Did Brian Lee make David Rundblad expendable?
by Mark Parisi on Dec 18, 2011 7:00 AM EST
in Analysis
Email
Print
Time for an informal poll: raise your hand if you knew that Milan Michalek would be outscoring Dany Heatley three seasons later.
Since none of you has the power to know the future, I'm going to assume that no hands were raised. But it brings up an interesting question: Just how far down the road should a NHL General Manager plan for? One year? Three years? Five years?
Sure, it's easy to say, "In five years, we want to have a top flight winger and at least one top goalie prospect," but there's no way of knowing for sure that the players you pick are going to pan out into those projected roles. That's part of the beauty of sports--everything is left to chance at the end of the day. Sure, you can hedge your bets by having good scouting and good coaching and good training staff and all of the other little things that go into taking a player's raw talent and actually developing them into what you hope they can be, but you never truly have control over how they turn out.
So what's a GM to do? Throw darts and hope for the best because it's all just luck anyway?
That sort of fatalistic approach probably wouldn't keep you your job for too long, so it's no surprise that there's a specific pattern to most GMs' approach to building a team. We see it most clearly around the trade deadline, but also during the first few days of free agency, and even sometimes during the draft:
Have a long-term plan, but worry about the immediate future first, and sort out next year... next year.
Given the transient nature of professional sports, this is a pretty rational approach. Do you think the Boston Bruins traded for Mark Recchi so they could lose to the Carolina Hurricanes in seven games? That clearly wasn't the plan, yet that's how it turned out. That's how it turns out for every GM who makes a move during the year. When the season is over, there are 29 GMs who made moves that didn't win them a Stanley Cup, and one who did--and that doesn't deter the others in the least for making moves for the immediate future of their team. What else are they supposed to do? Try to pretend they know what their team will look like three years into the future? Some of them won't even have jobs!
What does this have to do with Brian Lee?
Lee has three points (all assists) in his last four games. Senators fans already know he is never going to live up to his draft position, but he is rounding into form as an all-around utility defenseman. He's not out of place in a situational second pairing position, and he's a strong third pairing guy--the kind who might actually give the team an advantage thanks to his all-around skill set. He can hit, cover, and pass, which makes him almost ideal to throw on the ice when the top pairings need a breather.
But he's not better than David Rundblad. Not by a long shot, and he never will be. How, then, could he possibly have made Ottawa's best prospect expendable?
The answer lies in the immediacy required of general managers discussed above. What does the defensive depth chart of the Ottawa Senators currently look like?
We know what the top pairing of the future is. Erik Karlsson and Jared Cowen are currently playing just under thirty minutes a night and tearing it up in the process. They're studs.
Filip Kuba and Sergei Gonchar are supposedly ready to return to action on Tuesday. Before his injury, Kuba was playing top minutes with Karlsson, and Gonchar was doing well as a second-pairing, as well as playing on the top power play unit alongside Karlsson. Kuba was picking up power play time on the second unit.
Chris Phillips will probably slide down to the third pairing, where he still has the skills to perform at a high level.
And that leaves David Rundblad, Matt Carkner, and Brian Lee fighting for one spot--the spot with the least value--that of the sixth defenseman.
Of those three, there's no debate that Rundblad is the most talented. But there also shouldn't be much debate that Brian Lee is the most well-rounded. Matt Carkner is an ideal situational defenseman.
So when Bryan Murray is forced to look at this year's needs -- no telling what next year might look like, remember -- he's faced with the prospect of either stagnating his best prospect in a spot where he won't get the best minutes for his development, or flipping him for another top prospect and playing Brian Lee exactly where he should.
David Rundblad is not a sixth defenseman. Brian Lee is. And the only spot open on the team this year, and probably next, is a third pairing one. With that reality staring us in the face, it's possible to understand why Murray might have been willing to part with such a tantalizing young prospect, isn't it?
162 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Brutal trade
The AHL exists for a reason, and it is where Rundblad belonged. That is definitely not an insult, but the AHL is a common league for the AHL and Murray shouldn’t have been so quick to dismiss it and get rid of a guy with massive potential for Turris of all people.
Had he given up a little bit more Murray could have had Richards or Carter. He could have thrown a $3 million offer sheet at Turris and only given up a 2nd had Phoenix been unwilling to match it. Draft Couturier and we would have had a player of Turris calibre already. Just absolute idiocy.
So then you know how Turris and Rundblad will turn out three years from now?
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
So you're an expert?
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Dec 19, 2011 9:47 AM EST up reply actions
Hahaha.
That was my first thought too.
by RogerTheShrubber on Dec 19, 2011 12:59 PM EST up reply actions
soooooo,
what you are trying to say, after the fire sale that saw fisher and kelly traded for prospects, is that murray, better yet melnyk, should have opened the coffers to throw more money out there for another highly paid, highly sought after and probably another dany hately? also, why carter? that would have been a step back so far this season. and just because couturier plays well in the philly system, what makes you think he would have produced the same results in the sens?
I give murray credit for giving DR. 7up, a chance at going pro full time. which he deserves but probably couldnot get there soon enough playing against the depth of the sens dmen
by spezzasbrother on Dec 18, 2011 11:57 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
All I'm saying
is that better return could have been had if we decided Rundblad was expendable. You really think we could get nothing more than Turris had we offered Rundblad + a 2nd to every other team? Also, Carter’s cap hit is >2 mill less than Heatley. You’d rather have Turris than Carter?
If we throw them a offer sheet
we would be paying him over double what we are now? Now that sounds stupid to me… And you have no idea how either will do.. Turris hasn’t even played a game for the sens yet.. Bite your tongue cause you have no idea how this will pan out. And if turris turns into an allstar you lachisym will look like a total idiot
Probably?
Sterling Snakehouse - Silver Seven
by Ryan Classic on Dec 18, 2011 7:25 PM EST up reply actions
wait wait wait
You value <$2 mill in cap space as greater than David Rundblad?
