This is fun bar talk, but it is going to come down to two things. One is how they do from now until then. The other is how the kids develop in Rockford. Saad is not leaving, imo, because he's a top 6 guy and the Hawks seem to have few prospects to fill this role. Kruger, to me, would be easiest to replace if it is true that most Rockford prospects project well as bottom six guys. For Leddy, I think the decision could come down to him or Oduya, and that choice will be affected greatly by Leddy's continued development (or lack thereof). Rozie, Brookbank and Kostka will all be gone, so they'll need a bunch of d-men to come up in the next few years.

If forced to guess - which you're forcing me to do, you wicked person, you - my order of departure would be Krugman, Leddy, Saad.
- mohel

That's my line of thinking as well. Hawks have guys like Nordberg, Danault (or maybe McNeill) who might come up and centre the fourth line in a few years. Kruger does so much more than that, but in principal his position is 'most replaceable,' if you want to call it that.

As far as Leddy (or the D in general) is concerned, it does depend how the Rockfish kids pan out. Presumably Clendening might be ready to come up as a defenseman as well. Maybe guys like Holl or Johns factor in.

Besides perhaps TT, the Hawks don't have a lot of Top 6-type prospects. Saad definitely needs to stay.

In relation to possible depth for the future, I'd love to see a guy like Svedberg become something for the Hawks.

In comes world class netminder Alexander Salak...
- prd797

The Czech's are making a comeback, it's 4-2 now. It's all because of Salak!

This is fun bar talk, but it is going to come down to two things. One is how they do from now until then. The other is how the kids develop in Rockford. Saad is not leaving, imo, because he's a top 6 guy and the Hawks seem to have few prospects to fill this role. Kruger, to me, would be easiest to replace if it is true that most Rockford prospects project well as bottom six guys. For Leddy, I think the decision could come down to him or Oduya, and that choice will be affected greatly by Leddy's continued development (or lack thereof). Rozie, Brookbank and Kostka will all be gone, so they'll need a bunch of d-men to come up in the next few years.

If forced to guess - which you're forcing me to do, you wicked person, you - my order of departure would be Krugman, Leddy, Saad.
- mohel

Wicked person? Me?

The Czech's are making a comeback, it's 4-2 now. It's all because of Salak!
- DarthKane

This Swedish PP looks fierce. Probably don't want to take penalties against them.

Wicked person? Me?
- EKolb13

Yes, you know it is true!

The Czech's are making a comeback, it's 4-2 now. It's all because of Salak!
- DarthKane

Maybe they decided getting embarassed right out the gate wouldn't be so good after all...

The funny thing is, I like my football commentary, and I like my hockey commentary for the most part, but the mentalities for doing the play-by-play for each feel different.

I've got the BBC feed, and the English announcer's trying to approach it like its a football match. Safe to say, it's been horribly bad analysis. Bring in hockey guys to talk about hockey, don't mix and match

Yes, you know it is true!
- mohel

I'll cop to that, Mr. Unicorn.

The Czech's are making a comeback, it's 4-2 now. It's all because of Salak!
- DarthKane

How did Barinka and Salak look against NHL level competition in this small sample size?

Interesting to see how Oduya - hammer adapt their game to Team Sweden strategy and style of play.

I'll cop to that, Mr. Unicorn.
- EKolb13

How did Barinka and Salak look against NHL level competition in this small sample size?
- jhawk59

Barinka looked old and slow (for a 30ish year old), overly agressive.

Salak's been the better looking goalie of the three that have been in the game (Kovar, Lundqvist the other two) IMO, though that doesn't really say much.

This Swedish PP looks fierce. Probably don't want to take penalties against them.
- mohel

EkmanLarson and Karlson manning the point on pp.

Too bad we do not compare in our wildest dream with a Keith-Clendenning!

This Ogi hockey will be fun for people to watch - everyone will get to see Blackhawks-style hockey.

sweden kicks czech butt. hawk players normal game--rozsival -2 and kruger no goals and no assists and is knocked down a lot

That's not what I said.

I was floating the hypothetical idea that their might not be enough cap room to retain one or two of Kruger, Saad and Leddy.

If it came down to it, who would you keep and who would you let walk out of that group?
- EKolb13

i keep Saad without question. If there is enough cap room, Krugman (if not, sign a cheap UFA Malhotra type), and leddy can get traded for a king's ransom at the deadline

Sounds like Dahlbeck is a gem at times in Rockford. Do you think he could take over the #Project Brookbank/Rozy role next season Eli? Looking forward to Johns too.

i keep Saad without question. If there is enough cap room, Krugman (if not, sign a cheap UFA Malhotra type), and leddy can get traded for a king's ransom at the deadline
- ikeane

absolutely keep saad. agree with your strategy.. kruger can be replaced

@HockeyBroad: On this day in 2010 #MNWild traded Nick Leddy's rights to the #Blackhawks in exchange for Barker/Johnsson. CHI fans have gloated ever since.

@HockeyBroad: Correction, thanks. RT @hockeenight It was Barker for Leddy/Johnsson. Which makes it even funnier.

absolutely keep saad. agree with your strategy.. kruger can be replaced
- georgem

I'm surprised how many people so readily give up on Kruger. He brings something different that the others but he does bring something useful. I get the whole "who is more replacable" idea, but we've been pining for a face off specialist for a long time and now we have one. I think Kruger could be more than just a 4th line centre and if I were Stan I would look at several other options before losing him.

