I do not think Mashinter is all on Q... remember, they traded a number 1, eleventh overall, to get him, and the FO had to justify what they got for Beach.
- RedFeather

You are right about it not being all on Q. The FO likes Mashinter on the roster, or else he would have been in the AHL instead of playing for the Hawks at that point.

Yeah agree with this, the forwards are very thin not only need First line LW , I'm not sure where the offense will come from a third line. Forwards look weak not just not from what we're use to in Chicago but weak compared to a lot of teams.
- HamiltonHawk

Been saying this for a while. You lose TT and Shaw from the bottom 6. That is unreplaced offense. Couple with the gaping Top 6 LW hole. Major issues. We will need several players to step it up and fill in even if we get Vesey or Hurdler.

Remember that '15 cup teams third line was TT Vermette Sharp.

........... On the 2nd line if they move Panerin up withToews.
Anyone else buyin that there may be something alittle more to Toews stepping back, maybe re thinking all 8 years here, Let's see , sold the single family crib in Lincoln Park for a condo again, no convention, not around to try to help sell this kid Vesey on Chicago ect.
I get it about relaxing on the P.R. Stuff to an extent, but given the fact about him losing 2high end LW's in Sharp and Saad in 2years and then they run hackers out there with him instead, I know he makes the good coin but hockey is a team game some of it built on chemistry which is what he is all about
so I get it he could've walking away for a bit to chill and maybere think his stuff ,and maybe the very slightest bit of doubt may have started to creep in on " do I want to do all 8 here if there just gonna give me midgets and journeymen on my LeftWing. Maybe I'll tell my agent season by season now and see how it plays out.Hate it if you want boys when you read this, but he did go and talk to the boss about Lobbying for Lucic if they let Ladd go which they did, so I could see this Vesey thing being very crucial to Tazer.
- wonthecup10

It's not a "college loophole" - it's a legitimate bargained part of the CBA - exercising his right to become a free agent does not show a lack of character - in fact, since the extra year or two in college could have been disasters for him, either in performance or because of injury - seems to me he showed a definite presence of character by having confidence in his abilities and the guts to get to free agency.
- StLBravesFan

I disagree with this. He was in a win-win situation. Whether or not he had a bad year or two in Harvard, he could have just signed with BUF--so, he always had a "fall back."

John, I don't see things as pessimistically at all on the offensive side.

The bottom six likely opens with Panik, Desi, Kruger, Lundberg, Tootoo and ONE of Rasmussen/Hartman/Schmaltz/Motte. The top six picks up either Vesey or Hudler.

I would argue that losing TT was addition by subtraction. Losing Shaw not a great thing, but the mileage and the stupid penalty gene might not be bad things to lose either.

The toughest scenario is if they can't find anyone for the top six. Even then, I would contend that having five of those slots filled with very good to HOF players puts the onus on those guys to step it up. Many teams have only one decent top six line.

As for the defense - still seeing that squad as deep as they have ever had, and that will reap big dividends for the possession game as well as less minutes on the top three guys.
- Return of the Roar

Who replaces the scoring of TT and Shaw? And Laad? Lundberg TooToo and Schamltz? I don't buy you addition by subtraction. You really sell Shaw short too.

Take Laad out of the equation. You need 70 pts from Scmaltz TooToo and Lundberg to fill the scoring void in the bottom 6. Keep in mind that last year's team had trouble scoring and did not have much secondary scoring. So to get back to, at best average scoring depth, you need two rookies and a journey men 4th liner to replace TT and Shaws scoring.

JJ's "pessimism" (or reality check) is spot on.

You need 70 pts from Scmaltz TooToo and Lundberg to fill the scoring void in the bottom 6.
- bhawks2241

You don't need all 70 because your defense is 33% better.

Who replaces the scoring of TT and Shaw? And Laad? Lundberg TooToo and Schamltz? I don't buy you addition by subtraction. You really sell Shaw short too.

Take Laad out of the equation. You need 70 pts from Scmaltz TooToo and Lundberg to fill the scoring void in the bottom 6. Keep in mind that last year's team had trouble scoring and did not have much secondary scoring. So to get back to, at best average scoring depth, you need two rookies and a journey men 4th liner to replace TT and Shaws scoring.

JJ's "pessimism" (or reality check) is spot on.
- bhawks2241

Are you counting Shaw on the bottom 6? Because most of his points were when he was on line 1.

