HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Leblanc Thread (Update-Q Rights traded to M.Junior)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-15-2010, 01:48 PM
  #376
JeromeHP
Jerome_Berube
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,592
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habnot View Post
what part of playing don't you understand....funny how the list stops in 2007.
well i can give it try if you don't mind (good players who should play in the Q next year)

-Olivier Roy G Bathurst (edm 5th rounder in 2009)
-Eric Gelinas Def Chicoutimi (NJ 2nd rounder in 2009)
-Sean Couturier C Drumondville (2011 draft)
-Maxime Clermont G Gatineau (2010 draft)
-Nicolas Deslaurier Def Gatineau (LA 3rd rounder 2009)
-Mathieu Corbeil G Halifax (2010 draft)
-Michael Chaput C Lewiston (2010 draft)
-Matthew Bissonnete Lw Lewiston (2010 draft)
-Samuel Carrier Def Lewiston (2010 draft)
-Brandon Gormley Def Moncton (2010 draft)
-Kiril Kabanov Lw Moncton (2010 draft)
-Marek Hrvik Lw Moncton (2010 draft)
-Jean-Francois Bérubé G Montreal (LA 4th rounder 2009)
-Charles-Olivier Roussel Def Montreal (NSH 2nd rounder 2009)
-Adam Polasek Def PEI (2010 draft)
-Andrej Nestracil Lw PEI (DET 3rd rounder 2009)
-Louis Domingue G Quebec (2010 draft)
-Ryan Bourque Lw Quebec (NYR 3rd rounder 2009)
-Phillipe Paradis C/LW PEI (CAR 1st rounder 2009)
-Jerome Gauthier-Leduc Def Rimouski (2010 draft)
-Gleason Fournier Def Rimouski (Det 3rd rounder 2009)
-Petr Straka Rw Rimouski (2010 draft)
-Jakub Culek Lw Rimouski (2010 draft)
-Jonathan Huberdeau C/LW Saint-john (2011 draft)
-Steven Anthony Lw Saint-john (Van 7th rounder 2009)
-Nathan Beaulieu Def Saint-john (2011 draft)
-Simon Depres Def Saint-John (Pitt 1st rounder 2009)
-Thomas Jurco Rw Saint-John (2011 draft)
-Stanislav Galiev Lw Saint-John (2010 draft)
-Michael Bournival C/Lw Shawinigan (2010 draft)
-Philippe-Michael Devos C Victoriaville (undrafted 90s)
-Brandon Hynes Rw Victoriaville (2010 draft)

and could go on with some 2011/2012 nhl draft prospect playing in the Q

JeromeHP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2010, 01:48 PM
  #377
markov`
Registered User
 
markov`'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Top 2 in the world
Posts: 3,647
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habnot View Post
what part of playing don't you understand....funny how the list stops in 2007.
The list stop in 2007 because after that it's too early to tell.

The Q clearly owns the ECAC as far as impact players (and anything prospect for that matter) goes.

markov` is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2010, 02:08 PM
  #378
Habnot
 
Habnot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,677
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by markov` View Post
The list stop in 2007 because after that it's too early to tell.

The Q clearly owns the ECAC as far as impact players (and anything prospect for that matter) goes.
No problems, I differ in opinion. I think you are overstating the impact players but I can be wrong.

That being said, the problem is that you only focus on the ECAC part - Harvard played games against non conference teams, 7 or 8 if I'm mistaken that all have quality players and/or prospects. The Boston College or BU lineup would make minced meat our of any LHJMQ team. To think otherwise is delusional.

Habnot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2010, 02:17 PM
  #379
JohnnyReb
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markov79fan View Post
well team from the qmjhl didn't had their full lineup in those game vs ushl team. i know rimouski didnt had their top 6 or 7 players for those game. those players where in nhl training camp
Really?

Rimouski’s team that year:
http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/l...010282008.html

Rimouski’s lineup for those games:
http://ushl.stats.pointstreak.com/te...&seasonid=2211

I’ll save you the trouble of doing the comparison; only Michal Frolik and Olivier Fortier were missing – two, not six or seven. Very good players, for sure, but let’s not carried away. They didn’t have “six or seven players attending NHL camps.”

