Good point and I'd normally agree with this (the idea you leave suspect character guys alone), but the Blackhawks internal leadership is so damn strong that I have that much confidence in our core leadership group that they would take that 'questionable' player and turn him into a star.

Wasn't Brandon Saad thought to be 'questionable' coming out of the draft...he'd disappear in "big games"?

You have Kane, going from a punky kid to a totally mature winner.

Bickell...the epitome of laziness...now showing more and more work ethic by the day

That is why a player like Mark McNeil...the book on him is the talent is TOTALLY there, but he can be lazy, take shifts off...what he needs is a little medication from Doctors Toews and Seabrook, as well as the rest of the staff.

SO...Evander Kane would give the Hawks snarl, size, grit, and talent...IF he'd join the party. However, even assuming he could be 'reformed', I JUST DONT see the fit. His cap hit and position make it questionable.

Positions I see the Hawks looking at in off-season
L2-Center-As always
Bottom 6 winger-PK guy, speed, and size
Bottom pairing D-man

Bottom 6 players could come from the farm...
- kwolf68

True but all the players you name are home grown and the Hawks problem. Not sure you want to trade for a player who you know is a headcase. That said I sure like his skill and speed.

Judge, Jury and Executioner. Same role my wife took on after we got married.
- Canardhawk

Who knows they may know more than Q in some regards. There is more than one way to win a championship team. If Q was infallible, he would never have been fired from previous coaching gigs. Should winning two Cups give Q a pass? Sure. Does that not mean he can never be questioned? What do you think?
- faustus1500

Of course he can be questioned but I said some fans think they know more than he does. If any of us did we'd be making a million plus dollars a year coaching in the NHL, wouldn't we?

Any trade of Sharp (and I believe it's very logical) should...

REDUCE the Cap + Fill L2-Center hole or add another top 4 D-man

If trading Sharp doesn't do the above there is no reason to trade him. Evander Kane does not meet above criteria.
- kwolf68

So, you'd like another team to give the Hawks a legit top six center that is underpaid (and therefore cap-friendly), AND you'd like them to take an older higher-paid player in return. Does this other GM really work for the Hawks? C'mon....

I totally agree about the strength of the Hawks culture and its ability to make a player better. It has limits, though; such as getting Pirri to play defense a little more. But if I were Stan, I'd be willing to take a chance on a "bad apple" and see if said bad apple has the balls to do his bad apple-ness with Toews, Seabrook, Kane, Hossa and Keith to answer to.

That said, E. Kane would cost the Hawks a core player to fit within the cap and I don't see Stan breaking up the core just to shuffle the deck in the next couple years. For cap reasons, maybe, but adding Kane would certainly not be a cap reason.
Bottom 6 players could come from the farm..
- mohel

Trading from the core can be done and at SOME POINT has to be done (as new players ENTER the core, older players will be moved out), but I don't see the logic in it for THIS player.

Well, we are going to see what kind of moxy this team has tonight on the road for game 6

We gotta stick our head in the mouth of the alligator and not flinch

Its really time the leaders on the team like Sharp, Seabrook, Keith, and Toews get on the team about playing like champions

If they get blown out or handled by LAK pretty easily tonight, it will be a major letdown. You can handle losing a close one, but if you cant show up to play for a game like tonight, a clash of the titans, then you cant blame anyone but yourself

So, you'd like another team to give the Hawks a legit top six center that is underpaid (and therefore cap-friendly), AND you'd like them to take an older higher-paid player in return. Does this other GM really work for the Hawks? C'mon....
- mohel

You find that diamond in the rough...last year Columbus was shopping Derek Brassard...Kyle Turris, who at first was immature then became a talented but injury plagued player, was available for next to nothing and it appears he has finally figured it out. Frans Neislon a couple years ago could have been had for a song. Those are just 3 off the top of my head.