Again, show some respect
Debate and disagree, but do so in a civil manner. There’s no need to namecalling.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Dec 19, 2011 9:57 AM EST up reply actions
Starting to like the trade
At the start of the year there was a lot of questioning about what the Sens were going to do with the logjam of defensemen on the team. Who was going to be second line center was also an issue coming into this season and frankly Da Costa is not the solution, his forehead is either seriously too big or his helmet is kiddie sized and that does not a second line center make. Aside from that one incredible pass Runblad made weeks ago, I was very unimpressed with his play. He seems to make very simple judgement and situational mistakes that he should have figured out in his junior years. As much as I was looking forward to seeing him on the team this year I’ve been greatly unimpressed and I don’t think that he’ll turn into the Lidstrom-esque player that we all hoped he would. I believe he’ll end up being more Salo-esque than anything. From Mark’s writeup yesterday, I see a bit better where this is going and trust his judgement having seen the guy actually play a few games. And I never thought I’d say this but Lee is growing on me…
by JeffreyLebowski on Dec 18, 2011 8:02 AM EST reply actions
Sounds like we should have traded Lee then
by RogerTheShrubber on Dec 18, 2011 10:38 AM EST reply actions
Ha, I'm not sure if you read the article
I’m positing that Rundblad was traded because he was more talented than the spot available to him. That made him a luxury that Murray could afford to flip for another piece. Lee obviously wouldn’t have the same value.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
by Mark Parisi on Dec 18, 2011 11:38 AM EST up reply actions
I did.
But if Lee has any value then we should have traded him.
In the end, anyone who dislikes this trade dislikes it because Rundblad was about a season in the AHL from being able to replace Kuba. Anyone who likes it disagrees with that statement.
by RogerTheShrubber on Dec 18, 2011 1:51 PM EST up reply actions
So that we're stuck
with a worse 3rd pairing dman then we have now? and we have no idea how rundbland will develop sure hasn’t looked great so far other than a few good passes. He was a liability everytime he hit the ice, thats why they were keeping him at such low minutes
But Lee doesn't have any value
His only value is to the organization, because he naturally fills the sixth defenseman role. His value to other organizations is nil, which is why he’s already cleared waivers once. Rundblad would have been wasted there, and Murray had the chance to flip him for someone more useful to the organization now and long term.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
If this is actually true, again very short sighted
Even if Rundblad spends a year in the minors, and then he probably has a place in top 4 next year. Even if he doesn’t waiting 2 years is fine in a rebuild.
Even if Turris pans out, this is still a brutal trade. Given what we know today, Rundblad is less risky and has top pairing ceiling. Jared Cowen may have outperformed him in 30 games but careers last longer than that. In fact forget Cowen, Rundblad can be better than Karlsson.
Turris has had a few years and hasn’t really dominated any sort of a decent league like Rundblad.
Turris for just a 2nd rounder is worth it, nothing more.
I also find it crazy that Murray would rather trade Rundblad than a 1st round pick. The odds of a 10thish overall pick developing like Rundblad are low.
So yeah, we might get lucky, but gross overpayment.
Erik Karlsson is better than your favourite player.
Twitter: @sens_adnan
by Adnan on Dec 18, 2011 10:51 AM EST via mobile reply actions
Still with you.
I feel like Murray (who I generally support) just Millburied us.
Not just in the conventional sense of Millburying (making an awful trade), but also in the new sense, because I feel like we’re a 12 year old kid that he just beat up.
by RogerTheShrubber on Dec 18, 2011 11:26 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
I don't agree with your statement, but...
…I’ve rec’d it for the awesome way it was said.
by spez_dispenser on Dec 18, 2011 12:27 PM EST up reply actions
You can't reasonably claim it's short-sighted
Unless you know the future, which of course, none of us do.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
by Mark Parisi on Dec 18, 2011 11:40 AM EST up reply actions
I can perfectly reasonably claim that
We gave up essentially two prospects for one. Our main prospect is less of a risk to bust and has the same ceiling.
But one player can help us more this year (Turris) so Murray went ahead and did it.
Erik Karlsson is better than your favourite player.
Twitter: @sens_adnan
I don't get the "this year" sentiment
Let’s say they both reach their potential. Do you really feel that a top four defenseman (I assume we agree that Ottawa’s top pairing is Karlsson-Cowen for the next 10 years or so) would have more of a long-term impact than a second-line center? If so, that’s pretty mind-boggling.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
It's no bigger than assuming Rundblad was going to develop into a top defenseman
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
Rundblad could easily be a 1st pairing defenceman so no we don’t agree with that.
Erik Karlsson is better than your favourite player.
Twitter: @sens_adnan
Yes Rundblad could be #1 on Ottawa in the future, remember we can’t predict the future. ;)
But if we look it from the original club point of view, Turris is what? a 3rd or 4th liner on Phoenix?
Phoenix had to trade him, Ottawa did not have to trade Rundblad.
Erik Karlsson is better than your favourite player.
Twitter: @sens_adnan
Ha, fair enough
Though I would point out that Turris was on those lines not as an indictment of his talent, but because his coach did not have faith in him, not unlike Rundblad here.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
cmon mark
stop arguing for arguments sake. we’re all aware that no opinion we give here is FACT so you don’t have to be the contrarian for the sake of pointing how that there are a number of ways this can turn out.
like the heatley trade, we can analyze and make predictions based on what we know RIGHT now based on the information given RIGHT now, and 3 years from now it can turn out completely different than we thought. on a completely FACTUAL basis, both players have had outstanding production against highly skilled competition in OTHER leagues, but neither has yet to produce in the one league that matters — the KHL (haaaaa. kidding). rundblad has more unknown at the moment, given that he’s played 24 games of north american hockey, and thus we can definitely relish in the idea that he could become lidstrom.. or who knows, he could become brian lee… or develop and attitude and go back to the SEL forever.. i’m not defending adnan’s perspective on this trade as it is a little bit extreme and baseless, but the notion that murray is trading a player who we can reasonably argue has a much higher ceiling relative to his position and his position’s needs, but will take longer to develop, for a player who can “help now”… the whole point of the rebuild is to help contend for 5-10 years with a solid core a la chicago, pittsburgh etc. i’m not saying turris is not going to help that, he could win the rocket richard trophy one years, who really does know, but as far as is proven, rundblad seems like a more surefire bet down the line and murray is seemingly gambling that (ALONG WITH A SECOND ROUNDER!!!) for more immediate help
by Caden on Dec 18, 2011 12:27 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
but the notion that murray is trading a player who we can reasonably argue has a much higher ceiling relative to his position and his position’s needs, but will take longer to develop, for a player who can "help now" is a bit short-sighted
^apparently i didn’t finish my sentence haha. it was long and had a lot of commas, so i lost my place (i don’t read what i write til after i post it)
Well, I'm not arguing for argument's sake
I’m just pointing out that it’s not rational to evaluate a trade based on how we guess players might do.
