to be a better spot for him? Don’t underestimate the respect that ex-NHLers are shown by junior hockey players. |
|
|
|
Post by juliansteed on Dec 2, 2019 22:57:19 GMT -4
The difference between this cycle and the last cycle is that we didn't go all in for the 2012 championship run much to the displeasure of many, including myself, who thought we should acquire a top D-man. Our biggest move was the free acquisition of Charlie Coyle. We traded Oke and acquired Villemare with a 1st going the other way in each trade. Near the beginning of the season we moved one 20 out for a 2012 1st and spent a 2013 1st to bring in another which was eventually reacquired in the Tesink trade.
So in the end we had 2 2012 firsts to help start the rebuild without even making a major trade at the draft, which would be considered unusual for a team that just won back to back championships. We still didn't tear down the team until the Christmas trading period of the 2012-2013 season. So if the 2017-2018 season was year 0 of a rebuild, the 2012-2013 season was kind of like year 0.5. This year's team is ahead of where the 2013-2014 team was but is behind where the 2014-2015 team was.
The two 2012 draft picks were used for Highmore and Leblanc but Leblanc was then traded which was a bit of a step back in terms of the rebuild. (Ironically, that trade is actually indirectly doing more to help this rebuild than the last one.) Highmore didn't really break out until his 19 year old season. So I'll be interested to see how this team compares in its 2nd half to the 2nd half of the 2014-2015 season after Leblanc got traded away. If our 2nd half is better than the 2nd half of that season then I think we're in pretty good shape.
|
|
|
|
Post by j3e4 on Dec 2, 2019 23:10:42 GMT -4
We definitely had a stronger contingent of non-import 18 year olds 5 years ago than we do now. We pulled Highmore, Leblanc, and Smallman from the 2012 draft and added Del Paggio as a free agent. Compared to our crop of 2001 born non-import players which is pretty much nobody.
|
|
|
|
Post by j3e4 on Dec 2, 2019 23:15:46 GMT -4
And now the one that is calling the shots was the defensive coach - arguably our biggest downside so far this year. Then for those concerned about the defensive coaching, wouldn’t this new role for said coach have high potential to be a better spot for him? Don’t underestimate the respect that ex-NHLers are shown by junior hockey players. Agreed. Cowan has shown he is a decent assistant when in a different role but the defense coach didn't seem to be the right fit for him. I would feel better about today's move if we manage to name a decent replacement for Cowan as the defensive coach for the remainder of the season. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Dec 3, 2019 7:51:53 GMT -4
Then for those concerned about the defensive coaching, wouldn’t this new role for said coach have high potential to be a better spot for him? Don’t underestimate the respect that ex-NHLers are shown by junior hockey players. Agreed. Cowan has shown he is a decent assistant when in a different role but the defense coach didn't seem to be the right fit for him. I would feel better about today's move if we manage to name a decent replacement for Cowan as the defensive coach for the remainder of the season. My two cents would be if things are going well and you have a coaching opening (i.e. your head coach moves on to the pros, decides it is time to retire, etc.) then promoting from within can be a good option. If things are not going well, firing the head coach to put one of his right hand men in charge doesn't inspire much confidence ... if the assistant was such a great choice, the team would not have had as many problems as they do in the first place. |
|
|
|
Post by berner on Dec 3, 2019 10:24:00 GMT -4
Agreed. Cowan has shown he is a decent assistant when in a different role but the defense coach didn't seem to be the right fit for him. I would feel better about today's move if we manage to name a decent replacement for Cowan as the defensive coach for the remainder of the season. My two cents would be if things are going well and you have a coaching opening (i.e. your head coach moves on to the pros, decides it is time to retire, etc.) then promoting from within can be a good option. If things are not going well, firing the head coach to put one of his right hand men in charge doesn't inspire much confidence ... if the assistant was such a great choice, the team would not have had as many problems as they do in the first place. Assistant coaches are not necessarily from the same mould as the head coach. And especially in this case, Cowan was here long before Dixon was installed so he wasn’t even someone Josh brought in. Give it until Christmas and see what you think, if Jeff Cowan is a ‘Josh Dixon lite’. My guess is you’ll feel he’s not. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Dec 3, 2019 11:19:02 GMT -4
