Can't forget about Tarasenko hahahah

Hoping for an I-55 series here.
- Jason Millen

Yes!!

JJ,

Any whispers rumbling yet about Stan's plan for Panarin?
- maria_wyeth

I remember seeing an interview with Panarin in the beginning of the season where he says he didn' care about the money so much ... He just wants to get better.
Now all of a sudden he tells the interviewer that the cap situation in Chicago not very good but will discuss contract in summer. To me he sounds like he is posturing and And not very humble about playing for the Hawks and Kaner. I hope I am wrong but Panarins comments down' sound like a" home town discount" will not be part of the discussion with Stan. ..it might be" pay good money or I will walk". The smell of money seem to always change a man. Forget the solace. Good luck Stan !

[url]

IDK, been reading everything here for some time. If I'm Rocky Wirtz, you know the guy that ultimately signs all the checks, and i'm catching "wind" of alleged discord between MY front office and the coaching staff, namely Q. Then i call ALL of them into my office and tell them to either fix it, or find new employment. And that would apply to ALL of them. i would be curious to see what someone like Babcock would do with this team. JJ has hinted on numerous occasions about "too many cooks in the kitchen". If someone like McD. is fouling up hockey ops, Rocky needs to step in and correct that. NOW! As well as any other discord that may exist. This "core" isn't getting any younger. End of story. Thanks.

Bob P.
- BobP.

Agreed 100%, and I know we have the 3cups ,but I am still alittle envious while reading about other teams potential moves and copious amounts of cap space while we are looking at the potential of losing players and replacing them with Rockford slugs and Beer league Clubfoots. Dammmmmmm!

Agreed 100%, and I know we have the 3cups ,but I am still alittle envious while reading about other teams potential moves and copious amounts of cap space while we are looking at the potential of losing players and replacing them with Rockford slugs and Beer league Clubfoots. Dammmmmmm!
- wonthecup10

AMEN BROTHER !!!

Agreed 100%, and I know we have the 3cups ,but I am still alittle envious while reading about other teams potential moves and copious amounts of cap space while we are looking at the potential of losing players and replacing them with Rockford slugs and Beer league Clubfoots. Dammmmmmm!
- wonthecup10

It's inevitable with a cap. Look at all the good teams from the last 6-7 years. Pitt, LA, Bos, Van, Ana, NY. All of them either are or were in cap hell. Some got out of it and are average right now, others have a number of first or second year players that are playing lights out (Pitt, Ana).

The only reason LA is in as good of shape as they are is because they lost Voynov and Richards contract.

IDK if it was Trevor Daley, Trevor Daley's hip, Coach Q, Daley's d-partner, or WHAT THE FRANK was going on the first 20 games of the season, because Trevor Daley looked pretty darn awful. His defensive miscues were frequent, his gap control was nonexistent, and he looked more like a rookie than a 10 NHL veteran. I was very critical of Daley, and I think rightfully so given his performance in the Hawks Indianhead sweater.

We can only guess what happened on/off the ice that resulted in such poor play from Daley. It smells to me like typical Q favorites and goats. I'm assuming Daley came to camp out of shape due to his surgery, never got his skating legs, was on a short leash from Q, and the short leash made him even handle the puck like a hot potato.

I'm watching the playoffs and Daley has been a stud. Playing top pair minutes, driving possession, jumping into the rush to create offense, and making clean breakout/stretch passes. WHAT THE HECK?!?! Missed opportunity this year, especially when you look at the jump Hossa had in games 5-7. I'm at a loss for words about the personnel decisions from Q this year.
- EnzoD

I'm not a be all end all stats guy but they just can't be ignored out of hand. Daley had a 56.4% Corsi in his 29 games with the Hawks. Better in fact than he has with the Pens. http://www.hockey-referen.../players/d/daleytr01.html

It must be noted though that he had 66% offensive zone starts to 33% defensive. That will skew his overall corsi.