The people who are claiming that the trade is “short sighted” seem to have given up on Kyle Turris before he’s even played a minute for the team. He’s a 22-year old kid with a ton of upside, who is already more talented than any of our current second line prospects.
As you point out, neither he or Rundblad has shown anything at the NHL level yet, so we have to figure there’s an equal chance that they’ll pan out. If that’s the case, then Turris is a player who could help the Senators organization for as many years as Rundblad could have. I don’t see how that’s “short sighted”.
If Murray had traded for for someone like Shane Doan, that would clearly be short sighted, because Doan is 35 and on the downside of his career.
Just because Turris can help this year doesn’t somehow preclude him from helping in future years as well, but that seems to be the conclusion dislikers are jumping to, and I just can’t understand it.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
Even if Turris works out, it’s still a bad trade for me. By your own admission, we overpaid. That implies we didn’t get value as we know it now. Just because other teams were willing to overpay as well, doesn’t justify this.
For the record, I haven’t given up on Kyle Turris. I hope he works out.
Erik Karlsson is better than your favourite player.
Twitter: @sens_adnan
If it's a bad trade because we overpaid, I can understand
If it’s a bad trade because it’s “short-sighted”, I don’t see it.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
It’s both. A rebuilding club shouldn’t overpay. Which makes it shortsighted. I guess we just see things differently.
Erik Karlsson is better than your favourite player.
Twitter: @sens_adnan
You see things differently because of your personal feelings towards Rundblad, you admitted you haven’t even seen Turris play yet you are willing to be critical of his game/potential.
It’s true, I love Rundblad. And I have never seen Turris play that is right.
I have nothing against Turris though and hope he does great. I just don’t think we should have paid what we did.
Erik Karlsson is better than your favourite player.
Twitter: @sens_adnan
What difference does this make?
Isn’t everything we’re all saying here because of our personal feelings towards a certain player?
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Dec 19, 2011 10:13 AM EST up reply actions
If Kyle Turris works out how is that bad? Ottawa has been looking for a 2nd line centre for pretty much forever. If Turris lives up that billing, then it’s a win for the Sens.
Reality is we have Gonchar for another season after this, so when everyone is healthy Gonchar is on the first PP unit with Karlsson.
by modsuperstar on Dec 18, 2011 2:47 PM EST up reply actions
I think he can
If Lee becoming a bottom pairing defender made a potential top-pairing defender expendable because there was no place on this team for him this year, it’s certainly short-sighted.
Rundblad may not be ready for second pairing this year, but I’d wager he will be next season. And next season, Filip Kuba will be long gone. Who will step up into the second pairing with Gonchar, if Cowen and Karlsson are the top pairing?
I don’t think Adnan is saying that this deal was short-sighted; he was saying that if this deal was made because Brian Lee made David Rundblad expendable, then it was short-sighted. And I’d agree with that.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Dec 19, 2011 10:08 AM EST up reply actions
But I think that argument only holds water if there's no chance of replacing Rundblad
Guys like Ryan Suter, Dennis Wideman, and even Barrett Jackman are available through free agency this year. And that’s assuming that none of our prospects emerges, as we all seem to be assuming Rundblad would have.
What he brought to the team isn’t irreplaceable, so I have a hard time accepting that as an argument for short-sightedness.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
by Mark Parisi on Dec 19, 2011 10:28 AM EST up reply actions
But it's harder to replace than what Brian Lee brings
Which, I think, is the point.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Dec 19, 2011 11:06 AM EST up reply actions
Well, I definitely can't argue that
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
by Mark Parisi on Dec 19, 2011 11:08 AM EST up reply actions
But Pheonix wouldn’t take Brian Lee and a second rounder for Kyle Turris
Mark Ingram-OROY
Cam Jordan-DROY
New Orleans Saints-2012 Super Bowl Champs
TOP IS GAWD!
You're absolutely right
But that’s not the point.
If the only reason we traded David Rundblad is because he’s not as good at playing in a bottom-pairing role this season for the Ottawa Senators, then it was a short-sighted decision to make.
But anyway, at this point I’m just clarifying semantics.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Dec 19, 2011 6:07 PM EST up reply actions
Considering you have admitted that you have never seen Turris play it might be a bit short sighted on your point to be taking this stance until you have at least seen Turris play one game….
Turris for a 2nd rounder?? You really should do just a little more homework on the market for a top 6 goal scoring 3rd overall 22 year old….
I strongly disagree with your assessment of the situation….
Except that Turris isn't exactly a top-6 goal scorer just yet
That’s just his potential.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
Well Filatov was a potential top 6 goal scoring, 6th overall, 21 years old
And we got him for 3rd rounder.
Turris isn’t a flight risk, so there is a bit of a premium for that, 2nd rounder or maybe a 1st rounder. Though 1st sounds still way too much.
But Rundblad and 2nd rounder is gross overpayment.
Erik Karlsson is better than your favourite player.
Twitter: @sens_adnan
A simple comparison between a 3rd and a 6th overall pick is a bit simple as things such as the draft year and teams ahead in the drafts needs should be taken into account. In the case of Turris only Kane and JVR were drafted ahead of him and as was stated Gretzky was so high on him Phoenix almost traded up to guarantee his pick. If Turris turns out to be anything like the 2 picks ahead of him…this trade is a steal for Ottawa.
You were the only who simply used his 3rd overall status as a reason.
Erik Karlsson is better than your favourite player.
Twitter: @sens_adnan
That's not true
If I’m buying a used car that’s worth $2000 and someone else comes in offering $5000, it’s still a gross overpayment for me to outbid him and buy it for $6000.
An overpayment isn’t dependent on what others are willing to pay, it’s based on what the asset is worth.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Dec 19, 2011 10:15 AM EST up reply actions
Ummm...
