If Shaw and Kruger WERE Calle Jarnkrok players they would have...they are not. He hasn't shown advance in his game can't hold the puck and that would be where my argument would start.
- wiz1901

I'm talking about 2013 for kruger when he did a 2 year 2.7 total and 2014 when Shaw did a 2 year 4 mil total contract. would they have done a 5-6 year deal and for what amount?

Unless Hayden has gotten a lot more agile, I don't think it is a fair comparison as Jimmy Vesey glides well and his lighter on his edges...in my humble opinion...and if you don't believe in climate change, you should be spending less time here.
- wiz1901

Wiz, with all due respect, while I DO believe in climate change, I don't believe that anyone who disagrees shouldn't be spending time here. That's a pretty intolerant view, IMHO.

Let's stick to hockey and maybe the White Sox ....

I'm talking about 2013 for kruger when he did a 2 year 2.7 total and 2014 when Shaw did a 2 year 4 mil total contract. would they have done a 5-6 year deal and for what amount?
- kmw4631

Are you thinking that Järnkrok skipped his bridge deal? Because he didn't, it was just only a year.

Like, there's not much different from what the Hawks did with Shaw vs what the Preds did with Järnkrok - i.e. they both got bridge deals after their ELC was over They're the same age (like 2 months apart), but Shaw's ELC was signed a year sooner so he got a 2 year bridge deal instead of a one year one like Järnkrok. Then at 24/25, they both got their first long contract with the exact same lengeth. The difference is that Shaw had two productive seasons in the NHL finished vs Järnkrok who had one meh season, so Shaw's bridge deal was a lot more and so is his new deal.

Both teams employed the same bridge deal method that is fairly standard for bottom 6 forwards.

Are you thinking that Järnkrok skipped his bridge deal? Because he didn't, it was just only a year.

Like, there's not much different from what the Hawks did with Shaw vs what the Preds did with Järnkrok - i.e. they both got bridge deals after their ELC was over They're the same age (like 2 months apart), but Shaw's ELC was signed a year sooner so he got a 2 year bridge deal instead of a one year one like Järnkrok. Then at 24/25, they both got their first long contract with the exact same lengeth. The difference is that Shaw had two productive seasons in the NHL finished vs Järnkrok who had one meh season, so Shaw's bridge deal was a lot more and so is his new deal.

Both teams employed the same bridge deal method that is fairly standard for bottom 6 forwards.
- L_B_R

My point would be instead of 2 years and 2 would shaw have taken a 6 year 2.5 and kruger a 6 year 2 mil? if they would have done it wouldn't we better in the long run. Thats my point. by doing bridge deals with these guys we basically say we are going to give you bridge and trade you. I know you cannot do both of them long term but maybe 1. long term deals should not only be for top 5 guys. You should do it were ever you find value.

Not the type of deal we see too often.

@generalfanager

Calle Jarnkrok (#Preds)
6 yrs @ $2M cap hit

https://t.co/V2Lb9FEX27 https://t.co/Z9BjdZNofx
- DarthKane

AGENT TAKE: my client is what he is... cool?

It's very rare for a player, team and agent to say... let's do a $2M deal for 6 years please, because this player is only going stay flat or only get marginally better in over half a decade.

I think NASH is happy, his agent has already moved on and Jarnkrok clearly has no confidence in his progression, so he's chillin'.

My point would be instead of 2 years and 2 would shaw have taken a 6 year 2.5 and kruger a 6 year 2 mil? if they would have done it wouldn't we better in the long run. Thats my point. by doing bridge deals with these guys we basically say we are going to give you bridge and trade you. I know you cannot do both of them long term but maybe 1. long term deals should not only be for top 5 guys. You should do it were ever you find value.
- kmw4631

Bridge deals are done because teams don't know yet if a player is valuable yet, though, and non-elite players like them because it gives them a chance to prove they're valuable. What if Shaw had gotten injured ala Bickell during that longer contract? Everyone would have been pissed that they hadn't gone the bridge deal route. Shaw would have been stupid to take a longer but less money contract at that age - he would have been out a lot of money now. Bridge deals are good for both team and players to make sure they're paying / getting the right amount of money / term. Yeah, it'd be nice if we could have gotten Shaw/Kruger at a cheaper value, but it's silly to pretend like bridge deals aren't good 99% of the time. I'm guessing everyone here wishes Saad had taken a bridge deal, for example.

And again, the basis of your proposal is skewed because Järnkrok is on his 3rd contract just like Shaw with the exact length at the same age, he's just didn't prove he's as valuable as Shaw did so his new contract is less. Normally long term contracts aren't as cheap as Järnkrok's because player feel they can improve on the next deal, but that's a different discussion completely.

Unless Hayden has gotten a lot more agile, I don't think it is a fair comparison as Jimmy Vesey glides well and his lighter on his edges...in my humble opinion...and if you don't believe in climate change, you should be spending less time here.
- wiz1901

Get off my lawn!
Did u forget your meds today?

