Prospect Info: Samuel Girard

[GeauxPreds1]

I don't know why more people don't understand this. Many Preds fans seem to judge our bottom 2 D the same way they judge our top 4. Last year, people went on and on over how awful our 3rd pair was in the playoffs, yet dang if we didn't come within two games of winning the freaking Cup. (and probably would have won it without offensive injuries).

As you say above, if they played that much better consistently then they wouldn't be 3rd pair to start with, and therefore would not be here in the first place. Almost every team in the league is in the same boat as we are- with borderline, questionable talent on the 3rd pair. That is never going to change.

Wouldn't you want your 3rd pairing to be good if you have the players to make it good. Your logic is 3rd pairings are suppose to be bad or else they wouldnt be 3rd pairing.
Josi ellis( when he comes back)
Pk ekholm
Emlien and Girard
Seems like a great 3 pairing
Irwin has been horrible i would scratch him unless we have injuries

 

[triggrman]

Wouldn't you want your 3rd pairing to be good if you have the players to make it good. Your logic is 3rd pairings are suppose to be bad or else they wouldnt be 3rd pairing.
Josi ellis( when he comes back)
Pk ekholm
Emlien and Girard
Seems like a great 3 pairing
Irwin has been horrible i would scratch him unless we have injuries

I agree

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

I didn't say it was the same. It's a mutual agreement among leagues. There is nothing illegal about it. I don't like it but I understand why the CHL wanted it (protects their league).

I think it protects more than the CHL. NHL GMs do not always make the best decisions even in their own interests. A good number of the top NHL draft picks sign contracts while they are junior-eligible. I do not know that I'd trust NHL GMs to leave them all in junior when they need more time in junior. The temptation to get them into the system in the AHL at 18, 19 might be too great for some. It would be against the best developmental interests of most of those players.

Now, there are always a handful of truly exceptional cases like Girard. Maybe 10 kids each year who break camp on their NHL teams, but it's up in the air whether to send them back to junior or not. The rule does adversely affect those 10 kids every year. But I bet NHL teams would assign 20, 30, maybe 50 junior-aged kids each year to the AHL if they had carte-blanche. They'd all claim their kid, their wise draft pick, fit the exceptional category.

It would gradually change the face of both the AHL and junior leagues. AHL would become a younger, consequently less challenging league. As would CHL. And less challenging leagues aren't good for developing the best prospects either.

So if they have to have an agreement with no exceptions, I think they are right to land on the side they're currently on. The 10 kids affected will be hurt less by playing another year of junior than the cumulative effect of damaging the AHL and CHL development levels across the board.

But it might be nice if maybe every team had at least 1 exception card they could play every 2 years or something like that.

 

[PredsV82]

It wasn't collectively bargained was it? Seems a lot like collusion.

Whos do you say is colluding with whom and who is suffering as a result? It's not collectively bargained with the affected players because it's not involving professional hockey players, only junior players. I feel certain a junior player could seek out a non-NHL professional contract any time they wanted, but if they want to be given the benefits afforded to players who have been drafted (ie the teams training services, player development, etc) as well as being able to eventually reap the benefits of the NHL CBA, then they have to play by the rules established by the NHL.

 

[triggrman]

I'd say the difference in pay between CHL and the AHL does hurt players that could and should (Girard) in the AHL.

Teams affiliates are AHL, you would think NHL teams would prefer their prospects in their farm teams.

 

[Skinnyjimmy08]

I'd say the difference in pay between CHL and the AHL does hurt players that could and should (Girard) in the AHL.

Teams affiliates are AHL, you would think NHL teams would prefer their prospects in their farm teams.

Oh forsure NHL teams would love to have prospects like him eligable for AHL... But doing that would kill junior hockey. Many teams across Canada in the CHL are teetering on financial difficulties(alot are in financial difficulties) and if those teams lost their top players at 18/19 years old, it would be the end of many teams which would result in less teams for NHL teams to find players and so on... The trickle down effect would be horrible.