........... On the 2nd line if they move Panerin up withToews.
Anyone else buyin that there may be something alittle more to Toews stepping back, maybe re thinking all 8 years here, Let's see , sold the single family crib in Lincoln Park for a condo again, no convention, not around to try to help sell this kid Vesey on Chicago ect.
I get it about relaxing on the P.R. Stuff to an extent, but given the fact about him losing 2high end LW's in Sharp and Saad in 2years and they run hackers out there with him instead, I know he makes the good coin but hockey is a team game some of it built on chemistry so I get it he could've walking away for a bit to chill and maybere think his stuff ,and maybe the very slightest bit of doubt may have started to creep in on " do I want to do all 8 here if there just gonna give me midgets and journeymen on my LeftWing. Maybe I'll tell my agent season by season now and see how it plays out.Hate it if you want boys when you read this, but he did go and talk to the boss about Lobbying for Lucic if they let Ladd go which they did, so I could see this Vesey thing being very crucial to Tazer. L
- wonthecup10

Agree there is probably more to the step back, but doubt it is yet rethinking staying through his contract. More likely burnt out from giving his life to one thing and being brand marketed to within an inch of his life for so many years. Looking at his social media and the things he said in a couple of podcasts this summer, I wouldn't be at all shocked to hear the words, "I'm trying to find myself" come out of his mouth. Sounds like he is looking for more balance between hockey and other things in his life. Maybe with the extra time he has, he'll figure out the mix that works for him. I side-eye that Onnit group he seems to be associating with and what they push pretty hard, but if it works for our Cap to be a happier/better player, good on 'em.

John, I don't see things as pessimistically at all on the offensive side.

The bottom six likely opens with Panik, Desi, Kruger, Lundberg, Tootoo and ONE of Rasmussen/Hartman/Schmaltz/Motte. The top six picks up either Vesey or Hudler.

I would argue that losing TT was addition by subtraction. Losing Shaw not a great thing, but the mileage and the stupid penalty gene might not be bad things to lose either.

The toughest scenario is if they can't find anyone for the top six. Even then, I would contend that having five of those slots filled with very good to HOF players puts the onus on those guys to step it up. Many teams have only one decent top six line.

As for the defense - still seeing that squad as deep as they have ever had, and that will reap big dividends for the possession game as well as less minutes on the top three guys.
- Return of the Roar

That is a big assumption. I know that is what the Hawks would like to achieve. Not proven yet it will happen. And if it doesn't? I can only make an assessment based on what I know. Factor in Hudler. OK, that's a big help. Factor in Vesey? If you go by the interest in him based on scouting, signs seem to point toward a nice add.

But until then . . . or failing either . . . there's a big question as fart as getting scoring form more than one line. Which was a problem last year, and still needs to be addressed.

You don't need all 70 because your defense is 33% better.
- RedFeather

How do you arrive at 33%?

Campbell + Kempny > Svedberg + Gustafsson?

How do you arrive at 33%?

Campbell + Kempny > Svedberg + Gustafsson?
- John Jaeckel

Here's hoping for Vesey or Hudler!!

I will also add, that to this moment, I don't think anyone is hearing anything the last couple of days to indicate where Vesey is going. Seems like this thing is really locked down.
- John Jaeckel

I tweeted yesterday the Hawks are still a frontrunner, which seems correct but doesn't mean he is coming here.

The people I have talked to have mentioned there is a variety of opinion from scouts as to Vesey's upside.

I have no opinion at all on how good he can be or is right now. But someone who is very connected with a number of hockey scouts did say to me last week there isn't a strong consensus......but a wide range of opinion.

Here's hoping for Vesey or Hudler!!
- Hawkster

Yeah same here ,but something tells me that Stan will Swing & Miss on both.

How do you arrive at 33%?

Campbell + Kempny > Svedberg + Gustafsson?
- John Jaeckel

That is affirmative, sir.

Without a fairly significant add at LW, it is a thinner version of last year's forward group. Arguably, much thinner.

Seems funny to me that suddenly, Hinostroza, Motte and Hartman are "blue chip" prospects.

Don't get me wrong. Hartman, to me, looks like a kid who will be a good bottom 6 player. I've not seen enough of Motte to make a call. He had one good year in College.

Schmaltz looks like he can be a nice MOST LIKELY 3rd line player in the NHL—nothing to sniff at. But not a savior either.

