|
|
Post by SteveUL on May 13, 2020 9:48:51 GMT -4
poor bobby what an ass that guy is That is an unfair comment ... his position on this is not going to garner much sympathy, even among Cats fans, and he definitely should have kept his disappointment private rather than having Hodge do an article. That said, he contributes an awful lot to the community, and his passion for Q hockey is second to none (even if he could no doubt get better results if he could learn to stay out of the way) - Moncton is fortunate to have him. Not saying he is perfect by any means - but he doesn't deserve to be called an ass. ... and the PEI communities. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on May 13, 2020 10:04:42 GMT -4
Imagine if the contenders don't honor the "boomerang" trade... There is no option to not honour a trade. Any trade registered with the league happens no matter what, unless the league says different. If say Moncton decided it wasn't sending L'Heureux and/or Desnoyers to Halifax (or whatever the deal actually is), the league just scratches them off of Moncton's roster and writes them in on Halifax's roster. If they want to play they show up to Halifax's camp. If they show up to Moncton's camp they'd be inelligible players and could not play for Moncton, and Moncton would have to forfeit any games they did play in. Referees would probably be aware that they are ineligible and ban them from the ice before the puck was dropped. It would just never get to that as the players would go to where the league tells them to, for the good of their own hockey career. You are assuming you know for certain how the trade is written up ... when these are not made public, who the hell knows for sure. Assuming that it is registered with the league (even that is based on hearsay as they never confirm it publicly), it could still be: 1) At the draft, Halifax will send picks XYZ to Moncton for players A and B --- this is what you assume is the case, and I am not saying you are wrong; or, 2) At the draft, Halifax will have the option to send picks XYZ to Moncton for players A and B; or, 3) At the draft, Moncton will have the option to send players A and B to Halifax for picks XYZ. Not to mention with multiple players and picks rumoured to be involved, the options could in theory be separate (i.e. option to send player A for pick X, and option to send player B for picks Y and Z). In the past, we have seen enough rumoured futures trades not happen as speculated to make me think there might be options involved in some cases ... but don't know for sure. |
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on May 13, 2020 10:06:25 GMT -4
That would be an interesting twist ... I was wondering the other day about trades with futures, and how they really work. Are they set in stone at the time of the original deal in January? Or are they set up such as one team or the other has the option to return picks for players at the draft (which would provide protection if someone were to suffer a long term injury)? Take the Cats this season ... normally, the players they are supposed to send at the draft would likely hold (far?) more value than the picks they stand to get back ... so if anyone would have incentive to welch on the original promise, it would be them. But in this circumstance where the 2020/21 season is in some doubt, it is actually the opposite ... the Mooseheads might be inclined to say they no longer want older players with less remaining shelf life, and would prefer to just keep the picks, leaving the Cats holding the bag on veteran players who could potentially age out of the league before action resumes (clearly this would be a bigger factor if the players involved are Pelletier and Spence - which it sounds like they may not be). So question is - is the deal set in stone - or does one team or the other have an option to say, you know what, things have changed, we will decline the futures and just leave the deal stand the way it was ... Usually any deal involving futures, the futures are written into the deal, obviously not made public, but both sides sign off on it. In the past, some teams used to get both GM's to sign off on future considerations but not send in the paperwork until the draft. Way back when...say late 90's...I believe the "futures" were literally just an agreement between 2 GM's. CB ended up being screwed by RN I think when they wouldn't do the 2nd part of a deal in one of their early years if I recall correctly. Now the futures are just an unspoken part of the trade. Already on paper and agreed to. Only way out of it is putting conditions on the futures based on team success. |
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on May 13, 2020 10:10:56 GMT -4
