Today during Bowman's exit interview he mentioned some Swedish defenseman that will be coming over and ready to play. I believe he is referring to 2 in particular, and maybe a 3rd.

Robin Norell, Carl Dahlstrom are for sure ready to battle for a spot. The third guy would be Gustav Forsling, who outperformed both of the aforementioned, but is still raw and could use some more time developing.
- Hawks_49

They may be able to find some guys in house but the way their D is structured, they really need a veteran because you can rarely get by with two rookies on the same pair.

Duncan Keith will be very near 34 by the time next years playoffs arrive. I think the days of relying on him for 30 minutes a night plus are just about over.

I'm not buying that. And Hawk fans should hold Bowman accountable if these guys are all no better than the other two fringe Swedes form this year.

Forsling has some legit offensive skill, but he is tiny, as is Norell. Dahlstrom? Haven't heard much but I don't think he's anything special.
- John Jaeckel

Dahlstrom is a stay-at-home D that can play minutes and not be an idiot. I'd expect him as the #5 D by October. Forsling, I don't expect to see for a few years. I just threw his name out there because he is performing at a very high level

That's debatable. He has some mobility issues. Short area quickness/acceleration/ top speed is only average. He is a solid player in a lot of ways, and a lot better on his natural side. Definitely part of the solution, but not a replacement for what Oduya did over 200 feet of ice.
- John Jaeckel

Agreed. If TVR plays #4, the Hawks need a #5/6 D pair that can eat up about 15-17 minutes per night each. TVR was asked to do far too much and was always flipping sides(mostly on his off side, as you say)

Yeah, even if Daley would've figured out how to fit into the system, he would not have been a big shot blocking threat.

Honestly, with the exception of a couple of mistakes, I didn't think TVR played that bad...

You guys have a ton of love for Johnny Oduya. Is he your Bryce Salvador?
- eggsegan

Oduya improved significantly in Chicago. His game fit Q's system like a glove: blocked shots, good first pass out of the zone, learned when to pinch, could pitch in offensively, very mobile, learned better positional play, killed penalties.

Yeah, even if Daley would've figured out how to fit into the system, he would not have been a big shot blocking threat.

Honestly, with the exception of a couple of mistakes, I didn't think TVR played that bad...

You guys have a ton of love for Johnny Oduya. Is he your Bryce Salvador?
- eggsegan

JO fit the 'Hawks system. Took awhile for him after the '12 TDL and PO mishaps vs PHX. But he paired well with Hammer. And blocked shots. And was on the shut down pair. And opened up opportunity for Duncs and Seabs. A big loss Stan failed to backfill.

They may be able to find some guys in house but the way their D is structured, they really need a veteran because you can rarely get by with two rookies on the same pair.

Duncan Keith will be very near 34 by the time next years playoffs arrive. I think the days of relying on him for 30 minutes a night plus are just about over.
- fattyboubatty

Yeah. I'd like to debate that, but you're probably right. It'd be nice to see him around 27-29 minutes during the playoffs instead of forcing him to play more than half of every game. It's clearly catching up to him.

Dahlstrom is a stay-at-home D that can play minutes and not be an idiot. I'd expect him as the #5 D by October. Forsling, I don't expect to see for a few years. I just threw his name out there because he is performing at a very high level
- Hawks_49

I hear ya, 49.

At that level, I look for some skill or attribute that jumps out as potentially NHL caliber. Forsling has it offensively, can pass and skate and REALLY shoot. In those regards, reminds me a bit of Ryan Ellis. It's his size and play in his end that would be huge question marks. Norell from what i know is a similar type of player but not as productive as Forsling. I honestly don't know a lot about Dahlstrom except he was originally described as a Hjalmarsson style player—then I heard the organization had soured on him last year, unless I am confusing him with someone else.

I hear ya, 49.

At that level, I look for some skill or attribute that jumps out as potentially NHL caliber. Forsling has it offensively, can pass and skate and REALLY shoot. In those regards, reminds me a bit of Ryan Ellis. It's his size and play in his end that would be huge question marks. Norell from what i know is a similar type of player but not as productive as Forsling. I honestly don't know a lot about Dahlstrom except he was originally described as a Hjalmarsson style player—then I heard the organization had soured on him last year, unless I am confusing him with someone else.
- John Jaeckel

Yeah Forsling is still really raw from what I've seen and read about him. But the skill is there. Could turn into a stud. Norell, admittedly don't know much about him other than that he is a mobile defenseman who tends to be smart with the puck.

Dahlstrom is the real guy they need to step in next year. He is a big boy. 6'4 227 as listed on Elite Prospects. Good positional player who uses his stick well and isn't afraid to get nasty. Whether that translates to NHL or not is the question. Oh, and if Dahlstrom soured on the front office last year, I don't think he did this year. He got a two year extension from them last month I believe.

