OMG, built for next season is not limited to 1/20 teams. I can argue Guelph & NB are built for next season. Heck, any of the five central teams can realistically make 2023-24 their year. But built for 125 regular season games from now, and will make a title run …we may not even be able to correctly say which teams will make a title run after the 2024 trade deadline.
I don’t understand your obsession with a rebuild in 2024-25. Take a shot, worry about re-tooling after.
You can choose to believe and promote the ‘67s as a model franchise that has done things the right way. For spite, I’ll say any team can take the hard road that the ‘67s, Firebirds, hounds took. It’s not that impressive to have 4-5 poor years selling off the only players capable of making the team worth watching in order to bank a couple of top 4 picks.
Guelph trading away an entire draft class to win, then a few years later boast two years of the leagues top number of NHL draft players is impressive. Kingston deemed by many as cellar dwellers for several seasons after taking a shot, have since taken another shot and have thrown their hat into the ring to host the memorial cup; that’s pretty cool. The Petes had one often injured player to show for the 2017 and 2018 draft classes and “wasted” some of the few picks they had just to make the playoffs, now in the conversation of contenders. Wow, right?
The point is when someone says a team is build for a particular season, the expectation is they are going to contend. That is my interpretation. It usually means they have the pieces in place to add one or two key pieces and they are a sure fire Championship contender. THAT is how I read that comment. So, when you say built for next year, I look at the roster and see what they have and they really don’t have a lot. They don’t have anymore than any other average team. They have a reasonable group of forwards that they can work with but arguably three returning D-Men on what would be considered a championship roster (there’s no way they can use Cato as an OA on a contending team) and possibly no goalie. That is what I see.
You point to eight 19 year olds. I think they have five. Two of the other three are relatively useless and the third is a goalie that hasn't shown the ability to play at a level needed. Now, it is a goalie so that can change quickly and we really do need the full season this year to see if Flores is actually a quality goalie or not so I will reserve full judgement on him to the end of the season.
I also looks their trade assets. They burned through a lot of trade assets already just to get to the point where, IMO, they are average. That has been my point since the beginning. However, I tried hard to look at the roster more closely and figure out a way for them to actually improve that team enough to be a competent Memorial Cup host. They only way I see them being able to do that is to trade at least one of next year’s first round picks and pretty much all fo their remaining quality picks through 2026 as well as sell off some of their 19 year olds this year at the deadline (keep the three 19 year olds they anchor as OA’s next year). If they do that then I agree they may be in a quality situation.
However, if they were to do that, I point out they have two years of no picks, they have three 19 year olds and none of them are trending to the level of getting boatloads of pick sin return for. They will have no 18 or 19 year old 1st round picks the following season to be anchor players. I am simply pointing out if they do the things necessary to Contend and participate as a Memorial Cup host, they simply aren’t as well positioned to rebuild as most other teams that have made a run.
Does any of that preclude them doing what I am suggesting? No. Does that mean I am bang on regarding their ability to rebuild? No. I am simply pointing out that if Niagara chooses the nuclear option of hell or high water contention next year (which does seem to be the plan), then I don’t like the look of it. At all.
Usually teams that contend using assets make trades to bank trade assets in advance and then build their teams foundation and then use the surplus assets plus some additional assets to acquire key impact players to augment their team. My point with Niagara is they were devoid of many of the pieces so they used assets to acquire the foundational pieces. What teams every have done that? I can’t think of any bottom feeder team that would have been a bottom feeder team again use assets to be a middle tier team to create a foundation to essentially throw everything they have at something and leave themselves with nothing but an expansion team. I haven’t ever seen it. Ever. This will be a first IMO.
You can point to Guelph and Kingston, fine but they had decent teams before they started making trades. Niagara has three ‘05s and one ‘04 that was drafted by them that will participate on their roster next year. Four players. FOUR! They purchased the entire team and have the draft pick closet remaining to prove it. And yet, somehow, this team is going to barf up more draft assets and potentially more first round picks next year to throw it at a single season. It is reckless to say the least. The reality is, they won’t get to host the Memorial Cup without making more moves prior to this deadline. Again, it is reckless, especially when a team full of 18 year olds and four high quality 19 year olds will struggle to remain above .500 this year.
And, for the record, i am not using the 67’s as the model franchise in this argument. I am using them to show that as 67’s fans, we don’t believe they have the type of team returning to even think about contending and yet, looking at the current roster and draft cabinet, the 67’s are better positioned to make a run next year than Niagara is. We expect to potentially sell off a player to recoup whatever assets are used this year to potentially make a run. It is simply a comparison of rosters and situations which make the point of Niagara doing what it is doing to be reckless.