If the 20-21 season is cancelled, God forbid, shouldn't the league be concerned about the viability of some franchises? What kind of league will there be to come back to? The league has already said that beyond 20-21 there's no guarantee for 18 teams to still be in the league. A storm has been brewing on that front for years for some teams. Like a couple who has lived pay check to pay check for maybe the last 10 years but now face unemployment and questionable employment moving forward there's inevitably going to be some major economic changes that come out of all of this. And less CHL hockey teams is just inevitable. That bubble was going to burst as more and more teams watch losses pile up and ticket sales decline already leading up to this. Some teams will be looking at 1/3 to 2/3 of a loss in season ticket holders just from the seniors who won't be willing to spend the money and/or take the health risk. Some markets survive off that senior citizen crowd. |
|
|
|
Post by yesisaiditfirst on May 13, 2020 10:30:52 GMT -4
The financial bubble Q teams do better with the year off. They already lose money each season. Their owners soak up the losses. They wouldnt be able to go into any season with games in it but less ticket sales and less advertising sponsorship etc. The fixed costs (equipment) coaches, staff, player expenses (billet allowance etc), even before travel to road games etc....and trying to market it would put them under. Really for those teams a year off may help them. Consider that the owners all have their own businesses that may be headed to negative annual balance sheet for the year there may not be the normal wiggle room and credit help from banks. Only a few CHL teams turn annual profits. Not many of these investors are in it for the money. They do it for love of game and community. So if we hear later that the league will play a shortened season but not all teams will play in it...this will be why. I don't see a revenue/expense sharing model that is on the horizon here. Did anyone see that the Portland Winterhawks filed for bankruptcy? By all accounts they are a successful, large market WHL team - but they got dragged under by the other business interests of their owner. Sounds like they will survive and emerge with new ownership. Don't be shocked if more teams follow ... The owner of Portland was a Calgary business man. It's not a reflection on the operation in Portland as they are pretty stable season ticket lease and all is very good. Team turns a profit but owner got in a bind. I hear there are already other investors ready to buy it. I think you will see this happen out west though if oil money is ownership of some of the CHL teams. And not all are easy sells. |
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on May 13, 2020 10:41:52 GMT -4
There is no option to not honour a trade. Any trade registered with the league happens no matter what, unless the league says different. If say Moncton decided it wasn't sending L'Heureux and/or Desnoyers to Halifax (or whatever the deal actually is), the league just scratches them off of Moncton's roster and writes them in on Halifax's roster. If they want to play they show up to Halifax's camp. If they show up to Moncton's camp they'd be inelligible players and could not play for Moncton, and Moncton would have to forfeit any games they did play in. Referees would probably be aware that they are ineligible and ban them from the ice before the puck was dropped. It would just never get to that as the players would go to where the league tells them to, for the good of their own hockey career. You are assuming you know for certain how the trade is written up ... when these are not made public, who the hell knows for sure. Assuming that it is registered with the league (even that is based on hearsay as they never confirm it publicly), it could still be: 1) At the draft, Halifax will send picks XYZ to Moncton for players A and B --- this is what you assume is the case, and I am not saying you are wrong; or, 2) At the draft, Halifax will have the option to send picks XYZ to Moncton for players A and B; or, 3) At the draft, Moncton will have the option to send players A and B to Halifax for picks XYZ. Not to mention with multiple players and picks rumoured to be involved, the options could in theory be separate (i.e. option to send player A for pick X, and option to send player B for picks Y and Z). In the past, we have seen enough rumoured futures trades not happen as speculated to make me think there might be options involved in some cases ... but don't know for sure. I'm not assuming anything. The trades are all written down somewhere, and both GMs involved would be foolish to not have every step in writing, signed by both sides. This isn't 1975. |
|
|
|
Post by yesisaiditfirst on May 13, 2020 10:44:11 GMT -4
