THANK YOU!!!!

Who cares about Kevin Hayes and why do we care he chose the easy route to fulfill his dream of playing in the NHL? My god. All these posts about him being a bust or punk or whatever else are OLD.

The guy saw a team in Chicago with a limited short term chance to play in the NHL. I could care less he ran. Did we get a pick for him? I think we did.

This may shock some people.....but....not everyone in hockey thinks the Hawks are the cat's meow. I know.....surprisingly, and I'll let the bashing beginning.

Embraer
- Ogilthorpe2

Id' rather fly myself then fly in a turbo prop plane.

And I HATE to fly.

Obviously, but he's vastly overpaid and when people start whining this fall or next summer about "why did this guy have to go" you can stare right at that albatross of a contract and mutter profanity....like I do.

1 good playoff run. He's the Robert Horry of hockey, and even that comparison is being too kind.

If Bickell doesn't put up SOLID numbers THIS year, he should be at the very top of the list to be dealt, organizational size depth be damned.

Perspective is everything!!

Had Hayes signed with the Hawks, it wouldn't even been a story worthy of reporting in hockey circles.

Had Hayes been signed and then offered up to the Ranger fan base in a trade proposal, we would have been laughed at for the scraps we were returning.

Today Ranger fans are pencilling Hayes into their lineup.

Does anyone know if Chicago will participate in one of those pre- camp prospect tournaments - for example, the Traverse City Tournament.

The games would be only about a week away? The NYR playing in Traverse City may feature Kevin Hayes. Imagine Chicago in that group of teams. You could boo vociferously when Hayes is skating. But in recent years that is not the Tournament Bowman has put the prospects through and through.
- jhawk59

Sept.13-16 Leafs rookie tournament in London Ontario featuring the hawks, penguins, senators as well as the host leafs.

Perspective is everything!!

Had Hayes signed with the Hawks, it wouldn't even been a story worthy of reporting in hockey circles.

Had Hayes been signed and then offered up to the Ranger fan base in a trade proposal, we would have been laughed at for the scraps we were returning.

Today Ranger fans are pencilling Hayes into their lineup.
- 67hawks

In the big picture all that matters about Kevin Hayes or any other player drafted by any team is that they fulfill their potential. The higher they are drafted the longer they get to show what they can do (e.g. Kyle Beach). But to make an NHL team and stick, the player eventually has to deliver the goods.

Give me the Andrew Shaw example of making the grade any day. Time to move on from Hayes like Stanbow decided awhile ago.

Obviously, but he's vastly overpaid and when people start whining this fall or next summer about "why did this guy have to go" you can stare right at that albatross of a contract and mutter profanity....like I do.

1 good playoff run. He's the Robert Horry of hockey, and even that comparison is being too kind.

If Bickell doesn't put up SOLID numbers THIS year, he should be at the very top of the list to be dealt, organizational size depth be damned.
- SteveRain

Pretty sure Bickell understands that he needs to put more effort forth during the regular season. I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume it was his injury last year that really slowed him down a majority of the season.

He had another decent run in last seasons playoffs so I don't think you can really say he's had one good playoff run. The skill is there, just a matter of being consistent which I think he can be.

Pretty sure Bickell understands that he needs to put more effort forth during the regular season. I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume it was his injury last year that really slowed him down a majority of the season.

He had another decent run in last seasons playoffs so I don't think you can really say he's had one good playoff run. The skill is there, just a matter of being consistent which I think he can be.
- teh_HAWKZ

He played with two braces and it showed. When he played with one he was still hampered. Sure he had doctors clearence to play but if his critics have ever played competitively they might understand what he and Versteeg worked thru. Look no further than D Rose. It is mental as much as physical. I believe the Hawks are giving both a chance to stay here knowing the upside.

Id' rather fly myself then fly in a turbo prop plane.

And I HATE to fly.
- SteveRain

What's wrong with TP's?