If your scouting is so good...FIND that under-paid and possibly underperforming (maybe due to injury or talent around) player who can immediately step into the role and blossom. It's not a sure thing I realize, but shrewd organizations are always moving, always improving, and NEVER resting on their laurels.

As much as I like stirring the pot with trades..........Phuck that for now!, LET'S WIN 6MORE GAMES 1ST!

Well, we are going to see what kind of moxy this team has tonight on the road for game 6

We gotta stick our head in the mouth of the alligator and not flinch

Its really time the leaders on the team like Sharp, Seabrook, Keith, and Toews get on the team about playing like champions

If they get blown out or handled by LAK pretty easily tonight, it will be a major letdown. You can handle losing a close one, but if you cant show up to play for a game like tonight, a clash of the titans, then you cant blame anyone but yourself
- FourFeathers773

Its going to be a tough one. I sure hope the Hawks can find a way to get to a game 7 .

The Kings have lead equity they will be sending their D 30 feet into the O zone to try and grab the lead , the Hawks have to counter attack AND FINISH THEIR 2 on 1 opportunities. The 2 on 1 will be available to the Hawks tonight because LAK is going to be crazy aggressive.

I really hope Regin is in for Versteeg and even Morin in for Bollig. Bollig had a bette rgame in game 5 but Id love for a fresh Morin to be used in the bottom 6 and put some real pressure on the LAK D men.

Regin in for Versteeg is a no brainer . ALL Versteeg does is turn the puck over at both blue lines . He is awful at this point in time . He needs to be scratched.

Trading from the core can be done and at SOME POINT has to be done (as new players ENTER the core, older players will be moved out), but I don't see the logic in it for THIS player.
- kwolf68

This is true, but that older, expensive player is not going to get you much in return because the goal is to lose salary rather than add it. For example, trading Sharp after next season will be a salary-dump for the most part and will only make sense if there's a top six kid ready in the system. Who is that kid? Trading for E. Kane would be adding salary and losing a core player to add him - not a cap-related move.

I see no way Versteeg is in tonight.

You find that diamond in the rough...last year Columbus was shopping Derek Brassard...Kyle Turris, a talented but injury plagued player, was available for next to nothing. Frans Neislon a couple years ago could have been had for a song. Those are just 3 off the top of my head.

If your scouting is so good...FIND that under-paid and possibly underperforming (maybe due to injury or talent around) player who can immediately step into the role and blossom. It's not a sure thing I realize, but shrewd organizations are always moving, always improving, and NEVER resting on their laurels.
- kwolf68

I understand your thinking and I have thrown this idea out there as well. If you can manage to get said player onto the Hawks you may uncover that player to find your diamond or a lump of coal. So log as you can get this 'project' on the cheap and that there is a consensus amongst the scouting staff that there is reasonable upside it may be worth the chance. On the flip side you always have to ask why the other team wants to get rid of him. It's a gamble. And a player I would like to see the Hawks gamble on is Josh Bailey of the Isles.

Any trade of Sharp (and I believe it's very logical) should...

REDUCE the Cap + Fill L2-Center hole or add another top 4 D-man

If trading Sharp doesn't do the above there is no reason to trade him. Evander Kane does not meet above criteria.
- kwolf68

No

Well, we are going to see what kind of moxy this team has tonight on the road for game 6

We gotta stick our head in the mouth of the alligator and not flinch

Its really time the leaders on the team like Sharp, Seabrook, Keith, and Toews get on the team about playing like champions

If they get blown out or handled by LAK pretty easily tonight, it will be a major letdown. You can handle losing a close one, but if you cant show up to play for a game like tonight, a clash of the titans, then you cant blame anyone but yourself
- FourFeathers773

You talk as if the "moxy" of this team is in question. Absolutely wrong, imo. We already know the team is made of championship stuff. We'll find out tonight if they beat the Kings in game six. Who this team is has already been written in stone.

