GDT: Penguins @ Senators, Dec. 26, 7:30 pm, SNET

SpezDispenser wrote:How the hell was that not a goal?

Yeah, especially since the angle of view (camera is offset from the crossbar toward the center of the goal) would make it appear closer to the goal line that it really is. But without a clear view of where the puck is and where the goal line is, they can't make the right call. A higher-res camera would definitely help, but the mesh gets in the way, for sure. A pinhole camera built right into the corner of the crossbar/post would give you a wonderful picture -- it could be a (relatively) cheap camera, and at that distance it would probably give you as good a shot as a HD camera in the rafters, without the mesh screwing it up, and with no angle-of-view issues either.

SpezDispenser wrote:

Big Ev wrote:Tarasenko is NHL ready right now according to most scouts/experts, and he will have a great shot at making the team next year. Rundblad will as well, but I could see them putting him in the AHL. So really, I think they are both equal in terms of readiness.

It's just frustrating that they don't pick him when they had bad experiences with less skilled players like Zubov, Kaigorodov, and Nikulin. Tarasenko is a HELL of alot better than those guys and he won't waste his talents in the joke of a league that is the KHL, I think.

I'm also not going to just say that WE made a bad decision not picking him. So did most teams before our pick. Especially NYR.

Yeah, it's impossible to say if Ottawa did the right thing or not right now. I would say yes personally because I've already been teased with Rundblad being a bigger version of Karlsson. And if that's true - and that includes most of the hockey IQ hopefully - then I'm okay with it. Tarasenko would look nice as a Sens prospect right now, there's no debate there.

Why would the Rangers not take him? Or LA for that matter.

But the thing is, do we need another Karlsson? It's nice to have but I don't know if it's completely necessary. Look around the league, you don't see a lot of teams with 2 elite point producers on the back end. You need a balanced lineup with power up front and on defense. I think we would have been fine with Cowen-Karlsson + everyone else.

Big Ev wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:

Big Ev wrote:Tarasenko is NHL ready right now according to most scouts/experts, and he will have a great shot at making the team next year. Rundblad will as well, but I could see them putting him in the AHL. So really, I think they are both equal in terms of readiness.

It's just frustrating that they don't pick him when they had bad experiences with less skilled players like Zubov, Kaigorodov, and Nikulin. Tarasenko is a HELL of alot better than those guys and he won't waste his talents in the joke of a league that is the KHL, I think.

I'm also not going to just say that WE made a bad decision not picking him. So did most teams before our pick. Especially NYR.

Yeah, it's impossible to say if Ottawa did the right thing or not right now. I would say yes personally because I've already been teased with Rundblad being a bigger version of Karlsson. And if that's true - and that includes most of the hockey IQ hopefully - then I'm okay with it. Tarasenko would look nice as a Sens prospect right now, there's no debate there.

Why would the Rangers not take him? Or LA for that matter.

But the thing is, do we need another Karlsson? It's nice to have but I don't know if it's completely necessary. Look around the league, you don't see a lot of teams with 2 elite point producers on the back end. You need a balanced lineup with power up front and on defense. I think we would have been fine with Cowen-Karlsson + everyone else.

Co-sign.

We haven't had a blue chip offensive prospect since the 2001 draft. That's a decade for god sakes. This team is going to get worse offensively before it gets better (Alfie retiring etc), and that's a scary, scary thought.

wprager wrote:All I'm saying is that we had a number of high-end D prospects and couldn't score goals (EK leading the team is saying something, isn't it) and yet Murray went for another D. Kind of like the Habs picking Price when they had Theodore with some hardware from the year-end awards. I don't think they knew, at the time, that Theodore would drop off as much as he did with the changes to equipment and rules, and when they took away his "hair" medicine.

True enough. But if the Sens weren't comfortable with Tarasenko (and they'd have more knowledge than anyone else) who else would you take over Rundblad? Hishon, Watson, Bjugstad, Bennett, Sheahan, Hayes, Howden, Kuznetsov, Coyle, Etem, or Nelson?

I think drafting is a bit more complicated than BPA but drafting for need can sometimes bite you (like Lee in 2005, maybe, or potentially like McIlrath in 2010). Obviously the Price pick looks pretty good right now.