JohnnyReb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2010, 02:19 PM
  #380
Maverik
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 580
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habnot View Post
No problems, I differ in opinion. I think you are overstating the impact players but I can be wrong.

That being said, the problem is that you only focus on the ECAC part - Harvard played games against non conference teams, 7 or 8 if I'm mistaken that all have quality players and/or prospects. The Boston College or BU lineup would make minced meat our of any LHJMQ team. To think otherwise is delusional.
The team is built with tons of 22-23 years old. Of course they would make minced meat of a team of 17-19 yo with 2 overage players. Does not make them better prospect to be playing college hockey at 23.

Maverik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2010, 02:22 PM
  #381
josra33
Registered User
 
josra33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Rancho Cucamonga, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,131
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maverik View Post
The team is built with tons of 22-23 years old. Of course they would make minced meat of a team of 17-19 yo with 2 overage players. Does not make them better prospect to be playing college hockey at 23.
Winning answer right here!

josra33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2010, 02:27 PM
  #382
JeromeHP
Jerome_Berube
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,592
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyReb View Post
Really?

Rimouski’s team that year:
http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/l...010282008.html

Rimouski’s lineup for those games:
http://ushl.stats.pointstreak.com/te...&seasonid=2211

I’ll save you the trouble of doing the comparison; only Michal Frolik and Olivier Fortier were missing – two, not six or seven. Very good players, for sure, but let’s not carried away. They didn’t have “six or seven players attending NHL camps.”
my mistake

i swear i tought rimouski was missing 6 guys on their lineup for those game....looking back now quebec was missing 4 guys + the 2 rimouski players= 6 (i guess thats why i had the number 6 in my head lol )

anyway im not a ushl basher i like the league but imo the qmjhl is still a superior league

JeromeHP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2010, 02:30 PM
  #383
Habnot
 
Habnot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,677
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maverik View Post
The team is built with tons of 22-23 years old. Of course they would make minced meat of a team of 17-19 yo with 2 overage players. Does not make them better prospect to be playing college hockey at 23.
Agreed, but this whole fargin thread is about Leblanc and what's better for his development.....therefore, I guess you agree that going back to Harvard is better than playing in the Q, right?

Habnot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2010, 02:43 PM
  #384
montreal
Moderator
Go Habs Go
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Sark
Posts: 24,058
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyReb View Post
Further to that in 2007 two USHL teams - and most people agree that the USHL is vastly inferior to NCAA, even the ECAC - played four exhibition games against teams in the QMJHL, the Remparts and the Oceanic.
The USHL is the feeder league to the NCAA, guys usually go from the USHS to the USHL for a year or so to prepare physically for the NCAA. The USHL is more like the CHL in terms of age, whereas the NCAA it's very rare to see players under 18 and I'd say the average Freshman is closer to 19.

Just pointing this out for those that don't follow the USHL.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Markov79fan View Post
anyway im not a ushl basher i like the league but imo the qmjhl is still a superior league
Just want to add that the USHL made a big change this year when they added the USNDTP, so that's only going to make them a stronger league going forward as the rest of the league has to face the top prospects in the US now.

Do not want to compare leagues as I don't care and really I don't see enough games from either league. But Timmins sure likes the USHL,

http://www.habprospects.com/modules....rticle&sid=118

Pacioretty, Conboy, Kristo, Leblanc, Kishel, Bennett, Quailer, Cichy, Pateryn, Pat Johnson, all from 3 drafts.


Last edited by montreal: 06-15-2010 at 02:52 PM.
montreal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2010, 02:47 PM
  #385
Habnot
 
Habnot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,677
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
The USHL is the feeder league to the NCAA, guys usually go from the USHS to the USHL for a year or so to prepare physically for the NCAA. The USHL is more like the CHL in terms of age, whereas the NCAA it's very rare to see players under 18 and I'd say the average Freshman is closer to 19.

