That D is not "terrible". It is young and inexperienced....and both of these problems are solved with playing time.
That's not exactly true but neither is 'terrible':
Phillips, Gonchar and Kuba have all underperformed and they're proven products. The question is can they recover next year?
Karlsson has shown he has the offensive game and it hasn't gone away - the question is can he continue to improve defensively? Then we have Lee - he's physical, he can move the puck out and I think he gets underrated around here. And finally we have a final spot for Carkner or one of the prospects - so we'll see about that one.
I think our Defense Corps is pretty good - granted it's a lot of 'if's but you have to believe that our veterans can't play any worse than they have been and this season the veterans under-performing has been our major issue. If they can recover, we'll be good in the defense department.
That leaves Goaltending - if we can sign Anderson and he plays like he did with Colorado last season or even Florida before he was traded - our goaltending should be good. This is probably our biggest if of them all... we have to get a good goaltender signed and it looks like it will probably be Anderson as long as he doesn't implode or refuse to sign here.
If he does (refuse to sign or starts to suck)... well, we're in trouble.
That leaves our forward group... I personally think it sucks. We have Spezza, maybe Michalek and a bunch of unproven young players who could easily slump or not work out and we have a disaster on our hands.
I think we'll have trouble scoring goals even if we could land a guy like Richards. There's no easy fix except through drafts and trades and that's going to take time - and could easily cause another season of suffering.
The point is that you at least have to have the pieces in place and have a couple options before moving forward. Most rebuilding teams on the upswing never have all of the pieces in place initially. They stay in contention long enough to figure out a viable solution or a workaround.
Toronto has basically pushed forward without having a #1 Center, or a #1 Goalie. It's also debatable whether or not Phaneuf is a #1 Defenseman as well.
Fair enough. I think we'll see a more competitive roster next year, in the sense that it's hard to get worse than 29th. I don't see a couple of FA moves pushing us into the playoffs, however.
Sounds like a weight-loss scheme not involving exercise.
Liquid diet? Turns girls to sticks. I knew a girl who was pretty chubby. She did the liquid thing for like a month, and now she looks like a broom with fat girl sized boobies. I'm not sure if I'm impressed or not, but I just thought I should share.
Gonchar has been decent at best, Kuba is terrible and just makes the team worse, Karlsson can be a defensive liablility. Lee is decent as well, and Phillips is pretty solid. So out of our 6 defensemen we ice 1 defenseman that can actually play defense? We better have the best offense in the NHL next year if we are hanging our playoff hopes on that D lineup
I am continually amazed at how fans assess talent based on a 4-5 month sample size and ignore the body of work that doesn't support their theory. Phillips will bounce back, he is still relatively young and has a lot of pride in his game. Karlsson has been up and down all year but to think a kid that is 20 years old is not going to continue to improve is just silly. If he solidifies himself as a outstanding offensive defensiveman and an average defensive player I will be thrilled. Gonchar also plays with a lot of pride and will be better next year. He's been better the second half of the season and improved goaltending will help his numbers. Kuba will not be on the team in the fall.
So as I said, Karlsson, Cowen and Rundblad just need to get some games under their belt. That defence will be better in a couple of years.
That's not exactly true but neither is 'terrible':
Phillips, Gonchar and Kuba have all underperformed and they're proven products. The question is can they recover next year?
Karlsson has shown he has the offensive game and it hasn't gone away - the question is can he continue to improve defensively? Then we have Lee - he's physical, he can move the puck out and I think he gets underrated around here. And finally we have a final spot for Carkner or one of the prospects - so we'll see about that one.
I think our Defense Corps is pretty good - granted it's a lot of 'if's but you have to believe that our veterans can't play any worse than they have been and this season the veterans under-performing has been our major issue. If they can recover, we'll be good in the defense department.
That leaves Goaltending - if we can sign Anderson and he plays like he did with Colorado last season or even Florida before he was traded - our goaltending should be good. This is probably our biggest if of them all... we have to get a good goaltender signed and it looks like it will probably be Anderson as long as he doesn't implode or refuse to sign here.
