John Jaeckel: 2014-15 What Ifs

first lets go hawks

John Jaeckel: 2014-15 What Ifs
- John Jaeckel

I'll take as many positive "what-ifs" as the Hawks can get, please!

8th would be a stretch, I can't see them finishing lower than 4th. Worst case scenario maybe 6th.

Honestly don't know what the Hawks evaluation team sees in Rundblad. Expecting this guy to take a huge jump up is really wishful thinking -- moreso than thinking Nick Leddy will be able to make the leap to top 4 should he remain on the roster.

Watching Rundblad, I see very little that would indicate he's an answer. Average speed at best. Below average skating mechanics. Those 2 things alone tell me he is NOT the answer some think he might be.

The only real thing he's got is a value contract and not much else. What we saw (evidenced by Q's very short audition and he saw enough to not want more) last year was a guy that probably was drafted way ahead of his NHL level abilities.

Honestly don't know what the Hawks evaluation team sees in Rundblad. Expecting this guy to take a huge jump up is really wishful thinking -- moreso than thinking Nick Leddy will be able to make the leap to top 4 should he remain on the roster.

Watching Rundblad, I see very little that would indicate he's an answer. Average speed at best. Below average skating mechanics. Those 2 things alone tell me he is NOT the answer some think he might be.

The only real thing he's got is a value contract and not much else. What we saw (evidenced by Q's very short audition and he saw enough to not want more) last year was a guy that probably was drafted way ahead of his NHL level abilities.
- savvyone-1

I agree. It's a shame that his one-way contract and fear of being lost to waivers for nothing will give him the inside track to make the team opening night.

I agree. It's a shame that his one-way contract and fear of being lost to waivers for nothing will give him the inside track to make the team opening night.
- EKolb13

I don't think Runblad has any inside track on a job. If he can't play they will send him packing to Rockford or elsewhere and eat the loss of the draft pick. The kid is playing for his NHL career this month, he better be prepared and ready to perform or the competition will leave him out in the cold.

I'll take as many positive "what-ifs" as the Hawks can get, please!
- EKolb13

The reality is some of the negative "what-ifs" will likely happen and some of the positive "what-ifs" will happen too. The team's success will depending on the number of negative "what-ifs" vs. positive "what-ifs". .

On the negative side it's realistic that some of the young defenseman don't step up. But if Stan is able to keep both Oduya and Leddy for one more season it's not a big deal. Richards may flop but he will have to be a SUPER EXTREME MASSIVE flop to be a worse 2C than Handzus was last season. Injuries are a possibility and there's nothing that can be done about them.

In the neutral side I would expect Crawford and Raanta to be about the same as last season.

On the positive side I would expect Saad to continue his improvement as should Kruger.

Nonetheless it will be an interesting season.

I don't think Runblad has any inside track on a job. If he can't play they will send him packing to Rockford or elsewhere and eat the loss of the draft pick. The kid is playing for his NHL career this month, he better be prepared and ready to perform or the competition will leave him out in the cold.
- RickJ

Barring an epic failure on his part Rundblad will be on the team opening night. Stan wouldn't give up a coveted 2nd round pick for Rundblad only to lose him on waivers.

the most intriguing positive what if to me is what if Saad continues to play like he did in the playoffs. That by itself could lessen the effect of the what if where Hossa starts slowing down. Not saying he is the next Hossa, because Hossa will still be better than most NHL wings even if he slows a bit. But Saad has some room to pick up his numbers.

I don't think Runblad has any inside track on a job. If he can't play they will send him packing to Rockford or elsewhere and eat the loss of the draft pick. The kid is playing for his NHL career this month, he better be prepared and ready to perform or the competition will leave him out in the cold.
- RickJ

I'd believe that if Rundblad can't cut the mustard and "make" the team, Bowman would trade him to try to recoup some of the cost to acquire him. that might mean that he starts the season on the team until Bowman can finagle a trade of some type.

I can't see Bowman risking putting him on waivers and lose him for nothing.

I'd believe that if Rundblad can't cut the mustard and "make" the team, Bowman would trade him to try to recoup some of the cost to acquire him. that might mean that he starts the season on the team until Bowman can finagle a trade of some type.

I can't see Bowman risking putting him on waivers and lose him for nothing.
- EKolb13

Can't help but be reminded of the HUGE (frank)ING MISTAKE someone made on one Steve "Clown Shoes" Montador. Does anyone know if he's playing in a men's league somewhere?

I'd like to have a chance to turnstyle the guy and watch the clown shoes skating up-close and personal.

