JJ- love your insight. This is an honest question not trying to be an a-hole. I see the glaring hole at wing like everyone but is it really worse than the years of a glaring hole at 2 center? Why not move Panarin with 19 and then let Kane be Kane. He has produced with no center and average wings on his line most of career. He has a center to get puck then get in front and rotate the lw until something sticks. Of course it would be great to have a "real top 6" but we have always had holes now it is lw instead of center.
- lunchbox2111

It's an interesting thought but it just spreads out the offense they have without adding any. Not sure the overall results are any better.

Ehhhhhh . . . mehhhhhh . . . . It really all depends on how ready Vesey would be to play and contribute on the first line, which would be asking a lot.

Let me also add, I have not heard anything beyond a vague whisper that Shipachyov can possibly evencome over, or that the Hawks have any inside track on Vesey.
- John Jaeckel

Was going to ask, is there a certain date that this Shipachyov kid is allowed to start negotiating if he is allowed to come over? Seem to recall a June 30th being posted somewhere.

First of all, all indications are Vesey plays out east with either Boston or Buffalo. Plus he can't be signed before Aug 15th which means if the Hawks pin their hopes on him and then don't get him all the other options will probably be picked over by then.

Second, Shipachyov is not a guarantee to be a good player in the NHL. Unlike Panarin, Ship is a finesse player who may not adjust to the NHL style of play very quickly, if ever. Added to that is the talk on the street that Montreal was his preferred destination so even if he comes over, there's nothing I've seen that he would consider signing with the Hawks, especially if money is an issue which it probably is.

Third, with cap hits and retained and buried and overage - the Hawks salary cap is at $66.6M which is for 9 forwards, 6 d-man and the 2 goalies. That leaves $6.4M for 6 players (5 if they go with a 22 man roster). If they give Campbell or a top-6 LW anything over $2M, the rest of the roster will need to be filled by players making less than $1M.

I know JJ and lots of others have prioritized top-6 LW, but I think it's more important to solidify the d-corps with Campbell than it is to acquire a LW for the type of cap space they have remaining. In other words, Campbell at $2M will benefit the team more than a LW they can get for $2M. Additionally, Campbell has supposedly stated he would take a 1-year deal which is important to minimize the contracts carrying over to 2017/18 when Panarin's new contract will begin.
- EbonyRaptor

Some of this is bang on. But it's based on a flawed premise.

They went out and got KEMPNY to solidify the defense. I'm not saying that Kempny at 26 is better than Campbell at 37. I actually don't know (yet). But they helped their defense depth when they got him. So Campbell is . . . a nice to have. He is not critical.

I also agree, a $2 million per LW is not likely going to be the answer on the first line. But i also never suggested that was the answer. I have maintained all along, they will likely need to reshuffle the deck a bit and move a larger contract that's easier to backfill. It's not an easy answer.

But all this talk about $6 million for 7 guys is just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

I repeat:

So far this summer all the Hawks have done, aside from getting Kempny, is subtract NHL players for cap room and draft picks.

It wasn't a good enough team last year to legitimately compete for the Cup. It was a one-line dominant team that was (by its own standards) subpar defensively, not very good 5-on-5, highly dependent on 3-on-3 for wins—a team built for the regular season, not the playoffs.

What's changed?

They APPEAR to have shored up the middle or lower pairings with a mobile, smart, Czech blue liner who has shone well internationally and allegedly also has a big point shot.Assuming he is just as advertised, GREAT!

But they're down two MORE wings from the 2015 team, after losing two other wings from that team the previous summer.

They need experienced (and in at least one case) skilled players upfront, BADLY, if they are to legitimately compete for a Cup this year. Don't kid yourself.

Was going to ask, is there a certain date that this Shipachyov kid is allowed to start negotiating if he is allowed to come over? Seem to recall a June 30th being posted somewhere.
- walter34

I dunno, good question

[quote=SimpleJack]I think the way things are with the cap, they'd be better off viewing Panarin and Panik as the 2 top 6 LWs, and trying to fill in the 3 spots on the 3rd line instead.

IMO the top 6 is set with:

Panarin-AA-Kane
Panik-Toews-Hossa

4th line would be nice with Desi, Kruger, and Moose/Lundberg/Hartman/Motte

Gotta find some 3rd line scoring IMO, and for as cheap as possible. I think we can expect Schmaltz to maybe take one of those spots, but the other 2 are big question marks.