Just pointing this out for those that don't follow the USHL.
Agreed - I would also say that 18 year olds are a minority in the USHL. If you look at a Green Bay team that won the USHL, they only had 2 players that were 92 or younger birthdates. They had 8 players that turned 20 in 2009 and 2010. USHL is also an older league that CHL.

NCAA can carry players until they are 25, it is not uncommon and preferred to have freshmen come in at 21.

Habnot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2010, 02:56 PM
  #386
montreal
Moderator
Go Habs Go
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Sark
Posts: 24,058
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habnot View Post
Agreed - I would also say that 18 year olds are a minority in the USHL. If you look at a Green Bay team that won the USHL, they only had 2 players that were 92 or younger birthdates. They had 8 players that turned 20 in 2009 and 2010. USHL is also an older league that CHL.

NCAA can carry players until they are 25, it is not uncommon and preferred to have freshmen come in at 21.
Yea look at Conboy who turned 20 at the end of his last season in the USHL before going to Michigan St. But as for the USHL ages, I just mean that it's more like the CHL since they can have 16 year olds like the CHL. Seth Ambroz is a '93 that played in the USHL last year at 15 but that's rare as he's slated to be a top pick in '11.

montreal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2010, 02:58 PM
  #387
InglewoodJack
Registered User
 
InglewoodJack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Châteauguay
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habnot View Post
I'm sure Louis will have trouble sleeping tonight knowing that he has deeply disappointed you and the majority of this board.

I have posted this before so I apologize for the redundancy. What most people on this board don't realize is the difference in age and strength when comparing the NCAA and the CHL - especially LHJMQ. Having spoken to a member of the Leblanc team, junior has NEVER been an option. They see no value in playing against 16-20 year olds when you can play against 21-25 year old men. And given the so few quality prospects in the Q, the ECAC also offers better quality in addition to the strength.

The AHL is the level Leblanc wants to play next year. If the Habs think he can play, then he will sign and go to Hamilton. Otherwise he will return to Harvard, because he believes that the caliber offers him the best opportunity to continue developing his weakness, that is strength. Playing in the Q will not challenge his strength nor will it give him the opportunity to spend the necessary time in the gym to add mass.

There is no evidence whatsoever that the Q is a better development ground than NCAA - as a matter of fact quite the opposite. In addition to playing in the ECAC, Harvard also played against BU, twice against BC and twice against Minnesota, Dartmouth and Northeastern, all excellent teams with many 1st round prospects, something that is becoming a rarity in the Q.
What you aren't factoring in is the strength of Harvard/ECAC. Yeah he plays against men, but the reason that men play in NCAA, is because they aren't going into the NHL. They're playing hockey as an ECA. If he were to play in the Q, then he would be playing against a larger percentage of players who are NHL/AHL/Europe bound.

Also, I don't have stats to show this, but do you honestly think that hockey is the biggest priority at Harvard? As bad as it sounds, the Q makes you focus on hockey about everything, but I can't see the administration at Harvard letting Leblanc sacrifice much of his school time for sports. I know at Notre Dame you get kicked off the team if you don't keep a certain grade, it happened to my dad's friend's son, who screwed his hockey scholarship because of this. I imagine it's just as bad at Harvard too.

InglewoodJack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2010, 03:36 PM
  #388
InglewoodJack
Registered User
 
InglewoodJack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Châteauguay
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pam19 View Post
I would say that Peverley with 22G-33A would qualify as a top-6.
So does Moulson: 30G-18A (maybe his numbers are boosted by Tavares).

But I hope that Leblanc can be better than that.
May be Sharp (was at Vermont not in ECAC - East is stronger!)?
At this point, Leblanc's numbers for his first season looks great.

We will have a good idea of his value at WJC.
Until then, we have to wait.
Moulson and Peverley are in fact top six players. Or they were last year, but both of these guys are the biggest fluke success stories in the past few years. I hope that we don't get one good season from a fluke from our first rounder.

And isn't EC a better conference? Leblanc is dominating, but I really don't feel comfortable with him in the ECAC. But you're right. If he does make the WJC, which I expect him to, we'll see how he can match up with the big boys, and then I'll make my judgement.