IMO, just like old "Clown Shoes" where someone -- one or more of the scouts or Stanley (hard to believe it would ever be Scotty, but then again . . . ) chased that idiot and gave up a pick just to have the right to talk to him before he hit UFA!!! And to sign him for what we did . . .

Well, Rundblad simply smells like a lower-cost version of this (frank)ed up mistake. At least Rundblad won't cost us a buyout that we could have used on someone else. However giving up that 2nd round pick, would agree with you guys that think he's penciled in the lineup at least initially.

John Scott all over again? Q uses him, shows off the fact that the guy doesn't have the NHL-level abilities and ultimately forces Stanley to trade him?

The reality is some of the negative "what-ifs" will likely happen and some of the positive "what-ifs" will happen too. The team's success will depending on the number of negative "what-ifs" vs. positive "what-ifs". .

On the negative side it's realistic that some of the young defenseman don't step up. But if Stan is able to keep both Oduya and Leddy for one more season it's not a big deal. Richards may flop but he will have to be a SUPER EXTREME MASSIVE flop to be a worse 2C than Handzus was last season. Injuries are a possibility and there's nothing that can be done about them.

In the neutral side I would expect Crawford and Raanta to be about the same as last season.

On the positive side I would expect Saad to continue his improvement as should Kruger.

Nonetheless it will be an interesting season.
- DarthKane

So what if our starting line up this year is
JT/MH/PS
BR/PK/BS
AS/BS/BB
MK/JM/KV
BS/DK
NH/JO
NL/DRunblad
1.6 mil for Nord/Clendening or other Rock combos

and next year with a 75 million cap
JT/MH/BS(4.5mil)
TT/PK/MMartin
AS/BS/BPrust or pick a 2.5mil LW
MK(3.5mil)/JM/BManshinter
BS/DK
NJ/JO(4mil)
AClendenning/DR
1.6mil for McNeil/Johns or other rock combo

Still a above average lineup

Can't help but be reminded of the HUGE (frank)ING MISTAKE someone made on one Steve "Clown Shoes" Montador. Does anyone know if he's playing in a men's league somewhere?

I'd like to have a chance to turnstyle the guy and watch the clown shoes skating up-close and personal.

IMO, just like old "Clown Shoes" where someone -- one or more of the scouts or Stanley (hard to believe it would ever be Scotty, but then again . . . ) chased that idiot and gave up a pick just to have the right to talk to him before he hit UFA!!! And to sign him for what we did . . .

Well, Rundblad simply smells like a lower-cost version of this (frank)ed up mistake. At least Rundblad won't cost us a buyout that we could have used on someone else. However giving up that 2nd round pick, would agree with you guys that think he's penciled in the lineup at least initially.

John Scott all over again? Q uses him, shows off the fact that the guy doesn't have the NHL-level abilities and ultimately forces Stanley to trade him?
- savvyone-1

Gave up a 7th on a pipedream

What if Rundblad not only makes the club, but brings an element to the point on the Hawk power play that’s really been missing since 2011?
- John Jaeckel

Thanks JJ. I needed a good laugh today.

Gave up a 7th on a pipedream
- Cup-Bearer

Yeah, someone was taking the pipe on that for sure. The gas pipe.

Thanks JJ. I needed a good laugh today.
- carcus

You too?

Hey Carcus, hope the family (and your little guy) is doing well.

Hawks are going to be a great team for years.

What if Rundblad not only makes the club, but brings an element to the point on the Hawk power play that’s really been missing since 2011?

I think this is a given.

People laugh, but how many of us would have laughed at this "what if" a couple years ago:

"What if Johnny Oduya helps from one of the best shut down defensive pairs in the league"

Sometimes a player just needs to find the right fit witha team, maybe Chicago and Rundblad will be the right fit for each other they way Oduya and Chicago are.

What if Rundblad not only makes the club, but brings an element to the point on the Hawk power play that’s really been missing since 2011?

I think this is a given.

People laugh, but how many of us would have laughed at this "what if" a couple years ago:

"What if Johnny Oduya helps from one of the best shut down defensive pairs in the league"

Sometimes a player just needs to find the right fit witha team, maybe Chicago and Rundblad will be the right fit for each other they way Oduya and Chicago are.
- DarthKane

Then again...

Then again...
- Ogilthorpe2

Then again, to think that a guy that has barely sniffed the NHL is going to make an impact on the Hawks PP is really digging deep into someone's stash of some really potent leaves or flowers or what-have-you.

Does anyone really think Q is going to trust the point on the PP to Rundblad? I'm set for another season of shinpads and off-target whiffs by #2, another season of blasts into the goalie's chest by #10 or odd-man breaks created by an inability to keep the puck in at the point. And also set for another season of minimal time for PP unit 2 (presuming #8 is still around) with Leddy and Seabrook getting the call.