It's inevitable with a cap. Look at all the good teams from the last 6-7 years. Pitt, LA, Bos, Van, Ana, NY. All of them either are or were in cap hell. Some got out of it and are average right now, others have a number of first or second year players that are playing lights out (Pitt, Ana).

The only reason LA is in as good of shape as they are is because they lost Voynov and Richards contract.
- Chunk

Don't disagree with this to some extent. All i'm saying is, it's been strongly suggested on this forum that there is perhaps internal strive on the Hawks. If that's true, there is one guy that definitely has the power to "fix" the situation. Again, if true, he owes it to the fans to step up and do just that.

Don't disagree with this to some extent. All i'm saying is, it's been strongly suggested on this forum that there is perhaps internal strive on the Hawks. If that's true, there is one guy that definitely has the power to "fix" the situation. Again, if true, he owes it to the fans to step up and do just that.
- BobP.

Agreed, if true. And even if it isn't true, he needs to be smart, decisive and dare I say it a bit aggressive. He can't wait until a deal comes to him. I also think he needs to pick one. Either do a hockey trade or a salary dump. This whole thing of trying to get cap space and "useful parts". I think is a pipe dream. You won't get enough cap space, and you won't really get a good enough player to make a difference (in my opinion).

Hey, what's Jordan Hendry doing these days...?

I'm absolutely sure that it's true that Bowman's leverage disappeared the longer the summer wore on. Not buying out Bickell appears to have been a very serious error.

I'm far less certain that any GM would have allowed Bowman to dump Sharp and his entire $5.9m cap hit on them, and given Bowman two quality draft picks for his time, too. Because that seems like a mindnumbingly stupid thing to do.
- darklighter

Not buying out Bickell had a huge affect. Especially if it's before the draft. Plus the Sharp deal may have been a diffferent return, with thought JO can be retained. Even TDL approach could have been different.

Hoping for an I-55 series here.
- Jason Millen

Cubs vs ?
Houston - I-55 doesn't go directly there

But that didn't work out to well for you last season, did it?

Not buying out Bickell had a huge affect. Especially if it's before the draft. Plus the Sharp deal may have been a diffferent return, with thought JO can be retained. Even TDL approach could have been different.
- blackhawk24

I believe this too be so true. If they bought out bickell they would have looked to be in a lot better shape and wouldn't have had to trade sharp for that and Verssteeg and Nordstrom. We may have been able to start season with sharpie and johns at the rock with dano which would've given Stanbo more options.

Agreed, if true. And even if it isn't true, he needs to be smart, decisive and dare I say it a bit aggressive. He can't wait until a deal comes to him. I also think he needs to pick one. Either do a hockey trade or a salary dump. This whole thing of trying to get cap space and "useful parts". I think is a pipe dream. You won't get enough cap space, and you won't really get a good enough player to make a difference (in my opinion).

Hey, what's Jordan Hendry doing these days...?
- Chunk

As it looks now, would have much rather looked forward to Dano, Danault ,and Johns all in Hawk uni's going forward, but that turns out to be just a Duck farting in shallow water now. Hey yay, enjoy the Cubs and looking forward to the Bears rebuild, I don't like what I am hearing as far as the front office here and if this guy craps the bed this June/July, look for that cold sore to rear its ugly head come a bad start this October.

so...those total times of 21.00 combined minutes of determined this first round series?
... having Daley there makes the difference even though he won't buy in?

Maybe, don't know about the not buying in but its possible, could be though



It is so very EASY TO PLAY ARMCHAIR GM AFTER THE FREAKING FACT.

To be fair, I hated the Danault trade for Wiese and Fleisch from the second it was announced. Thought they needed top 6 and top 4 Dman. I wouldn't of traded Dano or Danault, but I understand I'm too conservative at the trade deadline. After they got Ladd, I didn't think they needed more bottom 6 guys.

look to the REAL culprits in the loss: Your super star girlfriend Panarin over handling the biscuit and his lack of conviction to SHOOT when he should, and the big guys not getting it over the line.

