Windsor Spitfires 2023-24 Offseason Thread (Part 3)

Status
Not open for further replies.

FireBall959

Registered User
Apr 11, 2015
479
471
Disagree 💯. Winegard has no OA projection and just blocks development of someone younger. The league is soft and even the fights aren’t really fights anymore. Few know how. Martin as a 4th liner can take care of that role. Hjelholt with potential for 3 more years has way more upside and his skating is way beyond what Winegard can bring.
Hjelholt at 18yrs old is a bubble player. If in 2 yrs he is in the discussion to be your overager then the rebuild has failed. Hjelholt with 2 more years and o/a potential inhibits the development of younger players more than 1 more year of Winegard.
 

FireBall959

Registered User
Apr 11, 2015
479
471
We all saw teams like Kitchener and London come in here last year and manhandled us. With fight limits you need more than 1 option and even if our o/a was that player, I don't want our top players being that option. If a player like Walton had shown the desire to engage that way maybe different but he hasn't shown that. If not keeping Winegard then I wouldn't go Hjelholt either, bring in some 17 or 16 with potential.
 
  • Like
Reactions: oldPeng

Knownothing

Registered User
Nov 1, 2022
504
531
Who’s he blocking that’s ready this season? Winegard’s a bubble player and gone next season. Why not give his spot to someone else ?

Delete You answered the question.
 

FireBall959

Registered User
Apr 11, 2015
479
471
My issue with Hjelholt is he is te same age as everyone else. Next year we will need an o/a d plus probably an import d, so Hjelholt with be a 19yr old 6-7guy ( same as Winegard). It's like groundhog day. We are also not talking about a player eating up 20 minutes a game either. Personally I'd like to see a. 17yr old get the experience.I'm tired of 18-19 yr old rookies who age out before they gain the benefit of experience. I' d run Winegard one and done then Hicks full time nex year if a guy like Lavigne isn't ready. And after watching the Friday morning sessions he was unnoticeable to me. That's just what I'm thinking. Manzo is getting most of my icetime over either Winegard or Hjelholt anyways
 

RayzorIsDull

Registered User
Nov 16, 2007
14,698
3,470
bp on hfboards
We all saw teams like Kitchener and London come in here last year and manhandled us. With fight limits you need more than 1 option and even if our o/a was that player, I don't want our top players being that option. If a player like Walton had shown the desire to engage that way maybe different but he hasn't shown that. If not keeping Winegard then I wouldn't go Hjelholt either, bring in some 17 or 16 with potential.
Did they manhandle them because those two teams were good?

Did they manhandle Windsor because of a terrible coaching search and didn't give the players a chance?

Can they be more physical? Probably. Can they be physical but also disciplined? We won't know that. They certainly weren't last year Eichler with a few suspensions. How can we forget Martin taking a terrible retaliatory penalty against London.

If you're going to be physical and undisciplined it doesn't matter then. London was SH the most but they also had 29 SHG. Spits were middle of the pack for penalties but one of the worst PKs. Before we talk about being physical figure out the PK first.

 
  • Like
Reactions: windsor7

Knownothing

Registered User
Nov 1, 2022
504
531
My issue with Hjelholt is he is te same age as everyone else. Next year we will need an o/a d plus probably an import d, so Hjelholt with be a 19yr old 6-7guy ( same as Winegard). It's like groundhog day. We are also not talking about a player eating up 20 minutes a game either. Personally I'd like to see a. 17yr old get the experience.I'm tired of 18-19 yr old rookies who age out before they gain the benefit of experience. I' d run Winegard one and done then Hicks full time nex year if a guy like Lavigne isn't ready. And after watching the Friday morning sessions he was unnoticeable to me. That's just what I'm thinking. Manzo is getting most of my icetime over either Winegard or Hjelholt anyways
I get it and can’t argue against it. But if that’s your case, I’d rather give Lavigne the spot this season over Winegard.
 

OHLTG

Registered User
Nov 18, 2008
16,953
9,246
behind lens, Ontario
If the option is between Winegard and, say, Hicks or Lavigne, you give the spot to the younger guys. Walton has shown more willingness to use his size and be the player we've wanted since day one, so he would take over that role. Lavigne can play physical and we saw him get involved in the Blue-White. Hicks isn't physical but is the future... so...

You have plenty of guys who can and will go, even on D. Winegard's willingness isn't the selling point it would have been last season.
 

windsor7

Registered User
Nov 29, 2015
10,321
3,154
If the option is between Winegard and, say, Hicks or Lavigne, you give the spot to the younger guys. Walton has shown more willingness to use his size and be the player we've wanted since day one, so he would take over that role. Lavigne can play physical and we saw him get involved in the Blue-White. Hicks isn't physical but is the future... so...

You have plenty of guys who can and will go, even on D. Winegard's willingness isn't the selling point it would have been last season.
Need them to actually play defense too. Can't have more Charmin..
 
  • Like
Reactions: oldPeng

punch1943

Registered User
Apr 15, 2012
4,192
1,743
South Detroit
Nice to hear the opinions from those who were able to attend training camp and the blue-white game. By all accounts it appears we will be a lot better off this year than last. Better coaching will go a long way in improving the team. IMHO in this rebuilding season we will see a lot of changes early on as the team tries to find its way. We have a lot of potentially very good young players who will get more and more ice time as they get experienced. It would be great if we end up with a number of guys who are able to play well in Lasalle and are able to switch to the Spits later this year. I’m hoping we will be in the position to gradually move a few of our older guys to contenders because a couple newcomers allow us to do so. Love to see us end up with a top notch goalie and defender.
 

Teflon

Registered User
Jan 6, 2018
1,951
3,485
Id guess Manzo makes it. But theres still some in camp very similar.

QUOTE="RayzorIsDull, post: 196661107, member: 62813"]
Cristoforo Woodall and who's the 3rd?
[/QUOTE]
 

hockeylegend11

Registered User
Sep 11, 2010
16,037
4,249
That's right. I forgot. Wonder if it is just an oversight on the website that he is not shown on the preseason roster
I am assuming so.
As well Spits on their site mentioning 21 players cut from their training camp roster,including 2 I wasn't sure of, speaking of winger Julian Gignac and goalie Michael Newlove .
Now there 31 players left of the 52 starting in camp as Cen Alex Stewart was not cut Saturday.
So 3 Goalies,10 Dmen and 18 forwards remain.
Keep in mind after 2 exhibition games at 5 players are leaving for NHL camps,Greentree, Protas,Davis,Spellacy and Mathurin,leaving 14,9,3 in terms of forwards, dmen and goalies.
 

hockeylegend11

Registered User
Sep 11, 2010
16,037
4,249
With Newlove's signing Spits now have 4 goalies signed,ages in brackets Windbiel(16)
Newlove(17),Froggett (18) and Costanzo(19).
Only Costanzo is older then 18.
Spits have now signed 8 new players and 1 OA,9 players in total.
6 are 16 years,1-17,1-18 plus Mathurin who is 20,pretty impressive
2G,2D,5F.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DetSpitsFan

OHL4Life

Registered User
Sep 6, 2017
4,877
4,840
Who’s he blocking that’s ready this season? Winegard’s a bubble player and gone next season. Why not give his spot to someone else ?

Delete You answered the question.
the market will be flooded with guys soon, you probably can get a serviceable d for an 8th.

do that, no more sub par OHL players in Windsor, time to raise the floor

why sign Lavigne if your not gonna play him?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Ad

Ad