What's wrong with TP's?
- Ogilthorpe2

I just think a lot of people are so used to larger planes that TP freak them out

they're loud, shakier (more subject to choppy flights and turbulence with the much lighter weight), more cramped, etc

most of them are pretty damn old too, like Wilbur Wright era, but most people dont realize how old the modern 737's and such are anyway

He played with two braces and it showed. When he played with one he was still hampered. Sure he had doctors clearence to play but if his critics have ever played competitively they might understand what he and Versteeg worked thru. Look no further than D Rose. It is mental as much as physical. I believe the Hawks are giving both a chance to stay here knowing the upside.
- Cup-Bearer

A healthy Bickell and Versteeg will make a huge difference for the team. If they can be effective wingers on the 3rd line then that leaves Kruger, Smith, Morin and Regin for the 4th line. That's the depth we need for a long successful playoff run.

He played with two braces and it showed. When he played with one he was still hampered. Sure he had doctors clearence to play but if his critics have ever played competitively they might understand what he and Versteeg worked thru. Look no further than D Rose. It is mental as much as physical. I believe the Hawks are giving both a chance to stay here knowing the upside.
- Cup-Bearer

Oh, I still play and I understand what both of you are saying.

Bickell needs to better and more consistent to help ease the goal production from other depth members.

Big year from him.

I just think a lot of people are so used to larger planes that TP freak them out

they're loud, shakier (more subject to choppy flights and turbulence with the much lighter weight), more cramped, etc

most of them are pretty damn old too, like Wilbur Wright era, but most people dont realize how old the modern 737's and such are anyway
- FourFeathers773

Meh. Right tool for the job. There are hundreds of flights flown by jets every day that probably should be a turbo-props, from an economic and environmental standpoint. The ignorant traveling public won't put up with it though. Due mainly to misperceptions of jets being newer, and safer, they insist on flying one. Meanwhile, the jet burns 2-3 times more fuel while arriving only 5-10 minutes earlier, and then the people complain about the price of their ticket.

Meh. Right tool for the job. There are hundreds of flights flown by jets every day that probably should be a turbo-props, from an economic and environmental standpoint. The ignorant traveling public won't put up with it though. Due mainly to misperceptions of jets being newer, and safer, they insist on flying one. Meanwhile, the jet burns 2-3 times more fuel while arriving only 5-10 minutes earlier, and then the people complain about the price of their ticket.


- Ogilthorpe2

I always laugh when people complain about how old the props are or look

yet they are completely fine to get on the jets that have the old ash trays in the arm rest still there sealed shut

like they forget how long ago smoking on planes was outlawed...

I always laugh when people complain about how old the props are or look

yet they are completely fine to get on the jets that have the old ash trays in the arm rest still there sealed shut

like they forget how long ago smoking on planes was outlawed...
- FourFeathers773

Delta's still flying DC-9's built in the mid-60's.

Meh. Right tool for the job. There are hundreds of flights flown by jets every day that probably should be a turbo-props, from an economic and environmental standpoint. The ignorant traveling public won't put up with it though. Due mainly to misperceptions of jets being newer, and safer, they insist on flying one. Meanwhile, the jet burns 2-3 times more fuel while arriving only 5-10 minutes earlier, and then the people complain about the price of their ticket.


- Ogilthorpe2

Ogi, correct me if I'm wrong but from a piloting standpoint, the turbo prop is a lot safer (i.e., easier for the pilot to control and land) than a jet in the event of mid-air equipment failures, no?

Correct me again if I'm wrong, but if they eventually replace all the hydraulics/moving parts, isn't a 50 year old plane basically as safe as a ten year old one? Just probably not as comfortable for passengers?

Meh. Right tool for the job. There are hundreds of flights flown by jets every day that probably should be a turbo-props, from an economic and environmental standpoint. The ignorant traveling public won't put up with it though. Due mainly to misperceptions of jets being newer, and safer, they insist on flying one. Meanwhile, the jet burns 2-3 times more fuel while arriving only 5-10 minutes earlier, and then the people complain about the price of their ticket.