Isn’t the value determined by what people are willing to pay? I’m pretty sure your car is worth $6000.
by RogerTheShrubber on Dec 19, 2011 1:01 PM EST up reply actions
Not if it's only worth $2000.
Look at Wade Redden: Was he worth $6.5M a season when the Rangers paid him that? Absolutely not.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Dec 19, 2011 6:07 PM EST up reply actions
He was when they signed him.
And that’s an unfair comparison between a single event and an ongoing contract.
by RogerTheShrubber on Dec 19, 2011 9:01 PM EST up reply actions
It's not a comparison
It’s an example to prove a point. The point being: Just because someone will pay something doesn’t mean that’s what it’s worth to everyone else.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Dec 20, 2011 1:41 PM EST up reply actions
I also find it crazy that Murray would rather trade Rundblad than a 1st round pick. The odds of a 10thish overall pick developing like Rundblad are low.
Remember, we’re in a rebuild. If BM suddenly traded a 1st round pick away, the media, blogosphere and all us fans would have torn him apart.
That said, I totally agree with your logic. BM traded a pick for Rundblad once. It would be like doing it again. I just wish we gave up the unknown potential of a draft pick, instead of Rundblad, who I think we can all agree is a legitimate blue-chip. This year’s draft is supposedly defence-heavy, so by the time Ottawa selects, the bpa will likely be another D.
Rundblad should have been in the AHL for a while, a la Karlsson. After the deadline, Kuba should be gone, and that would open up a nice amount of ice-time for him after learning the North American style for a few months down in Bingo.
Basically, I’m happy we got Turris, but I think we paid the wrong price for him.
ALFIE! ALFIE! ALFIE!
I think the first-rounder would have been fine
Right now, it looks like our first-rounder will be in the 8-12 range; Turris was drafted third overall, and some projected him to go first. There’s good reason to make that trade.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Dec 19, 2011 10:16 AM EST up reply actions
I definitely would have preferred to give up the first rounder to Rundblad
I’m not sure why Murray didn’t.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
by Mark Parisi on Dec 19, 2011 10:29 AM EST up reply actions
Good comment
I could see it being short-sighted, if the justification for feeling able to trade a 20-year-old defenceman with huge potential is the fact that there’s no spot for him on the roster today. But I don’t think that’s the only reason; I think Murray and MacLean decided that Rundblad wasn’t going to turn into the same defenceman they had projected a year ago. I also think they feel Turris can be of more value, in the short and long term, to the Ottawa Senators.
I’m not sure Rundblad is necessarily less risky than Turris. They’re both pretty risky right now.
Before the season, I actually thought it quite possible that Rundblad could become a better defenceman than Karlsson, mostly because he did better in the SEL than Karlsson ever did, and because he’s much bigger than Karlsson—and not afraid to throw his weight around. The way Karlsson has developed, though, I’m no longer very optimistic Rundblad could be nearly as good.
There’s no way Turris would have been traded for a second rounder.
You’re right that it’s strange Murray would rather trade Rundblad than a future first-rounder. I wonder if there’s something we’re all missing (perhaps off the ice) that Murray and MacLean don’t like about Rundblad.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Dec 19, 2011 10:05 AM EST up reply actions
You’re right that it’s strange Murray would rather trade Rundblad than a future first-rounder. I wonder if there’s something we’re all missing (perhaps off the ice) that Murray and MacLean don’t like about Rundblad.
I don’t think so. I think that they knew what they had in Rundblad, and that there wasn’t going to be space for him moving forward. They can pick up a good 3/4 D through FA – a good, stable character guy, and move on. We needed top 6 talent more, and Turris gives us that.
My head is still hurting from the trade
A puck carrying d’man with flair who can score …….We’ll forever look at him like we look at Chara and wonder why we let him go.
Chara?
but we got to KEEP Wade Friggin’ Redden ;)
"I couldn't score in a brothel...couldn't finish a sandwich"
- Joe Corvo
Here's hoping it doesn't become
Rundblad?…..but we get to KEEP Kyle Friggin’ Turris :0
by whatsinaname on Dec 19, 2011 12:30 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Are you suggesting that Rundblad has the potential to be as dominant as Chara?
Seriously?
I don’t see that as a remotely likely scenario. I think the projections of Rundblad as a second-pairing defenceman with good powerplay skills are probably fair. I see Rundblad more like Andrej Meszaros in a lot of ways (as I’ve said before), but with better offence and worse defence.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Dec 19, 2011 10:18 AM EST up reply actions
No, no. Chara is quite a different animal altogether.
I am using Chara as an example of a very dominate player we let go of. I can see Ottawa fans in the future look at Rundblad longingly imagining what could have been. I see DR with more flair offensively than Andrej. Defensively, DR will much improve over time. I hear people talk about Turris being a 50-60 point center, same as DR one day as a d’man. If that is the case, I rather have Rundblad. This trade is done. Reality. I am looking forward to seeing Turris in action tomorrow night and THURSDAY!! Here’s rooting for Turris to succeed.
by whatsinaname on Dec 19, 2011 12:52 PM EST up reply actions
Well, defensively Rundblad MIGHT improve over time
There’s no way of knowing what they will or won’t do.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
Well there is one way...
..but wait, no…it’s too dangerous.
Or is it? What if we used “statistics” to assess historical trends and then calculate the probability of the occurence of future events?
It just might work! But we’re going to need a crack team.
by RogerTheShrubber on Dec 19, 2011 2:41 PM EST up reply actions
This is all crazy talk!
Join the team Mark. We need you.
by RogerTheShrubber on Dec 19, 2011 4:02 PM EST up reply actions
A time machine would be easier
But if one was ever invented, we’d probably have heard about it by now.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Dec 19, 2011 6:23 PM EST up reply actions
Turks
The iPad/iPhone autocorrect for Turris is “Turks”. I think we have a nickname.
by RogerTheShrubber on Dec 18, 2011 11:23 AM EST reply actions
Turricane!
Is one I came up with just this morning.
by Pirateninjabot on Dec 18, 2011 12:44 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
You talk about current need
I think that only contending teams should be looking at their roster in such a manner. Rebuilding teams should get all the assets they can and see how they pan out. I think he should have been sent to the minors. See how everybody develops, keep the best and trade the rest.
