CC gave up 4 goals in 32 minutes on 14 shots. Raanta who has played a handful of games in 6 months came in the game cold and gave up 2 goals in 28 minutes on 16 shots. For my money the guy making $750k did a better job than the guy making $6m
- fvineze

oh for phukn sakes...yeah for one game....craw is your biggest problem but he nowhere near the hawks real problems...

oh for phukn sakes...yeah for one game....craw is your biggest problem but he nowhere near the hawks real problems...
- bogiedoc

He's part of the salary cap problem...his play is not the problem, his cap hit is....

this team better start scoring goals...they are going to need them or its look out below...
- bogiedoc

Agreed though this team's success begins with team defense and they're not playing that at all. And they look even worse when a team with all that skill can't score consistently.

Sorry if someone already posted this. Oduya to miss "weeks".

http://espn.go.com/blog/c...ury?ex_cid=espnapi_public

The top-3 defenseman pairings during Monday’s practice were:
- Duncan Keith with David Rundblad
- Kyle Cumiskey with Michal Rozsival
- Niklas Hjalmarsson with Brent Seabrook
- MNHawk

ahhh chicago?? our problems just got alot worse...or to steal that great line from Jaws: the hawks are going to need a smaller net....

He's part of the salary cap problem...his play is not the problem, his cap hit is....
- EnzoD

no....toews and kanes cap hit next year are the problem

No offense, but your trade proposal might be the worst I've ever seen.
- CBHawks88

Right?

Well, I don't know about the worst, but it was pretty (frank)ing bad. Definitely in the team photo.

no....toews and kanes cap hit next year are the problem
- bogiedoc

True but you cant find #1 Centers and Leading NHL scorers everyday...Goalies with a career .915 save% are all over the NHL and making 1/4 of what Crawford makes

"How do you trade your leading scorer?"

"Who's going to replace his 30+ goals?"



My how quickly things change.

I know you are just the messenger...I gave up listening to that arrogant blowhard many years ago.

What the hell does mr. duke (smartest guy in the room) know about this?? Please explain??
- bogiedoc

As I was saying, he made it pretty clear when he first stated it (and then again when a caller asked him to expand on his initial statement) that there are off and on ice issues with Sharp and that the best step for this team is Sharp no longer being here.

I don't think Bernstein knows anything about hockey and yes he is both arrogant and a blow hard. My only reason to relay this to the board was that despite being a hockey neophyte and an asshat in general, Bernstein knows a lot of people in the FO and people much more in the know that most of us so for him to go in so hard on Sharp, especially as it relates to hockey and his own acknowledged lack of hockey acumen, leads me to believe he knows or has heard some of the same things bandied about here. All of this I was trying to connect the dots in relation to JJ saying in his blog there is a problem in the room and it revolves around one guy.

I would have thought that was self-explanatory from my initial missive but hopefully that's a little more clear for you now.

"How do you trade your leading scorer?"

"Who's going to replace his 30+ goals?"



My how quickly things change.
- Ogilthorpe2

Ogi, you always trade your leading scorer. Thats when their perceived value here is greatest.

no....toews and kanes cap hit next year are the problem
- bogiedoc

Canadian Looney is the problem.

ahhh chicago?? our problems just got alot worse...or to steal that great line from Jaws: the hawks are going to need a smaller net....
- bogiedoc

I just hit on your link. Then hit on one that said 15 richest hockey players ever. Hossa was about 11 or 12. Who is the 7th richest player ever? Brad Richards! And I'm not drunk.

True but you cant find #1 Centers and Leading NHL scorers everyday...Goalies with a career .915 save% are all over the NHL and making 1/4 of what Crawford makes
- EnzoD

success = big $$ contract for players...and when you go to 4 WC finals in 6 years and win 2 cups eventually you pay the price in $$ and the idiotic world of NHL financing with a hard cap....smart and well managed organizations get screwed and end up having to sell off key players that they developed.

would that be Quick at .915, 2.30
or Price at .919, 2.45

success = big $$ contract for players...and when you go to 4 WC finals in 6 years and win 2 cups eventually you pay the price in $$ and the idiotic world of NHL financing with a hard cap....smart and well managed organizations get screwed and end up having to sell off key players that they developed.

would that be Quick at .915, 2.30
or Price at .919, 2.45
- bogiedoc

I'm not a Crawford hater by any means. But when you have 19, 88, 10, 7, 81 all making over 5 mil per year(and that bonehead Bickell at 4 mil), it is not financially responsible to pay a goaltender 6 mil per year. If anything, the sustained success of this group (especially in 2010 with a goalie who turned out to be very mediocre) is in spite of the goalie, not because of him.

As I was saying, he made it pretty clear when he first stated it (and then again when a caller asked him to expand on his initial statement) that there are off and on ice issues with Sharp and that the best step for this team is Sharp no longer being here.

I don't think Bernstein knows anything about hockey and yes he is both arrogant and a blow hard. My only reason to relay this to the board was that despite being a hockey neophyte and an asshat in general, Bernstein knows a lot of people in the FO and people much more in the know that most of us so for him to go in so hard on Sharp, especially as it relates to hockey and his own acknowledged lack of hockey acumen, leads me to believe he knows or has heard some of the same things bandied about here. All of this I was trying to connect the dots in relation to JJ saying in his blog there is a problem in the room and it revolves around one guy.

