Isnt TVR in the same situation? We risk losing him as well.
- z1990z

My guess is that we'd lose Pokka or TvR in the expansion draft.

I'm still not in favour of trading TvR, at least not until we see what Kempny can bring at the NHL level.

As much as I am not a big fan, could Gustafsson be a solid replacement for TvR? At least for next season we're just talking about 3rd pairing minutes. If you look at all the advanced stats Gus seems to be amongst the leader on the team (for the D).
- DarthKane

I like Gustafsson quite a bit, but it was clear his confidence took a hit after he got the Leddy treatment from Q. Hopefully he can bounce back and stop over thinking it.

I like Gustafsson quite a bit, but it was clear his confidence took a hit after he got the Leddy treatment from Q. Hopefully he can bounce back and stop over thinking it.
- JRoenick97

I disagree. I think Gustafsson got inside his own head.

Q explicitly said he wanted to see Gustafsson be more aggressive in the offensive zone and use his talent there. I think Gustafsson pulled back on his own accord to be more defensive minded and hurt his own game

I disagree. I think Gustafsson got inside his own head.

Q explicitly said he wanted to see Gustafsson be more aggressive in the offensive zone and use his talent there. I think Gustafsson pulled back on his own accord to be more defensive minded and hurt his own game
- hawkeytalkman

I don't disagree that this is what got him the Leddy treatment, then it spiraled from there.

I don't disagree that this is what got him the Leddy treatment, then it spiraled from there.
- JRoenick97

Gus averaged almost 15.5 minutes per game, but his ice time varied greatly from game to game. Sometimes he played less that 7 minutes and others over 20 minutes. If Gus were to be TvR's replacement it would be nice to see him get a solid 12-13 minutes each night on the 3rd pair.

I don't disagree that this is what got him the Leddy treatment, then it spiraled from there.
- JRoenick97

Personally, I think if Gus is given a shot again, he has a chance to take a real step forward. He wasn't always good last year, but there are some real nice aspects to his game. I hope he doesn't regress and maybe with the way the team is starting the year, he will gain some confidence in the AHL until a spot opens up for him to play again.

1) He was creative with the puck at times and showed he can make some great passes. For example, I think his first point as a Blackhawk (in his first game) was a great pass, fore-checker closing in to hit him, and he sent AA to a breakaway goal. Or Jan 8th, vs Buffalo, he made a nice fake shot/pass to Hjalmarsson that sent him in for a goal.

2) He can skate the puck up ice. The Hawks need this. Getting through the neutral zone was horrid last season. Losing Saad/Sharp/Oudya/Leddy, has all hurt the ability to transition.

My hope is that the Hawks give Gus a little more time because he still has potential.

Personally, I think if Gus is given a shot again, he has a chance to take a real step forward. He wasn't always good last year, but there are some real nice aspects to his game. I hope he doesn't regress and maybe with the way the team is starting the year, he will gain some confidence in the AHL until a spot opens up for him to play again.

1) He was creative with the puck at times and showed he can make some great passes. For example, I think his first point as a Blackhawk (in his first game) was a great pass, fore-checker closing in to hit him, and he sent AA to a breakaway goal. Or Jan 8th, vs Buffalo, he made a nice fake shot/pass to Hjalmarsson that sent him in for a goal.

2) He can skate the puck up ice. The Hawks need this. Getting through the neutral zone was horrid last season. Losing Saad/Sharp/Oudya/Leddy, has all hurt the ability to transition.

My hope is that the Hawks give Gus a little more time because he still has potential.
- breadbag

I could not agree more. I hope he's shaken off that turnover in the blues elimination game

Barring a trade for a top 6 LW. I really think you need to break up Kane and Panarin. Kane with either Anisimov or Toews can carry a lesser LW wing. Hossa, god love him, can't really elevate another player's offensive game anymore. You need a bonafide top 6 LW with him.

I mean Kane made the Richard Versteeg combo deadly for a large chunk of '15. Can Schmaltz bring a Versteeg like game? With maybe a bit less stupid?

Personally, I want to see. Panarin Toews Hossa, X Anisimov Kane.

Anyone have a Sharp lite laying around they could loan the Hawks for cheap?
- bhawks2241

The folly of the Blackhawks LW situation has made me consider whether or not Kris Versteeg would be an upgrade over any LW on the roster not named Artemi Panarin. I know, I know, he's in Europe now and not an option. I'm just saying that's how bad the second top 6 LW scenario is looking right now.

1) I have considered that many times but here's the hard truth—bottom line. Without Ladd, prior to his arrival, it can be argued that Shaw was the closest thing the Hawks had to a solution on Toews' left wing. And, heck, they also tried TT there. The other solutions were Ryan Garbutt and Marko Dano.

ALL. GONE.

So no matter how you nuance it, they are down a lot of experienced wingers, and still have a big hole as far as someone to play on Toews' left side.

I know, I know, everyone wants to say Hossa and even Toews are done or not very good or belong on the 4th line playing ten minutes a night.