Agree and I think it is the way the Stan views things and therefore
1.AA stays
2.They try and sign Campbell
3.They see how the Rookies play
4.Make a deal at the Deadline when the Cap Hit is reduced
- Colbyboy

You are forgetting how much input Q has—it's substantial and more now than it was a couple of years ago.

Which is why I don't see them going too far to sign Campbell, playing 'the kids" is going to be a disaster (and by the way, I have it on pretty good info., the player leadership is not real keen on that notion either), they won't have any more cap space relatively speaking on deadline day without making a move to reduce their cap.

IMO, the important thing is to get the most out of the top players. Too much time of Hossa/Toews was wasted because they often didn't have someone solid to play with or if just kept changing too often. Call them a 5th line for all it matters, just need someone that can make the line click. It can't be stressed enough that this team can't rely on Kane and Crawford to get them there again. Not saying Kane and Crawford can't play well again, but don't hang all your (Not saying you personally) hopes on them having a career year again. An injury or slump could put the Hawks on the outside looking in.
- breadbag

Every. Word. Of. This.

You are forgetting how much input Q has—it's substantial and more now than it was a couple of years ago.

Which is why I don't see them going too far to sign Campbell, playing 'the kids" is going to be a disaster (and by the way, I have it on pretty good info., the player leadership is not real keen on that notion either), they won't have any more cap space relatively speaking on deadline day without making a move to reduce their cap.
- John Jaeckel

If true, then Q deserves some of the blame for what I believe are some of the worst trades a GM could make over the last two years. Just as quiet moves form the backdrop of a team to rise from the ashes, so too are quiet moves that can be the impetus for a team's destruction. I fear we've seen a few of those later moves already.

I´m ok with Campbell if he comes with cheap one year contract. Problem is that from last two years this team has lost Saad, Sharp, Shaw, Teravainen etc. from offense and now there is no one who could fill that void. It is guite clear that Ladd and Weise won´t be back. Thank god for Panarin but Hawks are really thin at wing. And when they don´t have much cap room to go with Hawks are forced have those with ELC´s in the opening roster.
- MjulQvist

AND this.

If true, then Q deserves some of the blame for what I believe are some of the worst trades a GM could make over the last two years. Just as quiet moves form the backdrop of a team to rise from the ashes, so too are quiet moves that can be the impetus for a team's destruction. I fear we've seen a few of those later moves already.
- kwolf68

Q, IMO, is to blame for Bollocksing the Sharp/Johns trade. Daley was really the most useful part of the return and Q mismanaged it to the point that Daley asked out of town.

I'm not saying Q is always right.

I AM saying, he has a LOT of say, more than he did in years past. And Stanley has not helped matters by himself bollocksing a few situations.

You are forgetting how much input Q has—it's substantial and more now than it was a couple of years ago.

Which is why I don't see them going too far to sign Campbell, playing 'the kids" is going to be a disaster (and by the way, I have it on pretty good info., the player leadership is not real keen on that notion either), they won't have any more cap space relatively speaking on deadline day without making a move to reduce their cap.
- John Jaeckel

So who do they move (AA or Crow or?) and when do they do it (before the season starts or later or at the TDL)?

IMO if a top 4 Dman like Soupy falls into your lap you go for it, but the question is at what price and what are your priorities? I can't pretend to know what the Hawks decision makers are thinking and planning, but I will be disappointed if they do nothing because that team won't be fun to watch especially when the rest of the teams in the division and conference are getting better.

Every. Word. Of. This.
- John Jaeckel

Further, looks at the Penguins run to the Cup. Two dominant scoring lines with Crosby and Malkin together then the Kessel line which was unstoppable. In the playoffs you need more than one big time scoring lines and depth over four lines. Hawks are a one line scoring team with a broken first line that needs a LW. Everyone saw the difference Ladd made to that line when he arrived. I think they need to trade Anisimov. They've won two Cups without a pure second line center and one another with an older cheap second line center. Why not try to do the latter?

Q, IMO, is to blame for Bollocksing the Sharp/Johns trade. Daley was really the most useful part of the return and Q mismanaged it to the point that Daley asked out of town.

I'm not saying Q is always right.

I AM saying, he has a LOT of say, more than he did in years past. And Stanley has not helped matters by himself bollocksing a few situations.
- John Jaeckel

And hopefully both have learned something from this. The core of this team still has 2-3 solid years left...each wasted is another year closer to rebuild time.