This is true, but that older, expensive player is not going to get you much in return because the goal is to lose salary rather than add it. For example, trading Sharp after next season will be a salary-dump for the most part and will only make sense if there's a top six kid ready in the system. Who is that kid? Trading for E. Kane would be adding salary and losing a core player to add him - not a cap-related move.
- mohel

Which is why I trade Sharp now and not then, because he gets you even less value in a salary dump.

I would not advocate moving Sharp, but his replacement is already in house. If you remove Sharp we still have a full set of top 6 wings...

Kane-Hossa-Bickell-Saad

Sharp IS a very good player, IS a high character guy who I'd hate to see move out, but it may be the long term best move for the program and there would absolutely be a team out there seeing his skillset and leadership as another piece to the puzzle.

That said, I am tired of just GIVING away players because of our cap situation (see Brian Campbell) so I'd certainly be AGAINST trading Sharp if it was for a freaking Rusty Olesz...

I understand your thinking and I have thrown this idea out there as well. If you can manage to get said player onto the Hawks you may uncover that player to find your diamond or a lump of coal. So log as you can get this 'project' on the cheap and that there is a consensus amongst the scouting staff that there is reasonable upside it may be worth the chance. On the flip side you always have to ask why the other team wants to get rid of him. It's a gamble. And a player I would like to see the Hawks gamble on is Josh Bailey of the Isles.
- paulr

That's the difficult game you play. We have already GIVEN away high priced players for absolute tomato cans (see Soupy's trade). We got NOTHING for BC...but we did improve the cap which allowed us to quickly turn things around.

I consider this very similar to that situation... I was a HUGE Brian Campbell fan and if he was on our team since 2010, we'd have at least another Cup....OR we'd have one fewer.

So I advocated trading him. It sucks, because HE WAS A CORE guy...but we have to pay more than just a few people. Losing Toews, Kane, Seabrook, Keith are NOT options that should even be open for discussion. So you find a player making big coin that you can replace in house if possible. UNLIKE Campbell, we have Sharp's replacement already here (Saad). I find it hilarious people think there is NO WAY Sharp is getting moved...so the Hawks are gonna pay a third line winger almost 6 mpy? Yea right.

When Campbell left it got really ugly on our blueline after the top couple guys. But we made a pretty quick run back and the extra cap flexibility allowed that to happen.

I like Josh Bailey as well.

How's it going, Cup? I agree on 87.7. Also agree on Regin going in. What channel number is the NHL on XM or Sirius?
- mohel

XM is channel 92,I think Sirius is 207????

Which is why I trade Sharp now and not then, because he gets you even less value in a salary dump.

I would not advocate moving Sharp, but his replacement is already in house. If you remove Sharp we still have a full set of top 6 wings...

Kane-Hossa-Bickell-Saad

Sharp IS a very good player, IS a high character guy who I'd hate to see move out, but it may be the long term best move for the program and there would absolutely be a team out there seeing his skillset and leadership as another piece to the puzzle.

That said, I am tired of just GIVING away players because of our cap situation (see Brian Campbell) so I'd certainly be AGAINST trading Sharp if it was for a freaking Rusty Olesz...
- kwolf68

I would trade Sharp for a legit 2C. Not sure you'll be able to identify a "diamond in the rough" that the other team doesn't know is good (or has the potential to be good). If the other team knows he's good, why would they trade him for Sharp; who is entering his mid-30's, makes a lot of money and is likely injured at the moment? Sounds great, but I don't think it sounds all that realistic.

Which is why I trade Sharp now and not then, because he gets you even less value in a salary dump.

I would not advocate moving Sharp, but his replacement is already in house. If you remove Sharp we still have a full set of top 6 wings...

Kane-Hossa-Bickell-Saad

Sharp IS a very good player, IS a high character guy who I'd hate to see move out, but it may be the long term best move for the program and there would absolutely be a team out there seeing his skillset and leadership as another piece to the puzzle.

