I think you are missing the point of WIN NOW.

Aside from Teuvo, all the guys project as bottom 6 in the forward group and maybe 3rd pairing for D. The prospects that are worth getting called up do get called up quickly AND STICK -- Hammer (age 21), Saad (20), Shaw (20), Leddy (19), Teuvo (20). All of them saw maybe half a year in Rockford… International talent makes is quickly, too, as Kruger came over from Sweden at age 21. The only "late" bloomers were Kris Versteeg at age 22 and Bryan Bickell at age 24. How are those last two working out?

Now look at the "in the system" roster on nhl.com:
http://blackhawks.nhl.com...htm?srt=age&type=prospect

If you organize it by age by clicking on the age column, you see several players grouped at the top who are already at the age of 22 and on the last year of their ELC deals. Don't you think the Hawks FO and Coach Q can probably evaluate talent pretty well and know that certain players may have reached their threshold and may not have a shot at cracking the uber-talented Hawks roster?? When they get traded at this point, they are not being given away for nothing... Bowman shipped an older Clendening to Vancouver because he had no chance here and got back a 3-year-younger prospect/asset (Forsling, I believe) who may have a higher ceiling than Clendening. Johns was traded with Sharp for CAP SPACE (an asset) plus two NHL players. If McNeill, Ross, etc. go with Bickell for the asset of cap space, then maybe they have a genuine shot at cracking a less-talented NHL roster as a bottom-6 player.

Were the Hawks energized when Ryan Hartman decimated the poor NJ Devil schmuck on Hartman's first shift? Sure… And hopefully, since he is only 20, they keep him in the system for a couple for years.

But the Hawks will always be WAY MORE ENERGIZED by having teammates who are really friggin' good at hockey. Those teammates may not be prospects but rather astute college signings like Kyle Baun, who either makes the team this year or is shipped out at age 23. Or astute international signings like Artemi Panarin (also 23). Panarin will either adjust and be a genuine contributor or will "ship himself out" by going back to Russia.

Again… look carefully at the argument. NHL-ready prospects in the Hawks system MAKE the team. Non-NHL ready prospects get traded to other NHL teams who field NHL teams with AHL players as 4th-liners or 3rd-pairing D-men. And those teams don't even make the playoffs, let alone advance, let alone get to the final, let alone win, let alone win:

3 CUPS IN 6 YEARS, BABY!!
- DMChi2010

Well done
you have ability to do your own blog

Also when you draft late in rounds the GM is playing the board. The Hawks ranked TT really high, when he slipped they didn't hesitate. Similar with Saad, Mcneil and Danault.

Then it is a matter of hoping others were wrong and you are right.
- Al

One of the reasons I was surprised that they didn't grab Oliver Kylington when he dropped this year. They must have really wanted Graham Knott. Reports are Kylington has impressed the Flames enough to want to keep him here. Also surprised me that they didn't move 1-2 players for more picks in 2015. Leads me to believe the injury situation for Bickell (maybe Versteeg too) prevented it. Thought they might move the rights to Nordstrom. They also drafted size this year to... Sort of and uncharacteristic draft for them.

Worth a read:

http://www.mynhltraderumo...ckhawks-top-10-prospects/

Anyone have a list of the UFA defensemen for next season? I'm just wondering if the class will be strong or not.
Although I do not want to trade Seabs, wondering what his trade value would be at the TDL this season. Any smart GM will at least window shop.
- powerenforcer

Meh....

http://www.spotrac.com/nh...ents/2016/ufa/defenseman/

We know who will be at the top of the list and the Hawks won't move Seabrook at the deadline unless they aren't going to make the playoffs.
- Al

If Seabrook isn't signed and they let him walk for nothing then they will be rebuilding sooner rather than later. I guess they will look at it as another shot at a cup but an asset like that has to bring a return in a cap system. They have no replacements for Seabs and there are none available in free agency. Maybe a couple stop gaps like Hamuis/Johnson may help but that type of band aid lines up things for a hard fall in a few years.

So Quennville thinks Kruger is essential to winning a cup, but Crawford not so much, eh? Um, ok... I guess that's why they pay 4th line centres so much more than starting goalies.
- mcmasterkev

Try reading the blog without just looking for some interpretation you can nail the blogger on. Oh wait, forgot who I was addressing. Never mind.

Worth a read:

http://www.mynhltraderumo...ckhawks-top-10-prospects/
- walleyeb1

Thanks, Tikhonov isn't on that list?

I would think trading Crawford is the best combination of clearing cap space, not including prospects and getting something good in return. It leaves a question mark at goalie, but if you can find a reasonably priced guy that will push Darling I think they would be fine.

I would also take a long look at Hartman and if it looks as though he is ready I would move Shaw. I would like to keep Shaw, but you can't keep everyone forever.

