|
|
Post by Bev on Aug 10, 2007 0:25:19 GMT -4
Hunchberger was sulking at the draft likely because it was taking him so long to be picked up. One would think he would show up. Poor Herd fan was feeling very sorry for him and you know sympathy is not always her strong suit.  Im not sure if Hunch was there but his agent was flipping out...not sure why, everyone knew he was going NCAA...did he expect him to go 1st rd?? He was there in a lime green shirt. |
|
|
|
Post by chsb on Aug 10, 2007 8:45:19 GMT -4
Here is a break down of players at camp by position:
goaltenders:
Antoine Tardif
Tommy Legault
Champion, Nicolas G * 1990-05-02 - 145
Richmond, Jared G * 1989-05-21 6'02" 160
Scola, Alex G * 1990-05-05
Szostak, Matthew G * 1990-04-27 5'11" 179
Turgeon, Jean-Christophe G * 1989-06-14
MacRae, Andrew G 1988-09-13 6'04" 184
Lagacé, Jean-Michel G * 1990-05-02 5'09" 148
defense:
left:
Chamberland, Carl D 1988-05-19 6'02" 189
Desnoyers, Marc-Antoine D 1989-01-15 6'01" 176
Labrie, Mathieu D 1987-06-26 6'00" 194
Legros, Jean-Simon D * 1989-09-12 6'01" 207(winger also)
Robar, Shane D * 1990-02-13 6'02" 182 G
Sigouin, Nicolas D 1989-07-18 6'01" 185 G
Smearer, Cory D * 1990-04-28 5'11" 185 G
Tanel, Daniel D * 1990-11-28 6'06" 235
Tesink, Brad D 1989-01-15 6'04" 215 G
Jenks, Scott D * 1989-02-20 5'10" 180
right:
Blanchard, Remi D * 1990-06-27 5'10" 168 D
Foucher, David D 1989-08-14 6'02" 208 D
Landry, Kevin D * 1990-06-26 6'02" 185
Renaud, Maxime D 1989-03-04 5'11" 166
centermen:
Basque, Daniel C 1988-08-30 6'01" 188
Clendenning, Jordan C 1987-02-04 5'11" 200
Couture, Vincent C * 1990-07-01 6'02" 179
Jean-Bouliane, Mathieu C * 1991-04-07 5'10" 162
Knowles, Brian C * 1989-04-29 5'10" 160
Lefebvre, Julien C * 1990-11-03 5'08" 145
Messier, Charles-Antoine VAN C 1988-11-04 5'11" 178
Perreault, Mathieu WAS C 1988-01-05 5'09" 155 G
Robichaud, Andrew C * 1989-04-23 5'09" 160
Therrien, Nicolas - * 1988-03-21 6'00" 181(?)
right winger:
Faille, Éric AD 1989-07-27 5'11" 160
Grenache, Samuel AD 1989-12-05 5'11" 173
Houde-Brisson, Xavier AD * 1989-01-15 6'04" 200
Hunchberger, Kyle AD * 1990-02-14 6'01" 171
Jezegou, Spencer AD 1988-10-14 5'11" 199
Lévesque, Maxime AD 1990-02-09 5'11" 185
Rousselle, Julien AD * 1989-01-25 5'10" 180
left winger:
Bartos, Martin AG 1988-06-02 6'01" 182
Bernier, Jordan AG * 1991-04-04 6'01" 193
Buntic, Andy AG * 1989-08-15 5'11" 222
Critchlow, Cameron AG * 1991-12-18 5'09" 176
Côté, Gabriel AG * 1991-04-28 5'11" 147
Gismondi, Paul Anthony AG * 1990-06-08 6'00" 210
Joly, Tomy AG 1988-06-29 5'09" 175
LaBelle, Lucas AG 1988-10-02 5'09" 184
Lambke, Taylor AG * 1990-03-22 5'09" 150
Landry, Pier-Paul AG * 1990-03-26 5'09" 160
Lanteigne, Patrick AG * 1990-03-08 5'11" 190
Mailloux, Guillaume AG 1988-05-07 6'03" 221
Massé, Dany AG 1988-05-12 5'10" 193
Robichaud, Danny AG * 1989-05-23 5'09" 190
|
|
|
|
Post by MikeC on Aug 10, 2007 10:28:22 GMT -4
Isn't Scott Jenks paying NCAA next year?
