|
Post by forrest on Aug 15, 2005 6:43:46 GMT -5
I predict Bergeron will have a very good year with Saint John and a lot of people will regret we didn't protect him.
I reserve myslef the right to say "I told you so" in 4-8 months from now. ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Aug 15, 2005 7:11:06 GMT -5
I predict Bergeron will have a very good year with Saint John and a lot of people will regret we didn't protect him. I reserve myslef the right to say "I told you so" in 4-8 months from now. ;D ;D ;D I regret losing him too ... but who would you have left unprotected instead of him ? Try not to use hindsight in your answer as management didn't have it when they had to make their decision.
|
|
|
Post by CrazyJoeDevola on Aug 15, 2005 7:12:42 GMT -5
Well, by most accounts for what he does, he had a good year last year... now he's a year older, and will play more on an expansion team. Plus he will be one of their more dependable, experienced players and most likely a fan favorite. You're going out on a limb there, arent you...
|
|
|
Post by Cristobal Huet on Aug 15, 2005 7:13:51 GMT -5
I predict Bergeron will have a very good year with Saint John and a lot of people will regret we didn't protect him. I reserve myslef the right to say "I told you so" in 4-8 months from now. ;D ;D ;D I regret losing him too ... but who would you have left unprotected instead of him ? Try not to use hindsight in your answer as management didn't have it when they had to make their decision. 1-Bernier...he had no chance of coming back 2-Adam...could have easily been replaced by Emanuele or Blanchette had he been claimed.
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Aug 15, 2005 7:22:45 GMT -5
I regret losing him too ... but who would you have left unprotected instead of him ? Try not to use hindsight in your answer as management didn't have it when they had to make their decision. 1-Bernier...he had no chance of coming back 2-Adam...could have easily been replaced by Emanuele or Blanchette had he been claimed. Yes ... I don't argue those names ... but would you protect Bergeron ahead of Bodnarchuk, Welcher, etc once Bernier and Adam are left unprotected ? I think way back in June most agreed that Bergeron was to be left off the list ... most argued about Bernier, Welcher, Bodnarchuk, Adam, Blanchette .... but the consensus seemed to be that Bergeron (a 3rd line grinder that could fight middleweights) was unfortunately expendable. I think Nolan probably has already found a few comparable FA's that he is bringing in that can be 3rd line grinders that can fight. While I really wish we still had Bergeron ... I don't think he will be difficult to replace.
|
|
|
Post by forrest on Aug 15, 2005 9:03:30 GMT -5
Like Steve said, it's hard not to use hindsight, but with the depth we had/have on D, I would have protected Bergeron over Adam. He's the only player they protected that I could think of taking off for Bergeron.
Steve Bernier I would have protected him. The lockout wasn't over with, and even if the chances were very very small, it would have been catastrophic to have Bernier play his 20 year old season with a Q team other than the wildcats when they are hosting the memorial cup.
But in reality, what I wish Moncton would have done is do some side deals with one of the expansion teams. Example, leave Demers or Chabot, even Samson or Gaudet unprotected and have one of them trading Yandle to us (I know, we got him anyway) or Jeff Caron or Alex Biega if Moncton could have convinced him to report (play the memorial cup card) is another example.
Maybe they tried, but neither were interested. But if Bergeron ends up playing 1st or 2nd line in SJ, he could have 20-25 goals, that's why I expect he will have a good season.
|
|
|
Post by hockeyfan99 on Aug 15, 2005 9:16:57 GMT -5
Unfortunately for you guys Moncton had one of the deepest roster in the league making this expansion protected list very difficult to complete. I agree without hindsight you couldn’t have left Bourque or Saunders unprotected, and there just wasn’t room for Welcher who didn’t perform as hoped. But even without hindsight I think Management should have known that Bernier wasn’t going to return. I know Rocket Management left Lapierre & Bonneau unprotected because they contacted the Canadians first. Had Bernier not been protected this spot then could have been used to protect Bodnarchuk. History has since shown that you guys could have traded him to Halifax (who needed defense) for Churchill. Then with Churchill he would have been very attractive to both expansion teams or even other teams and you probably could have gotten a player like Lambert which would have really helped your secondary scoring. Not an easy move but it certainly would have been beneficial for you guys plus if that trade didn’t work out you still wouldn’t have been any further behind than protecting Bernier.
Your other big decision (IMO) was Bergeron vs Adam. But I think that merely comes down to preference. Your defense is already pretty deep so I don’t think losing a 5th/6th defensemen like Adam would have hurt you guys too much especially with guys like Tanguay, Emanuele & Demers waiting in the wings. Although at the time Management might have already known that the chances of Saunders reporting were slim so they needed defense. But personally I would have preferred to keep Bergeron over Adam because I really like what he has to offer and he could have really helped you as a quality checking line player.