And of course, another season of the statue play call for 5 on 3's, reminding me of the 3 Stooges short "Rhythm and Weep" where Curly nailed his shoes to the roof preventing him from jumping off the building.

One can only hope Dineen runs the PP, is a 3 Stooges fan and has seen this short and seeks to prevent its ongoing 5-3 repeat.

What if Rundblad not only makes the club, but brings an element to the point on the Hawk power play that’s really been missing since 2011?

I think this is a given.

People laugh, but how many of us would have laughed at this "what if" a couple years ago:

"What if Johnny Oduya helps from one of the best shut down defensive pairs in the league"

Sometimes a player just needs to find the right fit witha team, maybe Chicago and Rundblad will be the right fit for each other they way Oduya and Chicago are.
- DarthKane

It is a given that he is going to be a key element of the team/powerplay????

I think you have the words given & slight possibility mixed up.....

I am again gonna use one of JJ's blogs blatantly for my own purpose:

I am looking for a one or three persons interested in playing yahoo Fantasy Hockey in a ten team rotisserie league with
a live draft Tuesday evening Sept. 30th.
Not looking for any one who just wants to draft and then quit after a month and not make moves.
We are going to set it up with small reserve benches so no one can horde talent, and if you are needing an area of upgrade you have to drop and add or start trading.
It is a part of group that started playing together years ago, but many of the originals have become half hearted in interest and there were so few moves that it looked like they didn’t care, so it was a lifeless fantasy league that we would love to revive.
We are setting this up in away that each GM has 9 forward positions, three at each, two goalies you can carry only three max., but only FOUR defenseman. There will be a SHORT reverse bench…we are debating three or even two there.
There will be IR or day to day IR slot too, even discussing one of each.

Send me a P M with your regular email if interested....

Then again, to think that a guy that has barely sniffed the NHL is going to make an impact on the Hawks PP is really digging deep into someone's stash of some really potent leaves or flowers or what-have-you.

Does anyone really think Q is going to trust the point on the PP to Rundblad? I'm set for another season of shinpads and off-target whiffs by #2, another season of blasts into the goalie's chest by #10 or odd-man breaks created by an inability to keep the puck in at the point. And also set for another season of minimal time for PP unit 2 (presuming #8 is still around) with Leddy and Seabrook getting the call.

And of course, another season of the statue play call for 5 on 3's, reminding me of the 3 Stooges short "Rhythm and Weep" where Curly nailed his shoes to the roof preventing him from jumping off the building.

One can only hope Dineen runs the PP, is a 3 Stooges fan and has seen this short and seeks to prevent its ongoing 5-3 repeat.

- savvyone-1

Sometimes you really have to wonder what Q is thinking and what the organizational philosophy is towards the PP.

I understand Keith on the PP. While I believe that he is probably the 3rd or 4th best option on the point at the PP, I can understand a coach allowing his #1 Dman to get significant PP time. Like it or not, it isn't going to change.

I don't understand the Sharp on a point instead of Leddy or Seabrook. While Sharp has a decent shot, I would argue that Leddy and Seabrook's are both better from the point and they see the game better from there than Sharp. When a play breaks down, I would rather have a Dman back on the point than a forward. In addition Leddy has shown the ability to skate the puck into the zone effectively (that he doesn't know what to do with it once he gets there is another story), and increasing his minutes by giving him PP time(and thus reducing Keiths minutes would seem to make sense).

In terms of Runblad, he surely didn't show much in his few short opportunities last year, in fact I thought he looked below average in his own end, with poor reads, etc. For all the crap Leddy takes, he looks much better than Runblad. If you are looking for a PP specialist to run the point, then Clendening is in the mold you want. Offensively he can run the PP, but you would have to limit his minutes to specific matchups at full strength due to the deficiencies in his own end. Look at a guy like Krug in Boston, seems to have a knack offensively, not very good in his own end (although improving). Clendening is 5'11" vs. Krugs 5'9" for those who say he is not big enough. You want a role player D man for the PP, you have it.

You would hope the Hawks brass see's and knows all this too. I find it hard to believe that a Runblad makes the roster based solely on having given up a 2nd rounder for him. If he is good enough then fine, otherwise you have plenty of young defensemen with varying skillsets you could utilize in a "protected" fashion thru matchups, etc.

What IF...

the hawks find $ 750,000 for sign Paul Bissonnette,

only to stop the HockeyBuzz fans from worrying about toughness?