Molly's too old for this sh it! Geritol is more like it!!
- wonthecup10

Kruger & Zues will inter change at 2nd & 3rd line center & Brad Winchester will be your 4th line center. JMO that is all.
- wonthecup10

I'm kind of counting on this...

What's wrong with Kruger as the #2 center? The kid is fearless, defensively responsible and would rather pass the puck then shoot it. That's perfect if you have Sharp and Hossa as your wingers.

Shaw will be centering the 3rd line. The Hawks won a cup with him in that role.

As for Handzus, him on the 4th line with Winchester and Smith spotting him for games off isn't the worst thing in the world.

Phuuuuck........just saw "uncle Lou" may be in on DAMIAN Brunner! this is 1 that I think is gonna bite Ken Holland in the ass! If Paul Holmgren had any sense , instead of offering that stiff Cleary that cash, he should get in on this kid, he'd be good with Claude Giroux! and he'd REALLY be good with Hossa & sharp centering! not gonna happen.... so here you go True!!!! Pirri to the rescue!!

The Hawks PP is not Scottish.
- Ogilthorpe2

Fixed.

I'm kind of counting on this...

What's wrong with Kruger as the #2 center? The kid is fearless, defensively responsible and would rather pass the puck then shoot it. That's perfect if you have Sharp and Hossa as your wingers.

Shaw will be centering the 3rd line. The Hawks won a cup with him in that role.

As for Handzus, him on the 4th line with Winchester and Smith spotting him for games off isn't the worst thing in the world.
- EKolb13

Ilove kruger!! he's got some 20 goal seasons in his future! I like shaw also but I think the hawks long term plans are to have some size at center on the bottom 2 lines. JJ had said before that Stan Bowman has like Brad Winchester for awhile, so odds are , he plays on that 4th line A lot more than he sits.
my worry about Shaw is that sooner or later someone is gonna string him out & beat the livin Dogsnot out of him. little guys like that tend to get under other players skin which isn't the worst thing when they are on your team , but to play against is another story. Pat Verbeek was a little ignorant arsehole & finally the refs stopped intervening for him and let him catch his lunch more than a few times. that is what I see in the cards for shaw. look at his 1st game, if the refs don't jump in Zac Rinaldo would have nailed him good.

My parents used to listen to a singer named Fabian....but he's old.
- UnnamedSource

I've been told I look like Fabian ... or was it Fabio ...

"I think one thing he has to adapt to is how he plays down low in his own end. But I think that will be the determining factor on how well he’s going to be doing it and how long he’s going to be doing it." Quenville on Saad.

The bolded is why Pirri doesn't look to be getting a shot. Saad could be leading the team in scoring, but if he isn't good in his own end Q isn't going to play him at center. That's why Sharp doesn't play center any more either, he's just not at the same level in his own zone that he was in the past. You HAVE to have defensively responsible centers in Quenville's transition system or else the puck never gets possessed for long enough by the D to make a tape to tape breakout pass and send the Hawks the other way. Its not a matter of giving him a shot, its a matter of the head coach assessing a player's defensive skills (which seem to be congruent with what nearly everyone else sees from the kid) and determining that he simply doesn't have what it takes to play on this team in this system. And to everyone who says, "watch Pirri succeed with another team" he might in terms of offense, but that team won't be winning jack when it matters

I love posts like this, so much to shake my head at so I will only touch on a few...

Saad.....I think it's stretch to say people are doubting him. I think it's more or less common sense to be skeptical of his success at center when...in all the years he has played hockey he has never played the position. Painting a broad brush is what you do well though. It will be interesting to see how he plays this year. I'm more inclined to think he ends up back on the wing because he is better suited there. Also, players usually slump in the second year. He has to take the next step and thinking that it's guarantee is wishful thinking.

Pirri.....again with your magical broad brush of all of us feeling the cup is half empty is ridiculous once you consider how you've come to your conclusion he is ready for the next step.....that is by looking at stats. You mention in the same breath he needs to responsible defensively yet you either fail to comprehend what we, who have seen him play, consistently say about his game or you just don't care that many of us have said he is...already...at the AHL level.....a defensive liability...and how this in itself will not be welcome in Q's system.