The situation with both players brought in for Sharp/Johns was a debacle. Daley is a fast skating, quick thinking hockey player. He's not a beast in his own zone, but the Hawks have never had many guys like this, but rather guys who could transition really quick. Daley-at the time-seemed like a perfect fit. The subsequent moves of Daley were mind boggling.

The Garbutt thing was equally as ridiculous. Garbutt was an aggressive, fast skating player who was perfect in a bottom 6 checking role. So he's dealt for a guy who was cut, then Bowman goes out and gets two guys for "bottom 6 checking roles" with 1 almost always in the press box while Brandon Mashinter was taking starts. Meanwhile, the people you dealt for these bench warmers could have been used to "right" the idiocy of moving Daley.

What the Hawks do this summer is going to be very interesting. Right now it looks like more sitting on hands time. I hope that's not the case, but if Taylor Hall, PK Subban and Shea Weber can be traded in 1 day, no reason the Hawks can't make a tough move or two to get this salary cap straightened out to where they can add a couple solid wingers and maybe another depth d-man. Oh yea, not to mention the newest super hero's contract.

Let me also add, there will likely be 2 "kids" on the roster fairly regularly this year, no matter what.

Although anyone thinking any of them show up 10/1 and play 82 games probably needs to do less meth. The Rockford Shuttle will be very busy.

If they are relying on 3-4 roster spots to be filled by kids, that is asking for trouble.

I know, I know, Rutherford did it in Pittsburgh last year. The Pens also had not depleted their system like the Hawks have and the Pens NHL roster had not taken the kind of hits the previous couple of years quite like the Hawks has. The Pens ADDED a Phil Kessel prior to the season. They got Daley for Rob Freaking Scuderi.

Perspective.

1-2 rotating rookies is acceptable and part of the game. 3-4 is really saying you're not seriously contending this season, especially when you're back-filling good players who've left. Not just Shaw and TT, but also Sharp and Saad—who still really haven't been completely replaced. Panarin, yes. Panik, ehhh, sort of.

Further, looks at the Penguins run to the Cup. Two dominant scoring lines with Crosby and Malkin together then the Kessel line which was unstoppable. In the playoffs you need more than one big time scoring lines and depth over four lines. Hawks are a one line scoring team with a broken first line that needs a LW. Everyone saw the difference Ladd made to that line when he arrived. I think they need to trade Anisimov. They've won two Cups without a pure second line center and one another with an older cheap second line center. Why not try to do the latter?
- golfbard

Great thoughts.

Further, looks at the Penguins run to the Cup. Two dominant scoring lines with Crosby and Malkin together then the Kessel line which was unstoppable. In the playoffs you need more than one big time scoring lines and depth over four lines. Hawks are a one line scoring team with a broken first line that needs a LW. Everyone saw the difference Ladd made to that line when he arrived. I think they need to trade Anisimov. They've won two Cups without a pure second line center and one another with an older cheap second line center. Why not try to do the latter?
- golfbard

Great post, but my only problem with moving Anismov is I don't think he's that valuable. How many people will be lining up for a center making 4.55 who can't win faceoffs and scored only 42 points centering Patrick Kane and A. Panarin? For what Anisimov does well (play smart, get to the net, create space, speak Russian), teams probably think they can get that for cheaper than 4.55.

Great post, but my only problem with moving Anismov is I don't think he's that valuable. How many people will be lining up for a center making 4.55 who can't win faceoffs and scored only 42 points centering Patrick Kane and A. Panarin? For what Anisimov does well (play smart, get to the net, create space), teams probably think they can get that for cheaper than 4.55.
- kwolf68

You may be right. The book on him when he came to Chicago last year was he is a third line center, maybe a 2C in the right circumstances.

His performance with the New Wonder Twins last year sort of supports that. He is willing around the net, a good defender, can score a goal, OK setting up the play. So he was "good enough" in that role with two of the game's best forwards.

It also supports the theory that Kruger could center them and they might not skip a beat.

You may be right. The book on him when he came to Chicago last year was he is a third line center, maybe a 2C in the right circumstances.

His performance with the New Wonder Twins last year sort of supports that. He is willing around the net, a good defender, can score a goal, OK setting up the play. So he was "good enough" in that role with two of the game's best forwards.