I'm not sure about the "Rundblad's further in his development so he can be dealt more quickly than Tarasenko could hypothetically be" argument because generally forwards develop faster than defencemen. This being the case, though, it'd make sense to get your D drafted before taking forwards because they'd mature around the same time (ignore the cap implications for now). Or you can just deal Rundblad.

Big Ev wrote:But the thing is, do we need another Karlsson? It's nice to have but I don't know if it's completely necessary. Look around the league, you don't see a lot of teams with 2 elite point producers on the back end. You need a balanced lineup with power up front and on defense. I think we would have been fine with Cowen-Karlsson + everyone else.

Rundblad and Karlsson are not identical players; I don't know why this comparison always picks up. It might be more ideal if we had a top-flight forward instead of Rundblad but I guess all we can say is that they felt Rundblad was the best/safer choice. And if Murray should get the benefit of the doubt anywhere, it's on draft day (IMO). Plus if we really **** the bed with Spezza gone, we'll be able to add a forward like Landeskog or RNH.

I'd revisit your analysis of the top teams again. Last season Chicago had Keith, Seabrook, Campbell and Hjalmarsson (and, recall, added Johnsson, but he got injured) while Philly had Pronger, Timonen, Carle and Coburn. Detroit's success came with Lidstrom, Rafalski, Kronwall and Stuart, while Anaheim won with Niedermayer, Pronger, Beauchemin and O'Donnell. Pittsburgh is a bit of an exception given the strength of the team lies on their incredible centre depth, but even they have/have had a top-flight offensive blue-line.

We have Karlsson, Cowen, Rundblad and Wiercioch, (plus depth behind them, and Lehner) which is an awesome step in that direction IMO. Obviously you can also point to Toews/Kane/Hossa/Sharp etc. on Chicago and Richards/Carter/Giroux/Briere etc. on Philly, and Datsyuk/Zetterberg/Franzen/Holmstrom/occasionally Hossa on Detroit, and Selanne/McDonald/Getzlaf/Perry/Penner/whomever on Anaheim, and that's definitely an area where we're lacking. But I think we can flesh out the forward corps a bit in the coming drafts.

It's not always about points, it's about having a solid top 4 that can move the puck quickly every single shift in a 7 game series.

Big Ev wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:

Big Ev wrote:Tarasenko is NHL ready right now according to most scouts/experts, and he will have a great shot at making the team next year. Rundblad will as well, but I could see them putting him in the AHL. So really, I think they are both equal in terms of readiness.

It's just frustrating that they don't pick him when they had bad experiences with less skilled players like Zubov, Kaigorodov, and Nikulin. Tarasenko is a HELL of alot better than those guys and he won't waste his talents in the joke of a league that is the KHL, I think.

I'm also not going to just say that WE made a bad decision not picking him. So did most teams before our pick. Especially NYR.

Yeah, it's impossible to say if Ottawa did the right thing or not right now. I would say yes personally because I've already been teased with Rundblad being a bigger version of Karlsson. And if that's true - and that includes most of the hockey IQ hopefully - then I'm okay with it. Tarasenko would look nice as a Sens prospect right now, there's no debate there.

Why would the Rangers not take him? Or LA for that matter.

But the thing is, do we need another Karlsson? It's nice to have but I don't know if it's completely necessary. Look around the league, you don't see a lot of teams with 2 elite point producers on the back end. You need a balanced lineup with power up front and on defense. I think we would have been fine with Cowen-Karlsson + everyone else.

My opinion differs from you - which usually doesn't happen - a lot today.

Are you really asking if teams need 2 or more high scoring defencemen? IMO, it is almost a must; something you can never have enough of actually.

Karlsson isn't just offense either, we are talking about players that are touted to be all-around players with few weaknesses to their game. A defensive core full of Gonchar's - won't fit under the cap for one - but I agree that won't work due to obvious holes in their play without the puck IMO.

I noticed Karlsson protected the puck really well in his own corner against 2 guys a couple of times and ended up getting out to the other corner. He's still learning but I can see where he's headed and it looks mighty good.

