Hockey's Future Prospect of the Year 2011: David Rundblad

SpezDispenser wrote:

Big Ev wrote:What the heck for? The guy is 40+ years old.

We need a veteran guy back there for cheap. He'd be a guy I'd like to sign for 1 year to stabilize things a bit.

Wouldn't that make an already crowded blue line that much more crowded? I think someone will be traded or bought out to make room as is. Personally, I don't think - given the state of the team overall - we need another aging vet on the blue line. Let the kids play and get experience and assess where we're at after 2-3 months. I'm not into giving an old fart a roster spot unless we know it's absolutely needed first.

Hoags wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:

Big Ev wrote:What the heck for? The guy is 40+ years old.

We need a veteran guy back there for cheap. He'd be a guy I'd like to sign for 1 year to stabilize things a bit.

We've got two, Gonchar and Philips.

Let me change the definition of the guy I want: David Hale, but a little more experienced.

strachattack wrote:
Wouldn't that make an already crowded blue line that much more crowded? I think someone will be traded or bought out to make room as is. Personally, I don't think - given the state of the team overall - we need another aging vet on the blue line. Let the kids play and get experience and assess where we're at after 2-3 months. I'm not into giving an old fart a roster spot unless we know it's absolutely needed first.

In my humble opinion, the bluelines that are being offered about here is not good enough by any stretch of the imagination. Not only that, I'd LOVE to give Rundblad the reigns and have him get some experience, but the odds of both Cowen and Rundblad making the team as rookies is less than stellar IMO.

O'Donnell is just an example of the experience I would look for as a GM, possibly even a one for one swap of Kuba for a slightly cheaper veteran. Gonchar didn't prove he can play last year and that's a real issue. Phillips improved when we got a real goaltender, but again, I wouldn't put all my eggs in that basket either when the insurance of getting an old vet. would cost less than a million.

Cowen's ready from what I've seen and heard, Lee improved dramatically, Karlsson's there forever, Kuba blows, as of now Gonchar sucks, Carkner's a great 7th D-man IMO, Rundblad's got one of the most risky styles of hockey anyone can imagine, we'd be really better off with him in the AHL. So if the Dung hits the fan, we could have 2 defective older guys (Gonchar and Kuba) + Phillips + Lee, who was solid as a rock last year, but the jury's still out on + Cowen (rookie) + Carkner (reliable as a 6th/7th guy). Not too good.

Or we could just go with:

Cowen - Karlsson
Phillips - Gonchar
Kuba - Rundblad
Carkner

and take the pain. Anderson will have to be ludicrously good though for us not to be selecting the Nail next year.

SpezDispenser wrote:Or we could just go with:

Cowen - Karlsson
Phillips - Gonchar
Kuba - Rundblad
Carkner

and take the pain. Anderson will have to be ludicrously good though for us not to be selecting the Nail next year.

That's probably what will happen, since Dorion thinks Rundblad can play in the NHL now.

They can sign an FA to a 2-way much like Hale late in the offseason if they want a plan B but I think Rundblad will be Karlsson'd into the lineup

SpezDispenser wrote:

strachattack wrote:
Wouldn't that make an already crowded blue line that much more crowded? I think someone will be traded or bought out to make room as is. Personally, I don't think - given the state of the team overall - we need another aging vet on the blue line. Let the kids play and get experience and assess where we're at after 2-3 months. I'm not into giving an old fart a roster spot unless we know it's absolutely needed first.

In my humble opinion, the bluelines that are being offered about here is not good enough by any stretch of the imagination. Not only that, I'd LOVE to give Rundblad the reigns and have him get some experience, but the odds of both Cowen and Rundblad making the team as rookies is less than stellar IMO.

O'Donnell is just an example of the experience I would look for as a GM, possibly even a one for one swap of Kuba for a slightly cheaper veteran. Gonchar didn't prove he can play last year and that's a real issue. Phillips improved when we got a real goaltender, but again, I wouldn't put all my eggs in that basket either when the insurance of getting an old vet. would cost less than a million.

Cowen's ready from what I've seen and heard, Lee improved dramatically, Karlsson's there forever, Kuba blows, as of now Gonchar sucks, Carkner's a great 7th D-man IMO, Rundblad's got one of the most risky styles of hockey anyone can imagine, we'd be really better off with him in the AHL. So if the Dung hits the fan, we could have 2 defective older guys (Gonchar and Kuba) + Phillips + Lee, who was solid as a rock last year, but the jury's still out on + Cowen (rookie) + Carkner (reliable as a 6th/7th guy). Not too good.

All valid points, for sure. It may very well turn out that way too. To be honest, I couldn't venture a guess. I guess i'm hoping Rundblad will make the team. I foresee a learning curve much like EK. He may be sent down but will be brought back up and will stick it out in the NHL for the remainder of the year. I hope Kuba disappears and I don't care how.