But it just defies logic that they can go from being 2/3 of arguably the best forward line on the planet in June 2015 to pretty mediocre by October 2015.

What happened? Anyone? Bueller?

How about the subtraction of the fast, skilled, fairly physical LW they had been playing with for the prior two seasons?

But the Hawks don't need another top 6 LW, they already have ONE of those. The real issue is, how the heck are we gonna build a 4th line!!! SMH.

2) Uhhh, yeah, but, no.

We've talked about this before, remember? I wish there was a stat for o-zone possession time. I think we all don't have to think too hard to remember 2015 when Toews' line, and Kruger's line, primarily, would maintain offensive zone possession for so long that the Hawks could often make complete changes, and they got a lot of goals off that.

I DO agree, from an X's and O's standpoint, offense starts in your own end with clean breakouts and speed getting the puck up the ice. BUT, it ends with finish in the offensive zone and just as you can say the D is critical to initiating offense—THE ABSOLUTE BEST DEFENSE 5-ON-5 is keeping the opponent pinned in their end, 150 to 200 feet from your net, chasing the puck and getting worn out defending. There IS no argument against that.

And in that regard—extended o-zone possession—the Hawks appeared to have really fell off the cliff last year and have not done much to address it—in fact, minus Shaw, Ladd and even TT, they are probably worse.

The big losses were Oduya, Saad and Sharp. You can argue Panarin replaced one of them. And maybe a combination of Campbell at 37 and Kempny as a rookie, fills the void on D. But they have not replaced a top 6 LW nor the positive domino effect on all the lines, by allowing Q to slot guys there they should be. Like Shaw as a lower line RW.

3) No it is actually really easy to say, barring the unlikely emergence of 20-21 year olds with zero to minimal pro experience playing way over their heads, the Hawk forward depth chart is clearly worse today than it was a few months ago. You cannot just write off Ladd as though he wasn't on the roster. He was. And he was helping the team, too, filling a role that had been empty all season.

They have not replaced Ladd (who they traded Dano for). They have not replaced Shaw. TT had value as a utility/depth guy and maybe one of the youngsters CAN do that this year. I don't see a guy among all the Rockford Would-Bes who comes in and does what Ladd could and Shaw did this year. But . . . maybe Bowman pulls a rabbit out of his hat at some point.
- John Jaeckel

and, Thank You.....bingo JJ

The folly of the Blackhawks LW situation has made me consider whether or not Kris Versteeg would be an upgrade over any LW on the roster not named Artemi Panarin. I know, I know, he's in Europe now and not an option. I'm just saying that's how bad the second top 6 LW scenario is looking right now.
- matt_ahrens

He is undoubtedly an upgrade. He makes a few head scratchers for decisions, but he can still put up 40-50ish points.

He is undoubtedly an upgrade. He makes a few head scratchers for decisions, but he can still put up 40-50ish points.
- JRoenick97

yeah, and I don't see who on the roster can fill that top 6 LW hole and do that.

Every team has a hole, for a long time Chicago's was the 2nd line centre role. While's it's very true that Saad's departure and the inability to fill his void has a massive impact on the team let's not ignore the fact that the 2C void was filled with Anisimov. We always had a need in the top 6, last season it just switched from 2C to 1LW.

I don't think Stan has the assets to acquire a legit #1 LW. I don't foresee this being a busy TDL either, Stan will want to hold on to all the draft picks this season after trading away so many picks in the past couple years. One way or another Stan will have to take a chance on somebody to fill the LW void, either one of the rookies or a low-key trade.
- DarthKane

Incorrect, every year there are typically 1-2 teams without holes, or without measurably debilitating ones, the ones still playing in June.

I disagree. I think Gustafsson got inside his own head.

Q explicitly said he wanted to see Gustafsson be more aggressive in the offensive zone and use his talent there. I think Gustafsson pulled back on his own accord to be more defensive minded and hurt his own game
- hawkeytalkman

He definitely regressed after a great start in Chi. Not sure why.

and, Thank You.....bingo JJ

- Hawkster

Thx, LBR had some good points, but it was the nuance and context I think that needed to be added.

yeah, and I don't see who on the roster can fill that top 6 LW hole and do that.
- matt_ahrens

Schmaltz maybe?.... Other than that it would be a dark horse.

Nuclear/random option of the day? Have McNeill or Moose center Panarin and Kane? Move Anisimov up to 1LW....

SO bored at work make it Friday at 5pm already.

Ho Hum

Schmaltz maybe?.... Other than that it would be a dark horse.

Nuclear/random option of the day? Have McNeill or Moose center Panarin and Kane? Move Anisimov up to 1LW....

SO bored at work make it Friday at 5pm already.
- bhawks2241

The options (from likeliest to produce a solution, to less likely):

1) trade
2) multiple veteran PTOs, find a workable, temporary solution—ie, a natural left winger who can get up and down the ice, make a play now and then and otherwise stay out of the way
3) reconfigure current assets—like moving AA out to LW with Toews, bounce Kruger up to 2L, or move Kane inside and try a rookie on his RW.
4) A rookie really overachieves and can get things going again on Toews' line

1) is problematic—what do you have to give up to get what you want, salaries
2) is a no-brainer, you have ZERO to lose by benign in trusty, Tanguay, ruutu, you name it.
3) also problematic unless Q really cracks an elusive code. Never know.
4) The yutes may be able to help on some level, and maybe if you can fill a spot or two on the lower lines, it gives you a bit more luxury to try something like #3.