The only thing that allows me to put up with this trade is Turris’ age and potential, and the fact that the draft is deep in d-men
In principle, I agree with you
But the impossibility of predicting the future makes that approach impractical. Hoping that your assets pan out isn’t a viable rebuilding strategy, because hope is not a strategy.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
by Mark Parisi on Dec 18, 2011 11:46 AM EST up reply actions
I agree with you
Wait and see approach in sports can end up screwing you, and in a salary cap system like the NHL it can destroy an organization.
I just hope Murray isn’t getting impatient with the rebuild. That is actually my main concern.
That is a concern that is totally valid
It’s easy to see Murray jumping the gun because the kids are overachieving this year.
But we’ve got Turris’ rights for a while, just like we do with Filatov, so presumably patience is still in his quiver.
I think he just saw an opportunity to improve a position of need and took it, personally.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
Developing prospects and seeing how they pan out isn't necessarily hoping.
Anyway, hope is part of the deal with rebuilding, whether strategic or not. Whether Rundblad or Turris, we’re hoping that the guy pans out. The strategic part is doing what can be done to realise those hopes.
For sure
Hope is definitely part of the deal.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
Well, hope isn't the strategy in that scenario
The strategy is increasing the number of prospects you have, thereby increasing your chances of finding ones that will become good NHL players.
Still, I think that even in that strategy, you need to be willing to trade some prospects or picks for prospects or picks you think have greater value to the team, which is what the Senators did in this scenario. In principle, I agree with this type of trade, but I still think we overpaid.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Dec 19, 2011 10:21 AM EST up reply actions
I agree
We overpaid.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
by Mark Parisi on Dec 19, 2011 10:29 AM EST up reply actions
For those who claim we should have sent him to the AHL
just playing devil’s advocate here, but what if Rundblad indicated he’d go back to Sweden instead? I just feel, like in a lot of situations as fans, that there are things we don’t know. Not to mention the pick is next year’s 2nd, and hopefully our team will be better next year!
a 2012 second rounder
means a second rounder in the 2012 draft.. which relies on this year’s results
That is a good point. What if he said he wasn’t going down this year and wanted to go back to Sweden? Since the Sens just bent over backwards to accommodate Filatov’s wishes, what’s to say Rundblad didn’t think that maybe going back to Sweden would be the right move for him. We know Lehner badmouthed Bingo pretty badly last year, so it could be Rundblad dug in his heels about going to Bingo.
by modsuperstar on Dec 18, 2011 2:50 PM EST up reply actions
I wish I had the facts on this
I thought it was odd that Runblad wasn’t sent to Bingo when he so clearly needed to be.
And there was the rumour in the fall that he WOULDN’T go …
… which would taint him in the eyes of GM and coach
I doubt it would be about Binghamton
If anything happened—and, although we have no knowledge of anything, Rundblad had expressed a reluctance to go to the AHL before the season began—it was likely more for comfort and money that Rundblad would refuse to report to the B-Sens. Comfort in travel and lifestyle, and money because he’d “only” make $67,500 in the AHL.
That’s projecting, of course, but those would be more likely reasons in my mind to any prejudice against the city of Binghamton. He would, after all, likely only be spending a few months there, and would be spending them with kids his age.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Dec 19, 2011 10:31 AM EST up reply actions
what people seem to overlook...
is, if and only if turris does not work out in the Senators, he can be flipped again…potentially for another 1st. and hopefully for the better.but for the 2nd round selection, there is not much nhl talent there for at least 3 – 4 years. min.
by spezzasbrother on Dec 18, 2011 12:05 PM EST via mobile reply actions
He can’t possibly be worth a first rounder if he doesn’t work out again.
Erik Karlsson is better than your favourite player.
Twitter: @sens_adnan
none the less, I will take my “red” pills today and watch this “turricane” hit ottawa on tuesday night. hope for the best!
by spezzasbrother on Dec 18, 2011 1:29 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Great article
Hopefully this guy pans out. Just wondering what other young centres may have been available, now knowing that rundblad was being shopped? Ryan Johansen, or brett connoly or jordan schroeder maybe? i hope murray maximized rundblads value in this trade.
it's hard to tell.
I don’t think Turris was worth Rundblad & a second-round pick, but for all we know Murray got the best possible return for Magic Number Seven. It’s hard to see how he could have done better, since he was basically trading potential for potential.
Someone like Johansen would have probably cost the Sens more, since he seems to be working out as a prospect in Columbus; I don’t know about trading for those other guys.
Ryan Johansen certainly would have been my preference
That kid is a straight up stud. But I doubt Rundblad and a 2nd would have been enough to get him—teams don’t generally let their top center prospects go for cheap. I get the sense Turris was only available because of the frayed relationship he had with the Coyotes.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
The 2nd round pick is what really bothers me.
It’s going to be a high 2nd rounder and someone who has shown flashes of what he will be, for a gamble. In my mind the price was just too high. Maybe Murray is panicking a little because ZBad is looking like a bigger project than hoped.
Nobody can argue that Murray has a bad record as GM when he believes he’s dealing with a contender (and he’s quick to slap that label on).
by Pmoron on Dec 18, 2011 1:09 PM EST via iPhone app reply actions
Yeah, the price was an overpayment for sure
But I don’t think Murray panicked. I think he just saw an opportunity and paid the price so that it didn’t slip by him.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
i think it's hilarious. to throw in an australian idiom, you're all "pissing into the wind"
turris hasn’t even played a game for us, rundblad barely played that much, yet here we are, all bemoaning and aching over the what could have beens.
as the article says, when an opportunity comes, then you have to take it. sure, rundblad could be the best defenceman in the history of the sport, possibly any sport (hyperbole alert!). but if he’s not going to fit into the puzzle, and the chance to upgrade a position in need of upgrading comes along, the the gm has to take it.
sure you could have sent him to the ahl, but then the opportunity is passed. in three, four or five years time, we could have had three world-beating d-men. but no offence to help them out. rundblad could break a leg in that time and his ceiling could drop dramatically. but who knows? that’s what mark’s saying here.
tl;dr i totally get the nuance of the article but it’s only 0540 here. too early to be thinking fluently lol
by AussieSensFan on Dec 18, 2011 2:46 PM EST reply actions 7 recs
To be fair
Baseless speculation and poorly informed/emotional analysis is the MO for sports bloggers. You could dismiss almost every discussion we have with either “we don’t know that because it’s the future” or “there’s probably something we don’t know about going on behind the scenes.” But then what would we talk about?
by RogerTheShrubber on Dec 18, 2011 5:11 PM EST up reply actions
Ummm...