I would have thought that was self-explanatory from my initial missive but hopefully that's a little more clear for you now.
- PhatJoeSki

no..i am not critical of you at all...your post here adds alot....

when anyone starts going public with vague ineunedo about that there are both on and off ice issues with someone...he needs to be more specific and be accountable than this oh I know more than you know BS and I also know what should be done about it.

oh for phukn sakes...yeah for one game....craw is your biggest problem but he nowhere near the hawks real problems...
- bogiedoc

You know he wet himself and passed out when Crow let in that little dribbler from center ice...

I'm not a Crawford hater by any means. But when you have 19, 88, 10, 7, 81 all making over 5 mil per year(and that bonehead Bickell at 4 mil), it is not financially responsible to pay a goaltender 6 mil per year. If anything, the sustained success of this group (especially in 2010 with a goalie who turned out to be very mediocre) is in spite of the goalie, not because of him.
- EnzoD

i think your point is a good one...coyotes are learning that the hard way with smith...

there is a good argument to be made that stanbow jumped the gun with that extension on craw but also remember the hawks were not very deep in goal tending when they won their 2nd cup.

I'm not a Crawford hater by any means. But when you have 19, 88, 10, 7, 81 all making over 5 mil per year(and that bonehead Bickell at 4 mil), it is not financially responsible to pay a goaltender 6 mil per year. If anything, the sustained success of this group (especially in 2010 with a goalie who turned out to be very mediocre) is in spite of the goalie, not because of him.
- EnzoD

Crawford should have won the Conn Smythe in 2013. He was that (frank)ing good. He outplayed Howard, Quick, and Rask. To say they won in spite of him is wrong on so many levels.

i think your point is a good one...coyotes are learning that the hard way with smith...

there is a good argument to be made that stanbow jumped the gun with that extension on craw but also remember the hawks were not very deep in goal tending when they won their 2nd cup.
- bogiedoc

It's all about the budgeting and when the tough cap choices have to be made (very very soon), who would you rather have, Crawford or Seabrook? Or Crawford or Saad? I think the choice is a fairly easy one...

As I was saying, he made it pretty clear when he first stated it (and then again when a caller asked him to expand on his initial statement) that there are off and on ice issues with Sharp and that the best step for this team is Sharp no longer being here.

I don't think Bernstein knows anything about hockey and yes he is both arrogant and a blow hard. My only reason to relay this to the board was that despite being a hockey neophyte and an asshat in general, Bernstein knows a lot of people in the FO and people much more in the know that most of us so for him to go in so hard on Sharp, especially as it relates to hockey and his own acknowledged lack of hockey acumen, leads me to believe he knows or has heard some of the same things bandied about here. All of this I was trying to connect the dots in relation to JJ saying in his blog there is a problem in the room and it revolves around one guy.

I would have thought that was self-explanatory from my initial missive but hopefully that's a little more clear for you now.
- PhatJoeSki

Heard the same thing you did and also found it interesting in the sense that when the Hawks have lost a few in a row, or are facing the Blues in the playoffs down 2 games and fans are in full panic Defcon 4 mode he usually is calling for calm.

Not that he's a hockey guy but agree with what you say in that it was certainly interesting given the deliverer of the message and context.

Crawford should have won the Conn Smythe in 2013. He was that (frank)ing good. He outplayed Howard, Quick, and Rask. To say they won in spite of him is wrong on so many levels.
- CBHawks88

I'm going to have to disasgree with you there...Kane or, as much as it pains me to say it, Bickell, should have won the conn smythe.

Very reasonable, if this is true!

Darling will be paid $575,000 next season and $600,000 in the 2016-17 season, a source told ESPN.com's Pierre LeBrun. The source believed Darling would be on a two-way deal next season and on a one-way deal the following season.

Heard the same thing you did and also found it interesting in the sense that when the Hawks have lost a few in a row, or are facing the Blues in the playoffs down 2 games and fans are in full panic Defcon 4 mode he usually is calling for calm.

Not that he's a hockey guy but agree with what you say in that it was certainly interesting given the deliverer of the message and context.
- HawkintheD

Yeah, and usually he never even stoops as low as to talk Hawk transactions so for him to go as far as saying that was interesting, especially how he said it.

Bickell should have won the Conn Smythe in 2013. He was that (frank)ing good.
- CBHawks88

Crawford was very good for much of this playoffs. i think it is a little hyperbolic to say that he, in isolation, outplayed all those goalies. And I'm not sure even in isolation you could say he outplayed Howard, who was unbeatable at times in round 2. Crawford also struggled for part of the Boston series. He was very good overall, playing behind a great team. I would not have given him the Smythe. Bickell was a beast, he would have gotten my vote.

Crawford was very good for much of this playoffs. i think it is a little hyperbolic to say that he, in isolation, outplayed all those goalies. And I'm not sure even in isolation you could say he outplayed Howard, who was unbeatable at times in round 2. Crawford also struggled for part of the Boston series. He was very good overall, playing behind a great team. I would not have given him the Smythe. Bickell was a beast, he would have gotten my vote.
- John Jaeckel

JJ at what point does the lack of effort up and down the lineup come back to Q and the coaching staff? they are paid to motivate and prepare the team after all....