not to mention HutsonLD Congestion
Matheson
Guhle (should not be a RD Longterm)
Xhekaj
Struble
Harris
Engstrom
Obviously this needs to be addressed
not to mention HutsonLD Congestion
Matheson
Guhle (should not be a RD Longterm)
Xhekaj
Struble
Harris
Engstrom
Obviously this needs to be addressed
OMG how the heck did I forget the biggest piece? Totally my bad.not to mention Hutson
either way, i think Harris is gone this summer. potentially Kovacevic in October. Savard at the trade deadline in 2025 and potentially Matheson too. Engstrom will be in NHL after next year's trade deadline - whether that's on the right or left side remains to be seen.OMG how the heck did I forget the biggest piece? Totally my bad.
He's just too small, you didn't spot him.OMG how the heck did I forget the biggest piece? Totally my bad.
either way, i think Harris is gone this summer. potentially Kovacevic in October. Savard at the trade deadline in 2025 and potentially Matheson too. Engstrom will be in NHL after next year's trade deadline - whether that's on the right or left side remains to be seen.
edit: i think Struble has more value than Harris across the league, so if it's a bigger trade he could be the one shipped out this summer instead.
It is at least being addressed on this forum, in multiple threads.LD Congestion
Matheson
Guhle (should not be a RD Longterm)
Xhekaj
Struble
Harris
Engstrom
Obviously this needs to be addressed
We don’t know who gets the job as head coach in Laval next season but really curious to see if they’ll play Engstrom on his off-side.
...what? Offensive defensemen like Benoit, Lyubushkin, McCabe, and Edmundson?I would advise looking at his points and offense only. When watching him next year in preseason games, look for his D coverage and how to handle bigger physical forwards. That's a major development area for Hutson.
Last thing we need is to have him earn a D spot by offense only. That's what the Leafs do bud.
I still chuckle when I see Hutson in people’s AHL projected line ups.
Not necessarily, but yes, that's what hockey development is. We're not in this to win the Calder cup every season. Winning it for Price made what difference exactly?So two months in you already have ECHL level D playing a regular shift in the AHL and TR has a LNAH D line?
You want 7-8D at the NHL level, 8-9 at the AHL level and 1-3 AHL contracts in the ECHL.
Not necessarily, but yes, that's what hockey development is. We're not in this to win the Calder cup every season. Winning it for Price made what difference exactly?
You're taking this as if losing half your D squad in the AHL happens all the time. It's exaggerated. Take it on the amount of contracts alone:Ah yes, getting trashed every game while forced into a role you might not be ready for is better for development than playing the role you're fit for and playing deep in the playoffs. Not getting trashed is also a lot better for morale which is key in development. Sad/demoralized player is bad for development, having fun (in a professional way) is good.
Also, who are you developping? 1 legit D and 5 ECHLer?
I'm not saying to fill the team with AHLer, but filling it with a bunch of 20 year old guys is not a good option either. Part of developing in the AHL is learning to be a pro and it's a lot easier if there are actual pros to show the good habits.
But AHL contracts are still part of your roster, why the f*** have you been ignoring them during this discussion?You're taking this as if losing half your D squad in the AHL happens all the time. It's exaggerated. Take it on the amount of contracts alone:
14-17 dmen
20-22 forwards
4-6 goalies
40-45 contracts. That's where most team end up right? All the rest are AHL contracts, so not really development purpose.
How would you split your layout?
We are discussing amount of contracts spent on players requiring development. Right now 14, means some of them will not play, specially if they do sign some vets to AHL contracts. So I'm agreeing with WTK, it means they will trade some.But AHL contracts are still part of your roster, why the f*** have you been ignoring them during this discussion?
We are discussing amount of contracts spent on players requiring development. Right now 14, means some of them will not play, specially if they do sign some vets to AHL contracts. So I'm agreeing with WTK, it means they will trade some.
Don't forget that the 5th OA will most likely eat a contract without playing on either squad, and we have to keep space. A team's roster is usually:
13-14 forwards.
6-8 defensemen.
2-3 goaltenders.
That's all NHL contracts. In the AHL it splits into NHL and AHL, but the point is if they're spending NHL contracts on players which they will not play (like Mysak), they might as trade them right before hurting dev.
It doesn't but "need development" usually translates into an NHL contract, with exceptions, like DD for a while. Signing good vets in the NHL also, usually it means they want a 2-way.NHL contracts doesn't mean "need development". For example, Kovacevic has a NHL contract but doesn't require development.
I would think they start Hutson in the NHL, then if you want all your important pieces to play more:Right now, we have space to play everyone, but no rookie could make the roster. Example:
Matheson - Guhle
Xhekaj - Savard
Struble - Barron
Harris, Kovacevic
Hutson - Reinbacher
Engstrom - Mailloux
Trudeau - XXX
The reason why we would need to trade a D is not playing spots per se, it's NHL roster spots. By trading Harris for example, you allow a rookie to push to make the NHL roster.
You also have to consider that there is a decent chance Savard and/or Kovacevic don't finish the year in Montreal.
For the record, I am for trading both Harris and Ylonen (or the dead wood) to make space at the NHL level for rookies otherwise the roster is pretty much already set.
I don't think we have a logjam at the NHL level yet. Let's let these youngsters earn their spots first.Definitely a few trades coming up, as soon as the draft.
It doesn't but "need development" usually translates into an NHL contract, with exceptions, like DD for a while. Signing good vets in the NHL also, usually it means they want a 2-way.
I would think they start Hutson in the NHL, then if you want all your important pieces to play more:
Matheson - Guhle
Hutson - Savard
Xhekaj - Kovacevic (or trade Kova to bring Stuble up, or move Xhekaj to semi-forward)
Harris
Engstrom - Reinbacher
Struble - Mailloux
Trudeau - Barron (or just trade him )
On a separate note, can you imagine that is the top 4 in Laval to start next season? That would be real exciting to watch even though I suspect Hutson has a decent shot at making the NHL roster.Hutson - Reinbacher
Engstrom - Mailloux
Trudeau - XXX