I like to think the content published here is usually more than baseless speculation and poorly informed/emotional analysis.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Dec 19, 2011 10:34 AM EST up reply actions
Speak for yourself
My writing a is a special blend of both. Baseless analysis, I call it.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
by Mark Parisi on Dec 19, 2011 11:00 AM EST up reply actions
Poorly informed because Turris is an enigma to most Sens fans
and emotional because we have convinced ourselves that Rundblad would be a huge part of our rebuild/future. And to be snatched of “our” (does this mean I have no life?) future is to say the least quite a shock to our senses.
by whatsinaname on Dec 19, 2011 1:00 PM EST up reply actions
I was more referring to the boards.
And I’m a regular for a reason. I think it’s well-written baseless speculation and poorly informed/emotional analysis. I also think you’re a classy bunch and this is a quality site that I enjoy reading and contributing to. Pleas don’t get me wrong on that.
My point is that pretty much all sports blogs are written by people who aren’t in the dressing or boardrooms and are taking what they read in the papers/twitter or whatever else and rehashing it with a twist. The same can also generally be said of the journalists. And then there is the problem that the team only tells the journalists what they want the public to think. So there’s a lot of spin to the info before it gets to the blogosphere.
So while as devoted fans we undertake to inform ourselves as best as possible, we’re working with a pretty imperfect flow of information. It’s entirely possible that Z. Smith actually gives a fuck, and we’ll just never know. But being part of a fan blog is going to get tired fast if people consistently point out these facts.
All I was saying is, we need a collective willing suspension of disbelief with regard to the fact that we only kind of know what we’re talking about.
by RogerTheShrubber on Dec 19, 2011 1:16 PM EST up reply actions
Good article and perspective Mark...
Well thought out…
Good post Mark!
Although I just posted in the previous analysis my thoughts on this trade, I have something to add. The thing I like about this is that even though Turris seems like a win-now move, he is still very young. We should perceive this as a win-now AND later move. He isn’t some old veteran that Murray has brought in. He is a young guy that can help the team this year and many more to come. Just like Rundblad could as well.
In this case, Murray sacrificed a defensive prospect that the team does not have an immediate need for and brought in an offensive prospect that also fills the team’s immediate need.
To be successful for many years, a team needs depth in offense as well as in defense. looking at how the Sens are performing right now, the draft position they would get is looking like it won’t help in adding offensive depth. Instead, it would probably add a prospect in defense. So in that case, it’s a win-win because Murray ends adding to both offense and defense by the time the draft is done.
Since we can’t tell the future, it’s really difficult to hate this trade. I still feel uneasy about it, but it makes sense just as much as it doesn’t. There are too many ifs right now to make a clear judgement on it.
by Los Blancos Chicca on Dec 18, 2011 3:00 PM EST via mobile reply actions
Unease is justified
We gave up a lot to get Turris. If he doesn’t pan out and Rundblad does, it’s a huge setback for Senate Reform.
Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs
Agreed.
I understand the unease because that is how I feel. But you have to look at both sides of it because it’s unfair to Murray to just look at all the negatives too. If Turris pans out and if the Sens draft a good defensive prospect (since the draft seems to be rich in defense this year) then this turns out to be great.
Each coin has two sides, it’s hard to pick which side the coin is gonna land on as soon as it is flipped.
by Los Blancos Chicca on Dec 18, 2011 3:15 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Jared Cowen's accelerated emergence made David Rundblad redundant.
Cowen has earned PP1 time in the absence of the vets, and he’s produced. Rundblad had his share of PP1 time with Karlsson as well, and yet ample shorthanded breakaways, coupled with a lack of production resulted.
Assuming we were keeping Rundblad around for years to come, it would have been tough to justify dropping Cowen to PP2 in lieu of Rundblad. It would have been completely detrimental to Cowen’s developmental trajectory to keep him off the main PP given his potential, and yet it would have had the same effect on Rundblad.
And that’s just the powerplay. In even strength situations, Rundblad has displayed one side and one side only… all out offense. Unfortunately, that has resulted in far more goals against than goals for, and despite the urge to chalk that type of poor play up to ‘rookie inexperience’, he has played like that since prior to his SEL days, if our Swedish friends are to be believed. It would have been a long and painful road to defensive responsibility, as completely changing one’s identity does not happen overnight.
Ultimately, something had to give. I’m shocked it happened as soon as it did, because Rundblad wasn’t even given a chance to raise his value as an asset. But who’s to say that he would have fully reached his potential regardless, in the shadow of Karlsson and Cowen. Chances are he wouldn’t have.
Indeed
Hence why I mentioned that he earned PP1 time ‘in the absence of’ Kuba/Gonchar.
Kuba/Cowen is the PP2 pairing we’ll be seeing, but if Rundblad were to be playing, Cowen likely wouldn’t see PP time at all. That wouldn’t be fair to Cowen seeing as he’s earned that opportunity. Long story short, I think this trade has the ability to elevate Cowen’s all around game as a byproduct of releasing Rundblad.
I'd agree with that
Although it implies that Rundblad would be playing once Gonchar and Kuba came back. I didn’t think that would be the case.
Co-manager, Silver Seven
I will agree that this trade will make Jared Cowen a better player
He might even get 1st PP time in the long run now.
Erik Karlsson is better than your favourite player.