Unfortunately it was pretty much a losing decision for your management because no matter who was protected, Moncton was going to end up losing one or two good players. Personally I really feel protecting Bernier was a big mistake especially when you look at how many other teams left their 20 yr olds unprotected and the expansion teams never bite. And that pick could have been used to try and trade Bodnarchuk away for some secondary scoring (or at least draft picks) or at the very least to keep Bergeron who would have contributed in a meaningful checking role.
|
|
|
Post by Cristobal Huet on Aug 15, 2005 9:32:42 GMT -5
I think protecting Bernier was a big mistake...
1-because nobody with any kind of common sense would think the NHL would not have settled the CBA by the time the Memorial Cup was here.
2-Bernier was a 1st rounder the Sharks were very high on, no reason to think he would not be signed
3-he's already had 4 years in the Q, nothing left to prove at this level even with the Memorial Cup
4-there were more likely players to be drafted by the expansion teams, they did not draft MA Bernier Lapierre Picard(Hal) Picard(Lew) or Pouliot
|
|
|
Post by forrest on Aug 15, 2005 9:55:21 GMT -5
I think protecting Bernier was a big mistake... 1-because nobody with any kind of common sense would think the NHL would not have settled the CBA by the time the Memorial Cup was here. 2-Bernier was a 1st rounder the Sharks were very high on, no reason to think he would not be signed 3-he's already had 4 years in the Q, nothing left to prove at this level even with the Memorial Cup 4-there were more likely players to be drafted by the expansion teams, they did not draft MA Bernier Lapierre Picard(Hal) Picard(Lew) or Pouliot 1. Very few people here has common sense and according to GOON, none have common sense in the Wildcats office. ;D Nobody knew how long it would take for the NHL to start operating again, and nobody knew exactly what kind of effects certain decisions would have. Examples: The delay to sign 2003 draftee, the delay to sign free agents. Just look at what happened with Roussin. Like I said, even if the chance was very remote, IMO they did a good thing in protecting him. BTW, I don't remember, but in case I said in the past (before the expansion draft) that they shouldn't protect Bernier, I'll chsb my way out of this by saying I thought about it more and it makes more sense now. ;D 2. Look what happened to Roussin, (oooppss... Damn Hindsight rule). 3. Nothing left to prove, but still has some experience to gain. Certain people think that leading a team to a championship would be just as good experience as playing 4th line in the AHL. And just as important in one's development. Are these people in the Sharks organisation? 4. You're breaking the Steve-rule, NO HINDSIGHT ALLOWED. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Cristobal Huet on Aug 15, 2005 11:14:43 GMT -5
I think protecting Bernier was a big mistake... 1-because nobody with any kind of common sense would think the NHL would not have settled the CBA by the time the Memorial Cup was here. 2-Bernier was a 1st rounder the Sharks were very high on, no reason to think he would not be signed 3-he's already had 4 years in the Q, nothing left to prove at this level even with the Memorial Cup 4-there were more likely players to be drafted by the expansion teams, they did not draft MA Bernier Lapierre Picard(Hal) Picard(Lew) or Pouliot 1. Very few people here has common sense and according to GOON, none have common sense in the Wildcats office. ;D Nobody knew how long it would take for the NHL to start operating again, and nobody knew exactly what kind of effects certain decisions would have. Examples: The delay to sign 2003 draftee, the delay to sign free agents. Just look at what happened with Roussin. Like I said, even if the chance was very remote, IMO they did a good thing in protecting him. BTW, I don't remember, but in case I said in the past (before the expansion draft) that they shouldn't protect Bernier, I'll chsb my way out of this by saying I thought about it more and it makes more sense now. ;D 2. Look what happened to Roussin, (oooppss... Damn Hindsight rule). 3. Nothing left to prove, but still has some experience to gain. Certain people think that leading a team to a championship would be just as good experience as playing 4th line in the AHL. And just as important in one's development. Are these people in the Sharks organisation? 4. You're breaking the Steve-rule, NO HINDSIGHT ALLOWED. ;D Why is it that Bernier had to be protected when no other team protected it's top drafted players then? They didn't have hindsight either and protected guys that will actually play for them this year. Bernier won't be on the 4th line in the AHL, should be top 2 lines after he gets his feet wet. Roussin will be playing pro next year. He was a late round pick and they tried to sign him and missed the deadline by fax, he got drafted in the 2nd round this summer so the odds are slim and none of him coming back to the Q.