That D will be fine. We're not expected to win anything next year, so just go with the rookies and let them develop. It's not like they are just drafted, they've have 2 years of development after their draft already. With 2 veterans in the lineup that's enough, IMO. We're rebuilding, finishing in the bottom is expected.

SpezDispenser wrote:Or we could just go with:

Cowen - Karlsson
Phillips - Gonchar
Kuba - Rundblad
Carkner

and take the pain. Anderson will have to be ludicrously good though for us not to be selecting the Nail next year.

I'm completely happy with that line up. If it shows signs of a disaster with no marked improvement over time you can resort to plan B and bring in a cheap aging vet to help steady the ship. It would have to be craptacular for that to happen though. If we finish with a lottery pick next year I hope we get to watch a young fun team like the Oilers in the process. I'm cool with that because you know it's only a matter of time before the kids mature and become awesome.

strachattack wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:Or we could just go with:

Cowen - Karlsson
Phillips - Gonchar
Kuba - Rundblad
Carkner

and take the pain. Anderson will have to be ludicrously good though for us not to be selecting the Nail next year.

I'm completely happy with that line up. If it shows signs of a disaster with no marked improvement over time you can resort to plan B and bring in a cheap aging vet to help steady the ship. It would have to be craptacular for that to happen though. If we finish with a lottery pick next year I hope we get to watch a young fun team like the Oilers in the process. I'm cool with that because you know it's only a matter of time before the kids mature and become awesome.

If we are going to suck next year, we'd better suck all the way to a top 1-2 pick. That's the difference between the Oilers and Lightning and say Florida, who is never bad enough to get a franchise talent, and is always in a perpetual rebuild. Look at the Lightning, who are one game from the Finals. A huge part of that is due to being a very bad club and drafting guys like Vecavalier, Stamkos, and Hedman etc.

Plus, I can't take another season of sucking, then making a futile Leaf-esque push that results in only hurting our draft position, then getting screwing by the draft lottery.

hemlock wrote:
If we are going to suck next year, we'd better suck all the way to a top 1-2 pick. That's the difference between the Oilers and Lightning and say Florida, who is never bad enough to get a franchise talent, and is always in a perpetual rebuild. Look at the Lightning, who are one game from the Finals. A huge part of that is due to being a very bad club and drafting guys like Vecavalier, Stamkos, and Hedman etc.

Plus, I can't take another season of sucking, then making a futile Leaf-esque push that results in only hurting our draft position, then getting screwing by the draft lottery.

Philly's franchise talent isn't top-2 pick (I don't consider JVR franchise talent). Neither is Boston.

Lots of ways to build a winner that don't necessarily involve tanking for a bottom-2 finish.

Hoags wrote:

hemlock wrote:
If we are going to suck next year, we'd better suck all the way to a top 1-2 pick. That's the difference between the Oilers and Lightning and say Florida, who is never bad enough to get a franchise talent, and is always in a perpetual rebuild. Look at the Lightning, who are one game from the Finals. A huge part of that is due to being a very bad club and drafting guys like Vecavalier, Stamkos, and Hedman etc.

Plus, I can't take another season of sucking, then making a futile Leaf-esque push that results in only hurting our draft position, then getting screwing by the draft lottery.

Philly's franchise talent isn't top-2 pick (I don't consider JVR franchise talent). Neither is Boston.

Lots of ways to build a winner that don't necessarily involve tanking for a bottom-2 finish.

That's true, but all things being considered, picks at the top of the draft tend to pan out better than later picks. It's certainly easier to build through the draft when you have earlier picks.

My point is that watching another season like this past one isn't worth a 6th overall pick.

Big Ev wrote:That D will be fine. We're not expected to win anything next year, so just go with the rookies and let them develop. It's not like they are just drafted, they've have 2 years of development after their draft already. With 2 veterans in the lineup that's enough, IMO. We're rebuilding, finishing in the bottom is expected.

strachattack wrote:
I'm completely happy with that line up. If it shows signs of a disaster with no marked improvement over time you can resort to plan B and bring in a cheap aging vet to help steady the ship. It would have to be craptacular for that to happen though. If we finish with a lottery pick next year I hope we get to watch a young fun team like the Oilers in the process. I'm cool with that because you know it's only a matter of time before the kids mature and become awesome.

In that case, yes just sign David Hale to another 2-way if he'll take it and bring him up when and if there are injuries.

If I was GM, I'd make it my mission to replace Kuba with a veteran defender, but I doubt he can be moved until the deadline - which might be a good thing as his value should be able to rise a little.

I don't want to be lottery team though, I can see us ending up in 11th or 12th, but a lottery team with Craig Anderson would mean he has a bad year IMO - and I want him to finally be the goalie who has a decent year for us.

hemlock wrote:

Hoags wrote:

hemlock wrote:
If we are going to suck next year, we'd better suck all the way to a top 1-2 pick. That's the difference between the Oilers and Lightning and say Florida, who is never bad enough to get a franchise talent, and is always in a perpetual rebuild. Look at the Lightning, who are one game from the Finals. A huge part of that is due to being a very bad club and drafting guys like Vecavalier, Stamkos, and Hedman etc.