That said, I am tired of just GIVING away players because of our cap situation (see Brian Campbell) so I'd certainly be AGAINST trading Sharp if it was for a freaking Rusty Olesz...
- kwolf68

I brought this issue up a few weeks ago and it, understandably, is a very touchy subject with Hawk fans,myself included. From a strictly pragmatic point of view, moving out core veterans just as they are on the downside of their careers, (however that can be determined) for a bluechip prospect is the best way to ensure the team doesn't get old all at once and that you improve the skill level at the same time. From an emotional side the core players are beloved by the fan base who can't bear the thought of the player being traded. I fall right in the middle, on one hand I want to see the team constantly updated and younger, on the other I don't want to see any of the core players I really like traded away. Lucky for us we have a Management group who will have to wrestle with that dilemma.

I brought this issue up a few weeks ago and it, understandably, is a very touchy subject with Hawk fans,myself included. From a strictly pragmatic point of view, moving out core veterans just as they are on the downside of their careers, (however that can be determined) for a bluechip prospect is the best way to ensure the team doesn't get old all at once and that you improve the skill level at the same time. From an emotional side the core players are beloved by the fan base who can't bear the thought of the player being traded. I fall right in the middle, on one hand I want to see the team constantly updated and younger, on the other I don't want to see any of the core players I really like traded away. Lucky for us we have a Management group who will have to wrestle with that dilemma.
- paulr

Excellent post Paul. With me I love what all our boys have done for this program...lifting two Cups is something I never thought I'd see. I remember those chithole days of the late 90s/early 2000s...

The player I hated moving? Andrew Ladd. When he was moved I was sick. He provided the grit, moxie, toughness, the edge that blended perfectly with our skilled guys. The efffing hell you say? Laddy is traded?

We traded other VERY popular and Very talented players (Soupy, Buff). When you live as close to the edge as the Hawks, a few things happen

-you are spending big money on great players which presumably leads to success. Check
-as players improve and demand raises, some players are pushed off that edge

The Blackhawks "core" should change as players not only get older, but new players demand to be included in that core. If we had no salary cap, that's one thing...but with a Cap the core can never be static because at some point you get diminishing returns and if you begin emotionally choosing the aging veteran over the now-more-skilled young and cheaper player you will get the results you deserve...failure, but at least 'the core' will be together.

Columbus needs some veteran scoring leadership with their youth especially with Umberger leaving

hopefully we can swindle Sharp for Ryan Johansen

ahh...

one can dream

A big RESOUNDING NO on Evander Kane. None. Go away. Don't need some immature kid in that locker-room and I can only imagine the price to get him would be sky high.

I see Eli is a ref.....congrats, I think.

If the hawks can win this game tonight, they will this series. Going to take their best effort as the Kings are treating this like a game 7. We haven't seen the best yet from Hossa, Sharp, Keith, Seabrook, and Crawford in this series. Hossa has been fantastic off the score sheet, but we need some scoring production tonight.

Stay out of the box....and lets hope the Hawks learned from the last time they were in LA that good starts don't mean $hit if they don't capitalize on the scoring chances.

That's the difficult game you play. We have already GIVEN away high priced players for absolute tomato cans (see Soupy's trade). We got NOTHING for BC...but we did improve the cap which allowed us to quickly turn things around.

I consider this very similar to that situation... I was a HUGE Brian Campbell fan and if he was on our team since 2010, we'd have at least another Cup....OR we'd have one fewer.

So I advocated trading him. It sucks, because HE WAS A CORE guy...but we have to pay more than just a few people. Losing Toews, Kane, Seabrook, Keith are NOT options that should even be open for discussion. So you find a player making big coin that you can replace in house if possible. UNLIKE Campbell, we have Sharp's replacement already here (Saad). I find it hilarious people think there is NO WAY Sharp is getting moved...so the Hawks are gonna pay a third line winger almost 6 mpy? Yea right.