If he does (refuse to sign or starts to suck)... well, we're in trouble.
That leaves our forward group... I personally think it sucks. We have Spezza, maybe Michalek and a bunch of unproven young players who could easily slump or not work out and we have a disaster on our hands.
I think we'll have trouble scoring goals even if we could land a guy like Richards. There's no easy fix except through drafts and trades and that's going to take time - and could easily cause another season of suffering.
Show me another team that has 3 kids 21 or younger on their blueline next year and I'll show you a d-corps that is young and inexperienced. Are you saying that we'd only be young if we were starting Karlsson and 5 rookies?
You need to have vets on a team and these are not bad vets to have. Imo Kuba will not be on the team in the fall.
Citizen (Warren) says we need to follow Thrashers rebuild blueprint and look for a loaded playoff team that is tight against the CAP (over it) for next year and ravage their roster the way Thrashers did (Byfuglien, Ladd, etc) to Chicago. granted it was "agreeable" to 'Hawks, but look where they are a year later.
I personally do not want Murray to trade away our young prospects and picks for slightly above average players. Atlanta is better I grant you, but still not where they could be if they kept to the Draft.
Which teams would Murray "target" and who would the assets be?
I want to keep our high picks and prospects like Greening and Condra, not trade them for a third liner.
Citizen (Warren) says we need to follow Thrashers rebuild blueprint and look for a loaded playoff team that is tight against the CAP (over it) for next year and ravage their roster the way Thrashers did (Byfuglien, Ladd, etc) to Chicago. granted it was "agreeable" to 'Hawks, but look where they are a year later.
I personally do not want Murray to trade away our young prospects and picks for slightly above average players. Atlanta is better I grant you, but still not where they could be if they kept to the Draft.
Which teams would Murray "target" and who would the assets be?
I want to keep our high picks and prospects like Greening and Condra, not trade them for a third liner.
I don't see any team that is in the same situation as Chicago was last year. If anyone it will be NJ who is in trouble next season.
Citizen (Warren) says we need to follow Thrashers rebuild blueprint and look for a loaded playoff team that is tight against the CAP (over it) for next year and ravage their roster the way Thrashers did (Byfuglien, Ladd, etc) to Chicago. granted it was "agreeable" to 'Hawks, but look where they are a year later.
I personally do not want Murray to trade away our young prospects and picks for slightly above average players. Atlanta is better I grant you, but still not where they could be if they kept to the Draft.
Which teams would Murray "target" and who would the assets be?
I want to keep our high picks and prospects like Greening and Condra, not trade them for a third liner.
I totally disagree with Mr. Warren. Sure Atlanta got a pretty great return, but for all they knew Byfuglien was just the beneficiary of playing with Toews and Kane. He's really blown all expectations and is looking like he will be a number 1 D for years to come. He's an exception. Players like Ladd and Versteeg haven't shown to be much more than decent 2nd/3rd line players on average teams. We could get players just as good via UFA and not give up any assets at all, plus they'd take roster spots away from young developing players who'd benefit from NHL time.
Citizen (Warren) says we need to follow Thrashers rebuild blueprint and look for a loaded playoff team that is tight against the CAP (over it) for next year and ravage their roster the way Thrashers did (Byfuglien, Ladd, etc) to Chicago. granted it was "agreeable" to 'Hawks, but look where they are a year later.
I personally do not want Murray to trade away our young prospects and picks for slightly above average players. Atlanta is better I grant you, but still not where they could be if they kept to the Draft.
Which teams would Murray "target" and who would the assets be?
I want to keep our high picks and prospects like Greening and Condra, not trade them for a third liner.
Show me another team that has 3 kids 21 or younger on their blueline next year and I'll show you a d-corps that is young and inexperienced. Are you saying that we'd only be young if we were starting Karlsson and 5 rookies?