The options (from likeliest to produce a solution, to less likely):

1) trade
2) multiple veteran PTOs, find a workable, temporary solution—ie, a natural left winger who can get up and down the ice, make a play now and then and otherwise stay out of the way
3) reconfigure current assets—like moving AA out to LW with Toews, bounce Kruger up to 2L, or move Kane inside and try a rookie on his RW.
4) A rookie really overachieves and can get things going again on Toews' line

1) is problematic—what do you have to give up to get what you want, salaries
2) is a no-brainer, you have ZERO to lose by benign in trusty, Tanguay, ruutu, you name it.
3) also problematic unless Q really cracks an elusive code. Never know.
4) The yutes may be able to help on some level, and maybe if you can fill a spot or two on the lower lines, it gives you a bit more luxury to try something like #3.
- John Jaeckel

JJ in your opinion is Q more likely to break up Panarin and Kane? Or just have open auditions for Toews LW like last year? I think Kane with Toews/Anisimov have the best chance to effectively carry/ elevate the play of a younger player/lower quality player.

Incorrect, every year there are typically 1-2 teams without holes, or without measurably debilitating ones, the ones still playing in June.
- John Jaeckel

This time around they have a hole to fill that was an issue last season as well as trying fill the void from losing Shaw. Not easy...

The options (from likeliest to produce a solution, to less likely):

1) trade
2) multiple veteran PTOs, find a workable, temporary solution—ie, a natural left winger who can get up and down the ice, make a play now and then and otherwise stay out of the way
3) reconfigure current assets—like moving AA out to LW with Toews, bounce Kruger up to 2L, or move Kane inside and try a rookie on his RW.
4) A rookie really overachieves and can get things going again on Toews' line

1) is problematic—what do you have to give up to get what you want, salaries
2) is a no-brainer, you have ZERO to lose by benign in trusty, Tanguay, ruutu, you name it.
3) also problematic unless Q really cracks an elusive code. Never know.
4) The yutes may be able to help on some level, and maybe if you can fill a spot or two on the lower lines, it gives you a bit more luxury to try something like #3.
- John Jaeckel

* Freudian typo.

My uninformed guess is that they try #s 2, 3, and 4 for the first month or two or three and then make a trade with a team that is willing to eat some salary. They'll also know the cost of the roster by then and maybe go with 22 instead of 23, that could free up a bit more cap space to take on salary of about $2m to $2.5m. If the trading partner keeps 50% of salary, that might bring in a fairly good LW for the remainder of the year. I'd also guess it is a player whose contract expires at the end of the year. So, I'm hoping some teams fail out of the gate to increase the LW market.

JJ in your opinion is Q more likely to break up Panarin and Kane? Or just have open auditions for Toews LW like last year? I think Kane with Toews/Anisimov have the best chance to effectively carry/ elevate the play of a younger player/lower quality player.
- bhawks2241

I wish there was a line in Vegas with reasonable odds concerning breaking up the Kane line. It may not stay that way but I'm thinking it's close to a lock to happen.

I could not agree more. I hope he's shaken off that turnover in the blues elimination game
- JRoenick97

Gus has size and can move. Hell, Steve Smith put one in his own net in the playoffs and he turned out all right. COACH the f'n guy, dont poop on him.

I wish there was a line in Vegas with reasonable odds concerning breaking up the Kane line. It may not stay that way but I'm thinking it's close to a lock to happen.
- Al

I think JJ mentioned something like this before but I seriously think the best option is to move Kruger to 2C, leave Kane and Panarin where they are...then move AA up to 1 LW. So:
AA - Toews - Hoss
Panarin - Kruger - Kane

Then the bottom lines should easily be filled with a combination of vets/rookies already in the system.

I think JJ mentioned something like this before but I seriously think the best option is to move Kruger to 2C, leave Kane and Panarin where they are...then move AA up to 1 LW. So:
AA - Toews - Hoss
Panarin - Kruger - Kane

Then the bottom lines should easily be filled with a combination of vets/rookies already in the system.
- Murph76

That's an option...All I know for sure is Toews/Hossa need someone to be 1st into the zone and capture the puck. As much as Q was questioned about putting Shaw there-That's the skill set he had.

I think JJ mentioned something like this before but I seriously think the best option is to move Kruger to 2C, leave Kane and Panarin where they are...then move AA up to 1 LW. So:
AA - Toews - Hoss
Panarin - Kruger - Kane

Then the bottom lines should easily be filled with a combination of vets/rookies already in the system.
- Murph76

Can't put an offensively inept shutdown C on our primary scoring line....

And then who plays C in the bottom 6? We'd have the worst C depth in the league if we went that route.