I think we're getting to the point now that at least some people would be hardpressed to show excitement over it given the magnitude of butthurt in this thread(s).
That sucks... I could have easily went the other way on this deal and tore into BM because I don't like what he did to this team.
But speaking honestly Turris is going to be a very good player for us. I can't wait till the Sens fan base sees him play... Turris I have been high on for a while and loved watching him play.
He is going to come in and he is going to wow... his play will be so good it will be hard for people to complain.
I am convinced he is going to impact our team for the better.
I know as soon as the fan base sees Turris use his wrist shot they are going to drool over this guy.
He is going to be given an oppotunity to produce and he will use his shot a lot.
I keep saying Kessel and his release is every bit as smooth.
I saw his wrist shot in the highlight reel and the bend in his stick was wicked. Unfortunately that's only one take. I wish they had better highlights of his overall play, passing, stick handling, entering the zone etc... One of each type isn't enough except to say he can do it at times. Rundblad's SEL video was more complete since it showed him shooting, passing and hitting. Guess we'll find out more come Tuesday.
Just out of curiosity, when the Rangers signed Redden, or the Lightning traded for Meszaros, how many people on this board played the "GMs know best" card and actually waited before passing judgment?
One can read millions of "Art of Scouting" books and in the end it will still be a failure. Or else every hight draft picks would turn out to be superstar in this league and as we see the top players in this league right now, its not the case at all.
That isn't the case at all.
While I'm very curious as to why you didn't mention the rest of my post talking about actually watching players and only mentioned my supplementary references, what you just said has nothing to do with my argument at all.
There's a difference between having potential and realizing potential. That's the difference that I made (in my mind quite clearly), but apparently I need to clarify.
have you ever read a game day thread? it reads like a bipolar schizophrenic lady going through menopause.
I have to stop attending. Spot on
Quote:
Originally Posted by trentmccleary
We're never going to know if Murray was bidding against himself or not... because we're never going to know what some of the next best offers were.
Like I said though, I'd still find it very hard to believe that all of sudden NHL teams have strted throwing 1st & 2nd rounders out there for reclaimation projects. This is usually the time in players careers where they're at risk being moved for cheap in change of scenery deals (ie; 22yo Latendresse for 22yo B.Pouliot).
We have a legitimate insider here that says some of the offers were arguably better. You've followed this, it'd be ignorant to think the other offers out there weren't significant.
trent, that's the point, you don't pay this much for reclamation projects. What does this tell you?
And no, I'm not saying this makes us right....I'm just saying, our people don't think this is a gamble. They might be wrong....but the method they used to come to that conclusion goes much deeper than his stat line.
We have a legitimate insider here that says some of the offers were arguably better. You've followed this, it'd be ignorant to think the other offers out there weren't significant.
trent, that's the point, you don't pay this much for reclamation projects. What does this tell you?
And no, I'm not saying this makes us right....I'm just saying, our people don't think this is a gamble. They might be wrong....but the method they used to come to that conclusion goes much deeper than his stat line.
The bolded part is so true that the rest of this thread should be locked and closed.
I belief the hoodlums of our world would say "Nuff Said".
The difference is you won't be spending a 1st round pick on a player scouted once. Because you can't account for all the external stuff you just mentioned.
There's really no substitute for more viewings. But lots of physical skills can be evaluated very quickly. The thing is, you may catch a kid with the flu that didn't have legs, maybe the kids parents didn't get his skates sharpened that day when he needed them.
But what about a 2nd, 3rd, 4th round pick? 1st is more obvious of scouting. But also the general talent level is higher. Using the one off strategy, its much more difficult to get an accurate reading for the middle round players. Kid could have been sick one game as you mentioned. You can't account for all the external stuff, but if you don't try, you may end up with another Alexandre Daigle situation.
But what about a 2nd, 3rd, 4th round pick? 1st is more obvious of scouting. But also the general talent level is higher. Using the one off strategy, its much more difficult to get an accurate reading for the middle round players. Kid could have been sick one game as you mentioned. You can't account for all the external stuff, but if you don't try, you may end up with another Alexandre Daigle situation.
Daigle's problems were probably more off ice than on ice. Too much hype and rushed. Things have changed in Ottawa with prospects
While I'm very curious as to why you didn't mention the rest of my post talking about actually watching players and only mentioned my supplementary references, what you just said has nothing to do with my argument at all.
There's a difference between having potential and realizing potential. That's the difference that I made (in my mind quite clearly), but apparently I need to clarify.
I dont know who your post was targeted at. All I saw that you said one game to determ a player and so on and so on. And therefor the answer that I gave.
But what about a 2nd, 3rd, 4th round pick? 1st is more obvious of scouting. But also the general talent level is higher. Using the one off strategy, its much more difficult to get an accurate reading for the middle round players. Kid could have been sick one game as you mentioned. You can't account for all the external stuff, but if you don't try, you may end up with another Alexandre Daigle situation.
I'd argue that one of the reasons that the draft order is not reflective of overall success (in hindsight) is more to do with kids not getting enough exposure, rather than kids changing in skill level.
Just out of curiosity, when the Rangers signed Redden, or the Lightning traded for Meszaros, how many people on this board played the "GMs know best" card and actually waited before passing judgment?
It's not even really the GM knows best card.
It's the...I've never sat there and evaluated the kid so I'm not going to deem this a failure or a success and I'll give the people that have watched him the benefit of the doubt for now card.
