|
Post by cbtitan on Jun 29, 2006 14:13:06 GMT -5
All in all a core of 1989-1990 will take at least two years to pan out. So your first big year could be 2008-2009....
|
|
|
Post by catnut on Jun 29, 2006 14:25:25 GMT -5
We would have 2 down years, before being back at the top. However, with the surrounding cast of veterans, our down years should not be as far down as the Titan's as I don't expect to see a game of musical chairs with the 20 YO's.
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Jun 29, 2006 14:28:11 GMT -5
All in all a core of 1989-1990 will take at least two years to pan out. So your first big year could be 2008-2009.... Agreed - we will be down the next two seasons barring some miracle ... how far down remains to be seen, and could be dependent on the mileage we get out of our vets this year, how fast the kids develop, quality of coaching we land, impact of our new euros, arrival of any Americans, etc... If things go poorly, I can see us being near last each of the next two years - if we get some breaks I can see us being a 55-65 point team that finishes somewhere in the 12-16 range overall and goes out in the first round.
|
|
|
Post by catnut on Jun 29, 2006 14:32:39 GMT -5
The way I see it as of today, the year 2007-2008 should be worse than 2006-2007 as the Cats will have traded the veterans and the remaining ones will have graduated. The second year, the Cats would be relying solely on the young 'uns.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jun 29, 2006 14:57:43 GMT -5
But if we get some luck and some decent trades we may have a team like Gatineau had this year. We won't be a contender but it will make for some interesting moments I am sure.
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Jun 29, 2006 19:46:19 GMT -5
The Wildcats are about at the same stage as the 2003-2004 Titan after losing Gervais and Bergeron. However Moncton does not have a potential Mathieu Roy or Thomas Beauregard lined up yet....may be Cameron?? All in all it is gonna be a good two years process... And the fans will show up instead of abandoning the team like they do up north.
|
|
|
Post by Bev on Jun 29, 2006 20:05:43 GMT -5
We would have 2 down years, before being back at the top. However, with the surrounding cast of veterans, our down years should not be as far down as the Titan's as I don't expect to see a game of musical chairs with the 20 YO's. You better hope you don't have any major injuries or 18 year old NHLers disappearing from your roster.
|
|
|
Post by Cristobal Huet on Jun 29, 2006 20:10:37 GMT -5
All in all a core of 1989-1990 will take at least two years to pan out. So your first big year could be 2008-2009.... 1989's will be 18 in 2007 2008 which is next year. If they are well surrounded by solid 20 year olds, they should not be a bottom feeding team.
|
|
|
Post by Cristobal Huet on Jun 29, 2006 20:12:02 GMT -5
The way I see it as of today, the year 2007-2008 should be worse than 2006-2007 as the Cats will have traded the veterans and the remaining ones will have graduated. The second year, the Cats would be relying solely on the young 'uns. 07-08 should not be too bad if all the 17 year olds get to play the upcoming season. Those guys will all be 18 in 07-08 and evolved from prospects to production.
|
|
|
Post by lalalaprise on Jun 29, 2006 20:25:02 GMT -5
Labelle and Martikanen are blue chips also. Labelle was 3rd in MAAA scoring last year and should develop into a frontline Q scorer in time. Martikanen is rated to go in the 2nd round of the NHL draft. Nobody is saying they WILL be good players, but there is solid potential, and as I said earlier, a better base to start with than in 2000-2001. Just like with Voracek in Halifax there is no guarantees attatched to potential. Labelle was a 16 playing with a poor class of 15 y/o forward in MAAA, I doubt he is blue chip. Again if Bttian posted the same comment you would carve him a new asshole Labelle is bluechip...hes has amazing skills. The crop of 15's in AAA wasnt that weak...he still played against guys his own age. He is better than Marc-Andre Julien, his team mate, who went 35th overall to Chicoutimi.
|
|