If the 20-21 season is cancelled, God forbid, shouldn't the league be concerned about the viability of some franchises? What kind of league will there be to come back to? The league has already said that beyond 20-21 there's no guarantee for 18 teams to still be in the league. A storm has been brewing on that front for years for some teams. Like a couple who has lived pay check to pay check for maybe the last 10 years but now face unemployment and questionable employment moving forward there's inevitably going to be some major economic changes that come out of all of this. And less CHL hockey teams is just inevitable. That bubble was going to burst as more and more teams watch losses pile up and ticket sales decline already leading up to this. Some teams will be looking at 1/3 to 2/3 of a loss in season ticket holders just from the seniors who won't be willing to spend the money and/or take the health risk. Some markets survive off that senior citizen crowd. Its an excuse to weed out the poor situations. But this is across our economy. The last 2 months have been hard on many fledgling businesses but the ones who go under (of already have) were a calamity away from it. They would have been hurt by tax increases, interest rates, minimum wage increases. If they are in an industry with competitors with better balance sheets it doesnt always mean a net loss in jobs for their displaced staff. Often times those businesses pick up the slack. This whole Covid-19 situation taped together by a mish mash of govt temporary handouts and subsidies is going to restructure that part of the economy. Banks are still lending money but a whole lot more hoops to get startup cash for new business. In junior hockey a team that is hovering over the water line barely is at mercy of the tolerance of its investors to be the life vest. But it takes something like this beyond their control to really deflate it and this is it. Usually you get pressure to hang in there. Things will be better. But that isnt going to happen now. Not to pick on Bathurst but I just dont see a ground swell building for a save the Titan campaign now. Who in this climate will step forward with money down on that? I wouldnt even put a deposit down today (May 13) on Halifax tickets because I need that money right now and there is little expectation in my mind there will be a rush on tickets for a long time. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on May 13, 2020 10:47:58 GMT -4
The league has already said that beyond 20-21 there's no guarantee for 18 teams to still be in the league. A storm has been brewing on that front for years for some teams. Like a couple who has lived pay check to pay check for maybe the last 10 years but now face unemployment and questionable employment moving forward there's inevitably going to be some major economic changes that come out of all of this. And less CHL hockey teams is just inevitable. That bubble was going to burst as more and more teams watch losses pile up and ticket sales decline already leading up to this. Some teams will be looking at 1/3 to 2/3 of a loss in season ticket holders just from the seniors who won't be willing to spend the money and/or take the health risk. Some markets survive off that senior citizen crowd. Its an excuse to weed out the poor situations. But this is across our economy. The last 2 months have been hard on many fledgling businesses but the ones who go under (of already have) were a calamity away from it. They would have been hurt by tax increases, interest rates, minimum wage increases. If they are in an industry with competitors with better balance sheets it doesnt always mean a net loss in jobs for their displaced staff. Often times those businesses pick up the slack. This whole Covid-19 situation taped together by a mish mash of govt temporary handouts and subsidies is going to restructure that part of the economy. Banks are still lending money but a whole lot more hoops to get startup cash for new business. In junior hockey a team that is hovering over the water line barely is at mercy of the tolerance of its investors to be the life vest. But it takes something like this beyond their control to really deflate it and this is it. Usually you get pressure to hang in there. Things will be better. But that isnt going to happen now. Not to pick on Bathurst but I just dont see a ground swell building for a save the Titan campaign now. Who in this climate will step forward with money down on that? I wouldnt even put a deposit down today (May 13) on Halifax tickets because I need that money right now and there is little expectation in my mind there will be a rush on tickets for a long time. I have said for a couple of months now - when this is over, the strong will be stronger, and the weak will be weaker. There will be many opportunities to buy assets at distressed prices for those with the cash to do so - doesn't matter if we are talking buying stocks, buying a business, real estate, or even big ticket consumer items like vehicles, furniture, electronics, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on May 13, 2020 10:50:24 GMT -4