|
|
|
Post by forrest on Aug 15, 2005 11:17:17 GMT -5
1. Very few people here has common sense and according to GOON, none have common sense in the Wildcats office. ;D Nobody knew how long it would take for the NHL to start operating again, and nobody knew exactly what kind of effects certain decisions would have. Examples: The delay to sign 2003 draftee, the delay to sign free agents. Just look at what happened with Roussin. Like I said, even if the chance was very remote, IMO they did a good thing in protecting him. BTW, I don't remember, but in case I said in the past (before the expansion draft) that they shouldn't protect Bernier, I'll chsb my way out of this by saying I thought about it more and it makes more sense now. ;D 2. Look what happened to Roussin, (oooppss... Damn Hindsight rule). 3. Nothing left to prove, but still has some experience to gain. Certain people think that leading a team to a championship would be just as good experience as playing 4th line in the AHL. And just as important in one's development. Are these people in the Sharks organisation? 4. You're breaking the Steve-rule, NO HINDSIGHT ALLOWED. ;D Why is it that Bernier had to be protected when no other team protected it's top drafted players then? They didn't have hindsight either and protected guys that will actually play for them this year. Bernier won't be on the 4th line in the AHL, should be top 2 lines after he gets his feet wet. The difference is they weren't hosting the memorial cup. They could afford to take a gamble like that and keep a young prospect to accelerate the development of their team.
|
|
|
Post by Cristobal Huet on Aug 15, 2005 11:21:05 GMT -5
Why is it that Bernier had to be protected when no other team protected it's top drafted players then? They didn't have hindsight either and protected guys that will actually play for them this year. Bernier won't be on the 4th line in the AHL, should be top 2 lines after he gets his feet wet. The difference is they weren't hosting the memorial cup. They could afford to take a gamble like that and keep a young prospect to accelerate the development of their team. It has nothing to do with the Memorial Cup, Bernier was not coming back, no use protecting him...and I'm not talking hindsight, I said it in June.
|
|
|
Post by mikeb on Aug 15, 2005 11:42:00 GMT -5
Unfortunately for you guys Moncton had one of the deepest roster in the league making this expansion protected list very difficult to complete. I agree without hindsight you couldn’t have left Bourque or Saunders unprotected, and there just wasn’t room for Welcher who didn’t perform as hoped. But even without hindsight I think Management should have known that Bernier wasn’t going to return. I know Rocket Management left Lapierre & Bonneau unprotected because they contacted the Canadians first. Had Bernier not been protected this spot then could have been used to protect Bodnarchuk. History has since shown that you guys could have traded him to Halifax (who needed defense) for Churchill. Then with Churchill he would have been very attractive to both expansion teams or even other teams and you probably could have gotten a player like Lambert which would have really helped your secondary scoring. Not an easy move but it certainly would have been beneficial for you guys plus if that trade didn’t work out you still wouldn’t have been any further behind than protecting Bernier. Your other big decision (IMO) was Bergeron vs Adam. But I think that merely comes down to preference. Your defense is already pretty deep so I don’t think losing a 5th/6th defensemen like Adam would have hurt you guys too much especially with guys like Tanguay, Emanuele & Demers waiting in the wings. Although at the time Management might have already known that the chances of Saunders reporting were slim so they needed defense. But personally I would have preferred to keep Bergeron over Adam because I really like what he has to offer and he could have really helped you as a quality checking line player. Unfortunately it was pretty much a losing decision for your management because no matter who was protected, Moncton was going to end up losing one or two good players. Personally I really feel protecting Bernier was a big mistake especially when you look at how many other teams left their 20 yr olds unprotected and the expansion teams never bite. And that pick could have been used to try and trade Bodnarchuk away for some secondary scoring (or at least draft picks) or at the very least to keep Bergeron who would have contributed in a meaningful checking role. Agree totally!
|
|
|
Post by forrest on Aug 15, 2005 12:05:39 GMT -5
The difference is they weren't hosting the memorial cup. They could afford to take a gamble like that and keep a young prospect to accelerate the development of their team. It has nothing to do with the Memorial Cup, Bernier was not coming back, no use protecting him...and I'm not talking hindsight, I said it in June. Not having a superstar player like Bernier in the lineup in a rebuilding year and having kept a young prospect instead would be ok. But like I said, in a memorial cup year, even if the chance is very remote, around 5% chance, I agree with the decision. You were saying back in April and May that chances were around 5%.
|
|
|
Post by Cristobal Huet on Aug 15, 2005 12:15:53 GMT -5
It has nothing to do with the Memorial Cup, Bernier was not coming back, no use protecting him...and I'm not talking hindsight, I said it in June. Not having a superstar player like Bernier in the lineup in a rebuilding year and having kept a young prospect instead would be ok. But like I said, in a memorial cup year, even if the chance is very remote, around 5% chance, I agree with the decision. You were saying back in April and May that chances were around 5%. I said he was 98% gone. The expansion teams would have taken a player like Bergeron/Emanuele/Bodnarchuk/Blanchette that they can plug into their lineup over a 2% chance of Bernier coming back...plus they wouldn't send him back to an expansion team.
|
|