Unless Hayden has gotten a lot more agile, I don't think it is a fair comparison as Jimmy Vesey glides well and his lighter on his edges...in my humble opinion...and if you don't believe in climate change, you should be spending less time here.
- wiz1901

I didn't say what I believe or don't believe on that subject but it is a political hot button that is not appropriate on this hockey website so I simply asked for the subject to not be discussed here.

I didn't say what I believe or don't believe on that subject but it is a political hot button that is not appropriate on this hockey website so I simply asked for the subject to not be discussed here.
- EbonyRaptor

Hmmm that's interesting, is it really a political issue or is it just one party disagrees with the other.

For me I look at all the info and try to make an edumacated decision.

Hmmm that's interesting, is it really a political issue or is it just one party disagrees with the other.

For me I look at all the info and try to make an edumacated decision.
- BetweenTheDots

The point is that it's not hockey discussion and allowing comments on those kinds of hot button topics could turn into a divisive discussion which is inappropriate here.

I agree with Raptor. No poliitics !! If ai want to get political I'll go to facecrack. I dont need to read any liberal bs or any right wing talk here

Haha, thanks for the clarification.
- BearsnHawks

You bet!

Ten or so years ago NHL.com had an article about Thailand's national hockey team or some other amateur Thai team. Good article about the greater internationalization of the sport beyond North America and Europe. That article also talked about how the Thai team would get clobbered literally 90-0 or some absurd score like that. And I believe they were playing teams from other Asian countries so it wasn't like they were playing Team Canada. As long as they loved playing hockey, that's all that matters.

18 Days till Vesey day boys and girl



Hudler still out there ?

I agree with Raptor. No poliitics !! If ai want to get political I'll go to facecrack. I dont need to read any liberal bs or any right wing talk here
- mmurray892

Maybe that was unintentional, but you kind of contradicted your own point here.

Yes, since most Americans can't have a civil discussion of politics, science, religion, there's no point in fostering it here.

Maybe that was unintentional, but you kind of contradicted your own point here.

Yes, since most Americans can't have a civil discussion of politics, science, religion, there's no point in fostering it here.
- John Jaeckel

Thanks JJ!! The only left and right talk I like here is who are our left and right wings.

Thanks JJ!! The only left and right talk I like here is who are our left and right wings.
- FourOrr

Or Goalies going post to post.

Tomas Fleischmann as a Top 6 LW for the Hawks this year is an absolutely desperate move. Shaw is more of a 1LW than Fleischmann at this point in his career. He is over-the-hill and has very serious health issues with the blood clots. His age and productivity over the last 3 seasons would indicate he is barely a 3rd liner right now. Would "Flash" at $500,000 on a 1 year deal be a nice depth add? I guess. However, he could not keep up with the Playoff pace this past spring, and that's why he was scratched for most of the series VS STL. BTW, Do the quotations indicate it is not a real thing in your mind? You know more than 99% of scientists? Interesting..
- EnzoD

Zo would you agree that there is not one player on the roster or in FA that the Hawks can plug into the 1LW slot and positively say this is the guy, except maybe Hudler who would probably put them over tap? Can they/you be sure Panik is that guy or Schmaltz, Motte, Hinostroza, Buan, Kero, Fleishman or Panarin to 1LW-AA to 2LW-Kruger to 2C?.

Ever play the horses? You're only sure of one horse (Toews) to win this race and wanna play a trifecta. So you wheel that horse (Toews) with 3-4-5-6 more horses (options) hoping to fill in the other two spots for a winning ticket, basically increasing your odds with more options. ........If a fan is looking for "the definitive" answer at 1LW it just isn't there.

If Fleishman is signed it's not the answer but just another option/stop gap/fill in. An option with some back class who is also more flexible than any option I see so far.

The Hawks won cups with elite top 4 or 5 forwards, an elite top 4 Dmen, excellent to elite goaltending and depth throughout. Looks like this is the template again admitting it's falling just a bit short at forward. ...But considering a flat cap the Hawks are just 1 of 30 teams with holes. Finding forwards is much much easier to find than Dmen and less so than goalies. The successful past template is in place as best as it can be while trying to tweak and add as options are tried to fill holes.

Fleishman's Hero Chart: http://ownthepuck.blogspot.com/

Get off my lawn!
Did u forget your meds today?
- Yikes726

Easy there, big fella.

Zo would you agree that there is not one player on the roster or in FA that the Hawks can plug into the 1LW slot and positively say this is the guy, except maybe Hudler who would probably put them over tap? Can they/you be sure Panik is that guy or Schmaltz, Motte, Hinostroza, Buan, Kero, Fleishman or Panarin to 1LW-AA to 2LW-Kruger to 2C?.

Ever play the horses? You're only sure of one horse (Toews) to win this race and wanna play a trifecta. So you wheel that horse (Toews) with 3-4-5-6 more horses (options) hoping to fill in the other two spots for a winning ticket, basically increasing your odds with more options. ........If a fan is looking for "the definitive" answer at 1LW it just isn't there.