The main problem I see with going young is that Q doesn't like young players and tends to bury them on the bench. I don't want to see Keith logging 30+ minutes a game during the regular season.

Edit:

I find it to be a problem that so few of the prospects on that list are their own draft picks.

If Seabrook isn't signed and they let him walk for nothing then they will be rebuilding sooner rather than later. I guess they will look at it as another shot at a cup but an asset like that has to bring a return in a cap system. They have no replacements for Seabs and there are none available in free agency. Maybe a couple stop gaps like Hamuis/Johnson may help but that type of band aid lines up things for a hard fall in a few years.
- tredbrta

They won't let Seabrook walk. Their is just too much mutual respect between both sides. The Hawks are a class organization and so is Seabrook. If by some small chance they can't get it done, they will ship him out on his terms with the Hawks getting a massive return. Just can't see that happening.

I would think trading Crawford is the best combination of clearing cap space, not including prospects and getting something good in return. It leaves a question mark at goalie, but if you can find a reasonably priced guy that will push Darling I think they would be fine.

I would also take a long look at Hartman and if it looks as though he is ready I would move Shaw. I would like to keep Shaw, but you can't keep everyone forever.

The main problem I see with going young is that Q doesn't like young players and tends to bury them on the bench. I don't want to see Keith logging 30+ minutes a game during the regular season.

Edit:

I find it to be a problem that so few of the prospects on that list are their own draft picks.
- pjm901

Name one reasonably priced, available goalie, currently with a team having room for a $6MM salary, which is a team on the list of teams CC would go to, that is as good as Crawford and good enough to push Darling, and is not eligible for a new contract in the next three to four years.

Yeah. Not gonna happen.

So Quennville thinks Kruger is essential to winning a cup, but Crawford not so much, eh? Um, ok... I guess that's why they pay 4th line centres so much more than starting goalies.
- mcmasterkev

You seem to be suggesting that Q has said the opposite...that CC isn't essential...but Q has never remotely intimated such a thing.

Any discussion of Kruger only concerns Kruger, because he is the RFA and remains a question mark.

...and last I checked Crawford is still under contract.

Ryan Stanton has signed with the Capitals...

...1 year, 2-way deal.

Thanks, Tikhonov isn't on that list?
- BetweenTheDots

Tikhonov is 27 and has played in the NHL. Not a prospect.

4 out of the 10 in that report were free agent signings.

I would think trading Crawford is the best combination of clearing cap space, not including prospects and getting something good in return. It leaves a question mark at goalie, but if you can find a reasonably priced guy that will push Darling I think they would be fine.

I would also take a long look at Hartman and if it looks as though he is ready I would move Shaw. I would like to keep Shaw, but you can't keep everyone forever.

The main problem I see with going young is that Q doesn't like young players and tends to bury them on the bench. I don't want to see Keith logging 30+ minutes a game during the regular season.

Edit:

I find it to be a problem that so few of the prospects on that list are their own draft picks.
- pjm901

Considering where they draft that is hardly a problem. The fact they are getting many of the top free agent prospects is a plus IMO.

Ryan Stanton has signed with the Capitals...

...1 year, 2-way deal.
- ArlingtonRob

1 year, 2-way deals are something that will be up Stan's alley.... soon... once he gets his cap sitch figured out.

Name one reasonably priced, available goalie, currently with a team having room for a $6MM salary, which is a team on the list of teams CC would go to, that is as good as Crawford and good enough to push Darling, and is not eligible for a new contract in the next three to four years.

Yeah. Not gonna happen.
- Return of the Roar

Ya never know Roar, if you add a 3rd team into the scenario.

I think most every team in the division would love Crow, especially Winnipeg.

Spitballin on your question.

Edmonton? Talbot.

Cam Ward? 1 year left at 6.3 mil.

Islanders? Halak at 4.5 mil thru 2017-18.

Philly? Mason at 4.1 thru 2016-17.

Ottawa? Anderson at 4.2 thru 2017-18.

SJ? Martin Jones at 3 mil thru 2017-18.

Toronto? Riemer at 2.3 thru 2015-16. Bernier is an RFA.

Ya never know Roar, if you add a 3rd team into the scenario.

I think most every team in the division would love Crow, especially Winnipeg.

Spitballin on your question.

Edmonton? Talbot.

Cam Ward? 1 year left at 6.3 mil.

Islanders? Halak at 4.5 mil thru 2017-18.

Philly? Mason at 4.1 thru 2016-17.

Ottawa? Anderson at 4.2 thru 2017-18.

SJ? Martin Jones at 3 mil thru 2017-18.

Toronto? Riemer at 2.3 thru 2015-16. Bernier is an RFA.
- Mr Ricochet

Every single one of these guys is a downgrade, so out of the box the Hawks are worse in net with Darling plus any of them versus CC plus Darling.

