|
Post by Porkchop on Nov 20, 2006 13:47:18 GMT -5
doesn't have to be 19....you look at their next Euro pick....probably 18 and suddenly he shows up in Moncton for the next 2 years...........I really don't care one way or the other whether Moncton burns all the bridges with 32 NHL teams.....that wouldn't bother me in the least...... 32 ? Are we up to 32 now ? Vancouver doesn't care what Moncton needs ... they drop off an 18 yr old that they just drafted ... let him play here for a year ... if he shows anything special you can be sure they won't hold him back from the AHL the next year. Why would they slow his development ? You are grasping at straws ... all teams ... Vancouver included ... must do what is best for their own team ... within the limits of what they are allowed to do. The only thing that will prevent Moncton from trading Bourdon is if it was written into the deal with VD. You are going around in a circle......you agreed with me a bit back......if this thread goes long enough, you'll be back around. ;D...........you brought up the St. Louis team keeping a euro even though he wasn't ready, instead of sending him back..........I'm just saying I don't think it's good to go against their wishes, that's all.......it could bite you in the butt like it did before........good relationships with NHL teams is only a good thing, so whay shun Vancouver if they are asking for Bourdon to stay in Moncton......I'm sure it won't be for "no compensation"........
|
|
|
Post by catnut on Nov 20, 2006 13:48:25 GMT -5
So getting a 19 yr old Euro for one year is "balancing" out not trading Bourdon and receiving a young star (maybe 2) in the making for 3 and 4 yrs ... plus a high pick ? We can don't need Vancouver's help to draft a 19 yr old Euro. doesn't have to be 19....you look at their next Euro pick....probably 18 and suddenly he shows up in Moncton for the next 2 years...........I really don't care one way or the other whether Moncton burns all the bridges with 32 NHL teams.....that wouldn't bother me in the least...... At least, Moncton has bridges to burn....
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Nov 20, 2006 15:03:06 GMT -5
32 ? Are we up to 32 now ? Vancouver doesn't care what Moncton needs ... they drop off an 18 yr old that they just drafted ... let him play here for a year ... if he shows anything special you can be sure they won't hold him back from the AHL the next year. Why would they slow his development ? You are grasping at straws ... all teams ... Vancouver included ... must do what is best for their own team ... within the limits of what they are allowed to do. The only thing that will prevent Moncton from trading Bourdon is if it was written into the deal with VD. You are going around in a circle......you agreed with me a bit back......if this thread goes long enough, you'll be back around. ;D...........you brought up the St. Louis team keeping a euro even though he wasn't ready, instead of sending him back..........I'm just saying I don't think it's good to go against their wishes, that's all.......it could bite you in the butt like it did before........good relationships with NHL teams is only a good thing, so whay shun Vancouver if they are asking for Bourdon to stay in Moncton......I'm sure it won't be for "no compensation"........ No ... I have been consistent ... I don't think we should be bowing to an NHL teams requests unless they benefit us in some significant way. I am glad we traded Shkotov instead of Karsums ... St. Louis didn't like it and took Zakharov away ... but we got Bartulis so we didn't lose anywhere. There is no benefit to us in what you suggest with Vancouver assigning a Euro here ... we can draft our own Euro without their help ... and we get the same benefit for the Wildcats. I said a balance is needed ... meaning we have to get some benefit from Bourdon staying here ... getting a Euro from Vancouver is no benefit we couldn't get on our own. If Vancouver can't make it worth our while then there is no good reason to do it. If Vancouver wants us to play ball then they have to make it worth our while.
|
|
|
Post by Cristobal Huet on Nov 20, 2006 15:13:48 GMT -5
I don;t think it's a big deal because it would be utterly ridiculous for Vancouver to make a big deal over Bourdon being in cape Breton or Quebec or wherever...instead of Moncton.
|
|
|
Post by chaos12 on Nov 20, 2006 15:26:51 GMT -5
Thing i find funny if the ntc for bourdon is true whats the difference if he went to quebec or cape breton as i recall a certain quebec coach played goalie for a long time and prolly wouldnt be a bad coach for bourdon... Look at vlasic now he is with the san jose sharks and doing fine in my eyes.
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Nov 20, 2006 15:32:10 GMT -5
Thing i find funny if the ntc for bourdon is true whats the difference if he went to quebec or cape breton as i recall a certain quebec coach played goalie for a long time and prolly wouldnt be a bad coach for bourdon... Look at vlasic now he is with the san jose sharks and doing fine in my eyes. Is Bourdon switching to goalie ?
|
|
|
Post by bystander on Nov 20, 2006 15:33:46 GMT -5
damm, I hate this.. I have to agree with Steve. Vancouver canot tell the Cats what to do. Why would we want Bordon here this year, if he will be gone next and get nothing at all. If we can get some good return, and I am sure we can, then thats what the Cats need to do for themselves. Vancouver knows that we are rebuilding and that having Bordon for this year vs getting a nice return for our future is what the Cats need to do. They sent Bordon back to continue to work on certain aspects of his game. He can do that here or on a different Q team..