That's debatable. He has some mobility issues. Short area quickness/acceleration/ top speed is only average. He is a solid player in a lot of ways, and a lot better on his natural side. Definitely part of the solution, but not a replacement for what Oduya did over 200 feet of ice.
- John Jaeckel

Yeah he's no Oduya thats for sure and the Hawks are at their best when their D is mobile. But i think if we can get better overall depth 4-6, he can easily be one of those 3 guys assuming the other 2 aren't absolute trash that forces him to play too many minutes.

"But as was also pointed out STL had slightly more high danger chances."

That was the series right there. What little business the Hawks did around Elliott was primarily Anisimov, Shaw and Panarin. Kane was nowhere near the net except for the Game 5 winner, Toews line generated some chances and couldn't finish them.

Blues' prescription was simple— no cutesie running around the perimeter. Get it in, get it on net, look for rebounds and open guys in the slot. it worked. Especially when 91 was on the ice.

Notice how much of the Blues' offense was off the rush or starting at least with a blue line shot. The Hawks were way too cute, and their 5-7 defense was exposed: an old man, a slow giant rookie, a one-way rookie.
- John Jaeckel

tried to weave that in the game 7 stuff.....the goals were created from out high to start.

Yeah. I'd like to debate that, but you're probably right. It'd be nice to see him around 27-29 minutes during the playoffs instead of forcing him to play more than half of every game. It's clearly catching up to him.
- Hawks_49

His regular season TOI was around 25 minutes which is where I think you want him at this stage of his career, maybe pushing it a little here or there but they rode him pretty hard in the playoffs. It did catch up to him, despite having a game off and coming in well rested.

I wouldn't be overly happy with the moves Stan bo has made were I a Hawk fan. He's handed out a lot of big money and let a lot of quality players walk for little in return. If Panarin had not fallen into his lap, they would have had a hard time even making the playoffs.

Agreed. If TVR plays #4, the Hawks need a #5/6 D pair that can eat up about 15-17 minutes per night each. TVR was asked to do far too much and was always flipping sides(mostly on his off side, as you say)
- Hawks_49

Exactly this

That's debatable. He has some mobility issues. Short area quickness/acceleration/ top speed is only average. He is a solid player in a lot of ways, and a lot better on his natural side. Definitely part of the solution, but not a replacement for what Oduya did over 200 feet of ice.
- John Jaeckel

I see him as a very good 5 who can spot fill as a 4. Just my limited viewing 2 cents (this is based on how Q uses minutes I should clarify)

Much better first pass. Better positional defenseman but a little less physical.
- eggsegan

I agree, hence the notch above....

His regular season TOI was around 25 minutes which is where I think you want him at this stage of his career, maybe pushing it a little here or there but they rode him pretty hard in the playoffs. It did catch up to him, despite having a game off and coming in well rested.

I wouldn't be overly happy with the moves Stan bo has made were I a Hawk fan. He's handed out a lot of big money and let a lot of quality players walk for little in return. If Panarin had not fallen into his lap, they would have had a hard time even making the playoffs.
- fattyboubatty

Certainly Panarin was crucial. Not sure if Panarin fell into his lap so much as Bowman worked his ass off to get him to sign a deal with bonuses involved. Bowman has made some mistakes, but I'll give him credit for that move.

Crawford is the reason the Hawks were in contention for the division title, and I think if he didn't get injured and miss that much time at the end of the regular season, the Hawks would have won the division. He carried the team on his back for most of the year.

His regular season TOI was around 25 minutes which is where I think you want him at this stage of his career, maybe pushing it a little here or there but they rode him pretty hard in the playoffs. It did catch up to him, despite having a game off and coming in well rested.

I wouldn't be overly happy with the moves Stan bo has made were I a Hawk fan. He's handed out a lot of big money and let a lot of quality players walk for little in return. If Panarin had not fallen into his lap, they would have had a hard time even making the playoffs.
- fattyboubatty

A couple of observations about Keith: his genetics and natural athleticism are off the charts. I actually think Seabrook will decline (and maybe has already started to) before Keith will. I think Keith is still going to be highly productive and at or near the top of his game for another 4-5 years. He needs a summer off for sure. But he is a freak of nature athletically.

His regular season TOI was around 25 minutes which is where I think you want him at this stage of his career, maybe pushing it a little here or there but they rode him pretty hard in the playoffs. It did catch up to him, despite having a game off and coming in well rested.

I wouldn't be overly happy with the moves Stan bo has made were I a Hawk fan. He's handed out a lot of big money and let a lot of quality players walk for little in return. If Panarin had not fallen into his lap, they would have had a hard time even making the playoffs.
- fattyboubatty

Bowman decided to keep Hjalmarsson over Niemi, he went out and added Oduya and that formed an elite shutdown 2nd pairing that helped them win 2 championships.

He also drafted Saad, Shaw, TT, Kruger, etc to sustain/rebuild forward depth on the fly after having to move so many guys after 2010.