Plus, I can't take another season of sucking, then making a futile Leaf-esque push that results in only hurting our draft position, then getting screwing by the draft lottery.

Philly's franchise talent isn't top-2 pick (I don't consider JVR franchise talent). Neither is Boston.

Lots of ways to build a winner that don't necessarily involve tanking for a bottom-2 finish.

That's true, but all things being considered, picks at the top of the draft tend to pan out better than later picks. It's certainly easier to build through the draft when you have earlier picks.

My point is that watching another season like this past one isn't worth a 6th overall pick.

It's true...almost every Cup winner in the new NHL has won through the suck model.

SpezDispenser wrote:

Big Ev wrote:That D will be fine. We're not expected to win anything next year, so just go with the rookies and let them develop. It's not like they are just drafted, they've have 2 years of development after their draft already. With 2 veterans in the lineup that's enough, IMO. We're rebuilding, finishing in the bottom is expected.

strachattack wrote:
I'm completely happy with that line up. If it shows signs of a disaster with no marked improvement over time you can resort to plan B and bring in a cheap aging vet to help steady the ship. It would have to be craptacular for that to happen though. If we finish with a lottery pick next year I hope we get to watch a young fun team like the Oilers in the process. I'm cool with that because you know it's only a matter of time before the kids mature and become awesome.

In that case, yes just sign David Hale to another 2-way if he'll take it and bring him up when and if there are injuries.

If I was GM, I'd make it my mission to replace Kuba with a veteran defender, but I doubt he can be moved until the deadline - which might be a good thing as his value should be able to rise a little.

I don't want to be lottery team though, I can see us ending up in 11th or 12th, but a lottery team with Craig Anderson would mean he has a bad year IMO - and I want him to finally be the goalie who has a decent year for us.

I still think Kuba for an overpaid veteran forward makes too much sense. The UFA crop is weak, so instead of committing big money and big years to a question mark like Leino, Laich, ect we can swap out Kuba for someone who can put the puck in the net while opening a spot on the blueline for Cowen.

I'm not saying it's gonna happen, but I wouldn't write the idea off so quickly based on the price of defencemen. I just think if anything it'll be a post-UFA deal where a team has missed out on their targets.

Big Ev wrote:It's true...almost every Cup winner in the new NHL has won through the suck model.

I think that's a bit of a myth to be honest. Pittsburgh and Chicago won through the suck model (and an argument can be made that Chicago didn't fully win through the suck model) and all that teams before them definitely didn't win that way.

hemlock wrote:If we are going to suck next year, we'd better suck all the way to a top 1-2 pick. That's the difference between the Oilers and Lightning and say Florida, who is never bad enough to get a franchise talent, and is always in a perpetual rebuild. Look at the Lightning, who are one game from the Finals. A huge part of that is due to being a very bad club and drafting guys like Vecavalier, Stamkos, and Hedman etc.

Plus, I can't take another season of sucking, then making a futile Leaf-esque push that results in only hurting our draft position, then getting screwing by the draft lottery.

Never gonna happen, we're not top 3 pick material with Anderson in there. If he gets hurt for the season, then maybe, but the bottom feeders are still the Islanders of the world, Florida stinks to high heavens, Edmonton might improve, but they still won't be world beaters, depending on what Columbus does, they might suck badly. I just don't see us as a bottom team. 11th, 12th, 13th? Sure, I can buy that.

I think the Islanders will be a force, they really caught fire once they got rid of Gordon (Clouston clone). Jersey should be better, hard to tell.

Only Carolina, Atlanta and Florida will be the same or worse.

Leafs might improve as well, depending on what Jurke does over the summer.

Our standing next year will really depend on the coach.

stempniaksen wrote:
I still think Kuba for an overpaid veteran forward makes too much sense. The UFA crop is weak, so instead of committing big money and big years to a question mark like Leino, Laich, ect we can swap out Kuba for someone who can put the puck in the net while opening a spot on the blueline for Cowen.

I'm not saying it's gonna happen, but I wouldn't write the idea off so quickly based on the price of defencemen. I just think if anything it'll be a post-UFA deal where a team has missed out on their targets.

I think it's gonna happen personally. Columbus might get lucky and have Murphy fall down to where they're picking (I can't recall where they are, 8?) or if not Murphy then Beuleu (sp, you know who I mean from the Ice Dogs) or even Hamilton and if I were them, I'd have them play right away in the NHL. So I'd be looking at a veteran puck mover than I can acquire for Huselius. After I tried badly to get Gonchar and failed, I'd think about Kuba for Huselius. That's where I would target.

If not them, Detroit. Kuba had a horrible year for us, but Detroit is very smart in getting some of these cast offs - like Brad Stuart who was traded twice the year they acquired him I believe - and making it work real well.