Any chance Tuomo Ruutu is invited on a PTO?
- powerenforcer

Not enough glue and duct tape to go around now that Rozsival is coming back.

Not enough glue and duct tape to go around now that Rozsival is coming back.
- Al

Especially if Tanguay gets an invite too.

Not enough glue and duct tape to go around now that Rozsival is coming back.
- Al

I wasn't sure how bad he has been injured. I saw that he didn't do too much with NJ last season.

Any chance Tuomo Ruutu is invited on a PTO?
- powerenforcer

Ehhhhhhh, possibly?

My personal belief is sign as many "guys" to PTOs as you can get to come. You have nothing to lose. I think some might be afraid that it would "rob" a kiddo of their shot. But the bottom line is: the more healthy bodies you have in camp, and the more experienced ones you have, the better your chances of SOMEONE emerging and being the guy that fills a hole and helps you win.

Ehhhhhhh, possibly?

My personal belief is sign as many "guys" to PTOs as you can get to come. You have nothing to lose. I think some might be afraid that it would "rob" a kiddo of their shot. But the bottom line is: the more healthy bodies you have in camp, and the more experienced ones you have, the better your chances of SOMEONE emerging and being the guy that fills a hole and helps you win.
- John Jaeckel

Agreed!

You win an NHL job, not get handed one.

If some long of tooth old guy wlaks in and wins it it is not on Q, it is on you.

Name I heard and this was a suggestion of someone a friend thought they should invite: Jiri Tlusty

Have not heard back whether he is a name they are considering, would not surprise me however
- John Jaeckel

What is the story with him? I haven't followed him in a couple years. Looks like his play has tapered off. Injuries?

Does he still have the talent where if he is with good players he can produce? I know he was supposed to be a bit of a sniper. Would be a nice skill set to have as a LW.

Ehhhhhhh, possibly?

My personal belief is sign as many "guys" to PTOs as you can get to come. You have nothing to lose. I think some might be afraid that it would "rob" a kiddo of their shot. But the bottom line is: the more healthy bodies you have in camp, and the more experienced ones you have, the better your chances of SOMEONE emerging and being the guy that fills a hole and helps you win.
- John Jaeckel

I know that a lot of people think that exhibition hockey is garbage and difficult to watch (I would agree to a certain extent). What is valuable is looking at some of the effort, backchecking, ability to stake from A-to-B,...does the guy get to the corners?

My expectations for a PTO player that ultimately gets signed would not necessarily be for that person to plug the top-6 vacancy. Rather, if there is a forward (or two) that acquits himself well as a competent two-way forward, I think they would play into the revolving door of people auditioning for the slot. Whether that person is in a bottom-6 role and that elevates someone else to have a shot at #1LW or they are simply Rock depth, who knows? Not expecting the world from the PTO scrap heap

Ehhhhhhh, possibly?

My personal belief is sign as many "guys" to PTOs as you can get to come. You have nothing to lose. I think some might be afraid that it would "rob" a kiddo of their shot. But the bottom line is: the more healthy bodies you have in camp, and the more experienced ones you have, the better your chances of SOMEONE emerging and being the guy that fills a hole and helps you win.
- John Jaeckel

I don't think anyone believes that signing a veteran to a PTO robs a prospect of their shot. Signing a marginal veteran to an standard player contract (right now) could indeed take away an opportunity for some young guy.

I don't think anyone believes that signing a veteran to a PTO robs a prospect of their shot. Signing a marginal veteran to an standard player contract (right now) could indeed take away an opportunity for some young guy.
- DarthKane

That´s right! Just look how many PTO´s got signed last year.

What about Dallas Stars Valeri Nichushkin for TVR?

What about Dallas Stars Valeri Nichushkin for TVR?
- kmw4631

I haven't see him play much but he does have some upside. Can he play on the left side which is where we really need him?

While I don't believe Kruger will ever be an offensive force I believe he can produce more than he has. It's easy to call out Kruger for his poor numbers, but Q gives him the toughest defensive assignment night in and night out.

If Q can allocate some of Kruger's defensive duties to somebody else (maybe Rasmussen) then he could easily put up more points. I think 35 points could be quite reasonable and that puts him in the same zone as Shaw's output.
- DarthKane

He gets crappy zone starts but based on the qualcomp stuff it was Toews getting more of those. Really the only scenario was during the Ducks series on the last Cup run and then again for half the Bolts series.

Otherwise he took most of the D zone draws regardless of who was on the ice for the other team. Which is still a grind but with the way that group tilts the ice he should still put up a reasonable amount of points.

I suspect some of that changes based on the hole on the LW. Kooga gets closer to 16 minutes \ night, chips in 25-30 points catching the other teams best cheating, and that frees up Toews and Hossa to rip apart the other teams off lines.

He doesn't need to be a 15 and 30 guy but if he could do 10 and 20 or in that range, then that would go a long way in terms of picking up the slack.

Time for a new thread, I suggest:

X 19 X
X X 88
X X X
X X X

X X
X X
X X

X
X

Fill in all blanks and discuss

I haven't see him play much but he does have some upside. Can he play on the left side which is where we really need him?
- Lido_Shuffle

I'd prefer if half of Dallas' D core was not made up of former Hawks.

I haven't see him play much but he does have some upside. Can he play on the left side which is where we really need him?
- Lido_Shuffle

I think he's a RW and it would probably cost more than TvR to get him.

Time for a new thread, I suggest:

X 19 X
X X 88
X X X
X X X

X X
X X
X X

X
X

Fill in all blanks and discuss
- riozzo

Horrible roster, clearly this is much better:

X X 88
X 19 X
X X X
X X X

X X
X X
X X

X
X

Horrible roster, clearly this is much better:

X X 88
X X X
X 19 X
X X X

X X
X X
X X

X
X
- DarthKane

Wrong again.