But, it just seems way too desperate to be pinning a lot of hope on these guys. When Hinostroza came up last year, he showed a lot of speed and energy—and nothing else. How does that suddenly change if you plug him in at 1RW?

Meanwhile the Hawks, minus TT and Shaw (and Weise and Ladd and Fleischmann) really look RIGHT NOW like a thinner version of last year's 1 1/2 line team.
- John Jaeckel

Right you are.

IMO, The Hawks need someone coming in that can add a bit of depth. The bottom 6 last year was very ineffective and this year they are going in with less "known" pieces in the mix. TT wasn't a fan fav around here, but he had offensive skills they didn't replace and he was defensively responsible. Shaw had tenacity and net front presence that the Hawks lack in general.

The Hawks have retained pretty much all the PK personnel, which is at least something, but the offense could be hard to come by.

While time on ice is a factor that can change the numbers, if we look at the roster as it stands today without adding any new youngsters, and look at goals per game of individual players and goals per game in their career, the Hawks are projecting to be about middle of the pack offensively and around 2.7 goals for per game. (depending who plays and who sits) That is assuming everyone is healthy and the best players are playing and performing similar to last season. This by no means some exact prediction, but it doesn't paint an optimistic picture offensively.

Once you add in some injuries and factor in that Kane is more likely be near the 35 goal mark than the 46 he managed last year, the offense looks below average. Unless the Hawks can add some new blood that has some scoring touch, they need Kruger/Hossa/Toews to step up further in goal scoring and they need the likes of Kane/AA/Seabrook/Panarin to maintain their goal production.

Example career goal scoring rate of our bottom 6 guys on the roster today.

Kruger - 0.09 per game
Panik - 0.20 per game
Desjardins - 0.09 per game
TooToo - 0.09 per game
Mashinter - 0.10 per game
Rasmussen - 0.09 per game
Carrick - 0.05 per game

A bottom 6 comprised of these 7 players is maybe good for like 1 goal every 2 games based on career averages. Between the top 6 and the D the Hawks have to fill the void offensively and that is a tall order.

Am I the only one who has the feeling that Q is going to, for some reason, keep Keith and Hammer on the same line? I can't help but think he's going to try to keep forcing that as the #1 d pair instead of rolling with Keith + Seebs.

How do you arrive at 33%?

Campbell + Kempny > Svedberg + Gustafsson?
- John Jaeckel

I will just say this:

The swap out above SHOULD mean improvement on D—Campbell (at minimum) may upgrade one of the PP units.

The question is, how much does it improve the D, in what ways and in what situations, and then how much does THAT impact some pretty anemic 5-on-5 numbers last year.

No matter how good the D and the goaltending are, if you are as reliant as the Hawks were last year on one line for your scoring, you are in trouble come playoff time. Too many playoff teams can matchup your top line with a great d pairing and a shutdown forward line.

Truth is, last year's Hawk club was weaker upfront than the 2015 team that won the Cup, most notably at LW. And that is even WITH the addition of Panarin.

You can argue (as some have) that Toews and Hossa fell off a cliff on their own, and maybe that's why some think the "answer" is to bump Hossa down to 3RW and "replace" him with Hinostroza (jeebus). But the truth is, you have five bona fide top 6 forwards on this team (and that includes Toews and Hossa). Where the year before last, you really had 6:

Sharp, Saad, Toews, Hossa, Kane, Richards.

And you had two lines that together presented HUGE matchup problems for the OTHER team.

Personally, I think both Toews and Hossa had off years (and yes, I do think Hossa has better than last year in him still), but the revolving door on the left side did NOT help at all.

What you don't need a repeat of is another year long amateur hour talent call on that line.

Doesn't it strike anyone as odd that everyone is putting so much into Vesey coming in and instantly being a contributor on the top line for the Hawks and he hasn't played one game in the pros?

Like Al said, the scouting reports are all scattered on him being able to contribute at the NHL level...I mean, he's that much better than anyone in Rockford who has multiple years of professional experience and have come up in the Hawks system?

I will just say this:

The swap out above SHOULD mean improvement on D—Campbell (at minimum) may upgrade one of the PP units.

The question is, how much does it improve the D, in what ways and in what situations, and then how much does THAT impact some pretty anemic 5-on-5 numbers last year.

No matter how good the D and the goaltending are, if you are as reliant as the Hawks were last year on one line for your scoring, you are in trouble come playoff time. Too many playoff teams can matchup your top line with a great d pairing and a shutdown forward line.