I dont know who your post was targeted at. All I saw that you said one game to determ a player and so on and so on. And therefor the answer that I gave.
Jumpin' Jehosephats, how many times do I need to repeat my same point over and over. I think I'll use bold.
Watching one game of a player is NOT going to give you an in-depth look at a player. However, many of the physical elements and aspects that determine raw potential of the game can be sufficiently determined from observing one (1) game.
Bryan Murray has shown us that he is extreeeeeeeeemely impatient, gets frustrated very quickly and is unable to see the big picture clearly.
No matter how these players turn out, the trade needs to be evaluated at the time the deal was made and there is no other way to see it except as a huge overpayment for a player that has done nothing at the nhl level worthy of the potential of the assets our GM gave up.
Bobby Butler has put up better numbers than Turris so far in the NHL. We all now Butler's place on the roster.
But what about a 2nd, 3rd, 4th round pick? 1st is more obvious of scouting. But also the general talent level is higher. Using the one off strategy, its much more difficult to get an accurate reading for the middle round players. Kid could have been sick one game as you mentioned. You can't account for all the external stuff, but if you don't try, you may end up with another Alexandre Daigle situation.
When you get into the middle to late rounds...
You're mostly looking for players who can either certainly play depth roles (Zack Smith)....or you're taking crapshoot gambles on players with upside that have little chance of getting there (Andre Petersson, Emil Sandin). Sometimes that involves taking a chance on a player that you haven't done your homework on.
For example, I believe it was Pekka Rinne that was picked in the late rounds after a Nashville scout saw him in warm ups.
They have to do the due diligence with the higher picks, they can't miss those, you lose your job missing on 1st and 2nd rounders....so sometimes you don't have all the resources in the world to make as informed opinions as you'd like on later round players.
We may have taken Darren Kramer last year using his coach, Don Nachbaur's, approval of the kids chances more than anything else.
The diligence we've used in all rounds is probably better than a lot of teams though. We were highly connected in Sweden for a couple years through Anders Forsberg....if you have eyes in the Swedish junior leagues you can be getting 2nd round talent in the 4-6th rounds.
Bryan Murray has shown us that he is extreeeeeeeeemely impatient, gets frustrated very quickly and is unable to see the big picture clearly.
No matter how these players turn out, the trade needs to be evaluated at the time the deal was made and there is no other way to see it except as a huge overpayment for a player that has done nothing at the nhl level worthy of the potential of the assets our GM gave up.
This move signifies in NO way the end of a rebuild, so I don't know what you're getting at.
We didn't trade the guy for freaking Brian Rolston, he's in his young 20s.
Daigle's problems were probably more off ice than on ice. Too much hype and rushed. Things have changed in Ottawa with prospects
He radically changed his game 3 times within 1 year.
A competent organization would have taken better control over the career of a 20 yo that they had invested so much in.
I don't know if Turris will be an upgrade on what we already have but Murray & company including Maclean seem to think he is the answer to the 2nd line centre spot for this yr. Both Zibanejad & Da Costa were obviously too young for the job this yr & needed more seasoning. Regin & Foligno have been good but not great & I think they want someone who has the potential to be great. It could be argued that Turris has that potential but once upon a time he did, he had 1st line centre potential in his draft yr which should also tell us something about the hype surrounding the draft.
Turris has been a disappointment in Phoenix as Filatov was in Columbus & Murray took another risk to acquire him. Like many I was surprised that it was Rundblad that was part of the deal but I guess Phoenix didn't want Lee or Weircioch who were rumoured to be available. I was also surprised on the 2nd rd pick which IMO was an overpayment unless Turris turns it around in Ottawa. I guess the number of give aways & indecision that Rundblad was showing was enough for them to think it was a gamble worth taking. Hopefully they are right & Turris becomes a star in Ottawa, what we don't need is another problem player or give away machine. Hopefully he can play at both ends of the ice & produce at the offensive end. Is it too early to start creating lines with Turris?
Phoenix fan coming in peace. Turris is a very one-dimensional player, with a wicked shot and decent skating abilities, but that's about it as far as intangibles go. Although he's bulked up significantly this off-season, he still seems to be getting his legs back from the hold out (good riddance) His shot is his one saving grace, he is not strong on the puck or defensively, and I've always thought he should be on the wing where has more open space and can utilize his shot better. Anyways, enjoy him guys, I look forward to the pairing of OEL - Rundbland in the future.
This move signifies in NO way the end of a rebuild, so I don't know what you're getting at.
We didn't trade the guy for freaking Brian Rolston, he's in his young 20s.
it was a huge overpayment for a guy who did the same thing to his team as Heatley did to ours for the same reasons. Point is, BM doesn't use his assets well, doesn't learn from past experiences, and is very short sighted. (rundblad played 24 games)
Phoenix fan coming in peace. Turris is a very one-dimensional player, with a wicked shot and decent skating abilities, but that's about it as far as intangibles go. Although he's bulked up significantly this off-season, he still seems to be getting his legs back from the hold out (good riddance) His shot is his one saving grace, he is not strong on the puck or defensively, and I've always thought he should be on the wing where has more open space and can utilize his shot better. Anyways, enjoy him guys, I look forward to the pairing of OEL - Rundbland in the future.
It's Rundblad.
Have some patience...he can be as good as he wants to be. He wants to be as good as Mike Green.