|
|
|
|
Post by chsb on Aug 10, 2007 11:07:49 GMT -4
I inserted Scott just in case he changes his mind.....
|
|
|
|
Post by lalalaprise on Aug 10, 2007 12:22:47 GMT -4
Why would it be a waste of time? Alex Killorn went from AAA at 16 to Prep at 17 and he was drafted 3rd rd in the NHL... Prep school is a good level, and if i had a 16 year old kid there is no way he'd be going to the Q...prep school all the way without even questioning it. We can see that when you comment the Q draft...too bad.... No i just have my eyes open...ive seen Q teams fuck players...i have seen Q teams treat players like pieces of meat...im not saying it happens in all cases, but ive done my research, and if i had a kid that good, there is no way he is stepping 1 foot on the ice of a Q camp... Is the Q a bad option? Nope...its not a bad option...but everyone has their opinion...you are pro-Q and think everyone who goes prep school is stupid..im not going to try and convert your opinions but at least acknowledge that there are other options out there. |
|
|
|
Post by chsb on Aug 10, 2007 13:03:42 GMT -4
We can see that when you comment the Q draft...too bad.... No i just have my eyes open...ive seen Q teams fuck players...i have seen Q teams treat players like pieces of meat...im not saying it happens in all cases, but ive done my research, and if i had a kid that good, there is no way he is stepping 1 foot on the ice of a Q camp... Is the Q a bad option? Nope...its not a bad option...but everyone has their opinion...you are pro-Q and think everyone who goes prep school is stupid..im not going to try and convert your opinions but at least acknowledge that there are other options out there. Actually, being a scout as you advocate, I am surprised that you don't support better the CHL system which has a goal of trying to develop players for the pro ranks..... As a scout, you are actually advocating sending players to USA at prep schools over your day to day bread and butter leagues in Canada who happen to develop these fine young men for the pro ranks. I am not gonna be too critical of your clear choices, but scouts and agents alike have played a big role in the recent upsurge of kids choosing NCAA path over the Canadian system.... I simply find that by doing so you are getting away from the Canadian purpose of allowing a fair chance to each kid to develop in our country. |
|
|
|
Post by MikeC on Aug 10, 2007 13:05:04 GMT -4
No i just have my eyes open...ive seen Q teams fuck players...i have seen Q teams treat players like pieces of meat...im not saying it happens in all cases, but ive done my research, and if i had a kid that good, there is no way he is stepping 1 foot on the ice of a Q camp... Is the Q a bad option? Nope...its not a bad option...but everyone has their opinion...you are pro-Q and think everyone who goes prep school is stupid..im not going to try and convert your opinions but at least acknowledge that there are other options out there. Basically, in the end what you should want is to be able to go to University for free (or for the least amount of money), if pro-hockey (AHL minimum) isn't going to happen. Whatever route is going to get you that is the one you should take. |
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Aug 10, 2007 13:27:14 GMT -4
Here is a break down of players at camp by position: goaltenders: Antoine Tardif Tommy Legault Champion, Nicolas G * 1990-05-02 - 145 Richmond, Jared G * 1989-05-21 6'02" 160 Scola, Alex G * 1990-05-05 Szostak, Matthew G * 1990-04-27 5'11" 179 Turgeon, Jean-Christophe G * 1989-06-14 MacRae, Andrew G 1988-09-13 6'04" 184 Lagacé, Jean-Michel G * 1990-05-02 5'09" 148 You guys sure have a pile of goaltenders coming to camp ... but are pretty much certain to be going with Tardif (definately) and Legault (90% certainty). You open your camp later than most teams and so I am wondering when these extra 7 netminders will find a decent amount of playing time to show their stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Aug 10, 2007 13:51:38 GMT -4