When Campbell left it got really ugly on our blueline after the top couple guys. But we made a pretty quick run back and the extra cap flexibility allowed that to happen.

I like Josh Bailey as well.
- kwolf68

The high priced player you mention, Brian Campbell was traded to alleviate cap space because his contract (at the time) was one of the worst in the NHL. Comparing that situation with trading from the current core is an apples to oranges comparison. Patrick Sharp is the trending name to be traded because of the poor post season he is having. Yes, your philosophy makes sense...in order to keep the Hawks from becoming old and stale you must trade to replenish and keep the window open....I get it. However, just as one great post season does not define a player neither does one not so great post season. Let us not forget a few months ago he was an olympian.....he's been an All Star MVP and more or less even though streaky, one of the most consistent Hawk players during the cup run. You also mention these diamonds in the rough or these up n coming 2C's as if they will be a guarantee of success. The fixation on a 2C and how this exposes the Hawks is also comical....any team that is loaded down the middle has deficiencies in other places....lack of D depth....lack of overall depth...hole in the net. In the salary cap era you can't build a fantasy hockey team. You can't have it all. A team has to ask themselves what is most important and some teams feel being loaded down the middle is more important than their 5-6-7 dmen or their fourth line. Also trading for a diamond in the rough has risks....a risk most teams will find not worthy if it means giving up one of your top forwards. A team also has to consider injuries.....Say we trade Sharp for a young 2C....and then Toews gets concussed....that forward depth you speak of isn't so deep now. Plus all these up n comers you feel are a good fit....I think we have better talent currently in the system.....and lastly Brandon Pirri was also considered an up n comer.....

I brought this issue up a few weeks ago and it, understandably, is a very touchy subject with Hawk fans,myself included. From a strictly pragmatic point of view, moving out core veterans just as they are on the downside of their careers, (however that can be determined) for a bluechip prospect is the best way to ensure the team doesn't get old all at once and that you improve the skill level at the same time. From an emotional side the core players are beloved by the fan base who can't bear the thought of the player being traded. I fall right in the middle, on one hand I want to see the team constantly updated and younger, on the other I don't want to see any of the core players I really like traded away. Lucky for us we have a Management group who will have to wrestle with that dilemma.
- paulr

The issue is comes down to a couple things, to me. One....is there a part to replace the out-going player? Two....what is the upcoming salary for that player? Trading a core player without a replacement while the core player is still good is a no go, imo. You're also not going to get anything for a declining core member who has a lot of salary left. So restocking won't happen.

Making generalized statements like "trade core players while they're still good enough" get us nowhere other than circular arguments. Who goes? And for who? Then we can talk a bit more about apples to apples...

Excellent post Paul. With me I love what all our boys have done for this program...lifting two Cups is something I never thought I'd see. I remember those chithole days of the late 90s/early 2000s...

The player I hated moving? Andrew Ladd. When he was moved I was sick. He provided the grit, moxie, toughness, the edge that blended perfectly with our skilled guys. The efffing hell you say? Laddy is traded?

We traded other VERY popular and Very talented players (Soupy, Buff). When you live as close to the edge as the Hawks, a few things happen

-you are spending big money on great players which presumably leads to success. Check
-as players improve and demand raises, some players are pushed off that edge

The Blackhawks "core" should change as players not only get older, but new players demand to be included in that core. If we had no salary cap, that's one thing...but with a Cap the core can never be static because at some point you get diminishing returns and if you begin emotionally choosing the aging veteran over the now-more-skilled young and cheaper player you will get the results you deserve...failure, but at least 'the core' will be together.
- kwolf68

I too was most upset about the team losing Ladd. He would still be a vital player for the Hawks a guy who can play on any line, he skates well has decent skill, was physical, would drop the floves if needed, could play in any situation and he provided leadership. Like I said it's a touchy subject and most of us use emotion instead of logic when talking about our team. And that's OK because we don't have to make these decisions, merely comment on them and pretend we know better.