You are assuming you know for certain how the trade is written up ... when these are not made public, who the hell knows for sure. Assuming that it is registered with the league (even that is based on hearsay as they never confirm it publicly), it could still be: 1) At the draft, Halifax will send picks XYZ to Moncton for players A and B --- this is what you assume is the case, and I am not saying you are wrong; or, 2) At the draft, Halifax will have the option to send picks XYZ to Moncton for players A and B; or, 3) At the draft, Moncton will have the option to send players A and B to Halifax for picks XYZ. Not to mention with multiple players and picks rumoured to be involved, the options could in theory be separate (i.e. option to send player A for pick X, and option to send player B for picks Y and Z). In the past, we have seen enough rumoured futures trades not happen as speculated to make me think there might be options involved in some cases ... but don't know for sure. I'm not assuming anything. The trades are all written down somewhere, and both GMs involved would be foolish to not have every step in writing, signed by both sides. This isn't 1975. Agreed ... what I am questioning is what the fine print of those deals in writing say ... I don't know for sure, and I suspect very few people do ... I presented 3 IMO very plausible wordings for a trade - which is correct in fact? |
|
|
|
Post by Arnold Slick on May 13, 2020 11:11:23 GMT -4
Probably one that better suits the talent level of the QMJHL. 18 teams is unfortunately too many for the talent that the region produces. Now I’m not advocating or saying they should willingly drop teams but if they did lose some teams, the on-ice product would improve drastically. The WHL needs to cut back by about 4 teams, they are struggling to ice contenders year after year, too watered down. Both the WHL and Q need more Americans to report. They're quite aware of it as well as both leagues have an American camp and an American draft. How much of a difference that makes remains to be seen. As for the WHL struggling to ice contenders, I'll assume you mean Memorial Cup contenders? The big reason they're struggling is because, for the most part, they don't have teams sacrificing everything to go all in for one year. The ones that do end up rebuilding seemingly forever and who wants that? If Q teams were as conservative as WHL teams then you wouldn't see the run of success they've had at the Memorial Cup. WHL may not be winning Memorial Cups but they have WAY more parity than the Q. Comes down to personal opinion on what you prefer - Memorial Cups or a more competitive, interesting league. What you said is correct as well though...less teams would mean the talent not spread as thin and not as much need to go all in to contend for a Memorial Cup. Applies to both the Q and WHL. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2020 11:34:31 GMT -4
Isn't this what the league addressed just a week ago, that teams who went all in will not be able to renege on returns or be compensated?
For the league to have addressed it, it isn't hard to put 2 and 2 together that one team or another must have looked for a loophole. Courteau actually even mentions by name that Moncton and Chicoutimi both submitted requests for possible compensation.
The following is a quote from the story:
The Wildcats, who were second overall, made three big trades between Dec. 22 and Jan. 6, acquiring Bo Groulx and Jared McIsaac from Halifax and Gabriel Fortier from Baie-Comeau. They also acquired goalie Olivier Rodrigue from Drummondville at the draft in June.
The cost to acquire the quartet included three first-round picks, five seconds, four thirds and two fourths.
The Sagueneens acquired Felix Bibeau from Quebec, Dawson Mercer from Drummondville, Ralphaël Lavoie from Halifax and Karl Boudrias from Val-d’Or during the in-season trade period. It also acquired Ethan Crossman from Baie-Comeau, Rafaël Harvey-Pinard and Felix-Antoine Drolet in the pre-season.
They relinquished three firsts, nine seconds, four thirds and two fourths, plus two highly touted prospects to acquire the top-end talent.
Sherbrooke, Cape Breton and Rimouski also made significant investments in terms of players and picks to give their team the best chance to win.
The returns seem fairly cut and dried, and not compounded by "the three firsts, nine seconds, four thirds and two fourths become xyz if somebody goes pro.
As such, I'm guessing that these deals are fairly cut and dried. QMJHL teams are not that dumb these days to leave things as open as players possibly moving on to pro or being out with extended injuries. When you make deals of this magnitude, you cross the T's and dot the I's, or you're not a very good GM when it comes to making these megadeals.
Just my opinion, and I know that somebody will likely rip me a new arsehole for simply having an opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on May 13, 2020 12:41:36 GMT -4
Isn't this what the league addressed just a week ago, that teams who went all in will not be able to renege on returns or be compensated? For the league to have addressed it, it isn't hard to put 2 and 2 together that one team or another must have looked for a loophole. Courteau actually even mentions by name that Moncton and Chicoutimi both submitted requests for possible compensation. The following is a quote from the story: The Wildcats, who were second overall, made three big trades between Dec. 22 and Jan. 6, acquiring Bo Groulx and Jared McIsaac from Halifax and Gabriel Fortier from Baie-Comeau. They also acquired goalie Olivier Rodrigue from Drummondville at the draft in June.