No i just have my eyes open...ive seen Q teams fuck players...i have seen Q teams treat players like pieces of meat...im not saying it happens in all cases, but ive done my research, and if i had a kid that good, there is no way he is stepping 1 foot on the ice of a Q camp... Is the Q a bad option? Nope...its not a bad option...but everyone has their opinion...you are pro-Q and think everyone who goes prep school is stupid..im not going to try and convert your opinions but at least acknowledge that there are other options out there. Actually, being a scout as you advocate, I am surprised that you don't support better the CHL system which has a goal of trying to develop players for the pro ranks..... As a scout, you are actually advocating sending players to USA at prep schools over your day to day bread and butter leagues in Canada who happen to develop these fine young men for the pro ranks. I am not gonna be too critical of your clear choices, but scouts and agents alike have played a big role in the recent upsurge of kids choosing NCAA path over the Canadian system.... I simply find that by doing so you are getting away from the Canadian purpose of allowing a fair chance to each kid to develop in our country. Will you learn to read? LaLa said that if he had an ELITE talent, the Q is the way to go. It has nothing to do with NCAA over the Q. It has to do with the best way a kid can play hockey and get his education paid for because for kids who are not considered elite level talent the chances of them getting a pro contract are almost zero so they must consider ALL options. And why does the kid have to leave the country? We have very good private high school hockey programs in Canada. The CHL is not for every kid. You CAN get to the NHL using other avenues. And the CHL road is not always the glorious one you seem to think it is. |
|
|
|
Post by chsb on Aug 10, 2007 15:15:53 GMT -4
Actually, being a scout as you advocate, I am surprised that you don't support better the CHL system which has a goal of trying to develop players for the pro ranks..... As a scout, you are actually advocating sending players to USA at prep schools over your day to day bread and butter leagues in Canada who happen to develop these fine young men for the pro ranks. I am not gonna be too critical of your clear choices, but scouts and agents alike have played a big role in the recent upsurge of kids choosing NCAA path over the Canadian system.... I simply find that by doing so you are getting away from the Canadian purpose of allowing a fair chance to each kid to develop in our country. Will you learn to read? LaLa said that if he had an ELITE talent, the Q is the way to go. It has nothing to do with NCAA over the Q. It has to do with the best way a kid can play hockey and get his education paid for because for kids who are not considered elite level talent the chances of them getting a pro contract are almost zero so they must consider ALL options. And why does the kid have to leave the country? We have very good private high school hockey programs in Canada. The CHL is not for every kid. You CAN get to the NHL using other avenues. And the CHL road is not always the glorious one you seem to think it is. I fail to see that! Only a select few attending Prep School get to NCAA level.... So the "not elite" Canadian player can get an education in Canada while playing hockey too..... They can access College in the States for free, but when comes University, they have to pay or come back to Canada if they fail the grades academically or at the sport level being hockey... It is true what you say for the ages 16-17-18, but at 19 and beyond, if they are not good enough, they have to pay their own way. The Canadian system will bring a kid to University and secure scholarships for his full 4 years. To give a hands down advantage to the American way is simply not recognizing that a very few select ones access the NCAA program. |
|
|
|
Post by MikeC on Aug 10, 2007 15:25:37 GMT -4
I fail to see that! Only a select few attending Prep School get to NCAA level.... So the "not elite" Canadian player can get an education in Canada while playing hockey too..... They can access College in the States for free, but when comes University, they have to pay or come back to Canada if they fail the grades academically or at the sport level being hockey... It is true what you say for the ages 16-17-18, but at 19 and beyond, if they are not good enough, they have to pay their own way. The Canadian system will bring a kid to University and secure scholarships for his full 4 years. To give a hands down advantage to the American way is simply not recognizing that a very few select ones access the NCAA program. Who's giving a "hands down advantage" to the American system? We're just acknowledging the prep-school route as a viable option. |
|
joey
Draft Pick
Posts: 144 
|
Post by joey on Aug 10, 2007 16:05:15 GMT -4
This is off the topic but has anyone heard what Charles Bergeron is doing this winter. Ill miss him in the league. He was tough and very entertaining .