InglewoodJack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2010, 03:37 PM
  #389
Habnot
 
Habnot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,677
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by InglewoodJack View Post
What you aren't factoring in is the strength of Harvard/ECAC. Yeah he plays against men, but the reason that men play in NCAA, is because they aren't going into the NHL. They're playing hockey as an ECA. If he were to play in the Q, then he would be playing against a larger percentage of players who are NHL/AHL/Europe bound.

Also, I don't have stats to show this, but do you honestly think that hockey is the biggest priority at Harvard? As bad as it sounds, the Q makes you focus on hockey about everything, but I can't see the administration at Harvard letting Leblanc sacrifice much of his school time for sports. I know at Notre Dame you get kicked off the team if you don't keep a certain grade, it happened to my dad's friend's son, who screwed his hockey scholarship because of this. I imagine it's just as bad at Harvard too.
1. The fact that more players in the Q wind up in East Coast/AHL/Europe has nothing to do with abilities but options. Seriously, if I have a degree from Harvard and can get a six figure job do you think I'm going to the East Coast for $2,000 a month? Kids that play in the Q have no options because the majority barely have a HS leaving certificate.
2. There is no evidence that presently, and for the foreseeable future, the Q has more top level talent that NCAA.
3. The ECAC issue is a red herring. Harvard played nearly a fourth of it's schedule outside the ECAC against top programs such as BC, BU. Minnesota etc.

Habnot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2010, 03:48 PM
  #390
InglewoodJack
Registered User
 
InglewoodJack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Châteauguay
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habnot View Post
1. The fact that more players in the Q wind up in East Coast/AHL/Europe has nothing to do with abilities but options. Seriously, if I have a degree from Harvard and can get a six figure job do you think I'm going to the East Coast for $2,000 a month? Kids that play in the Q have no options because the majority barely have a HS leaving certificate.
2. There is no evidence that presently, and for the foreseeable future, the Q has more top level talent that NCAA.
3. The ECAC issue is a red herring. Harvard played nearly a fourth of it's schedule outside the ECAC against top programs such as BC, BU. Minnesota etc.
1) I'm just saying that for most players in the Ivy League division, Hockey isn't prioritized as much as it would be in the CHL.
2) Well, how many members of the top 2 rounds have ECAC commitments, and how many play in the Q ?
3) Then if this is so, why are they no great players coming from the ECAC?

We're not talking about the NCAA. Many great programs in the College circuit, and although I have a bias against American schools versus CHL, I don't have much of a problem with guys like Kristo, Bennett,etc. who are in respectable schools.

InglewoodJack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2010, 03:53 PM
  #391
montreal
Moderator
Go Habs Go
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Sark
Posts: 24,058
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by InglewoodJack View Post
And isn't EC a better conference? Leblanc is dominating, but I really don't feel comfortable with him in the ECAC. But you're right. If he does make the WJC, which I expect him to, we'll see how he can match up with the big boys, and then I'll make my judgement.
I assume you mean HE (hockey east) and yes it's a better conference. The big 3 are the conferences, WCHA, CCHA and HE. HE has won the NCAA championship the last 3 years, the CCHA is always tough with Michigan and others, Miami Ohio has become a top notch program. But the WCHA is often considered the best conference since they often end up with the most NHL draft picks. The ECAC is always looked down upon compared to the rest of the NCAA as they rarely win national titles, but still have some good programs like Cornell and Clarkson.

Only Cornell, Havard and RPI are the only ECAC schools to ever win a national title.

The weakest conference was the CHA but they folded, this past season was it's last. Now the weakest is the AHA (Atlantic Hockey) Air Force, RIT, Niagara, Mercyhurst, Holy Cross are usually the top teams but rarely have any NHL draft picks.

montreal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2010, 05:52 PM
  #392
Maxpac
Registered User
 
Maxpac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: hockey city
Posts: 14,620
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pam19 View Post
I guess that the only important question is:
ECAC > CHL?

