HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Winnipeg Jets
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

TNSE Release Former Thrasher Head Scout Dan Marr

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-13-2011, 10:27 PM
  #26
The Maltais Falcon
Registered User
 
The Maltais Falcon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,156
vCash: 500
Little wasn't rushed. He went back to juniors for a year, split time between Atlanta and Chicago the next year, then played in Atlanta full time in his third season after being drafted. The other three all made the jump immediately, which is definitely being rushed.

People complain now but I remember at the time whenever the subject of sending Bogosian/Kane/Burmistrov back to juniors after being drafted, the overwhelming response from the peanut gallery would be "OH NO, KEEP THEM UP, THEY'RE READY!"

As for the original subject, it was inevitable. Atlanta's scouting was mediocre in its best years and TNSE would do well to clean the entire house. I would've thought they'd keep the staff through the draft but others point out that making the move now allows them to network for new positions sooner. I guess it remains to be seen whether the rest of the staff will stay until the draft or not.

The Maltais Falcon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 08:05 AM
  #27
Tdoe42
Registered User
 
Tdoe42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 1,162
vCash: 500
TNSE Does have their own scouting staff... I remember them saying their European Scout found Eddie Lack in Sweden and plus the reins are off Craig Heisinger he now has the opportunity pick between the best players!

Tdoe42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 09:49 AM
  #28
Hawker14
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,064
vCash: 500
Looking back at the Thrashers drafting history, I'm not surprised to see Marr scapegoated.

Hawker14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 10:59 AM
  #29
Huffer
Registered User
 
Huffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 11,124
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by jet228 View Post
It's not always a nightmare when players come into the NHL early. Sure, its not the BEST situation, but very few teams are deep like the Red Wings and can afford to let their players mature in the minors.

With the new salary structure in the NHL, young players earning their chops in the NHL instead of the A is just a fact of life, the new reality.
The thing that sucks about bringing in your drafted players early is that you are using up some of the years that you have them under your control.

I know there are some wrinkles in the CBA, but in a nutshell a player becomes a UFA after 7 years in the league. If you send a player back to junior (or the AHL if they can) for two years prior to the NHL you get years 20-27 instead of 18 to 25. (Is my understanding of the CBA correct on this?)

My reasoning for letting players develop is because I would rather have years 20-27 than years 18-25 (before UFA status).

Huffer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 11:08 AM
  #30
Burmi
Registered User
 
Burmi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: 905
Posts: 720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulligan View Post
Looking back at the Thrashers drafting history, I'm not surprised to see Marr scapegoated.
What's wrong with their drafting history? Besides Patrik Stefan haha.

Burmi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 12:53 PM
  #31
Winnipeg Jet
Phoenix Coyote
 
Winnipeg Jet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: British Columbia
Country: England
Posts: 1,318
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
The thing that sucks about bringing in your drafted players early is that you are using up some of the years that you have them under your control.

I know there are some wrinkles in the CBA, but in a nutshell a player becomes a UFA after 7 years in the league. If you send a player back to junior (or the AHL if they can) for two years prior to the NHL you get years 20-27 instead of 18 to 25. (Is my understanding of the CBA correct on this?)

My reasoning for letting players develop is because I would rather have years 20-27 than years 18-25 (before UFA status).
I believe youíre right about that. Itís also one of the reasons that Detroit is so competitive. Because they have a quality organisation from top to bottom, on and off the ice, they can afford to keep prospects in the minors, learning in a league where the results arenít important as the development of the players. By the time they get to the NHL, theyíre anywhere from 20-23 and ready to make an instant impact in the league, seamlessly replacing a traded or retired player. Look at Darren Helm for example: He didnít play his first game in the NHL until he was 21 years old, and that year he got 7 games towards the end of the season, 18 in the playoffs. The following year he was sent back down to the minors, ended up being called up for 16 games in the NHL, and 23 in the playoffs. A year later at 23 years old, he finally made it and has been a valueable member of the team ever since. Detroit can actually afford to bring in players in their early 20ís for playoff runs when somebody gets hurt. They are what every team should aspire to.

Winnipeg Jet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 11:32 PM
  #32
ttam103
Registered User
 
ttam103's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 908
vCash: 500
Well i would think having an AHL team would force them either way to have scouts at the minor levels already in place. The Moose has done well so far so im assuming its going to be the same people for Winnipeg's big team.

ttam103 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 01:09 PM
  #33
Jet
Moderator
Spoiled Rotten
 
Jet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,610
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
The thing that sucks about bringing in your drafted players early is that you are using up some of the years that you have them under your control.

I know there are some wrinkles in the CBA, but in a nutshell a player becomes a UFA after 7 years in the league. If you send a player back to junior (or the AHL if they can) for two years prior to the NHL you get years 20-27 instead of 18 to 25. (Is my understanding of the CBA correct on this?)

My reasoning for letting players develop is because I would rather have years 20-27 than years 18-25 (before UFA status).

I agree, but the reality is you need those cheap contracts to fill out your roster.

Jet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 01:29 PM
  #34
Huffer
Registered User
 
Huffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 11,124
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by jet228 View Post
I agree, but the reality is you need those cheap contracts to fill out your roster.
I hear you there. With the cap system, you need a mix of vets at the top of the scale, a second tier of guys on their second deal after their ELC, and guys on their ELC (maybe).