I live in a major junior city in the CHL and media has to hype up rival teams coming to the city in hopes for fans to buy tickets for the games. If cities couldnt hype these top guys up and sell those extra tickets, teams would have to fold. Majority of arenas in the CHL on any given night are only half full as it is now

 

[drwpreds]

Wouldn't you want your 3rd pairing to be good if you have the players to make it good. Your logic is 3rd pairings are suppose to be bad or else they wouldnt be 3rd pairing.
Josi ellis( when he comes back)
Pk ekholm
Emlien and Girard
Seems like a great 3 pairing
Irwin has been horrible i would scratch him unless we have injuries

Well of course I want the 3rd pairing to be as good as it possibly can be. I am 100% in agreement that Girard should be playing. But my point stands- guys are on the 3rd pair for a reason- if they were consistently better they would not be on the 3rd pair. I just think we get a little obsessed on here with it. We are talking about guys who play at most 10 minutes a game when we are healthy elsewhere. And again, almost every team in the league has the same problem we have, if not worse........

That's all I am saying- of course I want us to have the best possible 3rd pairing.

 

[Scoresberg]

Of course we're talking about it because the 3rd pair is costing us games which it shouldn't given that 10 minutes of ice-time and the fact that we have the players to make it better.

 

[WildcatMapleLeafs28]

What are the chances he gets sent back to junior at this point ?

 

[Gnashville]

What are the chances he gets sent back to junior at this point ?

50/50 He has proven he belongs but the team has 9 defensemen right now.

 

[Pred303]

i don't agree with it, but i think there is about a 90% chance he's sent back to juniors because of the glut of 6th vet d-men on the roster.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

i don't agree with it, but i think there is about a 90% chance he's sent back to juniors because of the glut of 6th vet d-men on the roster.

Agreed, and not really happy about it. I'd put any of Irwin/Bitetto/Weber on waivers to keep him around. I'd play him every night also.

But NHL teams don't usually roll that way, and the fact that he has already only played 3 games out of 8 is telling. Alas. Surprise me (again), Mr. Poile, please?

 

[NSH615]

Is the 10 game rule 10 games played or 10 games on the roster?

 

[triggrman]

Is the 10 game rule 10 games played or 10 games on the roster?

10 games played.

 

[NSH615]

10 games played.

Wow. It would be bad asset management, but teams could really screw over a player. Have him sit on the roster 1/2 the year or more and only play him in a handful of games. He would get paid his NHL money, but his contract would never start.

I don't get this logic of the rule.

 

[triggrman]

Another protect the CHL rule.....

He needs to play, IMHO, if he's just going to be a healthy scratch, send him down. I think you can develop fine as s a player with limited NHL minutes, but you have to play.

 

[Legionnaire11]

Wow. It would be bad asset management, but teams could really screw over a player. Have him sit on the roster 1/2 the year or more and only play him in a handful of games. He would get paid his NHL money, but his contract would never start.

I don't get this logic of the rule.

A lot of times a player does just that and isn't sent back until into December. But the teams like to have these guys practice with the NHL roster, and go through training, video, gameday routine etc. In some cases that is more valuable than going back to a poorly run CHL program and continuing bad habits with little direction.

Look at the European model, they play a lot fewer games than NA juniors and many top prospects only play a handful of games but spend a lot of time training. Obviously there's not a one size fits all method, and there are pros and cons to any developmental approach.

 

[TitansVolsPreds615]

Keep in mind also that they are probably teaching Sam how to lift and eat in a way that will allow him to bulk up. He isn't just twiddling his thumbs while he is scratched. As someone else noted there is some benefit to seeing what life as a pro is going to be like and learning the amount of work that you need to put in off the ice to be a successful player.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Another protect the CHL rule.....

He needs to play, IMHO, if he's just going to be a healthy scratch, send him down. I think you can develop fine as s a player with limited NHL minutes, but you have to play.