As a subsidiary question, we should ask:
Practice time in ECAC > Practice time in CHL?

IMO, Leblanc already played at a level that is superior to CHL.
From 2009 draft, only players in NHL and in SEL played at a higher level...

Finally, it is perfectly possible for Leblanc to leave Harvard after his first term and go to Hamilton.
The talent level is superior in the ECAC then in the CHL?!
Sometimes i wonder even if YOU believe the crap you write....

Maxpac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2010, 06:30 PM
  #393
Svoboda crash
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 50
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pam19 View Post
You are attacking me because you have no argument to backup your ridiculous pretention.

Let's start with age, ECAC: 19-23, CHL: 16-19.
Now age is not everything but you need to have something to backup your pretention.

Any article, opinion, rumours?
Anything besides insults?

I can not believe this. I am asking a question and you insult me.
Guess that shows your behaviour...
How many ECAC players are drafted each year ? How many CHL players are drafted each year ? You have your answer

Svoboda crash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2010, 06:59 PM
  #394
InglewoodJack
Registered User
 
InglewoodJack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Châteauguay
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pam19 View Post
You must add USHL and NCAA because players in NCAA are already drafted before they go to NCAA.

But to answer your question, looking at last year first round:
  • Quebec (18 teams): Kulikov, Caron, Paradis, Despres;
  • USHL (14 teams): Leddy, Kreider, Moore, Schroeder, Palmieri.

Again, very few players are drafted from NCAA because they are already drafted before going to NCAA.
Furthermore, there are 18 teams in the Q, 20 teams in the O, and 22 teams in W: total of 60 teams.
Compare that with 14 teams from USHL.
There should be four (4X) times more players drafted from a pool of 60 teams compare to 14 teams.

Point is there are plenty of USHL/NCAA players drafted in the first two rounds.

Do not thank me, just admit I am right.
Yeah, we all understand that the USHL/NCAA is a perfectly acceptable route, but what about Leblanc's division which is pretty bad compared to the other divisions. Few quality players have made it after time in the ECAC.

InglewoodJack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2010, 09:56 AM
  #395
Habnot
 
Habnot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,677
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pam19 View Post
So now your argument is:
Yes NCAA is > CHL but ECAC < CHL?

Care to prove? Any article, comment, analysis to prove your point?

I think that with the links I provided, I made my point.

Edit: BTW, It is because of you that I tought to look at the number of USHL teams vs CHL.
Don't bother, it been explained before, people choose not to acknowledge the answer. Harvard played 8 non conference games against top programs such as BU BC, Minnesota, NorthEastern.

Add to that Cornell, Yale and Union were all ranked in the top 25 thorughout the season.

Habnot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2010, 11:06 AM
  #396
Natedawg
Lars Eller
 
Natedawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,777
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pam19 View Post
You are attacking me because you have no argument to backup your ridiculous pretention.

Let's start with age, ECAC: 19-23, CHL: 16-19.
Now age is not everything but you need to have something to backup your pretention.

Any article, opinion, rumours?
Anything besides insults?

I can not believe this. I am asking a question and you insult me.
Guess that shows your behaviour...

Edit:
Go read: here, here, here, here and here.
At least, I have some argument to back up my pretention.
I strongly disagree with you.

Only playing 20 some odd games doesn't do **** for their development either.

Natedawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2010, 11:32 AM
  #397
JeromeHP
Jerome_Berube
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,592
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pam19 View Post
You must add USHL and NCAA because players in NCAA are already drafted before they go to NCAA.

But to answer your question, looking at last year first round:
  • Quebec (18 teams): Kulikov, Caron, Paradis, Despres;
  • USHL (14 teams): Leddy, Kreider, Moore, Schroeder, Palmieri.


Again, very few players are drafted from NCAA because they are already drafted before going to NCAA.
Furthermore, there are 18 teams in the Q, 20 teams in the O, and 22 teams in W: total of 60 teams.
Compare that with 14 teams from USHL.
There should be four (4X) times more players drafted from a pool of 60 teams compare to 14 teams.