The cost to acquire the quartet included three first-round picks, five seconds, four thirds and two fourths.
The Sagueneens acquired Felix Bibeau from Quebec, Dawson Mercer from Drummondville, Ralphaël Lavoie from Halifax and Karl Boudrias from Val-d’Or during the in-season trade period. It also acquired Ethan Crossman from Baie-Comeau, Rafaël Harvey-Pinard and Felix-Antoine Drolet in the pre-season.
They relinquished three firsts, nine seconds, four thirds and two fourths, plus two highly touted prospects to acquire the top-end talent.
Sherbrooke, Cape Breton and Rimouski also made significant investments in terms of players and picks to give their team the best chance to win.The returns seem fairly cut and dried, and not compounded by "the three firsts, nine seconds, four thirds and two fourths become xyz if somebody goes pro. As such, I'm guessing that these deals are fairly cut and dried. QMJHL teams are not that dumb these days to leave things as open as players possibly moving on to pro or being out with extended injuries. When you make deals of this magnitude, you cross the T's and dot the I's, or you're not a very good GM when it comes to making these megadeals. Just my opinion, and I know that somebody will likely rip me a new arsehole for simply having an opinion. I think you're confused. The teams that went "all in" were just looking for the league to give compensatory picks(during the draft at the end of certain rounds) to the teams that spent big to win this year, not asking for him to change deals that were made. |
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on May 13, 2020 12:47:23 GMT -4
Isn't this what the league addressed just a week ago, that teams who went all in will not be able to renege on returns or be compensated? For the league to have addressed it, it isn't hard to put 2 and 2 together that one team or another must have looked for a loophole. Courteau actually even mentions by name that Moncton and Chicoutimi both submitted requests for possible compensation. The following is a quote from the story: The Wildcats, who were second overall, made three big trades between Dec. 22 and Jan. 6, acquiring Bo Groulx and Jared McIsaac from Halifax and Gabriel Fortier from Baie-Comeau. They also acquired goalie Olivier Rodrigue from Drummondville at the draft in June.
The cost to acquire the quartet included three first-round picks, five seconds, four thirds and two fourths.
The Sagueneens acquired Felix Bibeau from Quebec, Dawson Mercer from Drummondville, Ralphaël Lavoie from Halifax and Karl Boudrias from Val-d’Or during the in-season trade period. It also acquired Ethan Crossman from Baie-Comeau, Rafaël Harvey-Pinard and Felix-Antoine Drolet in the pre-season.
They relinquished three firsts, nine seconds, four thirds and two fourths, plus two highly touted prospects to acquire the top-end talent.
Sherbrooke, Cape Breton and Rimouski also made significant investments in terms of players and picks to give their team the best chance to win.The returns seem fairly cut and dried, and not compounded by "the three firsts, nine seconds, four thirds and two fourths become xyz if somebody goes pro. As such, I'm guessing that these deals are fairly cut and dried. QMJHL teams are not that dumb these days to leave things as open as players possibly moving on to pro or being out with extended injuries. When you make deals of this magnitude, you cross the T's and dot the I's, or you're not a very good GM when it comes to making these megadeals. Just my opinion, and I know that somebody will likely rip me a new arsehole for simply having an opinion. Moncton wanted compensation. Either picks or money i'm sure. They didn't want to change any deals to my knowledge. They wanted something in return for losing their playoff run. Nobody will rip you for an honest opinion. They will however rip you regularly if your last line is something constantly coming out in your posting style. Throw out opinions. Learn from them. Add to them. Read others. Learn from their opinions. That's how this works. People will take you to task if they don't agree and that's a part of it all, too. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2020 15:32:22 GMT -4
Isn't this what the league addressed just a week ago, that teams who went all in will not be able to renege on returns or be compensated? For the league to have addressed it, it isn't hard to put 2 and 2 together that one team or another must have looked for a loophole. Courteau actually even mentions by name that Moncton and Chicoutimi both submitted requests for possible compensation. The following is a quote from the story: The Wildcats, who were second overall, made three big trades between Dec. 22 and Jan. 6, acquiring Bo Groulx and Jared McIsaac from Halifax and Gabriel Fortier from Baie-Comeau. They also acquired goalie Olivier Rodrigue from Drummondville at the draft in June.