By the way, even Carkner can move the puck. He springs forwards more often that people care to acknowledge. I think this fixation on PMDs is a little absurd. The quality of forwards you have to move the puck to is a huge factor in your breakout too.

asq2 wrote:

Big Ev wrote:But the thing is, do we need another Karlsson? It's nice to have but I don't know if it's completely necessary. Look around the league, you don't see a lot of teams with 2 elite point producers on the back end. You need a balanced lineup with power up front and on defense. I think we would have been fine with Cowen-Karlsson + everyone else.

Rundblad and Karlsson are not identical players; I don't know why this comparison always picks up. It might be more ideal if we had a top-flight forward instead of Rundblad but I guess all we can say is that they felt Rundblad was the best/safer choice. And if Murray should get the benefit of the doubt anywhere, it's on draft day (IMO). Plus if we really **** the bed with Spezza gone, we'll be able to add a forward like Landeskog or RNH.

I'd revisit your analysis of the top teams again. Last season Chicago had Keith, Seabrook, Campbell and Hjalmarsson (and, recall, added Johnsson, but he got injured) while Philly had Pronger, Timonen, Carle and Coburn. Detroit's success came with Lidstrom, Rafalski, Kronwall and Stuart, while Anaheim won with Niedermayer, Pronger, Beauchemin and O'Donnell. Pittsburgh is a bit of an exception given the strength of the team lies on their incredible centre depth, but even they have/have had a top-flight offensive blue-line.

We have Karlsson, Cowen, Rundblad and Wiercioch, (plus depth behind them, and Lehner) which is an awesome step in that direction IMO. Obviously you can also point to Toews/Kane/Hossa/Sharp etc. on Chicago and Richards/Carter/Giroux/Briere etc. on Philly, and Datsyuk/Zetterberg/Franzen/Holmstrom/occasionally Hossa on Detroit, and Selanne/McDonald/Getzlaf/Perry/Penner/whomever on Anaheim, and that's definitely an area where we're lacking. But I think we can flesh out the forward corps a bit in the coming drafts.

Well, that sure saved me a lot of work in typing the exact same thing - which I was just about to do and alluded to earlier.

SeawaySensFan wrote:I noticed Karlsson protected the puck really well in his own corner against 2 guys a couple of times and ended up getting out to the other corner. He's still learning but I can see where he's headed and it looks mighty good.

By the way, even Carkner can move the puck. He springs forwards more often that people care to acknowledge. I think this fixation on PMDs is a little absurd. The quality of forwards you have to move the puck to is a huge factor in your breakout too.

You had me until I read that sentence. Watch New Jersey - if you are having trouble sleeping - and tell me that they don't need some PMD's. The Devils forwards are nothing to sneeze at.

In saying that, I still do agree to some extent; but the Devils example can't be denied.

Big Ev wrote:
But the thing is, do we need another Karlsson? It's nice to have but I don't know if it's completely necessary. Look around the league, you don't see a lot of teams with 2 elite point producers on the back end. You need a balanced lineup with power up front and on defense. I think we would have been fine with Cowen-Karlsson + everyone else.

That's the million dollar question I guess. No one wants to be the next NJ Devils circa 2010 who can't move the puck to save their lives. Plus, it's intriguing to think of a Cowen,Karlsson,Rundblad,Wiercioch for the next decade+, but at the same time, we don't have a forward prospect right now and I completely understand people's beefs with it.

The final thought I have is that I trust Forsberg and Dorion a lot. They've made some great decisions that look like they might pay off in the future - including drafting EK. If they think Rundblad was better than anyone else available when we picked who are we to argue?

Plus Butler was a big signing. He might not be elite or blue chip - although he's playing like it- but he's someone that could absolutely be a top six RW for us. Pretend that we used that pick with the SJ 1st round pick we traded away.

CockRoche wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:I noticed Karlsson protected the puck really well in his own corner against 2 guys a couple of times and ended up getting out to the other corner. He's still learning but I can see where he's headed and it looks mighty good.

By the way, even Carkner can move the puck. He springs forwards more often that people care to acknowledge. I think this fixation on PMDs is a little absurd. The quality of forwards you have to move the puck to is a huge factor in your breakout too.

You had me until I read that sentence. Watch New Jersey - if you are having trouble sleeping - and tell me that they don't need some PMD's. The Devils forwards are nothing to sneeze at.

In saying that, I still do agree to some extent; but the Devils example can't be denied.