Also adding Vermette and Desjardins last season proved to be HUGE come playoff time.

Went out and found TVR, and was able to salvage Anisimov out of losing Saad to fill in the hole at 2C. That created a hole at top 6 LW, but...

He then landed Panarin and stole Panik for TOR.

Overall its been decidedly more good than bad IMO.

Certainly Panarin was crucial. Not sure if Panarin fell into his lap so much as Bowman worked his ass off to get him to sign a deal with bonuses involved. Bowman has made some mistakes, but I'll give him credit for that move.

Crawford is the reason the Hawks were in contention for the division title, and I think if he didn't get injured and miss that much time at the end of the regular season, the Hawks would have won the division. He carried the team on his back for most of the year.
- Hawks_49

^^^^^

Crawford, PAK line, power play, 3-on-3. Aside from that, they really sucked 5 on 5, which speaks to the point I made above about why they lost the series.

^^^^^

Crawford, PAK line, power play, 3-on-3. Aside from that, they really sucked 5 on 5, which speaks to the point I made above about why they lost the series.
- John Jaeckel

Exactly. And I believe it was you and a few others saying they would be a bubble team this year, and I argued against it. But after the year is over, aside from that win streak... the Hawks really were a bubble team.

^^^^^

Crawford, PAK line, power play, 3-on-3. Aside from that, they really sucked 5 on 5, which speaks to the point I made above about why they lost the series.
- John Jaeckel

During the regular season yes, but I thought they were pretty good 5v5 in the playoff series against STL though, all things considered. Had more 5v5 scoring chances and a far better CF% ratio than they did all regular season long when facing other elite Western teams. STL had more high danger chances but only by a tad.

Bowman decided to keep Hjalmarsson over Niemi, he went out and added Oduya and that formed an elite shutdown 2nd pairing that helped them win 2 championships.

He also drafted Saad, Shaw, TT, Kruger, etc to sustain/rebuild forward depth on the fly after having to move so many guys after 2010.

Also adding Vermette and Desjardins last season proved to be HUGE come playoff time.

Went out and found TVR, and was able to salvage Anisimov out of losing Saad to fill in the hole at 2C. That created a hole at top 6 LW, but...

He then landed Panarin and stole Panik for TOR.

Overall its been decidedly more good than bad IMO.
- SimpleJack

And Troy Brouwer turned into Philip Danault who turned into 5 years spent developing who turned into two mostly wasted rentals at the deadline.

Danault was one of two assets Bowman had left a year ago from dealing Byfuglien, Campbell, Ladd, Versteeg, Sopel, and Brouwer. The other is Gustav Forsling. The rest? Bust prospects and draft picks.

Bowman's had some success. And some failures. Big time.

Never forget: he inherited 19, 88, 4, 7, 2, 10, 81, 50.

Batting .500 the rest of the way, you still do pretty damn good regardless.

Exactly. And I believe it was you and a few others saying they would be a bubble team this year, and I argued against it. But after the year is over, aside from that win streak... the Hawks really were a bubble team.
- Hawks_49

I think the Hawks this season were probably one of the top 5 teams in the NHL. A bubble team is someone like the Wild/Avs that barely makes or just misses the playoffs.

And Troy Brouwer turned into Philip Danault who turned into 5 years spent developing who turned into two mostly wasted rentals at the deadline.

Danault was one of two assets bowman had left a year ago form dealing byfuglien, Campbell, Ladd, Versteeg, Sopel, and Brouwer. the other is gustav Forsling.

Bowman's had some success. And some failures. Big time.

Never forget: he inherited 19, 88, 4, 7, 2, 10, 81, 50.

Batting .500 the rest of the way, you still do pretty damn good regardless.
- John Jaeckel

Still gotta wait and see on Danault, how he progresses. Same with the other Dano.

I'd say the success has been more "big time" than the failures. You're not gonna win the Cup every year. Overall I've been pleased.

His mistakes have been the Sharp trade, and overvaluing Bickell and Rundblad. I would add Timomen on a lighter note but they won the Cup anyways and it really didn't matter, but i do believe they are still paying him 750,000 this year which didn't help.

Other than that he's done a great job and we're still set up pretty well for the future until the core declines.

I think the Hawks this season were probably one of the top 5 teams in the NHL. A bubble team is someone like the Wild/Avs that barely makes or just misses the playoffs.
- SimpleJack

Yeah, we know you won't admit that. But they were eliminated in the first round.
Like . . . The Wild.

I think the Hawks this season were probably one of the top 5 teams in the NHL. A bubble team is someone like the Wild/Avs that barely makes or just misses the playoffs.
- SimpleJack

I think the Hawks found ways to win some games they shouldn't have won, mostly due to the 3-on-3 OT that their skill players can dominate. And Crawford stole them a whole bunch of games this year. One consistent scoring line and a porous defense. They got 100+ points again, but they shouldn't have.