I'm surprised how many people so readily give up on Kruger. He brings something different that the others but he does bring something useful. I get the whole "who is more replacable" idea, but we've been pining for a face off specialist for a long time and now we have one. I think Kruger could be more than just a 4th line centre and if I were Stan I would look at several other options before losing him.
- DarthKane

The question was framed by Eli as which of the three goes first; Leddy, Saad or Krugman. I don't think the answers to a bar-type question constitute "giving up" on Krugman. I placed him first to go in that hypothetical, but I don't accept the premise that one of the three has to go. There's too many variables to answer these question at this point. In the meantime, I'm very happy that Krugman is a Hawk. However, I think his limit is the bottom six because he has trouble putting the ol' biscuit in the basket. He's had a couple tries at playing at 2C and things didn't go too well, to my recollection.

The question was framed by Eli as which of the three goes first; Leddy, Saad or Krugman. I don't think the answers to a bar-type question constitute "giving up" on Krugman. I placed him first to go in that hypothetical, but I don't accept the premise that one of the three has to go. There's too many variables to answer these question at this point. In the meantime, I'm very happy that Krugman is a Hawk. However, I think his limit is the bottom six because he has trouble putting the ol' biscuit in the basket. He's had a couple tries at playing at 2C and things didn't go too well, to my recollection.
- mohel

The question was framed by Eli as which of the three goes first; Leddy, Saad or Krugman. I don't think the answers to a bar-type question constitute "giving up" on Krugman. I placed him first to go in that hypothetical, but I don't accept the premise that one of the three has to go. There's too many variables to answer these question at this point. In the meantime, I'm very happy that Krugman is a Hawk. However, I think his limit is the bottom six because he has trouble putting the ol' biscuit in the basket. He's had a couple tries at playing at 2C and things didn't go too well, to my recollection.
- mohel

Kruger is likely a bottom 6 guy, you're right. But I think he should be centring the 3rd line. McNeill, Danualt and Nordstrom could replace Kruger but time will tell.

For the long term I still see Versteeg as the most expendable on the team. I would rather get rid of Bickell over Versteeg but that would be a much more difficult deal for Stan to make. From what I've read Bickell's NTC limits him to 15 teams, so it's not out of the question.

Kruger is likely a bottom 6 guy, you're right. But I think he should be centring the 3rd line. McNeill, Danualt and Nordstrom could replace Kruger but time will tell.

For the long term I still see Versteeg as the most expendable on the team. I would rather get rid of Bickell over Versteeg but that would be a much more difficult deal for Stan to make. From what I've read Bickell's NTC limits him to 15 teams, so it's not out of the question.
- DarthKane

All good points, but that damn Eli asked a very specific question and got cranky when someone tried to weasel out! From a more serious point-of-view, your points are what I was getting at when I mentioned that there were too many variables to really answer that question now. Big injuries, sudden development at Rockford or on the Hawks, sudden bed-crapping at either place, aging, a bigger cap than anticipated, a smaller cap than anticipated, and (maybe most importantly) team results over the next year and a half, can all have an effect on who stays and who goes.

But in case Elbows is lurking, I'm guessing that Regin and PMB are here for the next several years....

All good points, but that damn Eli asked a very specific question and got cranky when someone tried to weasel out! From a more serious point-of-view, your points are what I was getting at when I mentioned that there were too many variables to really answer that question now. Big injuries, sudden development at Rockford or on the Hawks, sudden bed-crapping at either place, aging, a bigger cap than anticipated, a smaller cap than anticipated, and (maybe most importantly) team results over the next year and a half, can all have an effect on who stays and who goes.

But in case Elbows is lurking, I'm guessing that Regin and PMB are here for the next several years....
- mohel

Two top 6 forwards for a fourth round pick?! What a steal by Stan!

The question was framed by Eli as which of the three goes first; Leddy, Saad or Krugman. I don't think the answers to a bar-type question constitute "giving up" on Krugman. I placed him first to go in that hypothetical, but I don't accept the premise that one of the three has to go. There's too many variables to answer these question at this point. In the meantime, I'm very happy that Krugman is a Hawk. However, I think his limit is the bottom six because he has trouble putting the ol' biscuit in the basket. He's had a couple tries at playing at 2C and things didn't go too well, to my recollection.
- mohel

I'd let Leddy go first. Not based on talent but on bang for your buck. If Oduya leaves and Leddy goes in to the top 4 the formula that's been working for 2 years with top 4 defense goes right out the window

I'd let Leddy go first. Not based on talent but on bang for your buck. If Oduya leaves and Leddy goes in to the top 4 the formula that's been working for 2 years with top 4 defense goes right out the window
- rollpards19

I think Leddy fetches A LOT in return should Stan choose to shop him. I think his upside as a puck-moving defenseman is very high and my guess is a lot of GMs feel similarly. I believe Leddy will be playing long after Oduya is out of the NHL and his true potential probably won't be reached for another few years so, all things being equal, I don't think there's any choice if the choice is between which one of those two to keep, though salary cap concerns may mandate keeping Oduya and moving Leddy.