HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   OHL (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=148)
-   -   *OFFICIAL* Windsor Spitfires 2012-13 Season Thread (Part 7) (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1318839)

Blind Gardien 01-08-2013 05:56 PM

*OFFICIAL* Windsor Spitfires 2012-13 Season Thread (Part 7)
 
Continued from...

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1303921

LeafsFan18 01-08-2013 06:19 PM

http://youtu.be/_xa_B_T92o0

hockeyboy4 01-08-2013 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeafsFan18 (Post 57305693)

great scrap, now there both spits ;)

izzys 01-08-2013 06:24 PM

worked for me

good tilt

Ottomatic 01-08-2013 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockeyboy4 (Post 57305787)
great scrap, now there both spits ;)


Ottomatic 01-08-2013 06:49 PM

What does the Spits gain by waiving McNaughton? Since he cleared and is now in Jr. B, is he still ultimately the Spits property? Or is he essentially a free agent? Did he have to be waived before we could assign him to Jr. B because of his age or because he played too many games with us?

I don't think Graeme Brown will be up with us full time because we'd have to burn a A card on him, but he can play nine games up with us on a B card. I think only two games he's played in count towards his 10, the others were during the WJC's which don't count. With Bilcke out Bowen needs to dress as our 7th defenceman it would seem.

hockeylegend11 01-08-2013 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ottomatic (Post 57307011)
What does the Spits gain by waiving McNaughton? Since he cleared and is now in Jr. B, is he still ultimately the Spits property? Or is he essentially a free agent? Did he have to be waived before we could assign him to Jr. B because of his age or because he played too many games with us?

As i mentioned in another post with him clearing waivers Spits still can use him as an adffiliate player

hockeylegend11 01-08-2013 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ottomatic (Post 57307011)
What does the Spits gain by waiving McNaughton? Since he cleared and is now in Jr. B, is he still ultimately the Spits property? Or is he essentially a free agent? Did he have to be waived before we could assign him to Jr. B because of his age or because he played too many games with us?

I don't think Graeme Brown will be up with us full time because we'd have to burn a A card on him, but he can play nine games up with us on a B card. I think only two games he's played in count towards his 10, the others were during the WJC's which don't count. With Bilcke out Bowen needs to dress as our 7th defenceman it would seem.

The Spits have 12 healthy forwards after picking up Giftopoulous today so Bowen wont have to be dressed as the 7th D
Hopefully Spits use all 3 cards left

Ottomatic 01-08-2013 08:14 PM

^I think Bowen will still dress (when healthy), at the expense of one of our fourth line forwards if need be - as Boughner likes to have an enforcer on the bench. Clark is a willing kid, but undersized for the role.

But my larger point was that Bowen, due to the injury of Bilcke, had leapfrogged McNaughton on the Spits depth chart. We're really only up one player up front in the recent additions - Koko, Aleardi and Giftopoulos added but Maletta and Lorentz moved out.

Of course we have three cards and two days until the trade deadline and I hope we make some changes on our blue line.

Libbs 01-08-2013 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ottomatic (Post 57310611)
Of course we have three cards and two days until the trade deadline and I hope we make some changes on our blue line.

Iasked Jim if there was any rumblings to a Sudbury trade, he replied:

Jim Parker ‏@winstarparker
@Libbs24 Windsor thinking defence, but Sefton is an #NHL draft by #Sharks. Hard to see him as OA next year. Don't know if he fits the plans.

Ottomatic 01-08-2013 08:35 PM

We can't risk giving up assets, especially the level it would cost to get a Sefton, and then not have him come back. I guess we could pay a price as if he was a rental, and then include a couple conditional second rounders that would be conveyed only if he did play an OA year for us.

I'm not convinced Sudbury is outright tanking and in fire sale mode. They made the trade with Kitchener with an eye on next year, but also are guaranteed a play-off spot with Ottawa and Peterborough epically tanking. Hell the Wolves are only four points out of third in their conference.