The reason I put the maybe there is this. If you take a player and use him when he is 18 or 19 year old, baring any Sidney Crosby or Alex Ovechkins of the world, you won't get all that much production out of them. Hall had 22 goals this year in 65 games and in Stamkos's rookie season he had 23 in 79 games. Really good production for 18 year olds, but these guys are also the cream of the crop. And they still were not all that much higher than what some UFA vets could do.

Instead of using up their ELC time, why not fill in those spots with vets who can still provide the same production (or more) than an 18 or 19 year old, at around an ELC contract price?

I.E. Mark Recchi got 1 million this year for 14 goals. Eric Belanger got 750k for 13 goals.

When you look at ELC contracts for the top players (Hall, Seguin,and let's use Burmistrov) they typically get around 900k as a salary, and bonuses take them to around 3.75 million (1.5 for Burmistrov).

My theory is, why waste ELC years on your young players for 10 to 20 goal production when you can sign a vet who can most likely produce the same for less. And thereby, you can save the really productive years (20-27) before UFA.

Granted, this is based on the idea that you can find and acquire that vet UFA.

Agree / Disagree?

Huffer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 01:49 PM
  #35
Jet
Moderator
Spoiled Rotten
 
Jet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,610
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
I hear you there. With the cap system, you need a mix of vets at the top of the scale, a second tier of guys on their second deal after their ELC, and guys on their ELC (maybe).

The reason I put the maybe there is this. If you take a player and use him when he is 18 or 19 year old, baring any Sidney Crosby or Alex Ovechkins of the world, you won't get all that much production out of them. Hall had 22 goals this year in 65 games and in Stamkos's rookie season he had 23 in 79 games. Really good production for 18 year olds, but these guys are also the cream of the crop. And they still were not all that much higher than what some UFA vets could do.

Instead of using up their ELC time, why not fill in those spots with vets who can still provide the same production (or more) than an 18 or 19 year old, at around an ELC contract price?

I.E. Mark Recchi got 1 million this year for 14 goals. Eric Belanger got 750k for 13 goals.

When you look at ELC contracts for the top players (Hall, Seguin,and let's use Burmistrov) they typically get around 900k as a salary, and bonuses take them to around 3.75 million (1.5 for Burmistrov).

My theory is, why waste ELC years on your young players for 10 to 20 goal production when you can sign a vet who can most likely produce the same for less. And thereby, you can save the really productive years (20-27) before UFA.

Granted, this is based on the idea that you can find and acquire that vet UFA.

Agree / Disagree?
I agree mostly.

First off, you gotta find the guys who will give you value for contract. Problem with most of these UFA players is they will never earn their contracts (outside of the vet presence and intelligence, they won't produce as much as their contract should demand). If you can find guys like Selanne who was amazing this year, then you really have something.

When you let young guys mature in junior/ minors, you do save some cheap contract time, yes, but you also stunt their growth somewhat. No matter what age they come in, they still need to cut their teeth in the show, learn the speed of the game and learn to excel against the very best.

So, I do agree with you to a certain extent, but it's complicated.

Jet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 01:50 PM
  #36
tbcwpg
Registered User
 
tbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,164
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
I hear you there. With the cap system, you need a mix of vets at the top of the scale, a second tier of guys on their second deal after their ELC, and guys on their ELC (maybe).

The reason I put the maybe there is this. If you take a player and use him when he is 18 or 19 year old, baring any Sidney Crosby or Alex Ovechkins of the world, you won't get all that much production out of them. Hall had 22 goals this year in 65 games and in Stamkos's rookie season he had 23 in 79 games. Really good production for 18 year olds, but these guys are also the cream of the crop. And they still were not all that much higher than what some UFA vets could do.

Instead of using up their ELC time, why not fill in those spots with vets who can still provide the same production (or more) than an 18 or 19 year old, at around an ELC contract price?

I.E. Mark Recchi got 1 million this year for 14 goals. Eric Belanger got 750k for 13 goals.

When you look at ELC contracts for the top players (Hall, Seguin,and let's use Burmistrov) they typically get around 900k as a salary, and bonuses take them to around 3.75 million (1.5 for Burmistrov).

My theory is, why waste ELC years on your young players for 10 to 20 goal production when you can sign a vet who can most likely produce the same for less. And thereby, you can save the really productive years (20-27) before UFA.

Granted, this is based on the idea that you can find and acquire that vet UFA.

Agree / Disagree?
Agree to a point but the experience that the young kids, what it's like in the NHL, is also a bonus to using them over a vet. Obviously, as a team, you have to decide whether the extra cap hit and less years of RFA status are worth the experience factor.

tbcwpg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 02:27 PM
  #37
Huffer
Registered User
 
Huffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 11,124
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by jet228 View Post
I agree mostly.

First off, you gotta find the guys who will give you value for contract. Problem with most of these UFA players is they will never earn their contracts (outside of the vet presence and intelligence, they won't produce as much as their contract should demand). If you can find guys like Selanne who was amazing this year, then you really have something.

When you let young guys mature in junior/ minors, you do save some cheap contract time, yes, but you also stunt their growth somewhat. No matter what age they come in, they still need to cut their teeth in the show, learn the speed of the game and learn to excel against the very best.

So, I do agree with you to a certain extent, but it's complicated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbcwpg View Post
Agree to a point but the experience that the young kids, what it's like in the NHL, is also a bonus to using them over a vet. Obviously, as a team, you have to decide whether the extra cap hit and less years of RFA status are worth the experience factor.
I agree with you guys. It's a complicated issue.

Huffer 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 12:35 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.