Point is there are plenty of USHL/NCAA players drafted in the first two rounds.

Do not thank me, just admit I am right.
euh. you said the ushl produce 5 first rounder in the 2009 draft compared to 4 for the qmjhl. WRONG the ushl had one 1st rounder because Schroeder is NCAA and Leddy, Kreider are from the ushsh and Palmieri from the usntdp wich didnt play in the ushl until this year (09-10)

if you meant ushl (as the whole usa hockey) its fine but don't write ushl (14team) compared to the qmjhl (18 team) had one extra first rounder wich is false. you should count all the ncaa team and all the prep school if you want to compared it to the qmjhl.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pam19 View Post
So now your argument is:
Yes NCAA is > CHL but ECAC < CHL?

Care to prove? Any article, comment, analysis to prove your point?

I think that with the links I provided, I made my point.

Edit: BTW, It is because of you that I tought to look at the number of USHL teams vs CHL.
i don't know what to tell you if you believe ECAC »»»» QMJHL

you Mr Stats guy over here go look back at all the players who made it to the nhl coming from the ECAC

for every 1 good nhler (ECAC) players i will find you 10 players from the QMJHL.

yes players are older and stronger in the ECAC but that doesnt mean their better hockey player. history show that the Q has produce MUCH MORE & BETTER players than the ECAC and its not even close

yes they play out of conference game but thats not enough imo.

looking at harvard out of conference game last year (6 game) http://www.uscho.com/schedules/team..../gender,m.html

-boston University (HE) 1 game
-Boston College (HE) 2 game
-Minnesota (WCHA) 2 game
-Northeastern (HE) 1 game

not enough imo

JeromeHP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2010, 11:47 AM
  #398
freiheit
Registered User
 
freiheit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Saguenay
Country: Canada
Posts: 13
vCash: 500
What about getting an education

I've been happy all along with Louis Leblanc going to Harvard rather than in the Q. For him, as a person, because he'll be getting a good education. But also for the Habs, because you want to count on brilliant players that can bring leadership, work ethic, good decision making and such psychological qualities.

Unfortunately, the Q makes it so that players do not have much time to think throughout their development. It may have a minor effect on how well those players can put the puck in the net, I have no way to tell. But I'm pretty sure that the dedication one gives to an education has deep effects on one's personality and abilities.

I may be a bit off topic, but most of those guys will never make the nhl and I can only wish them the best education to get decent life opportunities afterwards.

freiheit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2010, 11:53 AM
  #399
Maxpac
Registered User
 
Maxpac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: hockey city
Posts: 14,620
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by freiheit View Post
I've been happy all along with Louis Leblanc going to Harvard rather than in the Q. For him, as a person, because he'll be getting a good education. But also for the Habs, because you want to count on brilliant players that can bring leadership, work ethic, good decision making and such psychological qualities.

Unfortunately, the Q makes it so that players do not have much time to think throughout their development. It may have a minor effect on how well those players can put the puck in the net, I have no way to tell. But I'm pretty sure that the dedication one gives to an education has deep effects on one's personality and abilities.

I may be a bit off topic, but most of those guys will never make the nhl and I can only wish them the best education to get decent life opportunities afterwards.
**** the education, he'll have more then enough time to go back to Harvard when his career is over. We know already he's a bright person, no need to pass World Economy II at Harvard to prove it. He already had his year that secured his future at Harvard. Playing for the Habs should be his priority.

Maxpac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2010, 12:01 PM
  #400
maxpower2010*
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 279
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxpac View Post
**** the education, he'll have more then enough time to go back to Harvard when his career is over. We know already he's a bright person, no need to pass World Economy II at Harvard to prove it. He already had his year that secured his future at Harvard. Playing for the Habs should be his priority.
At a certain point though, the blame for this disaster should fall onto Timmins and not Leblanc. Louis can do what he pleases with himself. That being said, how wishy-washy and poorly determined Louis is to professional hockey should of strongly been considered pre-draft, and clearly it wasn't given the talent that was still on the board when we drafted him.

maxpower2010* is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:18 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.