- Ogilthorpe2

I fly a LOT with SWA. I know some of the planes are old, and I always look at the skin of the plane as I board to see if it's cracked or fraying to determine how old the plane is....at least in my mind. I'm no expert.

However, I would assume the peace of mind like when I flew home a few weeks ago from Omaha after having a "ground delay" due to the weather, then our pilot got us in the air, only to having dodge massive cumulus nimbus clouds (ended up being the funnel that was spotted in DeKalb) on my way back. Now with a jet, I felt a helluva lot safer then hearing the grinding/whining noise of a turbo prop.

I also would hope that if a jet struck a bird it might have a better chance of not having engine failure compared to some prop plane.

I also have ZERO problem with burning up fuel or paying higher costs for riding in a jet. I'm not a fan of the pencil jet, that American Eagle flies, 1 and 2 seating arrangements.....

You also have to take into account that every weekend @sshole who thinks he's a pilot gets himself a sesna, and then every Monday you click on Yahoo and those @ssholes are crashing into buildings or god knows what else because they shouldn't be in the air. THAT is my biggest fear. I had a buddy who was a lfight instructor at Lewis who I played softball with who should up green to our games as his students tried to navigate those little planes and damn near killed him.

I won't fly on a prop/propeller plane. Not unless you flew me... I did fly once in a propeller plane on a fishing trip to Canada. Got to sit shut-gun and have a ton of respect for pilots. I couldn't do it.

A lot of "sour grapes" around here.

There's a guy - good size, maybe needs to improve his skating - very good college year - maybe because of his line mates, maybe a cause of his line mates' success - and we're relegating him already to an AHL backwater or worse - and saying a 54th pick in next year's class could be better.

Jeez - let it go - no one has seen him play a minute of pro puck - we sound like the spoiled children we're accusing him of being.
- StLBravesFan

Right, no one has seen him play a minute pro, but outside this board, many have anointed him some kind of budding superstar.

Here's where I will not criticize the Hawks for their drafting skill over size. Skating deficiencies, generally, are hard to over come and are often what separate successful pros from junior and NCAA stars. Size can, to a degree, be added through maturation and conditioning.

Now, if you're starting out at 5'10", 160, ugh, dunno. That's an uphill slog to today's NHL.

But I also agree, meh. Maybe he ends up appreciably better than his brother, more likely not. Who cares? I hope the Hawks grab a nice prospect with the comp pick.

Ogi, correct me if I'm wrong but from a piloting standpoint, the turbo prop is a lot safer (i.e., easier for the pilot to control and land) than a jet in the event of mid-air equipment failures, no?
- John Jaeckel

I thought the leer jet or whatever is supposedly the safest.

I would think you are right John. I would think a pilot could glide a prop plane down a helluva better then a jet in case of an emergency. then again, you look back to the disaster in Buffalo on that regional prop plane where the pilot over rid the system and barrel rolled into the subdivision.

Meh. Right tool for the job. There are hundreds of flights flown by jets every day that probably should be a turbo-props, from an economic and environmental standpoint. The ignorant traveling public won't put up with it though. Due mainly to misperceptions of jets being newer, and safer, they insist on flying one. Meanwhile, the jet burns 2-3 times more fuel while arriving only 5-10 minutes earlier, and then the people complain about the price of their ticket.


- Ogilthorpe2

Next door neighbor is a pilot for SWA. I laugh each time he tells me how people rip him a new one for delays. Never got that. LIke the pilots want to sit there on the tarmack or at the gate just because.

Exactly....I wish Kevin the best of luck and it's a compliment to the Hawks that he felt he couldn't make this team any time soon with their farm system and current roster.

I doubt Hayes will be Cam Neely but I also think he wont' be out of the league in 2 years.

Oh well.....back to debating sharp vs leddy vs oduya vs rozsival vs versteeg vs bickell.

I fly a LOT with SWA. I know some of the planes are old, and I always look at the skin of the plane as I board to see if it's cracked or fraying to determine how old the plane is....at least in my mind. I'm no expert.

