Which 20 goes?

[joey]

bjindaho said:

We can't reacquire Laberge. A player has to be away for two years before he can be reacquired, therefore Bartos will be the first player that we could reacquire (and Roy-Vallieres if he's young enough).

The team is 2-0 with Knox in the lineup but a lot of that seems to be more about him not screwing up top 6 chemistry than production. He is putting in good energy shifts, whereas F. Charland is actually making his linemates worse out there.

If we drop Knox, and right now he looks like he should only be dropped if we are dropping both, I'd hope for us to acquire someone to bump Gauthier from the top 6, but Gallant would be adequate, for now.

I see a division where one more big move might make us the favorites.

When I mentioned Laberge ,I meant Brec was saying Gallant was a third liner with CB last year. So was Laberge last year and this year hes moved up to top line duty. Things change.

[bjindaho]

ok, but Laberge had 50+ points last year versus Gallant's 20 i think it was.

[canucklehead]

bjindaho said:

ok, but Laberge had 50+ points last year versus Gallant's 20 i think it was.

11g + 6a = 17pts but your close

[Judas In My Mind]

canucklehead said:

bjindaho said:

ok, but Laberge had 50+ points last year versus Gallant's 20 i think it was.

11g + 6a = 17pts but your close

While we're at it, Laberge only had 39 points last year.

[bjindaho]

my bad... i didn't think he had such a terrible second half

[killer]

bjindaho said:

We can't reacquire Laberge. A player has to be away for two years before he can be reacquired, therefore Bartos will be the first player that we could reacquire (and Roy-Vallieres if he's young enough).



I see a division where one more big move might make us the favorites.

I am quite sure it is 3 years before you can reacquire a player not 2.


We need more then one player to be considered favorites.......... Halifax and Bathurst have much more scoring depth and experience up front then us. Our goaltending needs to become much better as well before we make any noise

[bjindaho]

the rule is that if the player leaves as a 17, he can come back as a 20, or if he leaves as a 16, he can come back as a 19. Bartos was traded after his 17 season, and therefore could come back next year as a 20, not that it would be smart.

I think that Halifax and Bathurst are pretty safe bets to win the division. On the other hand, another top 6 guy would bolster our playoff chances, since neither can come close to touching our D. But you are right, the goalies do need to step up before this becomes anything more than fantasy. All's I'm saying is:
Liske - Dido - Sparling
Leduc - Picard - 20

Grant - Sauve
Stich - Despres

would be sweet and would get all our guns some real experience (hopefully coupled with a deep run) for next year.

[elementz]

Well Charland and Knox are gone. Let the speculation begin.

[berner]

Funny thing is the poll results for who everyone thinks would be gone on Monday (assuming only ONE would be cut mind you) pointed to Fullerton!!

[bjindaho]

It's a locked poll, is it not? Therefore, Fully got a lot of votes after Mayer's win (when the poll was posted), whereas Charland only got votes in the last two days, and Knox fell behind when people started to vote for Charland.

[berner]

You must have missed my point... it's interesting that Fullerton got the most votes as the one 20 to go when the Dogs picked up Picard-Hooper. JB turns around and cuts not one but two 20s, neither of which were voted as most likely gone. Just goes to show JB is unpredictable even to dedicated fans.

And I should hope it's a locked poll now, kind of silly to have a poll asking for predictions when the move is already done.

[brec7]

joey said:

When I mentioned Laberge ,I meant Brec was saying Gallant was a third liner with CB last year. So was Laberge last year and this year hes moved up to top line duty. Things change.

Laberge is actually on CB's 2nd line, and CB is a team that it seems most feel will finish BEHIND your Sea Dogs. And Gallant is not as offensively gifted as Laberge.

I think Gallant is definitely good enough to be a #3 20 on a weak team in the Q, I'm just not sure why you guys are so gung ho about picking him up. But if you want to send the Eagles something good in exchange for him, feel free to do so. ;D

[bjindaho]

I think the thought is that our top 9 are more or less set, so most would like someone to plug in on the fourth line with Gallant and Thomas to provide leadership while not requiring prime minutes.