Not sure what my super star girlfriend means


boo FFggnng hooo that all three adds at forward crapped the bed.
The add ons are NOT the be all cure all, and if they are, you team is not that great.


This I agree with, but if they aren't going to play, you probably could've traded Danault's rights before the draft and get more if you are so hell bent on getting rid of him. I don't have the same opinion as others about him being better the Kruger, I don't believe that at all. I do believe that with Toews, AA, Kruger, Danault, they were set at C for a long time, that hasn't been the case here in a long, long time.

Yes ALL THREE if you really watched.

I wonder if Fleischmann was injured...but any one with craps the bed, so what that is not your core....

They thought daley wasn't the answer and I can live with THEIR decision, not no non insider after thought
- wiz1901

One thing I didn't give credit for in the Daley trade was I believe they gained cap space, its a little confusing to me with the Scuderi stuff in it.

If I critisize Stan (and I'm one of the ones who rarely does) and play armchair GM I go back to the point I made 5 or 6 pages ago. If Stan just made two moves at or before the draft and after the Sadd trade

Buyout Bickell and trade Sharp for a lower round pick. Think JO might have been with the team, Johns also. Shaw could probably be resigned this year

I don't disagree that Kruger brings something to the table but IMO it's easier to replace Kruger then it will to replace Shaw. Yes, the cap has screwed them in that regard, but it's only going to get worse for Stnaley.

If you haven't see the Panarin quotes from the IHF you need to read those. he flat out makes not of the hawks cap situation.

I'll keep saying it Bowman has SOME huge decisions to make to not lose assets he has no replacement for and to fit under the cap. Somebody outside of Shaw is also leaving this summer and it's not going to be just Bickell.
- SteveRain

Rain man: I know your thoughts on Kruger overpay run deep, so this isn't directed at you necessarily. When analyzing Kruger value versus cap hit, you need to consider Krug as $2.6m cap hit. He did the Hawks a BIG favor by accepting $1.5m this year. His $3.1 m cap hit includes makeup for that. If you average that one year $1.5m into this, he really signed for 4 years at about $2.6.

I personally think $2.6m/year is about perfect for Krug. Not a bargain, not an overpay.

Rain man: I know your thoughts on Kruger overpay run deep, so this isn't directed at you necessarily. When analyzing Kruger value versus cap hit, you need to consider Krug as $2.6m cap hit. He did the Hawks a BIG favor by accepting $1.5m this year. His $3.1 m cap hit includes makeup for that. If you average that one year $1.5m into this, he really signed for 4 years at about $2.6.

I personally think $2.6m/year is about perfect for Krug. Not a bargain, not an overpay.
- Cmonalready

But - the cap hit that counts is $3.1MM.

We can debate the state of the defense here for the Hawks, but the #1 issue is that Kane/Toews needed to score more than 1 goal in those 7 games. How many other teams would have taken St Louis 7 games with their 21 million dollar duo putting up 1 goal? How many teams would have won? I think it is a rather short list. Kane got a lot of offensive zone time, and so did Toews by the numbers.

Rain man: I know your thoughts on Kruger overpay run deep, so this isn't directed at you necessarily. When analyzing Kruger value versus cap hit, you need to consider Krug as $2.6m cap hit. He did the Hawks a BIG favor by accepting $1.5m this year. His $3.1 m cap hit includes makeup for that. If you average that one year $1.5m into this, he really signed for 4 years at about $2.6.

I personally think $2.6m/year is about perfect for Krug. Not a bargain, not an overpay.
- Cmonalready

With the year Kruger had, it may have been a better favor if had priced himself out of town and the Hawks could have gotten a bit in return by trading him at his highest value. I've always liked Kruger, but he wasn't worth the 1.5 M for the performance he provided this season.

This season (only talking this season) he was so-so at the dot. Scored exactly 0 goals and wasn't as effective as usual on the PK. He has to bounce back next year, or else his contract is another anchor (not Bickell bad, but not a value) because it is really all about the cap hit/term. The NHL is a business and all about "what have you done for me lately". Kruger may come close to living up to his contract, as he has the work ethic, but the health/talent might hold him back.