Did the Pete's have a ruling on the Schoenmakers not reporting issue they raised against us? Given they traded him now, I assume that would have been dropped if not already decided? Would this open up the door to us trading with them, or did WR do them dirty and it's another team who's bridge we might have burnt?

What are the odds Koekkoek plays in the show next year with Tampa Bay? Seems that his game still needs a lot of work - but TB should also want him out of Peterborough.

What would he cost us - Clarke, Bateman and a couple conditional seconds?

hockeylegend11 01-08-2013 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ottomatic (Post 57311655)
We can't risk giving up assets, especially the level it would cost to get a Sefton, and then not have him come back. I guess we could pay a price as if he was a rental, and then include a couple conditional second rounders that would be conveyed only if he did play an OA year for us.

I'm not convinced Sudbury is outright tanking and in fire sale mode. They made the trade with Kitchener with an eye on next year, but also are guaranteed a play-off spot with Ottawa and Peterborough epically tanking. Hell the Wolves are only four points out of third in their conference.

Did the Pete's have a ruling on the Schoenmakers not reporting issue they raised against us? Given they traded him now, I assume that would have been dropped if not already decided? Would this open up the door to us trading with them, or did WR do them dirty and it's another team who's bridge we might have burnt?

What are the odds Koekkoek plays in the show next year with Tampa Bay? Seems that his game still needs a lot of work - but TB should also want him out of Peterborough.

What would he cost us - Clarke, Bateman and a couple conditional seconds?

My offer to Peterborough would be Ebert,Bateman Clarke a conditional 2nd in return for Koekkoek,Varga and Quine and a conditional 4th

RayzorIsDull 01-08-2013 08:57 PM

I still think some players need to be moved out. It's fine to bring in Aleardi, Giftopolous and probably Khokhlachev(if he's not dealt) but with that being said a team doesn't not struggle for 1.5 years without there being bad seeds or issues with the team it just doesn't work that way unless every player is happy and wants to stick around on an underachieving team. I still believe Khokhlachev can have more value to a team like Sarnia, Barrie, Belleville, and Oshawa as compared to Windsor. There has to be a match somewhere.

cfaub 01-08-2013 09:32 PM

What’s Rychel’s next move?

Adding Aleardi and Giftopoulus are decent moves, the price was right and can’t really argue with them.

The problem comes when he makes his next move.

If Windsor is bidding on the Memorial Cup next year as they say then anymore additions start to affect needed assets for that bid. Any acquisitions need to be ones that will return or else those assets will likely bring them one or maybe even two rounds in the playoffs and not much more.

With Khokhlachev returning if this is how it plays out then they have 3 cards remaining and still have some major holes to fill for this year.

The only way they can justify keeping Khokhlachev IMO is if they get a couple of their US recruits to report.

DeGuiseppe and Schmaltz, both of whom would likely return next season would help to justify keeping Khokhlachev as well as giving up what would be a large return if they dealt him. This scenario would cost them nothing.

Without those two reporting at this point in time I don’t know how they justify keeping Khokhlachev while submitting a bid with a shortage of assets and a line up that leaves a lot to be desired.

With no surprise reporting from some of the hold out prospects they should be moving Khokhlachev, take the large return and see what else they could gain from moving a couple of others out for other assets and see what they can do with players acquired in those deals as well as some they have playing JR. B.

The line up the way it is has definitely improved but not to the point that they are a threat in the playoffs to anyone of those considered to be contenders. At the same time any other assets moved to further improve this line up takes away from the needed assets for their bid thus making that a pointless exercise.

I really want to see improvements made to this team but with their current plans of bidding on the Memorial Cup for next year they will do a ton of damage to the future of this franchise if they win the bid for years to come when you consider the costs of improving this team combined with the sanctions in place.

This team is not prepared to go all the way this year and next year is not looking to be that promising right now either. Regardless of whether or not they can convince a couple of US kids to report next year they will still be looking to be big spenders if they win the bid and they currently do not have the assets to spend.