No worse than the revolving door last year?....you mean the Stanley Cup Championship year when he wasn't even given so much as a sniff?

It's funny how you mentioned Saad first in your illogical rant when the first person who is given a chance to try out for the 2C........is number 20 himself who...again......has never played the position.......when your golden boy Pirri is skating with Winchester and Shalunov to open up camp.....but hey maybe Q is looking at the glass half empty.....the same glass most of us seem to be looking at.
- UnnamedSource

I like yours so much better. The John Stewart of the board here, framing all debates. I just don't get how when I disagree with others, I like to lay out my case and let the chips fall and add it up at the end. When others disagree with me, we have to assail character in such a way as to suggest that anyone who believes as I do, must be drinking kool aid?

While I know it is more fun for you to project your wisdom and understanding of what others write and believe and then pass it off as fact, it just does not add up. I know this is the frustrating part. So I will back track again and go over it all again real slow.

Saad, what did I originally say. Did I say that he is a lock? Did I not point out a handful of reasons why it is not so far fetched that he be given an opportunity and actually may do a fine job? A player his size, that skates as well as he does, is strong on the puck, especially around the net...is defensively responsible, has a lot of characteristics of a good center. Now I am confused, is this too broad a stroke I am painting? Never really understood what that meant. BTW, you infer I guaranteed Saad would be the man, when in my original post I laid out reasonable arguments why he or Pirri MAY actually be the answer. So I don't get your comment.

Pirri...first your revolving door retort. I know you have been here for a while, so you are familiar with the never ending 2nd line center debate? That was the reference. Bolland was in and out of the lineup last year and never played like a second line center...whatever that means.

Now on to your Straw man of the night award. Help me find somewhere where I wrote that Pirri was a Golden Boy? That he has earned a position? That he can't miss? I am probably older than you and am prone to memory lapses, so by all means serve me up a plate or two of my own words.

I am quite sure you are not able to, but what would be interesting or at the least respectful and courteous would be to acknowledge that all I have said all along, is that a player like Pirri, who has had his detractors at every level, has found a way to be successful. To evolve and grow as a player. From my point of view, as an athlete, you don't simply write a guy off without seeing if his pattern of adapting and succeeding at the next level holds. Does that say he is a lock? Do my words represent anything along the lines that Pirri is owed anything more than an opportunity?

As I have stated here plenty of times, we are all entitled to our own opinions and favorites. No problem. Because you or others do not believe Pirri is the answer, does not mean that my opinion in some way is an attempt to slander your opinion or belief. It does not mean that ultimately you may proven right. It is just my opinion based upon his growth and evolution as a player, it is not your "stats" claim. Although those do illustrate productivity; however what is more noticeable is the trust his coach has shown in him by putting him in important situations on special teams and at key points of the game.

Looks like with the line combos you qouted, all decisions have been made or are final. Heck, this camp thing is a waste of time. More entertaining to me is the amount of energy and stubbornness many will invest in the failure of a player. There is no irony to the board intelligencia that even after a player proves himself in some regard, that we should then double down on our position by rationalizing his success and performance. This I am guilty of baiting and encouraging. Until next time, gonna go get a glass of kool aid.

Fixed.
- MartiniMan

Exactly, and...

I like yours so much better. The John Stewart of the board here, framing all debates. I just don't get how when I disagree with others, I like to lay out my case and let the chips fall and add it up at the end. When others disagree with me, we have to assail character in such a way as to suggest that anyone who believes as I do, must be drinking kool aid?

While I know it is more fun for you to project your wisdom and understanding of what others write and believe and then pass it off as fact, it just does not add up. I know this is the frustrating part. So I will back track again and go over it all again real slow.