This is getting a little silly.

Look up the general numbers for 4C's around the league. Kruger's numbers (save for this season) are on par or slightly ahead of the league average. He's 25, skates well, and is great defensively. His contract is also not out of line with a majority of other similar players in the league. Take the team we just lost to, would you rather have Kruger or Brodziak/Ott?

Similar situation with Seabrook. At the beginning of the year, would anyone truly say that it would be a good idea to get rid of him for someone like Hamonic or Trouba? He just signed his extension and he is slotted right where he should be. The only guys that really out score him and are paid less are Keith and Burns (Burns cap hit is 40k less and is the same age).

I'll grant you that they each did not have their best years this year, but aside from Panarin, Kane and maybe Shaw, who on this team did? Save for about 15-20 games, this team did not really play well. We won on great goaltending, our PP and overtime, when elite skill truly takes over.

I understand the salary and cap hit concerns, but you do have to pay for good players. I'd rather put my money on Seabrook bouncing back (at age 31), than hope that Q likes some new guy. I'd rather have the problems we have than be Vancouver or Colorado right now.

Is there work to be done by the front office? absolutely. Are we likely to lose a player or two we don't want to? yes. Could Stan and Q have handled a few situations better? you know it. Is it worth the effort to grind teeth over deals that are already done? In my opinion, no. Look forward and hope that the office can find another couple of players and create some room.

Whew, no more Lagavulin at 4:15 for me!
- Chunk

I agree with the majority of what you mentioned, but the bolded is flat out incorrect as a FYI. Not saying that I'd let Seabs go for all these guys, but I'd definitely consider it for some.

Players who out scored Seabrook this year and make less:

Burns
Josi
Klingberg
Giordano
OEL
Byfuglien
Barrie (though he is coming off an ELC)

Players who outscored Seabrook and will be making less money next season:

Barrie( Doubt he gets over 6.8 mil personally, but all put him as a possible)
Karlsson
Burns
Josi
Klingberg
Giordano (albeit by 125K, thats 125k the hawks could use)
OEL
Barrie

Players that will likely (basing it off the fact seabrook had a career year this year) outscore Seabs next season, aren't on ELC's, and scored 40+ points this year:

Leddy
Muzzin
Hamilton
Shattenkirk (though his contract is expiring, and will likely get what seabs got)
Krug (RFA this off season, but likely not making over 6)
TJ Brodie
Victor Hedman


I love seabrook, his contract next year is paying him for what he's done, not what he will do. It's not unfair to him, he deserves it most definitely. But his contract isn't a steal.

I agree with the majority of what you mentioned, but the bolded is flat out incorrect as a FYI. Not saying that I'd let Seabs go for all these guys, but I'd definitely consider it for some.

Players who out scored Seabrook this year and make less:

Burns
Josi
Klingberg
Giordano
OEL
Byfuglien
Barrie (though he is coming off an ELC)

Players who outscored Seabrook and will be making less money next season:

Barrie( Doubt he gets over 6.8 mil personally, but all put him as a possible)
Karlsson
Burns
Josi
Klingberg
Giordano (albeit by 125K, thats 125k the hawks could use)
OEL
Barrie

Players that will likely (basing it off the fact seabrook had a career year this year) outscore Seabs next season, aren't on ELC's, and scored 40+ points this year:

Leddy
Muzzin
Hamilton
Shattenkirk (though his contract is expiring, and will likely get what seabs got)
Krug (RFA this off season, but likely not making over 6)
TJ Brodie
Victor Hedman


I love seabrook, his contract next year is paying him for what he's done, not what he will do. It's not unfair to him, he deserves it most definitely. But his contract isn't a steal.
- the_dough_boy

Hmm. Thanks for the correction. Not sure what the heck I was looking at. That'll teach me not to play on the computer and drink at the same time.

