I know, I know.
It’s that time of year where, in the absence of games or training camps, hockey fans spend a lot of time on Twitter and message boards constructing trade scenarios and lineups. That’s to be expected, and fine.
But man, there is some kind of crazy stuff getting thrown around out there. So please everyone, step back from the ledge. Hear me out. What’s needed is some longer term perspective.
Let’s explode some myths, shall we?
MYTH 1: “Because of the cap, the Hawks are out of options up front. It’s time for a “youth movement.”
Ummm, no.
The Hawks are out of free agent options as far as a badly needed top 6 winger (probably anyway—maybe they can still sway Jiri Hudler to take less money for a chance to win in Chicago—but maybe not).
The Hawks however, are not out of trade options.
Quietly, while the conventional wisdom has been that the Hawks have drained their pipeline of quality prospects, Stan Bowman has amassed a nice little cache of defense prospects, including, but not limited to: Ville Pokka, Gustav Forsling and Viktor Svedberg.
Bowman went out this offseason and signed Brian Campbell and Michal Kempny—and he also re-upped Michal Rozsival. And he thus really jammed up his NHL defense depth chart with the goal of getting deep in the playoffs.
Signing Campbell and Rozsival especially, were not moves for the future. Don’t kid yourself.
But why make those moves if you aren’t also going to address the gaping hole at top 6 LW? Hence, the Hawks’ pursuit of Jimmy Vesey and rumored interest in the likes of Tomas Vanek and others earlier in the summer.
So meanwhile, you have guys like Svedberg and Pokka and Forsling (all guys with legitimate NHL ability/potential) parked in Rockford or back in Sweden.
Again, consider that Bowman’s defense moves were all about this year and going far in the Spring, so holding on to all of these young defense prospects seems kind of foolish when you have a hole at forward on your NHL roster (and you do). It just defies logic.
Another name who I heard mentioned as a possible trade chip is Trevor van Riemsdyk. TVR is a nice piece to have, or to trade. A solid, versatile #5 defenseman with cost-certainty.
The point being: a trade of TVR and a defense prospect, with the right team, could bring back a somewhat more experienced winger who can help the Hawks this year.
MYTH 2: “But, but . . . Panik, Hinostroza, Schmaltz, Motte—those guys are good enough, right? I mean Pittsburgh won a Cup with four rookies. ”
Ehhhh, sort of. But not really.
Panik, at his best, is a third line energy winger.
Hinostroza scored 18 goals in the AHL last year, has speed and energy. So, at best, he’s probably in that category as well.
Schmaltz probably has the most upside of all these prospects—but my information is the Hawks see him this year, also, as a third line player.
Motte also might have some upside—he scored a lot last year at the University of Michigan. So did a guy named Andy Hilbert about 15 years ago. Remember him?
Schmaltz and Motte are 20 and 21 respectively. Hinostroza is 22. The three forwards (Sheary, Rust, Kuhnhackl) that Pittsburgh inserted last year were all 23-24.
Schmaltz and Motte played a handful of games in the AHL last year. Hinostroza one season there and a few games in Chicago. Pittsburgh’s trio had a lot more pro experience.
At that age and experience level, a couple of years’ maturity (physically and emotionally) and pro experience matters hugely.
We can debate this ‘til the cows come home, but the bottom line is this: the Hawks themselves know better.
They didn’t go after Vesey as hard and as heavy as everyone knows they did because they were convinced that one of the three other rookies could do the job they projected Vesey for. It just doesn’t make sense.
MYTH #3: “The bottom 6 is a bigger problem than the top 6.”
Uhhhh, step away from the meth rig, mmmm-kay?
Hey, it’s great if you can roll four lines that can score. But in the world of the salary cap, that is getting harder and harder to achieve—and it was never easy.
The Hawks’ problem last year was they were not very good 5-on-5, and that started with the fact that they relied on one line for nearly 45% of their scoring.
The year prior, 2014-15, when the Hawks won their last Cup, they got production from both of their top lines—and the Brandon Saad/Jonathan Toews/Marian Hossa line was arguably the best in hockey.
Last year, minus Saad, and with a revolving door, clown show audition of natural right wings and grinders playing way over their heads at left wing, that line was not what you’d call . . . good.
Conversely, the Hawks were great on the power play and 3-on-3 last year, because they could load up in those situations. Problem is, the refs swallow the whistles in the playoffs and there’s no 3-on-3, so they became a good regular season team and a first round out in the playoffs.
So you can blithely assume that Panik or Schmaltz or Hinostroza steps in and miraculously solves what Andrew Shaw, Teuvo Teravainen, Marko Dano and Ryan Garbutt could not solve last year on Toews’ left flank—and focus on that “nasty lower line problem.” But that would be kinda silly.
The lower lines, meh, you could do worse than Panik, Schmaltz and one of the game’s premier shutdown centers in Marcus Kruger, as a third line. A fourth line of Andrew Desjardins, Dennis Rasmussen and Jordin Tootoo? Tough as hell to play against, at least. Throw in Hinostroza, Motte, Swedish import Martin “Don’t Call Me Bill” Lundberg and say Ryan Hartman, you have options.
MYTH #4: “Marian Hossa is a plug horse at this point. He belongs on the third line. He will be on the third line.”
Probably not. Or not for long, unless there’s another move made by Stan Bowman.
Hey, fans and even Joel Quenneville can muse about a “Sunset” role for Big Hoss as a great third line, two-way threat. But those musings ignore the hard realities I’ve laid out above—at least this year, or barring an unforeseen move.
The lack of top 6 scoring balance (and resulting matchup advantages) hurt the Hawks badly last year. The Toews line was/is already down a legitimate top 6 left wing. So the answer is to subtract a legitimate top 6 right wing? Especially when you have zip, zero, nada to replace him with?
I love Hoss. Always have. No secret. But I would have zero issue bumping him down to Kruger’s right flank. Problem is, it doesn’t solve any issue—it just magnifies another one.
Hossa (and Toews) had an off year last year. There is a legitimate argument that a lot of that had to with cumulative fatigue.
If you look at the totality of the Olympics, regular seasons and long playoff runs in 2008 (Pittsburgh), 2009 (Detroit), 2010, 2014, and 2015 (three Cups and three conference finals), no NHL player has played more hockey over the last 8 years than Marian Hossa has.
So you can argue he has a lot of hard miles on him and he’s breaking down. Or you can argue, as a pretty remarkable athlete who can still outskate 95% of the league, a full summer of rest will do him wonders.
Remains to be seen.
The last time Hossa had a “full summer of rest,” (setting aside 2012, where he was rehabbing from Raffi Torres’ cheap shot), was 2011. In 2011-12, Hossa put up 77 points in 81 games, his best total versus the 5 years prior.
MYTH 5: “The Hawks are the odds-on favorite to come out of the West.”
Oddsmakers can say what they like.
The Hawks have improved their blueline. But they still have the same serious problem at forward—and no apparent solutions. Today. Well, enough of a problem that they would have a hard time going deep in the playoffs, where it’s all about depth and matchups.
MYTH 6: “All hope is lost.”
No, it isn’t.
There are still some cards Stan Bowman can play. Especially in trades. Aside from the much discussed and lamented top 6 winger issue, this year’s Hawks’ club will be rested and very deep at all the other positions. And very good.
How much would a 4th Cup since 2010 mean? Because literally, the Hawks might be 1 good veteran winger away.
All for now,
JJ
Chicago Blackhawks Blogger • 
Join the Discussion:
»