Spitsfan67* 01-08-2013 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockeylegend11 (Post 57312067)
My offer to Peterborough would be Ebert,Bateman Clarke a conditional 2nd in return for Koekkoek,Varga and Quine and a conditional 4th

Not enough to get both Koekoek and Quine here a underachieving 95 defenseman and 2 94 players that aren't really anything special and a second won't really make it all up...you would have to add 2 or more picks.

hockeylegend11 01-08-2013 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spitsfan67 (Post 57314331)
Not enough to get both Koekoek and Quine here a underachieving 95 defenseman and 2 94 players that aren't really anything special and a second won't really make it all up...you would have to add 2 or more picks.

While i get your pt with so many sellers might be the best offer they get

Could be left hanging the bag,Quine would move on and they get nothing in return,Koekkoek will be unhappy and Varga is a 2nd rd d who might not develop

Spitsfan67* 01-08-2013 09:38 PM

If Saginaw decided to sell do you think the spits could grab Locke? I mean he should be back next year and would really help the offense this year and even more for next year...and I would love to see him back in a spits uni.

hockeylegend11 01-08-2013 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spitsfan67 (Post 57314589)
If Saginaw decided to sell do you think the spits could grab Locke? I mean he should be back next year and would really help the offense this year and even more for next year...and I would love to see him back in a spits uni.

Rychel already asked about Locke a month ago was told they intend on keeping him,Young and Strong as o/as next year

LeafsFan18 01-08-2013 09:49 PM

From the Windsor Star:

Quote:

“We have one more card and I’d like to a defenceman,” Rychel said. “I’d like to add a defenceman that will help us next year.”

SpItFiReZ 01-08-2013 09:50 PM

According to the paper Rychel said he only has one card left and wants a dman

izzys 01-08-2013 09:53 PM

if we r trading koko we would have to wait for strome and ritchie to get traded first as that would drive the price for koko up

right now we have depth now at forward and if we would add a player like koekkoek and quine plus get varga i think we would finish in the 5th seed

u take those 3 u would have to give up
clarke
marchese/johnson
bateman
ebert

i think our line up this year would hang

rychel/koko/vail
remy/Quine/aleardi
(johnson/marchese) - ho-sang - clark
blicke - studnicka - verbeek

sieloff - koekkoeko
murphy- posa
sanvido-varga



i think that would be a dirty line up going into players ?

izzys 01-08-2013 09:55 PM

well then if he only has one card left looks like my whole last post was 100% waste of time

hahahaha:handclap::handclap::handclap::handclap::h andclap::handclap::handclap::handclap:

RayzorIsDull 01-08-2013 09:56 PM

If they only have 1 more card left I can't see how making an acquisition makes any sense. I guess we were all wrong on the card situation there isn't an acquisition out there that will make this team better. If they had 3 cards left things could have been better but just 1? Disappointing next couple days.

hockeylegend11 01-08-2013 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RayzorIsDull (Post 57315461)
If they only have 1 more card left I can't see how making an acquisition makes any sense. I guess we were all wrong on the card situation there isn't an acquisition out there that will make this team better. If they had 3 cards left things could have been better but just 1? Disappointing next couple days.

Cant see why he has only 1 card left,by my calculations unless Brown and the departed

Bezuch who I thought for sure was on a floating card of which teams were allowed 3

The only thing that could have happened was no NHl so need for the floating cards

If thats the case spits wasted a card on Bezuch and probably Alonge who played 1 exhibition game

punch1943 01-08-2013 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by izzys (Post 57315397)
well then if he only has one card left looks like my whole last post was 100% waste of time

hahahaha:handclap::handclap::handclap::handclap::h andclap::handclap::handclap::handclap:

Unless he's made a trade that hasn't been announced/finalized yet by the league which used the other two or he has two guys coming in from NCAA that have been carded but not announced.

I also have some prime swamp land in FLa for sale. (lol)

...the article did say he was looking to add a d-man that would help next year..so all we need to do now is figure out who's left.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:53 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.