With what may shape up to be an equally porous, if not worse SOG against squad up front, to me it is too big of a risk IF the FO is in win again mode.

The answer is finding a taker for 29 plus another $2-2.5MM.

I would think trading Crawford is the best combination of clearing cap space, not including prospects and getting something good in return. It leaves a question mark at goalie, but if you can find a reasonably priced guy that will push Darling I think they would be fine.

I would also take a long look at Hartman and if it looks as though he is ready I would move Shaw. I would like to keep Shaw, but you can't keep everyone forever.

The main problem I see with going young is that Q doesn't like young players and tends to bury them on the bench. I don't want to see Keith logging 30+ minutes a game during the regular season.

Edit:

I find it to be a problem that so few of the prospects on that list are their own draft picks.
- pjm901

Don't forget - because of their success, Hawks haven't had a lottery pick since 2008; highest picks since then have been: 28, 24, 18/26, 18, 30, 20, 54.

They've also picked up Kruger (5th round), Saad (2nd), Shaw (5th), Shaw 5th) thru the draft, plus several that are on that list (Daneault, McNeil).

Drafts haven't been bad....

Every single one of these guys is a downgrade, so out of the box the Hawks are worse in net with Darling plus any of them versus CC plus Darling.

With what may shape up to be an equally porous, if not worse SOG against squad up front, to me it is too big of a risk IF the FO is in win again mode.

The answer is finding a taker for 29 plus another $2-2.5MM.
- Return of the Roar

Question, with the roster that won the cup 3/in 6, if you replaced Crow with any of those names, would the Hawks still win the cup....??
exclude, Jones & Talbot

I would think trading Crawford is the best combination of clearing cap space, not including prospects and getting something good in return. It leaves a question mark at goalie, but if you can find a reasonably priced guy that will push Darling I think they would be fine.

I would also take a long look at Hartman and if it looks as though he is ready I would move Shaw. I would like to keep Shaw, but you can't keep everyone forever.

The main problem I see with going young is that Q doesn't like young players and tends to bury them on the bench. I don't want to see Keith logging 30+ minutes a game during the regular season.

Edit:
You really need to embrace the red BUD.
I find it to be a problem that so few of the prospects on that list are their own draft picks.
- pjm901

Question, with the roster that won the cup 3/in 6, if you replaced Crow with any of those names, would the Hawks still win the cup....??
exclude, Jones & Talbot
- Ur Not Me

Not bloody likely.

Every single one of these guys is a downgrade, so out of the box the Hawks are worse in net with Darling plus any of them versus CC plus Darling.

With what may shape up to be an equally porous, if not worse SOG against squad up front, to me it is too big of a risk IF the FO is in win again mode.

The answer is finding a taker for 29 plus another $2-2.5MM.
- Return of the Roar

I think the theory would/might be we think Darling can be the guy but aren't sure. In that scenario these guys MIGHT fit. An open competition for the #1 and insurance if Darling isn't ready, or can't handle the #1 spot.

Also the Hawks I'm assuming are thinking 3 steps ahead and one of those steps is signing Seabs to an extension. to do that it MIGHT be Crow that is the sacrificial lamb.

If Darling plays 30 games next year like he played the few games he did this year I'm guessing Crow's is the salary to go.

I think the theory would/might be we think Darling can be the guy but aren't sure. In that scenario these guys MIGHT fit. An open competition for the #1 and insurance if Darling isn't ready, or can't handle the #1 spot.

Also the Hawks I'm assuming are thinking 3 steps ahead and one of those steps is signing Seabs to an extension. to do that it MIGHT be Crow that is the sacrificial lamb.

If Darling plays 30 games next year like he played the few games he did this year I'm guessing Crow's is the salary to go.
- Mr Ricochet

I could see that next year, after a bigger Darling sample size. Although not if we're going to be in a playoff run.

Don't forget - because of their success, Hawks haven't had a lottery pick since 2008; highest picks since then have been: 28, 24, 18/26, 18, 30, 20, 54.

They've also picked up Kruger (5th round), Saad (2nd), Shaw (5th), Shaw 5th) thru the draft, plus several that are on that list (Daneault, McNeil).

Drafts haven't been bad....
- StLBravesFan

It's still not good that the first rounders aren't panning out. Obviously you're not going to get one of the top players in the draft at where they are going to pick, but you still should be able to find someone productive in the first round.

Name one reasonably priced, available goalie, currently with a team having room for a $6MM salary, which is a team on the list of teams CC would go to, that is as good as Crawford and good enough to push Darling, and is not eligible for a new contract in the next three to four years.

Yeah. Not gonna happen.
- Return of the Roar

I didn't say it would be easy to find that guy, but unexpected things do happen. Who thought Darling was going to play well enough to allow them to trade Raanta? Every option they have with trading people to clear the cap room they need has its own drawbacks.