The cost to acquire the quartet included three first-round picks, five seconds, four thirds and two fourths.
The Sagueneens acquired Felix Bibeau from Quebec, Dawson Mercer from Drummondville, Ralphaël Lavoie from Halifax and Karl Boudrias from Val-d’Or during the in-season trade period. It also acquired Ethan Crossman from Baie-Comeau, Rafaël Harvey-Pinard and Felix-Antoine Drolet in the pre-season.
They relinquished three firsts, nine seconds, four thirds and two fourths, plus two highly touted prospects to acquire the top-end talent.
Sherbrooke, Cape Breton and Rimouski also made significant investments in terms of players and picks to give their team the best chance to win.The returns seem fairly cut and dried, and not compounded by "the three firsts, nine seconds, four thirds and two fourths become xyz if somebody goes pro. As such, I'm guessing that these deals are fairly cut and dried. QMJHL teams are not that dumb these days to leave things as open as players possibly moving on to pro or being out with extended injuries. When you make deals of this magnitude, you cross the T's and dot the I's, or you're not a very good GM when it comes to making these megadeals. Just my opinion, and I know that somebody will likely rip me a new arsehole for simply having an opinion. I think you're confused. The teams that went "all in" were just looking for the league to give compensatory picks(during the draft at the end of certain rounds) to the teams that spent big to win this year, not asking for him to change deals that were made. Yes, definitely confused. I had been thinking that the teams were hoping to not be required to pay full value for previously agreed to trades, and especially not to be required to complete some of the hidden trade features that certain picks would be returned at the draft for players. I thought that somebody had mentioned that in throwing out the players possibly turning pro and shortened season comments. It didn't occur to me that they meant that those parts of the trades should be completed, and then compensatory draft picks be granted to soften the blow. The way you put it, I now see it a bit differently, and maybe those teams should have been given more consideration for those requested "compensatory picks" - as it isn't a lot different than drafting players who do not report. Still confused, but thanks for the explanation. Sorry Jack. Trying to be a good poster, but maybe it just isn't for everybody. I've been overly trying to not say anything to piss people off but it isn't working obviously. Posting isn't for everybody I guess. Thank you to all for giving me a chance to take part. There are a lot of good people here doing good things in the way of supporting their teams and it makes for a good read most of the time. I'll just stick to reading from now on though. The discussions seem to be over my head and don't want to make a fool of myself. Cheers everybody. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on May 13, 2020 15:41:55 GMT -4
I think you're confused. The teams that went "all in" were just looking for the league to give compensatory picks(during the draft at the end of certain rounds) to the teams that spent big to win this year, not asking for him to change deals that were made. Yes, definitely confused. I had been thinking that the teams were hoping to not be required to pay full value for previously agreed to trades, and especially not to be required to complete some of the hidden trade features that certain picks would be returned at the draft for players. I thought that somebody had mentioned that in throwing out the players possibly turning pro and shortened season comments. It didn't occur to me that they meant that those parts of the trades should be completed, and then compensatory draft picks be granted to soften the blow. The way you put it, I now see it a bit differently, and maybe those teams should have been given more consideration for those requested "compensatory picks" - as it isn't a lot different than drafting players who do not report. Still confused, but thanks for the explanation. Sorry Jack. Trying to be a good poster, but maybe it just isn't for everybody. I've been overly trying to not say anything to piss people off but it isn't working obviously. Posting isn't for everybody I guess. Thank you to all for giving me a chance to take part. There are a lot of good people here doing good things in the way of supporting their teams and it makes for a good read most of the time. I'll just stick to reading from now on though. The discussions seem to be over my head and don't want to make a fool of myself. Cheers everybody. Keep posting man, IMO, you are off to a great start! Don't let Jack get you down - he gives everyone a hard time ... I think it means he likes you! |
|