Truth is, last year's Hawk club was weaker upfront than the 2015 team that won the Cup, most notably at LW. And that is even WITH the addition of Panarin.

You can argue (as some have) that Toews and Hossa fell off a cliff on their own, and maybe that's why some think the "answer" is to bump Hossa down to 3RW and "replace" him with Hinostroza (jeebus). But the truth is, you have five bona fide top 6 forwards on this team (and that includes Toews and Hossa). Where the year before last, you really had 6:

Sharp, Saad, Toews, Hossa, Kane, Richards.

And you had two lines that together presented HUGE matchup problems for the OTHER team.

Personally, I think both Toews and Hossa had off years (and yes, I do think Hossa has better than last year in him still), but the revolving door on the left side did NOT help at all.

What you don't need a repeat of is another year long amateur hour talent call on that line.
- John Jaeckel

True this, hopefully the solid NHL forward somehow comes in before the trade deadline this year.

I will just say this:

The swap out above SHOULD mean improvement on D—Campbell (at minimum) may upgrade one of the PP units.

The question is, how much does it improve the D, in what ways and in what situations, and then how much does THAT impact some pretty anemic 5-on-5 numbers last year.

No matter how good the D and the goaltending are, if you are as reliant as the Hawks were last year on one line for your scoring, you are in trouble come playoff time. Too many playoff teams can matchup your top line with a great d pairing and a shutdown forward line.

Truth is, last year's Hawk club was weaker upfront than the 2015 team that won the Cup, most notably at LW. And that is even WITH the addition of Panarin.

You can argue (as some have) that Toews and Hossa fell off a cliff on their own, and maybe that's why some think the "answer" is to bump Hossa down to 3RW and "replace" him with Hinostroza (jeebus). But the truth is, you have five bona fide top 6 forwards on this team (and that includes Toews and Hossa). Where the year before last, you really had 6:

Sharp, Saad, Toews, Hossa, Kane, Richards.

And you had two lines that together presented HUGE matchup problems for the OTHER team.

Personally, I think both Toews and Hossa had off years (and yes, I do think Hossa has better than last year in him still), but the revolving door on the left side did NOT help at all.

What you don't need a repeat of is another year long amateur hour talent call on that line.
- John Jaeckel

If you are in the camp that TVR is a solid #5 but a below average #4, then Campbell should help quite a bit. I'm not going to sell TVR short but if Campbell plays as well as he did last season it should help the cause.

But as you have said and I have said numerous times-One line scoring about 42-43% of the goals is not a good thing. Usually that says to me the playoffs might not be in the cards and if they are it's usually a one and done.

Doesn't it strike anyone as odd that everyone is putting so much into Vesey coming in and instantly being a contributor on the top line for the Hawks and he hasn't played one game in the pros?

Like Al said, the scouting reports are all scattered on him being able to contribute at the NHL level...I mean, he's that much better than anyone in Rockford who has multiple years of professional experience and have come up in the Hawks system?
- Hank3Henshaw

Very valid point.

Doesn't it strike anyone as odd that everyone is putting so much into Vesey coming in and instantly being a contributor on the top line for the Hawks and he hasn't played one game in the pros?

Like Al said, the scouting reports are all scattered on him being able to contribute at the NHL level...I mean, he's that much better than anyone in Rockford who has multiple years of professional experience and have come up in the Hawks system?
- Hank3Henshaw

I think the Vesey signing sweepstakes says more about the state teams like the Hawks are in concerning the cap. There isn't another way to acquire -what could be a significant contributor- for less cap space. That's why the Euro signings and those out of the NCAA are a big deal to those up against the cap...plus the draft but not easy to find 1st unit players drafting deep into the 1st round.

......If a pleasant surprise happens like a Panarin the GM can buy some time before the next big money contract that will sting.

Am I the only one here that would rather want Jiri Hudler other than Vesey lol? idk.. I just have a funny feeling this kid is all hype.

You are right about it not being all on Q. The FO likes Mashinter on the roster, or else he would have been in the AHL instead of playing for the Hawks at that point.
- breadbag

We have desjardin...and Tootoo.....we do not need mash...

Am I the only one here that would rather want Jiri Hudler other than Vesey lol? idk.. I just have a funny feeling this kid is all hype.
- MichaeLionheart

I've been saying that....get hudler and let's go