Light shed on Rooneem's failure to sign with LA
 

Thought y'all would be interested in this, as a post-mortem.

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/article.php?sid=7591

HF: Do you think that Minnesota emphasizes different things in players? Do you think that’s why you might have a better opportunity with them?

MR: Yeah. They’re more into developing younger players, so no doubt I’ll probably get a chance with them before I would with LA. That’s another thing that I was thinking about with LA, just looking at their line-up and the players they have. It just wasn’t a good choice. And Minnesota, nothing better could have happened. They picked me up because they’re interested in my development and we have summer training camps for about two months, it’s the most of any NHL team in the league and it’s all about development, positive development to make me a better hockey player.


I hope it's ok that I just cut and pasted this part of the story but it kinda floors me.
I think we have a wonderful system for developing young players. Granted we might not have a 2 month training camp but we certainly do a very good job of developing our talent and I would say especially of late. Take a peek at Manchester. Take a peek at the Kings and all of the injuries our team has had to withstand the past few seasons and we have called up our young players and some have stepped up and some have not and been sent back down. Overall between Bruce, Dave, Andy and the rest of the Staff, I have no complaints.

I agree. In fact, I was very surprised when he said this. I wasn't going to argue with him though, because it's water under the bridge now.

Perhaps, and this is just me guessing, LA told him that if he was going to make the NHL, it would be as a checker, so to concentrate on that part of his game. That might be enough to turn a kid off. But if that's what they told him, I can't say that they were wrong. He has some offensive skill, but not enough I would say.

"That’s another thing that I was thinking about with LA, just looking at their line-up and the players they have. It just wasn’t a good choice."

Could mean:

1. The line-up is already set with veterans and propsects well above him and he was not going to get a chance in the NHL anytime soon.

2. The system is so deep that he was not going to leap-frog anyone and that he probably was looking at playing in the ECHL.

"They’re more into developing younger players, so no doubt I’ll probably get a chance with them before I would with LA."

Translation: they're roster is routinely filled ut with prospects while players like Cammy and Barney have a hard time of cracking the LA lineup.

Don't think that it is that the Wild develop players better (not that I know, but I doubt anyone KNOWS something as ephemeral and difficult to determine as that) but that he has more of a chance of playing at the higher levels sooner with Minnesota.

i'll take no. 2 for $500 alex...

I'm sorry I think if was in poor taste to trash talk the team that drafted you because you just wene not good enough to make the cut and there was better talent before you ot whatever other reason LA gave him.

I guess it's just all part of the game though and the head game that goes along with it. Sour grapes IMO.

I think it's quite a stretch to call this trash-talking. He was asked, he answered, asked a follow-up question and answered. He was pretty diplomatic I thought. If he wanted to trash talk LA, he could have done it right after he signed with Minnesota. Don't let your pro-LA bias read more into it than there was.

Not sure if he was trash talking. But even if he was, oh well...

Edit - simultaneous posting with Holly just beating me to the punch. :amazed:

Well true. I'm sorry. I'm not totally pro-LA biased. I just don't share my other affialiations as openly and I do live in LA, However, when the other teams come to town I am very conflicted inside. I just love the game.

From what I saw of him during the prospect camps, I hardly noticed him or he actually attended.

It sounds like sour grapes to me. The organization is better without him.

D

Could it be because we didn't know if we should pronounce his name ROO-neem or roo-NEEM?

Bah, chances are only jt remembers that joke.

That was pretty funny...ahhh, good times...

Dave in LA, I rarely think an organization is "better" for having lost a prospect and in this case I don't think it is. The only time I think it is is when the prospect is #1) an a-hole who will poison other prospects or #2) be an absolute waste of money. I doubt Rooneem would be either. If he were I seriously doubt Minnesota would have signed him as I have a great deal of respect for Risebrough and Lemaire.

I think it's just a case of The Wild valuing a prospect like Rooneem more than we do.
The Kings prefer physical lunch pail type of players, while The Wild prefer speedy players.

Seems like the Kings swapped one of their unsigned prospects for another unsigned prospect who was Wild property. Rooneem for Brust!
I thought Rooneem was a good skater, but as he expected, it was going to be tough to find a spot as a top six forward with the Kings. Best of luck to him with the Houston Aeros/Minnesota Wild.

Rooneem always seemed like the second coming of Craig Johnson to me

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/p...id%5B%5D=50689

If that's correct and he's really 6'2"...and speedy...then it could have been a mistake to let him go.

And I'm pretty sure Cammy is no lunch pail type. Nor are Lehoux and Pushkarov. Yeah, DT trends to those types but it's not like Risebrough and Lemaire get a bunch of nancy boys. Brunette and Dowd epitomized what they were doing there and I think those guys actually LOST their wheels in about 1998, maybe 1993 in Brunette's case...damn near every player there is a lunch pail type. I don't pretend to know their prospects that well but they've sure got alot of size according to the 03-04 McKeen's...only one out of five forwards shorter than 6'2" in their top prospects so if they've got that kind of size AND speed, lookout!

I don't care what anyone says, that's a compliment IMO. CJ should NEVER have been expected to be a first liner like the Kings put themselves in the position of trying to make him. He was always a good 3rd/4th liner and I thought he always did a yoeman's job without uttering a single complaint despite all the Kings crap he went through.

Having watched him play and stood next to him, I can verify that he is both. Or at least not far off 6'2.

I have a feeling we'll miss Rome before we miss Ronneem.

I miss Rome evey time I see the Pope.

Ah... how I cherrish the days we were debating the great loss of Matt Zultek and Justin Papineau...

While only seeing him in one game, Connor James reminded me as Craig Johnson.