Saad, what did I originally say. Did I say that he is a lock? Did I not point out a handful of reasons why it is not so far fetched that he be given an opportunity and actually may do a fine job? A player his size, that skates as well as he does, is strong on the puck, especially around the net...is defensively responsible, has a lot of characteristics of a good center. Now I am confused, is this too broad a stroke I am painting? Never really understood what that meant. BTW, you infer I guaranteed Saad would be the man, when in my original post I laid out reasonable arguments why he or Pirri MAY actually be the answer. So I don't get your comment.

Pirri...first your revolving door retort. I know you have been here for a while, so you are familiar with the never ending 2nd line center debate? That was the reference. Bolland was in and out of the lineup last year and never played like a second line center...whatever that means.

Now on to your Straw man of the night award. Help me find somewhere where I wrote that Pirri was a Golden Boy? That he has earned a position? That he can't miss? I am probably older than you and am prone to memory lapses, so by all means serve me up a plate or two of my own words.

I am quite sure you are not able to, but what would be interesting or at the least respectful and courteous would be to acknowledge that all I have said all along, is that a player like Pirri, who has had his detractors at every level, has found a way to be successful. To evolve and grow as a player. From my point of view, as an athlete, you don't simply write a guy off without seeing if his pattern of adapting and succeeding at the next level holds. Does that say he is a lock? Do my words represent anything along the lines that Pirri is owed anything more than an opportunity?

As I have stated here plenty of times, we are all entitled to our own opinions and favorites. No problem. Because you or others do not believe Pirri is the answer, does not mean that my opinion in some way is an attempt to slander your opinion or belief. It does not mean that ultimately you may proven right. It is just my opinion based upon his growth and evolution as a player, it is not your "stats" claim. Although those do illustrate productivity; however what is more noticeable is the trust his coach has shown in him by putting him in important situations on special teams and at key points of the game.

Looks like with the line combos you qouted, all decisions have been made or are final. Heck, this camp thing is a waste of time. More entertaining to me is the amount of energy and stubbornness many will invest in the failure of a player. There is no irony to the board intelligencia that even after a player proves himself in some regard, that we should then double down on our position by rationalizing his success and performance. This I am guilty of baiting and encouraging. Until next time, gonna go get a glass of kool aid.
- TrueGrit

Do you two need a room????

Since training camp is officially open.....let this be the first post of the year I simply state.....


NO......
- UnnamedSource

It would be really surprising if each of those players were gone by Xmas. Teams need depth, even if those players are not the players you are exactly thrilled to keep around. Now you also have to know that those players need to play enough games, a so called sample, to generate possible interest. It is likely one or more of them could garner a later round draft choice, a role player for our bottom lines, or even become the throw in on a trade.

The only thing I can say is probably going to "play" itself out with those players, is that one or more of them is moved since all beside Pirri skate too slow to stick on a regular basis on the lower lines. Probably Smith could survive of that group, but it is going to be telling by the end of the season if the next group of prospects at Rockford can move in and stay here in Chicago. Nordstrom and Danault can skate, so they have a leg up on Morin, Smith, Hayes.

In defense of the Morin/Smith/Hayes group.....each does have a skill set whereas they could find scoring success if they happen to play a few games and score enough to cause Q and Bowman to pause, thinking just maybe those players can be spotted in certain strategic match up.

But here again really see Morin and Hayes in particular battle for one spot, with maybe Smith able to be versatile enough to play in a few different line combinations than Hayes and Morin do not.

I have omitted Pirri above because he conceivably might add enough strength and defensive effort, to stick. With Pirri, it is definitely a "show me" because if he is lacking bad in strength not to be knocked easily off puck and isn't effective in backchecking, surely Q will have a short leash.

The players will determine their fate by their effort to overcome shortcoming...could be a theme early part of the year. By trade deadline StanBow will have determined if a Danault/Nordstrom or a veteran via trade would supplant the slow group (Smith/Morin/Hayes).

Leblanc? I cannot see regular ice for him even with the passer extraordinaire label. I wait to see him play a while before I will guess his eventual place on/off roster.