I meant from an Ottawa perspective. New Jersey is probably the team I like the least in the NHL, so I'm glad that the chickens have come home to roost there!

Besides, New Jersey has loaded up on offense up front and Lou wanted to attempt to balance that with ALL stay-at-home defensive D to placate and protect Fraudeur. The best success they had recently is when Fraudeur was out and Clemmensen was in and there was a good mix of players up front and at the back who could finally attack instead of defend and wait for an opening.

SeawaySensFan wrote:

CockRoche wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:I noticed Karlsson protected the puck really well in his own corner against 2 guys a couple of times and ended up getting out to the other corner. He's still learning but I can see where he's headed and it looks mighty good.

By the way, even Carkner can move the puck. He springs forwards more often that people care to acknowledge. I think this fixation on PMDs is a little absurd. The quality of forwards you have to move the puck to is a huge factor in your breakout too.

You had me until I read that sentence. Watch New Jersey - if you are having trouble sleeping - and tell me that they don't need some PMD's. The Devils forwards are nothing to sneeze at.

In saying that, I still do agree to some extent; but the Devils example can't be denied.

I meant from an Ottawa perspective. New Jersey is probably the team I like the least in the NHL, so I'm glad that the chickens have come home to roost there!

Besides, New Jersey has loaded up on offense up front and Lou wanted to attempt to balance that with ALL stay-at-home defensive D to placate and protect Fraudeur. The best success they had recently is when Fraudeur was out and Clemmensen was in and there was a good mix of players up front and at the back who could finally attack instead of defend and wait for an opening.

I'm sure you mean Johan Hedberg.

Scott Clemmensen plays in Florida; he backs up Vokoun. Clemmensen is one of my favorite goalies tho'.

SeawaySensFan wrote:

CockRoche wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:I noticed Karlsson protected the puck really well in his own corner against 2 guys a couple of times and ended up getting out to the other corner. He's still learning but I can see where he's headed and it looks mighty good.

By the way, even Carkner can move the puck. He springs forwards more often that people care to acknowledge. I think this fixation on PMDs is a little absurd. The quality of forwards you have to move the puck to is a huge factor in your breakout too.

You had me until I read that sentence. Watch New Jersey - if you are having trouble sleeping - and tell me that they don't need some PMD's. The Devils forwards are nothing to sneeze at.

In saying that, I still do agree to some extent; but the Devils example can't be denied.

I meant from an Ottawa perspective. New Jersey is probably the team I like the least in the NHL, so I'm glad that the chickens have come home to roost there!

Besides, New Jersey has loaded up on offense up front and Lou wanted to attempt to balance that with ALL stay-at-home defensive D to placate and protect Fraudeur. The best success they had recently is when Fraudeur was out and Clemmensen was in and there was a good mix of players up front and at the back who could finally attack instead of defend and wait for an opening.

From an Ottawa perspective, yes, that makes a lot of sense and I agree. I'm glad we clarified that.

Well, apart from the Devils we can also look at the 2008-2009 Senators, replete with Spezza, Heatley, Alfie, Vermette, Fisher, 17-goal Foligno, etc. We had decent forwards (we were like second/first in the league in offence the year prior), but remember how awful it was with Brendan Bell and Ryan Shannon running our powerplays? A blue-line with Phillips, Volchenkov, Kuba, Smith, Picard, Bell, Schubert, Campoli (for a few games) and Richardson/Carkner (for a couple games) meant missing the playoffs for the first time in however many seasons.

I think the point to take home is that Cup-winners/Cup contenders are hard to build and generally they're terrific at all positions. If hypothetically you subtracted Cowen or Rundblad and added a Paajarvi or Tarasenko, we'd be talking about how we were OK in all areas but not really awe-inspiring in any of them.

In Rundblad's case, they saw him as an opportunity to really strengthen the potential for this team's future blue-line down as one of the best in the league, and also saw him as a potentially elite asset that was also a safer acquisition. Maybe this team + Tarasenko > this team + Rundblad, but this team + Rundblad >>> this team without either, and they must have felt that the risk was too significant. So, apparently, did a number of other teams. My position hasn't wavered from my one on draft day: I really hoped they'd take Tarasenko but I'd definitely understand if they didn't.

