|
Post by HFTO on Jan 23, 2003 22:09:08 GMT -5
Assuming Sundstrom is a better finisher than Dackell in the vain of making this team younger do you move Dackell and also Juneau this year? If you are confident that Kilger can essentially replace Juneau. A Kilger, Sunstrom duo is younger, bigger cheaper. Would these players garner anything more than mid to late round picks?Could we get anything in a package with any of our other smurfs or one of our deadwood D men? HFTO
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Jan 23, 2003 22:20:39 GMT -5
Nothing.
Nothing is coming up. When Savard acquired Czerkawski I was certain it would trigger other moves since there was an obvious roster jam. But nothing happenned, he just let all these vets go in and out of the lineup.
Same thing with Sundstrom. Just more bodies, bigger jam.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jan 23, 2003 22:29:23 GMT -5
Nothing. Nothing is coming up. When Savard acquired Czerkawski I was certain it would trigger other moves since there was an obvious roster jam. But nothing happenned, he just let all these vets go in and out of the lineup. Same thing with Sundstrom. Just more bodies, bigger jam. Doc, I think you need either: 1) More beer or 2) Much less beer, since you're entering a serious post-booze downer. Relax.... even if we place Sund on waivers, we got more than many expected, and Boston was going to get a goalie for McLaren, if not Hack then Storr or some other goalie.
|
|
|
Post by GoMtl on Jan 23, 2003 22:44:00 GMT -5
yep, we got more than what most of us expected for hack. i like AS was not willing to part with hainsey or komi along with hack to get mclaren. when the season ends and boston once again doens't make it far in the playoffs, and hack moves on to some other team we will look back on this as a great trade. if not this year, then next year sundstrom will become a very key piece of our penalty kill and third line for years to come. good move by AS in the future. but this roster problem really worries me, andy dackell has been very useful for this club over the past couple seasons, but he is no longer needed, ship him off for what we got him for, a late round pick. while you're at it ship blouin off for free, then think about picking up a real enforcer, or just call up ward. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Jan 23, 2003 22:52:09 GMT -5
Doc, I think you need either: 1) More beer or 2) Much less beer, since you're entering a serious post-booze downer. Relax.... even if we place Sund on waivers, we got more than many expected, and Boston was going to get a goalie for McLaren, if not Hack then Storr or some other goalie. For sure #2. I'm just so darn tired to see Savard shooting 3 feet wide of the target. One quality I like for a GM is his capacity to identify his team's needs and act upon it. Savard really ranks low at that. Oh well.
|
|
|
Post by habwest on Jan 23, 2003 23:09:38 GMT -5
Well, they ain't bannanas, AS just can't go to the supermarket and pluck what he wants off the shelf. Sometimes its a relatively bare shelf GMs have to pick from, especially if they only have a few nickles in their pocket.
Frankly, I sometimes wish the critics were put in the job, to see how they would do. Always easy to throw rocks from the sidelines but it's a whole difference experience when you actually have to function in the real world. I find it hard to believe that GMs were lining up to trade big, strong, fast wingers with some talent to AS for Hackett. So he took what he could get. And we are not that strong at LW, on the Habs or in the system as yet.
Which brings me to the Dackell-Sundstrom comparison. Sundstrom's a L shooting LW and Dackell a R shooting RW. Aren't we kind of mixing apples and oranges?
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Jan 23, 2003 23:22:29 GMT -5
Isn't Sundstrom a RW? he played with Ricci and Thornton in SJ...Scott is a LW no? If it's Dackell vs Sundstrom...Sundstrom clearly wins: Younger, faster, better offensively and a tad bigger
|
|
|
Post by GoMtl on Jan 23, 2003 23:24:10 GMT -5
sundstrom is listed as a left shooting right winger at espn.com, and hockeydb.com
donno if he's now playing lw or what, but i thought he was right wing aswell?
|
|
|
Post by Psycorp on Jan 23, 2003 23:31:40 GMT -5
Sundstrom can play all forward positions but it's been a long time since he played another position than RW but i remember him playing center and left wing in New York and Tempa Bay.
|
|
|
Post by habwest on Jan 24, 2003 0:22:43 GMT -5
Ahh, I stand corrected. I was going by the NHLPA site which has him listed as a LW. Sundstrom was described as a RW in the trade article on the Sharks web site. I should have done my homework.
But at least he could play LW if needs be which might come in handy. Less of a log jam there than at RW.
On the question of further moves, I wouldn't bet on it either. Even if AS wants to do something it takes two to make it happen and there might not be another match out there, at least for a while. I think that the picture of a GM sitting back and seamlessly pulling strings when and how he wants to just isn't realistic. It's more a matter of what opportunities are out there I think than anything else.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jan 24, 2003 0:49:42 GMT -5
Yeah, HW, it was the one thing (like Doc) that I was hoping for, plugging a hole. Either a tough (even not so mobile) d-man or tough (even not so mobile) forward. I know you wouldn't get a Laraque, but someone less skilled, but tough. We may just have to draft him (a la Scott Parker, a 20 year old). C'est la vie. Without knowing what was out there, it's tough to judge, but I think AS did ok...and he had to save some $ too. Now those media types who were ready to ship Komi or Hainsey plus Jeff for Mclaren....they should be given some of Rocky's justice.
|
|