It also supports the theory that Kruger could center them and they might not skip a beat.
- John Jaeckel

Yep. I know any critique of AA is sacrilege, but he is well paid for what he delivers. Don't get me wrong, he's a very intelligent player in addition to those things you mention, but he is very ordinary overall and his deal is tough given the current cap situation, made more dire because of all the non-movement clauses handed out. He (and Kruger's) NTCs kick in tomorrow. I honestly don't consider Kruger's NTC a big deal (just naming 7 teams you don't want to goto isn't going to hamstring the team). But once AA is locked in then the Hawks are left with ZERO players of any sort of value that don't have some sort of clause, other than #72. And next year will be his last in Chicago if the Hawks don't make some hard choices.

As far as Kruger, he probably wouldn't create the space AA does, but because he's much better on faceoffs that line would more often start a play WITH possession of the puck. I've been a HUGE advocate of having a center with Kane who can WIN draws. When almost 60% of the time Kane's faceoff possessions start with him playing defense that's a bad thing. It's remarkable what Kane (and Pan) did do with such a poor faceoff guy last year.

Let me also add, there will likely be 2 "kids" on the roster fairly regularly this year, no matter what.

Although anyone thinking any of them show up 10/1 and play 82 games probably needs to do less meth. The Rockford Shuttle will be very busy.

If they are relying on 3-4 roster spots to be filled by kids, that is asking for trouble.

I know, I know, Rutherford did it in Pittsburgh last year. The Pens also had not depleted their system like the Hawks have and the Pens NHL roster had not taken the kind of hits the previous couple of years quite like the Hawks has. The Pens ADDED a Phil Kessel prior to the season. They got Daley for Rob Freaking Scuderi.

Perspective.

1-2 rotating rookies is acceptable and part of the game. 3-4 is really saying you're not seriously contending this season, especially when you're back-filling good players who've left. Not just Shaw and TT, but also Sharp and Saad—who still really haven't been completely replaced. Panarin, yes. Panik, ehhh, sort of.
- John Jaeckel

I don't like the rotating part of your "plan" - two or three games up and then down - does very little to develop skaters at the NHL level.

I'd rather see a couple of rookies - identified in September - given a good long look - 20/30 games - so they can really show what they do or don't have - instead of worrying that a bad line change or own-zone giveaway will result in a westward trip on I-90.

I know it's a competitive division/conference, and every loss hurts, but the kids need time to develop in the Show, the other players need time to become comfortable with them (and the kids with the vets), and coaches and management time to really evaluate the situation.

You may be right. The book on him when he came to Chicago last year was he is a third line center, maybe a 2C in the right circumstances.

His performance with the New Wonder Twins last year sort of supports that. He is willing around the net, a good defender, can score a goal, OK setting up the play. So he was "good enough" in that role with two of the game's best forwards.

It also supports the theory that Kruger could center them and they might not skip a beat.
- John Jaeckel

Given Bowman has a day and four hours to make something happen with AA before his new contract kicks in, do you think he feels pressured into making something happen or is it going to be like last season where he just sits there and this team digresses again.

I think a move needs to be made to move existing salary to be able to fill in around the core. CC for a first next year when the draft is in Chicago and a goalie to platoon with Darling is a solid option. Especially if Campbell is looking to take a sweetheart deal, that would be valuable cap space and a solid defense to put in front of a goalie who is unproven across 82 games and an entire playoff run.

My second thought is to hope someone would take AA off our hands for a bottom 6 guy, maybe a pick (again draft in Chicago) or a middle of the road prospect. Get the bottom 6 guy on a 2m AAV kinda deal, that saved 2.5m ish against the cap and gets a checker. Take that 2.5 and see if Eric Staal or Brad Richards(why not) would be willing to play between Panarin and Kane. He's similar size as AA, definitely a more skilled player, just off a huge contract and is still only 31. There have always been links to him liking Chicago but the money would just have never worked when he was on a 8m + contract.

I know that's two guys taking sweetheart deals with us and it's probably a pipe dream but the last fading star to take a deal like that ended up playing with Kane and winning a cup, stating publically that he wanted to come back but the money wouldn't work. I think being able to offer these vets 2-3m goes a lot further than offering them 1m just for a pride thing this point in their careers. And by moving either of these contracts it gives Bowman options which at the end of the day is all you can ask for in the hard cap era.

Yep. I know any critique of AA is sacrilege, but he is well paid for what he delivers. Don't get me wrong, he's a very intelligent player in addition to those things you mention, but he is very ordinary overall and his deal is tough given the current cap situation, made more dire because of all the non-movement clauses handed out. He (and Kruger's) NTCs kick in tomorrow. I honestly don't consider Kruger's NTC a big deal (just naming 7 teams you don't want to goto isn't going to hamstring the team). But once AA is locked in then the Hawks are left with ZERO players of any sort of value that don't have some sort of clause, other than #72. And next year will be his last in Chicago if the Hawks don't make some hard choices.