Yeah, if you can't play him 2 out of every 3 games at minimum, then send him back. And this is with Ellis and now even Weber out. There (hopefully) won't be any better time than now to play him. But they're not playing him. Sooooo...

Shawinigan is not a contender in the Q this year, but presumably he'd get traded. And have a spot on Team Canada for the WJC. So he ought to see some good challenges even in junior.

 

[drwpreds]

He needs to play, IMHO, if he's just going to be a healthy scratch, send him down. I think you can develop fine as s a player with limited NHL minutes, but you have to play.

Yep- we can argue over whether he is ready to be a full time NHL player or not, but for me what cannot be argued is it makes no sense whatsoever for him to be sitting in the press box and not playing anywhere. It is completely asinine.......

 

[NSH615]

Yeah, if you can't play him 2 out of every 3 games at minimum, then send him back. And this is with Ellis and now even Weber out. There (hopefully) won't be any better time than now to play him. But they're not playing him. Sooooo...

Shawinigan is not a contender in the Q this year, but presumably he'd get traded. And have a spot on Team Canada for the WJC. So he ought to see some good challenges even in junior.

Well Weber is back. Played Saturday. But point still taken. He is better than any of our current 4-7

 

[AdmiralsFan24]

Oh forsure NHL teams would love to have prospects like him eligable for AHL... But doing that would kill junior hockey. Many teams across Canada in the CHL are teetering on financial difficulties(alot are in financial difficulties) and if those teams lost their top players at 18/19 years old, it would be the end of many teams which would result in less teams for NHL teams to find players and so on... The trickle down effect would be horrible.

Maybe they shouldn't put teams in towns of 15,000 that isn't a suburb of some larger city. Why exactly are there teams in Swift Current, Owen Sound and Baie-Comeau for example? This may sound harsh but why is it the NHL's responsibility for these tiny, isolated towns to keep their best players an extra year while hurting the player's development just to keep these teams from folding?

 

[Jonesey]

Maybe they shouldn't put teams in towns of 15,000 that isn't a suburb of some larger city. Why exactly are there teams in Swift Current, Owen Sound and Baie-Comeau for example? This may sound harsh but why is it the NHL's responsibility for these tiny, isolated towns to keep their best players an extra year while hurting the player's development just to keep these teams from folding?

Be careful.. many people had that same question about Nashville just a few years ago.

 

[Skinnyjimmy08]

Maybe they shouldn't put teams in towns of 15,000 that isn't a suburb of some larger city. Why exactly are there teams in Swift Current, Owen Sound and Baie-Comeau for example? This may sound harsh but why is it the NHL's responsibility for these tiny, isolated towns to keep their best players an extra year while hurting the player's development just to keep these teams from folding?

Its not just those small towns... Many historical teams are having extreme attendance issues and losing a ton of money. Ive been to alot of games in Western Canada and into the US and its painful how many empty seats there are with Vancouver Giants, Kamloops Blazers, Prince George Cougars and teams in USA. Bigger cities with maybe 2000 to 3000 fans only and dropping yearly. I went to a Kamloops game last season and it was less than half full and you could hear a pin drop almost all game and fans heads were burried in the cell phones... And this was against their biggest rival Kelowna Rockets... A team loaded with alot of talent. Also went to a Kelowna game this season and the attendance was really low

And Kamloops/Kelowna are very good franchises that have made many many NHLers

 

[AdmiralsFan24]

Be careful.. many people had that same question about Nashville just a few years ago.

But Nashville isn't a town of 15,000 isolated from everywhere. It seems like bad business to set up shop in a place like Swift Current. You can draw a 6,000 square mile circle around Swift Current and not even get to 30,000 people and that's where they decided to put a team and expected to make money? Like, I'm not going to put a USHL team in Carroll, Iowa and then wonder why I'm not getting any people to my games and why I'm not making money or at least breaking even.