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Aug 10, 2007 16:07:22 GMT -4
Will you learn to read? LaLa said that if he had an ELITE talent, the Q is the way to go. It has nothing to do with NCAA over the Q. It has to do with the best way a kid can play hockey and get his education paid for because for kids who are not considered elite level talent the chances of them getting a pro contract are almost zero so they must consider ALL options. And why does the kid have to leave the country? We have very good private high school hockey programs in Canada. The CHL is not for every kid. You CAN get to the NHL using other avenues. And the CHL road is not always the glorious one you seem to think it is. I fail to see that! Only a select few attending Prep School get to NCAA level.... So the "not elite" Canadian player can get an education in Canada while playing hockey too..... They can access College in the States for free, but when comes University, they have to pay or come back to Canada if they fail the grades academically or at the sport level being hockey... It is true what you say for the ages 16-17-18, but at 19 and beyond, if they are not good enough, they have to pay their own way. The Canadian system will bring a kid to University and secure scholarships for his full 4 years. To give a hands down advantage to the American way is simply not recognizing that a very few select ones access the NCAA program. You're looking at this from a 15yr old kid trying to get to the NHL instead of a 15yr old kid trying to get an education. It's 2 completely different thing. Shockingly as this may seem to you not EVERY kid who wants to play in the Q wants to play pro hockey. Some of them realize the difficulty in that and come to the Q with the goal of getting their University education paid for. Kids can play prep school and go to an NCAA/top CIS school. Not necessarily to play hockey, but to get a top notch education. The system benefits those who plays for 4 or 5 years but not the ones who might fall through the cracks or get into a deep organization, it REALLY fucks them over. And even the ones it benefits do NOT get a free 4 yr ride from the Q. Individuals may based on the team they play for but for a 19yr old 5th defenceman in his 4th year in Rouyn-Noranda, he's getting the Q max(11,500 maybe?) and not much more. Thats not even 2 years tuition at a University in Nova Scotia. You're grossly over-rating the Canadian system based on the few elite non-professional players it benefits while completely ignoring the ones who it screws over. There are advantages/dis-advantages to both systems but to try to act like our system is full proof and the way everything should run is a very ignorant and arrogant presumption on your part. |
|
joey
Draft Pick
Posts: 144
|
Post by joey on Aug 10, 2007 16:08:01 GMT -4
Lucas Labelle will he stick this year as a19 year old.Did not play bad at the end of last year.
|
|
|
|
Post by lalalaprise on Aug 10, 2007 17:00:39 GMT -4
Will you learn to read? LaLa said that if he had an ELITE talent, the Q is the way to go. It has nothing to do with NCAA over the Q. It has to do with the best way a kid can play hockey and get his education paid for because for kids who are not considered elite level talent the chances of them getting a pro contract are almost zero so they must consider ALL options. And why does the kid have to leave the country? We have very good private high school hockey programs in Canada. The CHL is not for every kid. You CAN get to the NHL using other avenues. And the CHL road is not always the glorious one you seem to think it is. I fail to see that! Only a select few attending Prep School get to NCAA level.... So the "not elite" Canadian player can get an education in Canada while playing hockey too..... They can access College in the States for free, but when comes University, they have to pay or come back to Canada if they fail the grades academically or at the sport level being hockey... It is true what you say for the ages 16-17-18, but at 19 and beyond, if they are not good enough, they have to pay their own way. The Canadian system will bring a kid to University and secure scholarships for his full 4 years. To give a hands down advantage to the American way is simply not recognizing that a very few select ones access the NCAA program. There are more NCAA schools offering full scholarships than there are CHL teams...so what makes you think that a random player has more of a chance to play CHL than NCAA?? Plus if you cant play CHL than you arent good enough for the NCAA and then it becomes a moot point. You have this preconceived notion that if you play NCAA you wont go pro...well I hate to break it to you but the USHL had more players drafted than the QMJHL... |
|