There will be some who see both most all Icehog and Blackhawk games. Their input will be valued...I believe my read on the situation makes a lot of sense ....but I welcome other input. Beach probably gets some games in this year too. In his case he
Must play well and earn one quick look, plays well longer, maybe a second longer look.

2) You can practically count on one hand the number of times Stalberg's name is mentioned during the entire series.
- MartiniMan

I agree. Stalberg running to Nashville reminds me of the Island of misfit toys.

I like yours so much better. The John Stewart of the board here, framing all debates. I just don't get how when I disagree with others, I like to lay out my case and let the chips fall and add it up at the end. When others disagree with me, we have to assail character in such a way as to suggest that anyone who believes as I do, must be drinking kool aid?

While I know it is more fun for you to project your wisdom and understanding of what others write and believe and then pass it off as fact, it just does not add up. I know this is the frustrating part. So I will back track again and go over it all again real slow.

Saad, what did I originally say. Did I say that he is a lock? Did I not point out a handful of reasons why it is not so far fetched that he be given an opportunity and actually may do a fine job? A player his size, that skates as well as he does, is strong on the puck, especially around the net...is defensively responsible, has a lot of characteristics of a good center. Now I am confused, is this too broad a stroke I am painting? Never really understood what that meant. BTW, you infer I guaranteed Saad would be the man, when in my original post I laid out reasonable arguments why he or Pirri MAY actually be the answer. So I don't get your comment.

Pirri...first your revolving door retort. I know you have been here for a while, so you are familiar with the never ending 2nd line center debate? That was the reference. Bolland was in and out of the lineup last year and never played like a second line center...whatever that means.

Now on to your Straw man of the night award. Help me find somewhere where I wrote that Pirri was a Golden Boy? That he has earned a position? That he can't miss? I am probably older than you and am prone to memory lapses, so by all means serve me up a plate or two of my own words.

I am quite sure you are not able to, but what would be interesting or at the least respectful and courteous would be to acknowledge that all I have said all along, is that a player like Pirri, who has had his detractors at every level, has found a way to be successful. To evolve and grow as a player. From my point of view, as an athlete, you don't simply write a guy off without seeing if his pattern of adapting and succeeding at the next level holds. Does that say he is a lock? Do my words represent anything along the lines that Pirri is owed anything more than an opportunity?

As I have stated here plenty of times, we are all entitled to our own opinions and favorites. No problem. Because you or others do not believe Pirri is the answer, does not mean that my opinion in some way is an attempt to slander your opinion or belief. It does not mean that ultimately you may proven right. It is just my opinion based upon his growth and evolution as a player, it is not your "stats" claim. Although those do illustrate productivity; however what is more noticeable is the trust his coach has shown in him by putting him in important situations on special teams and at key points of the game.

Looks like with the line combos you qouted, all decisions have been made or are final. Heck, this camp thing is a waste of time. More entertaining to me is the amount of energy and stubbornness many will invest in the failure of a player. There is no irony to the board intelligencia that even after a player proves himself in some regard, that we should then double down on our position by rationalizing his success and performance. This I am guilty of baiting and encouraging. Until next time, gonna go get a glass of kool aid.
- TrueGrit

If you feel assaulting one's character is telling them to "keep drinking the kool aid" then you have thinnest of thin skin.....keep crying me a river.

Most of us know you like to argue for the sake of arguing. I appreciate you slowing things down for me because you more or less confirm what I already know. You claim Pirri has had all these successes and has managed to prove the doubters wrong.......3 years in the AHL has proven who wrong? Trust from coaches and the front office allow him to be put in important situations? Like last year when the Hawks brought him up and was a fixture during the championship run.......oh wait, yes that never happened? You must live in an alternative universe with a different view of reality than most of us. You like to swim in the sea of non committal points of "when did I say that?" or "did I ever say this" yet when a player has some success you seem to like raising your hand saying "Look at me! Look at me! I discovered Andrew Shaw!"

Most of us argue logical points and common sense based on information given and what the play of the team and the individual players are telling us. You should try to grasp that concept. Otherwise, I look forward to your annual mid season temper tantrum which leads to your month or two sabbatical.