However, I would assume the peace of mind like when I flew home a few weeks ago from Omaha after having a "ground delay" due to the weather, then our pilot got us in the air, only to having dodge massive cumulus nimbus clouds (ended up being the funnel that was spotted in DeKalb) on my way back. Now with a jet, I felt a helluva lot safer then hearing the grinding/whining noise of a turbo prop.

I also would hope that if a jet struck a bird it might have a better chance of not having engine failure compared to some prop plane.

I also have ZERO problem with burning up fuel or paying higher costs for riding in a jet. I'm not a fan of the pencil jet, that American Eagle flies, 1 and 2 seating arrangements.....

You also have to take into account that every weekend @sshole who thinks he's a pilot gets himself a sesna, and then every Monday you click on Yahoo and those @ssholes are crashing into buildings or god knows what else because they shouldn't be in the air. THAT is my biggest fear. I had a buddy who was a lfight instructor at Lewis who I played softball with who should up green to our games as his students tried to navigate those little planes and damn near killed him.

I won't fly on a prop/propeller plane. Not unless you flew me... I did fly once in a propeller plane on a fishing trip to Canada. Got to sit shut-gun and have a ton of respect for pilots. I couldn't do it.
- SteveRain

Couple of things, I do know that some horrible crashes in models like 757's happened because the jets are so automated, the pilot literally can do nothing when a rudder freezes or something like that. I do agree that the props are scary in bouncy weather, but that kind of thing, unless it's wind shear on take off or landing rarely causes horrific accidents.

Nothing more fun than riding in a Beaver or an Otter on a Canada fly in. It's beautiful to see the landscape below you and anticipate hooking up with a monster pike.

Did one once up in the NWT, heavy fog and bouncy weather, had to fly 100 miles just over the trees, with 15 hungover guys coming back to Yellowknife from the lodge.

After we got out, they probably hosed down the inside from the barf. SAME trip, Jean Chretien, then Canadian PM was in Yellowknife negotiating a treaty with the Dogrib Second Nations, and a goose flew into the engine of a jet and it crashed.

This.

Hayes got to this position as a result of a quirk of circumstances... he was quite mediocre for three college seasons, then had a stellar senior year. if he had been stellar as a Frosh/Soph, he might have been playing in Rockford 2 years ago. If he was mediocre as a senior, he'd likely be playing in Rockford this upcoming year. But the combination of mediocre early and stellar late got him to this free agency situation AND in demand.

Now if you were the Hayes family, sitting in April of 2014 with his stellar senior season, do you move down the road to sign w the Hawks, or do you test that free agency in a couple months, look for the best fit, and maybe even an easier path to the big leagues. I know there are a lot more arguments here to consider, like does he owe the Hawks loyalty for them working with him over the last several years.

But ultimately, if you're on this site and bashing him for being a selfish, immature, me first athlete because he decided to embrace this free agency opportunity, I think your view is clouded by a little bias for the Indianhead. If I were his dad, i'd have guided him to go through the process he just went through. I couldn't tell you at all whether I like the Rangers selection, or whether the Hawks might have been a better choice. I don't know organization depths that intimately. But he took the available option of looking around, and made the selection he thought was the best fit for him.

Frankly, I applaud the loyalty shown by Johns to the organization. If I were Stephen Johns' dad, I'd have recommended the same path as KHayes.

Delta's still flying DC-9's built in the mid-60's.
- Ogilthorpe2

Isn't someone still flying DC-3s somewhere?

The problem with flying - to me - is not the old(er) planes - I would think if they weren't safe, the airlines wouldn't fly them (and don't accuse me of drinking the Kool-Aid - there is great incentive for airlines to fly safe planes).

It's what happens inside the planes that drive me nuts: the cramped seating, the old seats where you're sitting right on the hard board under it because there's no cushioning left, the inadequate overhead storage.

But - cramming 30%-40% more people on airplanes than was usual thirty years ago is how the airlines make money these days.