As far as Kruger, he probably wouldn't create the space AA does, but because he's much better on faceoffs that line would more often start a play WITH possession of the puck. I've been a HUGE advocate of having a center with Kane who can WIN draws. When almost 60% of the time Kane's faceoff possessions start with him playing defense that's a bad thing. It's remarkable what Kane (and Pan) did do with such a poor faceoff guy last year.
- kwolf68

100% agree...and I would mind seeing krugs there...and letting moose or desjardin have the 4c spot

Still can't believe Nashville got Subban...Weber had the busted knee in 2015 and will be 31....PK will torment the Hawks for the next decade....
- EnzoD

This is where the 'Hawks could use Shaw. Subban is a mouth, a big mouth. Counteract a mouth by following through on checks and a little extra curricular activity. Nothing gets a mouthy guy fired up and make mistakes plus take stupid penalties like getting under his skin.

In comparison, though, college hockey is not an elite league hence my caution with Vesey and even our very own Schmaltz and Motte as well as with Caggiula when many NHL teams were coveting him after UND won the national title. I really do hope Schmaltz and Motte eventually become top-9 forwards within a few years, but ripping up college hockey doesn't always have a strong correlation to NHL success. And if they bust out of the gate flying and show decent consistency, then that would be icing on the cake.
- AEL_Fox

Following the USHL to NCAA to the NHL path, although not as closely the last two years, I notice many are unaware that the NCAA provides over 30% of all the players in the NHL. More than all of Europe combined. I have to run but will look this up today but IIRC most of NHL players come from Major Junior followed by the NCAA and then Europe. The following is helpful: http://collegehockeyinc.com/in-the-nhl

Once a hidden gem of hockey talent, college hockey has become one of the biggest suppliers of talent to the NHL, surpassing all Europe.

100% agree...and I would mind seeing krugs there...and letting moose or desjardin have the 4c spot
- southernhawk

Yep. I think we got some L4-C options if Kruger is slotted up. The two you mention, Kero on the farm and isn't this Lunberg guy a center? I know nothing about him.

I don't like the rotating part of your "plan" - two or three games up and then down - does very little to develop skaters at the NHL level.

I'd rather see a couple of rookies - identified in September - given a good long look - 20/30 games - so they can really show what they do or don't have - instead of worrying that a bad line change or own-zone giveaway will result in a westward trip on I-90.

I know it's a competitive division/conference, and every loss hurts, but the kids need time to develop in the Show, the other players need time to become comfortable with them (and the kids with the vets), and coaches and management time to really evaluate the situation.
- StLBravesFan

Not my plan, Sage. It's just what the organization does. Or have I been watching another team? The only exception has been Saad in 2013.

Given Bowman has a day and four hours to make something happen with AA before his new contract kicks in, do you think he feels pressured into making something happen or is it going to be like last season where he just sits there and this team digresses again.

I think a move needs to be made to move existing salary to be able to fill in around the core. CC for a first next year when the draft is in Chicago and a goalie to platoon with Darling is a solid option. Especially if Campbell is looking to take a sweetheart deal, that would be valuable cap space and a solid defense to put in front of a goalie who is unproven across 82 games and an entire playoff run.

My second thought is to hope someone would take AA off our hands for a bottom 6 guy, maybe a pick (again draft in Chicago) or a middle of the road prospect. Get the bottom 6 guy on a 2m AAV kinda deal, that saved 2.5m ish against the cap and gets a checker. Take that 2.5 and see if Eric Staal or Brad Richards(why not) would be willing to play between Panarin and Kane. He's similar size as AA, definitely a more skilled player, just off a huge contract and is still only 31. There have always been links to him liking Chicago but the money would just have never worked when he was on a 8m + contract.

I know that's two guys taking sweetheart deals with us and it's probably a pipe dream but the last fading star to take a deal like that ended up playing with Kane and winning a cup, stating publically that he wanted to come back but the money wouldn't work. I think being able to offer these vets 2-3m goes a lot further than offering them 1m just for a pride thing this point in their careers. And by moving either of these contracts it gives Bowman options which at the end of the day is all you can ask for in the hard cap era.
- rMac08

Dunno, bud, this is a tough time for the team. Hard decisions. They have to be creative or the team is going to likely take another step back.