That said, he's 31. It's not unthinkable that he will bounce back and have several good years. I'm not saying the contract is great. In the context of the rest of the team it is... Unfortunate. They had to negotiate and get him a contract and it was about market value. The alternative is to lose him and maybe replace him with someone who is cheaper and hopefully as good. Aside from the points, he was not good this year. I have confidence that he will be much better next year.

Yes I realize that makes absolutely no one feel any better

With the year Kruger hadhe wasn't worth the 1.5 M for the performance he provided this season.

health/talent
- breadbag

BRICK TEXT INCOMING: SORRY.

Just a couple things to consider for everyone (not singling you out but you just mentioned it) here in regards to marcus kruger this season, taken from war on ice(min 500 minutes played, centers, regular season):

The top ten players based on Dzone%, in worst to best order, in all situations are:

Gaustad, Kruger, Boyd Gordon, Glendening, Fehr, Dejardins, Carter, Stoll, Moore, auston watson

So this is grouping of players to contextualize how Kruger is used and how he performs in to closest players to him on the defensive side of the game:

All Strengths combined:
- 2nd highest TOI at 13.7 min (glendening)
- 3rd best Corsi For % at 41% (Desjardins, Watson)
- 2nd worst zone stars at -53.1% worse than teammates (gaustad)
- 2nd best scoring chance % at -9.2% in comparison to team (Dejardins)
- 4th best High danger chance % at -11.1% (watson, Dejardins, Moore)

5v5:
- 4th TOI/gm at 10.9 min (Dejardins, Glendening, Moore)
- 3rd best crosi for % at 48.4% (Dejardins, Fehr)
- 3rd worst zone starts at -81.2% (Gaustad, Watson)
- 1st (and only positive!) scoring for % at a 1%
- 5th best high danger chance % at 48.4% (Fehr, Watson, Glendening, Gordon)


Penalty Kill:
- 3rd highest PKTOI/gm (Glendening, Gordon)
- 5th highest Corsi For % at 8.3% (Carter, Dejardins, Moore, Gaustad)
- 5th worst zone starts at -97.3% (Fehr, Dejardins, Glendening, Gordon)
- 3rd best goals against/60 at 6.7 (Glendening, Gordon)
- 2nd highest TOI% for team at 54.6% (Glendening)


What does this all mean in the grand scheme of things? That's really up to you all.

I decided to base the player set on %Dzone starts, so that could skew the results a bit with not looking more at the PK specific details as well as limiting the results to centers (as defined by War on ice). I also cherry picked the stats I thought applicable in respect to each on ice strenth (though I kept the all and 5v5 stats the same, and changed pk for obvious reasons)

All in all, I took a couple things away from some digging in regards to how kruger played in the regular season this year, most importantly there is 1 guy that starts more in his own end (gaustad), and he performs worse, and less in every other aspect of his game.

So things to look at when it comes to how kruger played this year in what some could say his worst statistical year since being on the job full time, he is THE guy you want taking tough minutes. The tough time doesn't only include PK, which admittedly Glendening and Gordon may be better at, but taking showing the differences in 5v5 (Highest TOI% for all) and on the PK (what most of these guys are on their rosters for)

As for his health, with this past wrist injury being his only hiccup and a full summer to completely heal it up, I'm not worried at all. He's the second youngest in this group (watson).

He's also in the middle of the pack for AAV this past season, but will top the list next season (by 83k)

I'm happy with kruger, hope this is interesting to some.

Really long double post...
- the_dough_boy

Pulling for Sharks, but I'm neither here nor there usually on the Preds (though I think their homer arena policies are ridiculous). Got a good belly laugh seeing this after the triple OT last night:

https://vine.co/v/iQzutLpnjjx

1) How could Dallas have 6 skaters on the ice for so long without the refs calling a penalty?

2) How could Dallas leave Tarasenko that wide open with 6 skaters on the ice???

Pretty sure 90% of this board wanted Daley gone.....
- Blackwater13

Some here wanted the team to take more time with him, and definitely play him with Hjalmarsson.