I know there's a certain amount of frustration at the moment because Spezza's down and there's no one who can really step in to replace him. Part of that stems from Regin and Foligno not taking steps forward offensively this season. But even if we had Paajarvi or Tarasenko, neither of them would be filling the void left by Spezza right now anyway (MP has 14 points; VT isn't in the NHL).

So cheer up; there are plenty of bigger problems in the Sens' organization than Rundblad.

CockRoche wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

CockRoche wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:I noticed Karlsson protected the puck really well in his own corner against 2 guys a couple of times and ended up getting out to the other corner. He's still learning but I can see where he's headed and it looks mighty good.

By the way, even Carkner can move the puck. He springs forwards more often that people care to acknowledge. I think this fixation on PMDs is a little absurd. The quality of forwards you have to move the puck to is a huge factor in your breakout too.

You had me until I read that sentence. Watch New Jersey - if you are having trouble sleeping - and tell me that they don't need some PMD's. The Devils forwards are nothing to sneeze at.

In saying that, I still do agree to some extent; but the Devils example can't be denied.

I meant from an Ottawa perspective. New Jersey is probably the team I like the least in the NHL, so I'm glad that the chickens have come home to roost there!

Besides, New Jersey has loaded up on offense up front and Lou wanted to attempt to balance that with ALL stay-at-home defensive D to placate and protect Fraudeur. The best success they had recently is when Fraudeur was out and Clemmensen was in and there was a good mix of players up front and at the back who could finally attack instead of defend and wait for an opening.

I'm sure you mean Johan Hedberg.

Scott Clemmensen plays in Florida; he backs up Vokoun. Clemmensen is one of my favorite goalies tho'.

I know who I meant

asq2 wrote:Well, apart from the Devils we can also look at the 2008-2009 Senators, replete with Spezza, Heatley, Alfie, Vermette, Fisher, 17-goal Foligno, etc. We had decent forwards (we were like second/first in the league in offence the year prior), but remember how awful it was with Brendan Bell and Ryan Shannon running our powerplays? A blue-line with Phillips, Volchenkov, Kuba, Smith, Picard, Bell, Schubert, Campoli (for a few games) and Richardson/Carkner (for a couple games) meant missing the playoffs for the first time in however many seasons.

I think the point to take home is that Cup-winners/Cup contenders are hard to build and generally they're terrific at all positions. If hypothetically you subtracted Cowen or Rundblad and added a Paajarvi or Tarasenko, we'd be talking about how we were OK in all areas but not really awe-inspiring in any of them.

In Rundblad's case, they saw him as an opportunity to really strengthen the potential for this team's future blue-line down as one of the best in the league, and also saw him as a potentially elite asset that was also a safer acquisition. Maybe this team + Tarasenko > this team + Rundblad, but this team + Rundblad >>> this team without either, and they must have felt that the risk was too significant. So, apparently, did a number of other teams. My position hasn't wavered from my one on draft day: I really hoped they'd take Tarasenko but I'd definitely understand if they didn't.

I know there's a certain amount of frustration at the moment because Spezza's down and there's no one who can really step in to replace him. Part of that stems from Regin and Foligno not taking steps forward offensively this season. But even if we had Paajarvi or Tarasenko, neither of them would be filling the void left by Spezza right now anyway (MP has 14 points; VT isn't in the NHL).

So cheer up; there are plenty of bigger problems in the Sens' organization than Rundblad.

Another great post asq2.

Not to mention that almost all this Tarasenko talk is after people watching him play good for one game on National television. Can you imagine what will happen if Tarasenko plays horrible next game? Sens fans world will be turned upside down and Rundblad becomes a God again.

OK, well after I said Silfverberg to Alfie isn't the greatest comparison, here's what KRM had to say on HF:

Had the pleasure of watching Silfverberg tonight, that kid has progressed so much since I first saw him play in U18 hockey. Regarding his potential I called him a poor mans Alfredsson earlier this year, I think I have to withdraw that statement because there's nothing 'poor' about him at all.

http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=29819742&postcount=879

KRM is the poster who did yeoman's work keeping us up to date on EK's progression during the 2008-2009 season. He's also not really a huge prospects homer guy because he can be pretty hard on Rundblad, so that's high praise for Silver Mountain.

Justice?