You need to have vets on a team and these are not bad vets to have. Imo Kuba will not be on the team in the fall.
Who on earth is going into the season with 3 kids under 21?
Phillips-Kuba-Gonchar... Carkner and Lee also have a chunk of experience.
That's 5/6 with the exception of Lee all well over 21. 6/6 with one player who will be 21 going into next season: Karlsson.
Maybe if your random and completely unsupported assumptions actually happen... we'll have a young and inexperienced defense.
Until Rundblad/Cowen or any other prospect you care to mention actually wins a spot - I won't be holding my breath. Rundblad is the only one with a real shot of maybe outplaying Carkner or forcing Lee to be traded and even then - we'll see.
If we re-sign Craig Anderson, then we must sign Brad Richards. There is no point in wasting Anderson's talents, as well as Spezza's talent. If we are rebuilding, then they have to go. We have , potentially, a No.1 center and No.1 goalie entering their primes. We have seen that Anderson is capable of keeping this team in games. We have the cap space, not many teams do that can sign Brad Richards...LA? Whoever he signs with, Murray should be ready for the domino effect and pounce on whoever we can get.
So a team that consists of a minimum 5 rookies (Cowen, Rundblad, our 2011 1st, Silfverberg, and Butler- I say Butler only because it'll likely be his first full season with Ottawa) and potentially 2 more in the same boat as Butler (Condra, Greening) has a realistic shot at a contending?
You're delusional if you think that team has a shot at it all next season. Besides, we'd be setting ourselves up for cap disaster once all the ELC's run out and we've got 20-25% of our cap tied up in 2-3 players (Spezza @ 7, Richards @ 8, Milo @ 4.33)
Although I agree with everything else in this thread (apart from the OP), technically I think we had 6 rookies in 2005-2006 when we were probably the best team in the league. Kelly, Meszaros, Eaves, Emery, McGrattan, Schubert. Also Bochenski (briefly).
IF and thats a big IF Richards wants to be here, would you be happy with the 8+ million price tag?
I hope not - it throws it back out of whack. At the time, we signed Spezza and Heatley to the larger deals. They are about right now (3 years later). The Fisher, Kelly, Kovalev, Gonchar, Neil, etc were all considered above where they should have been.
We have finally managed to move Fisher. His number for a No3 centre was just wrong. Murray or whomever is GM needds to establish his CAP puzzle by position and not be influeneced by who's a nice guy. Its about who fits the picture.
Most expensive positions to me are G, 1 D, 1C, 1W, 2C, 2D, 2W
IF and thats a big IF Richards wants to be here, would you be happy with the 8+ million price tag?
I know it is a pretty significant "if" but, yes, I would be happy with that type of contract. We have the cap space. Anderson cannot get more than Niemi, that ha sbeen established. So, with the cap space, is there a better way to spend it?
Look , Pittsburgh won the Cup with two No.1 centres and meagre wingers. They had the No.1 guy in Gonchar and a No.1 goalie. We don't have Crspby or Malkin, but Spezza and Richards down the middle...wow. They can feed the wingers and Pitt doesn't have a Michalek or even an Alfredsson. Why shouldn't we get him?
If we get Anderson, we have to get Richards. There are still plenty of spots for the young guys but we have a lot of pieces including Anderson, Gonchar, Karlsson, Spezza, Richards and Alfredsson as your centrepieces. Hello new core!
The idea is to make trades with teams that are disadvantaged due to their cap situation. Trades are a legitimate way to build a championship team, no?
Cap space is a powerful tool, trades (and UFA signings) are the two ways to exploit it. Neither should be discounted.
Trades are more than legitimate - they are essential. In my view no team can win the SC without trading well and signing FA.
Both Detroit and Chicago have significant potions of their rosters as a result of trades and signings. San Jose is largely build on trades and FA signings.
No top team can rely purely on the draft. Not with FA at 27 and probably dropping in future.
You have to draft, trade and sign good players. You have to do all three well in order to win.