#10milfora3C

What about Dallas Stars Valeri Nichushkin for TVR?
- kmw4631

He's a RW, and with the trouble he's had transitioning to the NHL, it's probably not a good idea to try to switch sides on him. On top of that, the Stars have no real need for TVR - they already have a logjam at defense with 25/under guys who have to pass through waivers. If they pick up anyone on defense, it'll be for someone established who can definitively play top 4. They're more likely to package a forward and one of their highly thought up defensive prospects for a goalie.

Here is a discussion topic. How many games do you think Rozsival will play this season?

My guess is 35 games, as I think Kempny and TVR will get the lion's share of actual game time.

Rozsivals GP by season as a Hawk

12/13 - 27 GP (lockout year)
13/14 - 42 GP
14/15 - 65 GP
15/16 - 51 GP (Missed the first month with injury, likely would have played a lot with Keith out)

Additional considerations:

Will another Dman lower on the totem pole surpass him on Q's depth chart? i.e. Gus, Sved, Pokka... Certainly possible (maybe 50-50) given Rosy age and chance to decline further.

Also, maybe his playing time could be higher, given the fact our D core isn't so young anymore. Keith seems to still have worries about his knee and Seabrook was in rough shape exiting the playoffs. Campbell is up there in age now.

Depending how the forward lines work out, I wonder if Q will consider dressing 7 D. He has done it before and if he feels the 4th line isn't going to play, it could help balance the load.

Though I realize the great Tanner does not think fan observations and context underlying the stats count at all in ranking players, this per @HawksBreakdown, has position rankings as agreed by a crowd-sourced fan scouting site. . .discuss:



this one hurts a bit, seeing the former Hawks and considering our current dilemma






I see this one as being more influenced by reputation than performance

Though I realize the great Tanner does not think fan observations and context underlying the stats count at all in ranking players, this per @HawksBreakdown, has position rankings as agreed by a crowd-sourced fan scouting site. . .discuss:



this one hurts a bit, seeing the former Hawks and considering our current dilemma






I see this one as being more influenced by reputation than performance

- pdx2ord

Wow. I don't really disagree with much on the RW, but the relative position of guys like Silfverberg and Stone are a little surprising.

I like Tatar and Schwartz as much as the next guy, but if McDavid can be the 11th ranked center, there is no reason Panarin doesn't make the list.

D-men is to be expected. Center rankings are a bit more difficult, not only because of the volume of good players, but what some are asked to do vs. others.

I completely agree with your goalie assessment.

Wow. I don't really disagree with much on the RW, but the relative position of guys like Silfverberg and Stone are a little surprising.

I like Tatar and Schwartz as much as the next guy, but if McDavid can be the 11th ranked center, there is no reason Panarin doesn't make the list.

D-men is to be expected. Center rankings are a bit more difficult, not only because of the volume of good players, but what some are asked to do vs. others.

I completely agree with your goalie assessment.
- Chunk

Hudler and Frolik seem a bit high at RW - I think (barring injury) we'll see that McDavid is ar least a bit underrated at #11 - I think he showed in his shortened season how good he really is.

You're probably right about Panarin.

Hudler and Frolik seem a bit high at RW - I think (barring injury) we'll see that McDavid is ar least a bit underrated at #11 - I think he showed in his shortened season how good he really is.

You're probably right about Panarin.
- StLBravesFan

I wasn't trying to take anything away from McDavid. I was simply connecting their rankings both being rookies last year.

I think you can see some of the effect of marketing in these rankings.

Especially if Tanguay gets an invite too.
- 93Joe

Thankfully medical staff salary doesn't count against the cap.

Here is a discussion topic. How many games do you think Rozsival will play this season?

My guess is 35 games, as I think Kempny and TVR will get the lion's share of actual game time.

Rozsivals GP by season as a Hawk

12/13 - 27 GP (lockout year)
13/14 - 42 GP
14/15 - 65 GP
15/16 - 51 GP (Missed the first month with injury, likely would have played a lot with Keith out)

Additional considerations:

Will another Dman lower on the totem pole surpass him on Q's depth chart? i.e. Gus, Sved, Pokka... Certainly possible (maybe 50-50) given Rosy age and chance to decline further.

Also, maybe his playing time could be higher, given the fact our D core isn't so young anymore. Keith seems to still have worries about his knee and Seabrook was in rough shape exiting the playoffs. Campbell is up there in age now.

Depending how the forward lines work out, I wonder if Q will consider dressing 7 D. He has done it before and if he feels the 4th line isn't going to play, it could help balance the load.
- breadbag

Good perspective to bring up the option to consider dressing 7 blueliners and only 11 forwards. My take is that dressing 7 on D would be to (A) give Kempny a language buddy during actual game play (versus just during practices and in the locker room, bench, etc) and (B) allow van Riemsdyk to play regularly. So is that necessary to dress 7 defenders at the expense of rolling 4 forward lines? My gut says no but I could see why dressing 7 could be an option.

I personally feel the 4th line is the least of our concerns. That line is likely Desjardins, Rasmussen, and Tootoo with Lundberg, Hartman, and McNeill as other candidates. A line like that no matter who rotates in should be effective as far as being a shift-disturbing line with hopefully opportunistic goals to contribute some offense.

IMHO, there are more question marks in the first 3 lines with musical chairs going on, i.e. whoever plays 1LW will create a chain reaction of where others will play in the top 9 (whereas someone who doesn't get a spot in the top 9 is likely not going to get bumped all the way down to the 4th line).