Twitter: @sens_adnan
Murray sold low on Rundblad
It just seems to me like we paid for Kyle Turris’ potential (top 6 forward), while Phoenix paid for what Rundblad is right now (defenceman not quite ready for the NHL). I feel we should have gotten Turris for Rundblad without giving up the 2nd rounder. Their ceilings are similar (1st line centre vs. 1st pairing – power play quarterback defenceman), but I think we should have been given the benefit of the doubt with regards to Rundblad’s development. After all, Rundblad has failed to live up to expectations for 24 games. Turris has failed for 4 years.
by Sports Fan! on Dec 18, 2011 9:29 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
A fair trade
Turris is a former CHL Player of the Year who wanted out of Phoenix. Rundblad is a former D-man of the Year in the SEL who had previously threatened to go back to Sweden rather than report to Bingo. So, essentially, we traded one headcase with upside for another headcase with upside. Both of them are projects.
I'm not sure I'd call Rundblad a "headcase"
I think he was more considering going back to Sweden rather than threatening to go back. My guess is Murray would have talked him into going to Binghamton as long as it wasn’t for the whole year.
Don’t know much about the Turris situation. Some people say he wanted a big contract and was holding out for that (which I think is ridiculous). Some were saying Phoenix was stunting his development so they wouldn’t have to pay him and he wanted out for that (I can see why he’d want a trade if that were the case).
You earn your ice time. And neither player has. Yet.
I’m sure we’re going to hear lots of stories about what each player is “really like” in the next few days. But the facts as we know them is that each player has underperformed. Turris was playing 4th line minutes, and Rundblad was the 7th D-man, used basically only on the 2nd PP unit and whenever faceoffs were in the offensive zone. That’s why both were available — neither had earned the confidence of their coach, nor did they look like they were going to any time soon.
But they both have upside. Turris’ points per 60 minutes played last year was the highest on Phoenix and he was arguably Phoenix’s best player in the playoffs last year (not that that’s saying much). And Rundblad showed occasional flashes of good puck handling.
So, best wishes to both of them. They get new starts. Let’s hope they make something with those chances.
by Drive2theNet on Dec 18, 2011 10:07 PM EST up reply actions
For sure, they have underachieved.
I agree with you there. Expectations for Rundblad may have been too high this soon, but however you say it, he didn’t meet them. But I don’t think it was an attitude problem at all.
Fingers crossed on Turris!
by Sports Fan! on Dec 18, 2011 10:28 PM EST up reply actions
Only one issue:
The SEL is much better hockey than the CHL.
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Dec 19, 2011 11:04 AM EST up reply actions
Off topic
Anyone else ammused by the guy between Alfie and Butlers head?!? Lol
by fridgefullofmeat on Dec 18, 2011 9:51 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
am I the only one
who thinks Rundblad’s skating could hold him back from becoming the ‘stud’ we all assumed he’d become? He’s just plain slow…I suspect that can change but he is 21…wouldn’t it have been ironed out by now?
"I couldn't score in a brothel...couldn't finish a sandwich"
- Joe Corvo
Brian Lee made Rundblad expendable? Bahahahahahahaha
If anyone, I’d say Cowen made Rundblad expendable. That, and Rundblad made Rundblad expendable. Also Kuba and Gonchar’s improvements of late. Basically, a lot of things contributed more than Brian Lee, in my opinion.
Oh Captain, my Captain!
That, and Rundblad made Rundblad expendable.
Wunderbar!
by RogerTheShrubber on Dec 19, 2011 1:19 PM EST up reply actions
I get your point that Rundblad isn't a 6th/7th defenceman and that we had to choose between a trade or stunting his development (with which I don't entirely agree)
But I think what made Rundblad expendable was more his unexpected (at least to me) struggles and Cowen’s unexpected (again, at least to me) triumphs and the very much expected bounce-back from Kuba and to a lesser extent Gonchar. It’s all of those things that bumped Rundblad down the blueline for this year, not Brian Lee. Not to mention our need for a second-line centre and our better-than-expected season so far.
The fact that Brian Lee is a serviceable defenceman and that his game is more rounded than Carkner’s or Rundblad’s I don’t think made as much of a difference as the other things I’ve listed. If Cowen wasn’t eating up so many minutes, Rundblad could have a shot at more ice time. If Kuba and/or Gonchar were still struggling a lot, Rundblad could have a shot at more ice time. If the team was in the draft lottery so far and wasn’t desperate for a 2C, we could afford more time for Rundblad to figure it all out.
With the way the season’s going, I’m pretty skeptical that Murray wouldn’t still have done it if we didn’t have Lee and our 6th guy was Carkner and maybe one of the B-Sens. You made an argument that, short-term, Lee fills our needs better than Rundblad, but if you still think I’m missing the point then of course you’re welcome to explain what I missed.
Oh Captain, my Captain!
Broken Record Time but...
What’s with this nonsensical talk of Turris helping us now?
Let’s deal with straight facts for a minute:
- In 137 NHL games Turris has scored 19 goals and 46 points
- In 86 AHL games he scored 28 goals
Bobby Butler scored more than that last season between the NHL and AHL and look how he is struggling this season. They are totally different players of course, Turris is blindingly fast and that is an asset that will never go out of style but where in the world does this strange belief come from that the Sens need Turris as a 2nd line center?
He is Peter Regin (150 games 19 goals and 52 points)…right down to CC not really wanting to play him for many minutes like Tippet has done in AZ. Big difference is Regin has had numerous injuries so hasn’t been able to see steady improvement with offseason workouts, etc…there is NOTHING that shows that Turris will help this team now and only marginal evidence, which is basicall the fact that he is 22 1/2 years old, that he will have significant impact in the future.
Do you really think having a 35 point guy as second line center is going to help us now? Come on…that isn’t right.
And for all the talk of how desperate we are for offensive help and how overflowing we are in D depth (first read Marvs post on our supposed depth) here are some more hard facts:
Sens are 7th in goals FOR per game and dead last in goals AGAINST per game…sounds to me like we need as many D prospects as possible and not another 15 goal scorer.
Well I've read in a few places now that Turris was mismanaged by the Coyotes organization
And he’s admitted in interviews that he didn’t really see eye-to-eye with the coach. Given how great Maclean’s been at developing guys this season, not to mention the fact that Turris is only 22, I’m pretty sure he hasn’t hit his ceiling yet in terms of production. Maclean has said that he thinks the numbers have something to do with how few minutes he played in Phoenix and that he thinks the production will come with more ice time (although I’ll admit that now I can’t find the article where I read that).
