Or, even before that, the BJs signed Boll to a ridiculous 1.7 mil per year for 3 years. Or Burish at about the same cost. And as a fourth liner he makes a shade over a million this year anyway.

Bollig got about what I expected, and I'm fine with that money going his way with the cap hopefully jumping up a lot.
- prd797

I forgot about Boll. Good point.

I forgot about Boll. Good point.
- EKolb13

He just tweeted that he is offended by your forgetting of him, and will now forget about you in retaliation...

He just tweeted that he is offended by your forgetting of him, and will now forget about you in retaliation...
- mohel

How will I ever live with myself now?

It's Ryan Reeves money. Bollig would have gotten south of $1 million per season had the Blues not given Reeves a fat contract.
- EKolb13

Great call Eli......you've been saying this for months.

Post #1700 and something...

Great call Eli......you've been saying this for months.
- UnnamedSource

Well, for the last month at least...

Whatever. It was pretty obvious Pirri wasn't going to play anyway. I also wonder why SB couldn't have gotten just a wee bit more for him, unless it's part of some broader, tacit agreement with Tallon involving both the earlier Steeger deal and some future consideration...

... Kane should really catch fire in the playoffs, knowing he has both Zeus and Regin anchoring the 2C position.

I miss Bolland.

I hear what you're saying Rollpards ( And I agree about Kruger being better than Ott.) But here's what I'm getting at: There's a deficiency in the Hawks line-up. Mike Babcock was able to take Zetterberg and eliminate Toews and if he had anything more than the mediocre lineup that the Wings were he probably would have knocked the Hawks out. The Kings were too beat up and so were the Bruins but the Bruins could have easily won that series too.

Now teams are more loaded than they were last year: And the deficiency not only remains, it might be worse. Why should the hawks have to cover up that or merely "get by" with a Peter Regin…..?
- yahoodi

How about........just give the Hawks credit for winning 2 Stanley Cups without a true #2 center. If this happened or that happened.....but they didn't happened. The Hawks won 2 Cups not because their opponents were beat up....it's because the Hawks have the deepest team....still do. Deepest D.....and when healthy have 4 lines.....do they have holes.....yes but....so does every one else.

Let's see what Regin has and lets all withhold judgement until we get at least an 8-10 game sample size.

Remember when we all pooped on Oduya when he was acquired?....Well we don't win the cup without him....and he has been mostly solid.

StanBo has made two deals......Vsteeg and Regin......is there another one out there....let's wait and see.

How about........just give the Hawks credit for winning 2 Stanley Cups without a true #2 center. If this happened or that happened.....but they didn't happened. The Hawks won 2 Cups not because their opponents were beat up....it's because the Hawks have the deepest team....still do. Deepest D.....and when healthy have 4 lines.....do they have holes.....yes but....so does every one else.
- UnnamedSource

Sharp was really good at center down the stretch... Like really good in 2010 soooo to say they didn't have a legitimate 2C is not true.

Last year they were pretty fortunate they were healthier than everyone down the stretch. That gaping hole up the middle is getting a little stupid.

How about........just give the Hawks credit for winning 2 Stanley Cups without a true #2 center. If this happened or that happened.....but they didn't happened. The Hawks won 2 Cups not because their opponents were beat up....it's because the Hawks have the deepest team....still do. Deepest D.....and when healthy have 4 lines.....do they have holes.....yes but....so does every one else.
- UnnamedSource

I think both you and Yahoodi have some valid points here. Sure, the Hawks have won two cups without a permanent #2C. However, with the way teams in the west could be loading up at the TDL (St. Louis already did), perhaps not having a real #2C could be a detriment? Or it may not mean poop at all?

How about........just give the Hawks credit for winning 2 Stanley Cups without a true #2 center. If this happened or that happened.....but they didn't happened. The Hawks won 2 Cups not because their opponents were beat up....it's because the Hawks have the deepest team....still do. Deepest D.....and when healthy have 4 lines.....do they have holes.....yes but....so does every one else.
- UnnamedSource

Rollpards made a great point earlier about the Hawks style of play. Some (perhaps many) here bemoan the lack of red ass on the Hawks, and might say the Hawks were "lucky" they didn't have to play a red ass beast at full health in the playoffs. Well, maybe playing a serious red ass first style results in your team getting tore up, too, and lessens your chances of winning. Perhaps playing a speed game first increases the chances your team stays healthy enough to advance.