My two cents would be if things are going well and you have a coaching opening (i.e. your head coach moves on to the pros, decides it is time to retire, etc.) then promoting from within can be a good option. If things are not going well, firing the head coach to put one of his right hand men in charge doesn't inspire much confidence ... if the assistant was such a great choice, the team would not have had as many problems as they do in the first place. Assistant coaches are not necessarily from the same mould as the head coach. And especially in this case, Cowan was here long before Dixon was installed so he wasn’t even someone Josh brought in. Give it until Christmas and see what you think, if Jeff Cowan is a ‘Josh Dixon lite’. My guess is you’ll feel he’s not. I am not suggesting he is a clone of Dixon in any way ... more of a general observation that if a team is underperforming, likely all members of the coaching staff had something to do with that ... I would say the same if you were hiring externally - if the new coach was an assistant somewhere on a successful team, I would be more inclined to be optimistic than if you were bringing in someone who was an assistant on a team that struggled. |
|
|
|
Post by yoyomamajoe on Dec 3, 2019 11:38:51 GMT -4
Assistant coaches are not necessarily from the same mould as the head coach. And especially in this case, Cowan was here long before Dixon was installed so he wasn’t even someone Josh brought in. Give it until Christmas and see what you think, if Jeff Cowan is a ‘Josh Dixon lite’. My guess is you’ll feel he’s not. I am not suggesting he is a clone of Dixon in any way ... more of a general observation that if a team is underperforming, likely all members of the coaching staff had something to do with that ... I would say the same if you were hiring externally - if the new coach was an assistant somewhere on a successful team, I would be more inclined to be optimistic than if you were bringing in someone who was an assistant on a team that struggled. I am inclined to agree with you. Only thing we can hope for is that Cowan was limited by Dixon in teaching what he thinks is right and he can implement his own teachings now. Otherwise, I agree with you that Cowan might be part of the problem. Especially if he was in charge of D to start with. |
|
|
|
Post by interested on Dec 3, 2019 13:03:09 GMT -4
We’re in the third year of building towards our next championship. I don’t even follow the argument now so I give up on that second year/third year business. People are thrilled because the perceived problem behind the bench, who also happened to be the one calling all the shots, has been removed. And now the one that is calling the shots was the defensive coach - arguably our biggest downside so far this year. With respect, this overlooks the heirarchy natural in any coaching staff. A D coach might well contribute a lot to the success of a team, but understand: the head coach leads. The systems are his, and the approach to ice time allocations is his as well. If a team is playing terrible defense, the most likely problems are player personnel decisions (on the GM) and head coaching. |
|
|
|
Post by hal on Dec 3, 2019 13:36:48 GMT -4
Oh my God kill me now! I will give my tickets away if they hire this numb nuts. Stephane Leroux @stephrdsjunior J'ai comme l'impression que Marc-André Dumont devient un candidat intéressant pour la suite des chose avec les #SeaDogs il connait bien la section des maritimes, il a l'expérience et il est libre depuis son départ du Cap-Breton #LHJMQ #Asuivre Translated from French by I have the impression that Marc-André Dumont is becoming an interesting candidate for the continuation of things with the #SeaDogs he knows the Maritime Section well, he has the experience and he has been free since leaving Cape Breton #LHJMQ#Asuivre 1:26 PM · Dec 2, 2019·Twitter Web App He is a little busy right now..............He is driving a Forklift at the Local Pepsi Plant here in Sydney ....Andre Cote ( The Former CB President and President of Pepsi CB ) told him he would get him enough hours in for his Pogey . |
|