If Fleishman is signed it's not the answer but just another option/stop gap/fill in. An option with some back class who is also more flexible than any option I see so far.

The Hawks won cups with elite top 4 or 5 forwards, an elite top 4 Dmen, excellent to elite goaltending and depth throughout. Looks like this is the template again admitting it's falling just a bit short at forward. ...But considering a flat cap the Hawks are just 1 of 30 teams with holes. Finding forwards is much much easier to find than Dmen and less so than goalies. The successful past template is in place as best as it can be while trying to tweak and add as options are tried to fill holes.

Fleishman's Hero Chart: http://ownthepuck.blogspot.com/
- Mr Ricochet

But Mr. Ric, don't you know that the only answer to the Hawks' 1LW woe is that darned CC contract? You know if we could just trade him, we could sign Panarin's extension now and get a 1LW, and....

Oh yeah....NMC already used to block a deal to Calgary, if they find a dance partner they would need to sign another goalie (so you don't save $6MM by moving CC), you have to hope you can resign Darling for reasonable money who will be a UFA next year (lose even more of the $6MM), go into expansion without a protected #1 goalie, and the Hawks apparently can't/won't sign any 1LW vet for more than a one year deal.

Hudler is IMHO is not an option. Someone is going to pay him and give term.

SB is all in on Vesey while the McD spin machine is working "the kids can play" angle in the event Vesey goes elsewhere.

No real news will happen until after 8/15.

The point is that it's not hockey discussion and allowing comments on those kinds of hot button topics could turn into a divisive discussion which is inappropriate here.
- EbonyRaptor

True. And we are quite capable of having our own Hawk related divisive discussions on:
- whether or not to move Crawford
- which1LW to go after
- is Q a genius or a lucky blender of talent,
- or even the popular....we shooda kept Saad....

Nah, we don't need politics or religion here.....we got plenty!!!!

Wiz, with all due respect, while I DO believe in climate change, I don't believe that anyone who disagrees shouldn't be spending time here. That's a pretty intolerant view, IMHO.

Let's stick to hockey and maybe the White Sox ....
- Hank_Greenberg

For the record, I believe in climate change too. During the Cretaceous, the middle half of the US was covered by a warm tropical sea. Then there's the Ice Age. We should be ashamed......

But Mr. Ric, don't you know that the only answer to the Hawks' 1LW woe is that darned CC contract? You know if we could just trade him, we could sign Panarin's extension now and get a 1LW, and....

Oh yeah....NMC already used to block a deal to Calgary, if they find a dance partner they would need to sign another goalie (so you don't save $6MM by moving CC), you have to hope you can resign Darling for reasonable money who will be a UFA next year (lose even more of the $6MM), go into expansion without a protected #1 goalie, and the Hawks apparently can't/won't sign any 1LW vet for more than a one year deal.

Hudler is IMHO is not an option. Someone is going to pay him and give term.

SB is all in on Vesey while the McD spin machine is working "the kids can play" angle in the event Vesey goes elsewhere.

No real news will happen until after 8/15.
- Return of the Roar

Finding Panarin money is a train wreck to be dealt with soon, but not now. If Crawford is deemed the one to go then it is what it is but be careful. Some reading on Crow: http://www.dobberhockey.c...st/best-in-the-west-2016/

Some reading on Toews, who's scored 28 goals for three straight years, too: http://www.dobberhockey.c...ok-thoughts-on-nashtoews/

But Mr. Ric, don't you know that the only answer to the Hawks' 1LW woe is that darned CC contract? You know if we could just trade him, we could sign Panarin's extension now and get a 1LW, and....

Oh yeah....NMC already used to block a deal to Calgary, if they find a dance partner they would need to sign another goalie (so you don't save $6MM by moving CC), you have to hope you can resign Darling for reasonable money who will be a UFA next year (lose even more of the $6MM), go into expansion without a protected #1 goalie, and the Hawks apparently can't/won't sign any 1LW vet for more than a one year deal.

Hudler is IMHO is not an option. Someone is going to pay him and give term.

SB is all in on Vesey while the McD spin machine is working "the kids can play" angle in the event Vesey goes elsewhere.

No real news will happen until after 8/15.
- Return of the Roar

If the Hawks trade CC they will get Darling signed for 2-3mil a year and a backup will be around the same or less. So they will save a couple of million which can sign the Breadman.

Guys... remember what is important right now...and that is...

Mailing/emailing Rob Scuderi retirement brochures...anyone have his address?

I'm kidding, but on a serious note, it would just be nice if the Hawks could get that cap space back.

I want to get into a time machine and stop the Daley-Scuderi trade from ever happening.

The point is that it's not hockey discussion and allowing comments on those kinds of hot button topics could turn into a divisive discussion which is inappropriate here.
- EbonyRaptor

True, on another note saw the new Star Trek movie have to say pretty good, and I don't know which movie I'm anticipating more, Bourne Identity or Jack Reacher, oh well I guess I'll have to go see both of them