|
|
|
Post by Porkchop on Nov 20, 2006 15:38:20 GMT -5
You are going around in a circle......you agreed with me a bit back......if this thread goes long enough, you'll be back around. ;D...........you brought up the St. Louis team keeping a euro even though he wasn't ready, instead of sending him back..........I'm just saying I don't think it's good to go against their wishes, that's all.......it could bite you in the butt like it did before........good relationships with NHL teams is only a good thing, so whay shun Vancouver if they are asking for Bourdon to stay in Moncton......I'm sure it won't be for "no compensation"........ No ... I have been consistent ... I don't think we should be bowing to an NHL teams requests unless they benefit us in some significant way. I am glad we traded Shkotov instead of Karsums ... St. Louis didn't like it and took Zakharov away ... but we got Bartulis so we didn't lose anywhere. There is no benefit to us in what you suggest with Vancouver assigning a Euro here ... we can draft our own Euro without their help ... and we get the same benefit for the Wildcats. I said a balance is needed ... meaning we have to get some benefit from Bourdon staying here ... getting a Euro from Vancouver is no benefit we couldn't get on our own. If Vancouver can't make it worth our while then there is no good reason to do it. If Vancouver wants us to play ball then they have to make it worth our while. I agree with that......however the difference in that Euro you can draft anyway over the guy they could convince to go there, could be the difference between a Voroshilov and a Radulov.
|
|
|
Post by catnut on Nov 20, 2006 15:45:06 GMT -5
The only other compensation possible for the Wildcats would be if the Canucks could convince some US players they drafted (do they have any?) to come play here.
|
|
|
Post by Penguins23 on Nov 20, 2006 15:46:29 GMT -5
[quote author=porkchop board=20062007 thread=116371341 There is no benefit to us in what you suggest with Vancouver assigning a Euro here ... we can draft our own Euro without their help ... and we get the same benefit for the Wildcats. I said a balance is needed ... meaning we have to get some benefit from Bourdon staying here ... getting a Euro from Vancouver is no benefit we couldn't get on our own. If Vancouver can't make it worth our while then there is no good reason to do it. If Vancouver wants us to play ball then they have to make it worth our while. Real good point Steve, cause we all know we did AWESOME at this years Euro draft
|
|
|
Post by Porkchop on Nov 20, 2006 16:13:34 GMT -5
[quote author=porkchop board=20062007 thread=116371341 There is no benefit to us in what you suggest with Vancouver assigning a Euro here ... we can draft our own Euro without their help ... and we get the same benefit for the Wildcats. I said a balance is needed ... meaning we have to get some benefit from Bourdon staying here ... getting a Euro from Vancouver is no benefit we couldn't get on our own. If Vancouver can't make it worth our while then there is no good reason to do it. If Vancouver wants us to play ball then they have to make it worth our while. Real good point Steve, cause we all know we did AWESOME at this years Euro draft Hey you did good......one guy played 16 games and the other guy played 10......put them together and they played every game so far.......kind of a 2 for 1 deal........ ;D ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by chaos12 on Nov 20, 2006 17:00:43 GMT -5
my point a while was to say there more good coaches in the league other then moncton.... i did not say bourdon would be goalie....
|
|
|
Post by Sec21critic on Nov 20, 2006 18:10:12 GMT -5
[quote author=porkchop board=20062007 thread=116371341 There is no benefit to us in what you suggest with Vancouver assigning a Euro here ... we can draft our own Euro without their help ... and we get the same benefit for the Wildcats. I said a balance is needed ... meaning we have to get some benefit from Bourdon staying here ... getting a Euro from Vancouver is no benefit we couldn't get on our own. If Vancouver can't make it worth our while then there is no good reason to do it. If Vancouver wants us to play ball then they have to make it worth our while. Real good point Steve, cause we all know we did AWESOME at this years Euro draft When's the last time we drafted two euros that didn't pan out all that well for us (not counting the years we didn't draft)? I'm thinking 2001, when we drafted Shkotov (didn't report, was forced to report, got hosed by Quebec in a trade for him because they basically had us cornered) and Konkov (never reported). That was the worst, IMO. Going through the other years, we either drafted pretty well or at least received good compensation for at least one of the Euros we drafted each year. Pretty hard to crap on the Euro scouting staff we have in place when they only have years like this once every four or five seasons.
|
|
|
Post by Lirette on Nov 20, 2006 18:16:17 GMT -5
Real good point Steve, cause we all know we did AWESOME at this years Euro draft When's the last time we drafted two euros that didn't pan out all that well for us (not counting the years we didn't draft)? I'm thinking 2001, when we drafted Shkotov (didn't report, was forced to report, got hosed by Quebec in a trade for him because they basically had us cornered) and Konkov (never reported). That was the worst, IMO. Going through the other years, we either drafted pretty well or at least received good compensation for at least one of the Euros we drafted each year. Pretty hard to crap on the Euro scouting staff we have in place when they only have years like this once every four or five seasons. Especially since there are quite a few teams that struggle to find good euros each year.
|
|
|
Post by Cristobal Huet on Nov 20, 2006 18:17:55 GMT -5
Real good point Steve, cause we all know we did AWESOME at this years Euro draft When's the last time we drafted two euros that didn't pan out all that well for us (not counting the years we didn't draft)? I'm thinking 2001, when we drafted Shkotov (didn't report, was forced to report, got hosed by Quebec in a trade for him because they basically had us cornered) and Konkov (never reported). That was the worst, IMO. Going through the other years, we either drafted pretty well or at least received good compensation for at least one of the Euros we drafted each year. Pretty hard to crap on the Euro scouting staff we have in place when they only have years like this once every four or five seasons. Konkov was drafted with Thoresen, Shkotov was drafted the following year with Artukhin.
|
|