Let's see what Regin has and lets all withhold judgement until we get at least an 8-10 game sample size.

Remember when we all pooped on Oduya when he was acquired?....Well we don't win the cup without him....and he has been mostly solid.

StanBo has made two deals......Vsteeg and Regin......is there another one out there....let's wait and see.
- UnnamedSource

Three deals, my friend. How quickly we forget about #37....

I think both you and Yahoodi have some valid points here. Sure, the Hawks have won two cups without a permanent #2C. However, with the way teams in the west could be loading up at the TDL (St. Louis already did), perhaps not having a real #2C could be a detriment? Or it may not mean poop at all?
- EKolb13

St Louis still can't score consistently. I like the trade they made and do think they are better but like the Kings....they still need to put the puck in the net.

Rollpards made a great point earlier about the Hawks style of play. Some (perhaps many) here bemoan the lack of red ass on the Hawks, and might say the Hawks were "lucky" they didn't have to play a red ass beast at full health in the playoffs. Well, maybe playing a serious red ass first style results in your team getting tore up, too, and lessens your chances of winning. Perhaps playing a speed game first increases the chances your team stays healthy enough to advance.
- mohel

Y E S!

Sharp was really good at center down the stretch... Like really good in 2010 soooo to say they didn't have a legitimate 2C is not true.

Last year they were pretty fortunate they were healthier than everyone down the stretch. That gaping hole up the middle is getting a little stupid.
- fattybeef

If Teravainen dodes get a shot this season, and if Teravainen can produce and help this team, and if Teravainen is more suited at wing rather than center, as wiz says - could Sharp be forced to move to center?

St Louis still can't score consistently. I like the trade they made and do think they are better but like the Kings....they still need to put the puck in the net.
- UnnamedSource

I think the acquisitions of Miller and Ott will make the Blues a better team, but it doesn't mean that they're a better team than the Hawks, or anyone else with a legit shot at the cup.

If Teravainen dodes get a shot this season, and if Teravainen can produce and help this team, and if Teravainen is more suited at wing rather than center, as wiz says - could Sharp be forced to move to center?
- EKolb13

Ask it a different way, too:

IF TT gets a shot, and IF TT CAN'T produce to help the team (this year), and IF Handzus can't handle it, could Sharp be forced to move to center for this year's PO?

Post #1700 and something...
- EKolb13

This one is #1717.

If Teravainen dodes get a shot this season, and if Teravainen can produce and help this team, and if Teravainen is more suited at wing rather than center, as wiz says - could Sharp be forced to move to center?
- EKolb13

No his defense is too far gone. Q doesn't trust him much defensively anymore.

I think the acquisitions of Miller and Ott will make the Blues a better team, but it doesn't mean that they're a better team than the Hawks, or anyone else with a legit shot at the cup.
- EKolb13

Miller a minor (but unproven) upgrade in goal. Ott and Stewart are a wash, imo.

You're "shocked" about a difference of $300K per year? Seems like a small difference to be shocked about, especially against a cap that in the first year of the deal will be $71M.
- mohel

Ok....no need parse intent here. I should have said surprised. Does that make you feel better?

St Louis still can't score consistently. I like the trade they made and do think they are better but like the Kings....they still need to put the puck in the net.
- UnnamedSource

Why does everyone say the Blues can't score when they're third in the NHL in goals per game? They score enough, it's just spread out among more players, and losing Stewart and gaining Ott is probably almost a wash in terms of pt. production, given that Stewart didn't quite live up to expectations in STL.

Ask it a different way, too:

IF TT gets a shot, and IF TT CAN'T produce to help the team (this year), and IF Handzus can't handle it, could Sharp be forced to move to center for this year's PO?
- StLBravesFan

Also, good points.

Ok....no need parse intent here. I should have said surprised. Does that make you feel better?
- eburgio

I don't see the contract as out of line at all, and to expect a legit NHL player on an elite team to take less than $1M for the next three years while the market is going wild is reading yesterday's newspaper, imo. He signed for $1M in last season's dollars.