As for a comparison with Regin, given the repeated injuries to Regin’s shoulder, I doubt I’m the only one worried about his future and I really don’t think the comparison is fair. Just because two guys have similar point totals doesn’t mean you can say they’re pretty much the same, and I thought they had fairly different styles of play. Either way, we don’t even really know how Regin’s going to do under Maclean let alone Turris, so it’s too early to make that kind of judgment.
For your reading: this and this.
Oh Captain, my Captain!
"Sens are 7th in goals FOR per game and dead last in goals AGAINST per game…sounds to me like we need as many D prospects as possible and not another 15 goal scorer."
One of those aforementioned D prospects was a major contributor to that last place statistic. Also, Turris is perceived to be responsible defensively.
I do like your Peter Regin comparison; I was thinking the same thing. Similar builds, both quite fast, and both have cannons. Both could stand to bulk up by a good 10-20 lbs as well as the knock on both is that they tend to get pushed around and sometimes shy away from the gritty areas. And both played their best NHL hockey to date in a first round playoff loss against stiff competition.
Agree completely that Rundblad was a contributor
And I do not deny he sometimes needs a map in his own end but I do believe he needs the benefit of the doubt in thinking he can get better in his own end once he figures the NA game out a bit. He has been here for what, 4 months?
Canada isn’t as huge a culture shock as many places he could have gone but it isn’t home to him for sure so he has that plus the game itself plus the fact the goalies haven’t exactly lit it up and our strength isnt our defensive D corps…what if he had been able to play with Carkner for a few weeks?
Again, I get it I don’t agree with the move and think in time the team will regret moving him. I hope I am completely wrong.
I didn't mean they will be exactly the same
But this talk about us FINALLY getting our 2nd line center is just so much talk so far. His numbers, which are the only thing I care about, do not show he is 2nd line center material.
Our numbers also show we need more capable D – and even if Rundblad wasn’t going to turn into a stout defender the Sens didn’t get Turris to be a 4th line checker either. If he doesn’t score a LOT and his defensive game is weak then we lose on both accounts.
Not to mention the 2nd rounder in a draft that by all accounts is going to be deep again…even it provided us wiggle room to move up a bit for a player we covet.
Part of this is that I trust the current junior scouting staff but not so much for the pro guys…history has not been kind to the Murray era when considering trades.
Anyway, I admit that I am fired up but I am also perplexed and that is making me even more fired up because I feel like I am the only one questioning Turris’s true value and the need thing just doesn’t fit – he is a want, not a need.
I hope he lights it up and I am wrong – would be the happiest Sens fan there is but from what I know and have seen, I don’t expect lightning in a bottle.
As for mismanagement…wasn’t that the reason Filatov didn’t perform?
I'm pretty sure that no one has said we "finally" have our second-line centre
But we need one and Turris has the potential to do that. Of course there’s a chance that it won’t pan out, but there’s just as much chance that Rundblad never lives up to his huge potential (see: Brian Lee). It’s always a crapshoot. Any serious hockey fan knows that.
Oh Captain, my Captain!
That's and interesting choice of words
So because I am not just saying the Sens fate is determined by the winds and up to fate I am not a serious hockey fan? That’s innacurate and a very thinly veiled slight…
Using Brian Lee as an example actually hurts your position as well because “any serious hockey fan” knows that Lee was WAY off the board for the 9th pick and was a shot in the dark in the truest sense. He never did anything of note with his junior club, Team USA junior club, his college team and has done nothing of note so far in the AHL or NHL. He never had and does not now have huge potential.
Rundblad on the other hand tore up a men’s league as a teenager.
Lastly I think you need to read the posts a little closer, perhaps nobody stated it exactly as I did but there are plenty of “this help us now”, “we solidified our 2nd line center”, what to do with Regin, Foligno, DaCosta…many people, the Sens management included, are giving Turris the 2nd line center job before, in my opinion, he has shown he can fulfill it.
FYI I was replying to your comment
As much as I appreciate your comments about reading the other posts a little closer (speaking of thinly-veiled slights), they have nothing to do with my reply to your comment. Your comment, which wasn’t in reply to anyone else’s and which didn’t refer to any other comment on this post. Maybe next time you’re answering someone else, you should reply to their comment.
Also, there’s a big difference between me saying a trade is always uncertain and “the Sens fate is determined by the winds and up to fate”. I’m saying that anyone who tells you that this trade means we’re “FINALLY getting our 2nd line center” (your words) is not a serious hockey fan because anyone who watches the game often enough realizes that there’s uncertainty involved. Pretty big difference and certainly not a thinly-veiled slight.
Oh Captain, my Captain!
I wasn't answering anyone else
I figured posting at the bottom of a story based on trading Rundblad for Turris that it was obvious I was commenting on the thread.
My bad.
Either way, I disagree that it’s a crapshoot. There is uncertaintly as they are both young players but based off what I have seen of Rundblad and taking into account what he accomplished already I think there is a good chance he becomes a very good D.
From what I know of Turris, who has 2 extra years of development under his belt, I don’t see him becoming an explosive 2nd line center.
I don’t want or like getting into sidebar discussion or arguments so sorry if I came across that way – I just dont like the trade.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Silver Seven
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Los Angeles Kings give Rainn Wilson, a.k.a. Dwight Schrute, free playoff tickets in a Jell-O mold
- Monday’s Three Stars: Parise scores, Brodeur saves in Game 4 Devils win
- Zach Parise, Devils respond after a quiet Game 3 to even series with Rangers in Game 4
- Mike Rupp shoves Brodeur, sparks Game 4 chaos as Devils, Rangers coaches squabble (VIDEO)
- Devils try to even series with Rangers; watch the ‘Sandley Cup’ get built (Playoff Puck Previews)
Latest stories and headlines from NHL.com
- Brodeur, Parise lead Devils to 4-1 Game 4 win over rattled Rangers; East Finals tied, 2-2
- Brodeur, Parise lead Devils to 4-1 win over rattled Rangers; East final tied 2-2
- Brodeur, Parise lead Devils to 4-1 win over rattled Rangers; East final tied 2-2
- Wild prospects lead Saint John past Edmonton
- Labrie stars in Admirals 1-0 overtime win over IceCaps; Norfolk leads series 3-0
