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.
- SimpleJack

Before he was "discovered" by some Hawk fans last year, The Great AA was painted with that brush to a degree. But you knew that, right?

The issue is not so much a lower line C, but who takes defensive zone draws, and there would be an issue regarding Kruger getting overused or making Q's changes a bit wonky.

But McNeill, Desi, Rasmussen can all take draws and are probably better in the fit than AA.

Round and around we go.

What about making Panarin play LW with Toews and Hossa and trying Schmaltz or Panik with AA and Kane? That gives the Toews line the LW it desperately needs and I bet the Kane line still produces as well.
- SimpleJack

Because they have proven so much offensively in the NHL. We don't even know if Schmaltz will make the team.

Who are those teams this year?
- DarthKane

Hard to say, especially with Kessel going down.

Nashville has improved a lot and are not as bad upfront as their perennial reputation might lead some to believe.

I will have to think on it a bit more.

I will tell you this. If you think the Hawks, as constructed today are a SCF team, I will take that action.

In my view Schmaltz or someone else coming out of the blue to take AA's spot gives Q a lot more choices. AA would be a vg 3rd line center...

People think you can't screw with Kane's line...If I'm the coach and no other feasible choice...I change things with the best offensive player in the league and challenge him. Kane has always found a way....
- Al

Agreed.

And you can even move Kane himself inside. Especially with that Russian kid on the left wing.

IMO Toews/Kruger/McNeil/Lundberg would be hands down the worst center depth for any team with championship aspirations. And my point is that center depth is more important than going out of your way to make sure all 4 of your top 6 wingers are all stars/olympians/great players..
- SimpleJack

The first two guys have 5 Cups between them and are two of the best face-off guys in the league.

ALL of those guys with the possible exception of Lundberg (who we know nothing about in the dot) are better than AA on draws.

And AA is not exactly a dynamic draw and dish center man. His game is all work and grind below the circles, something he can do just fine on the wing.

Panik is more of a 2LW than Kruger is a 2C. I'd try Panarin with Toews and Hossa. Schmaltz or Panik with Kane and AA. Kruger at 3C or 4C.
- SimpleJack

Proof? The Great Panik's production in the AHL, or Kruger playing with Desi and Rasmussen and Mashinter?

Hard to say, especially with Kessel going down.

Nashville has improved a lot and are not as bad upfront as their perennial reputation might lead some to believe.

I will have to think on it a bit more.

I will tell you this. If you think the Hawks, as constructed today are a SCF team, I will take that action.
- John Jaeckel

I didn't say this, or anything remotely close to this. My initial comment (to sum up) was that the Hawks top 6 void has shifted from 2C to 1LW. Afterwards, I mentioned that I believe all teams have a void of some kind throughout their roster.

Chicago has voids beyond 1LW, I think the third line could be cause for concern too, especially of Panik (by default) ends up on a a line with Toews and Hossa. Kruger will be a fine 3C, but I don't feel warm and fuzzy about the idea of Desi and Tootoo on this wings.

Proof? The Great Panik's production in the AHL, or Kruger playing with Desi and Rasmussen and Mashinter?
- John Jaeckel

The proof is in the makeup of the player. Panik has top 6 tools/skills. This was seen at times last season playing with Toews/Kane. His best traits are offensively related, he's a good fit in that role though he's obviously nothing special. But Kruger? Kruger has no business playing in a top 6 role( 2C). He brings absolutely nothing to the table offensively and just doesn't fit. I mean don't get me wrong I love Kruger for who he is, but he's no 2C.

Schmaltz/Panik/and Kane? No offense but that line will suck unless Panik somehow get's MUCH better and Schmaltz is lightning in a bottle. So you're back to 1 scoring line again.
- Murph76

Why? Kane has had lesser line mates and done just fine. He dragged Handzus around for a while. He had Versteeg and Richards and that line tore it up for a stretch. Kane's line often dominates when Q double shifts him with 4th liners. He will be just fine as long as he has Anisimov or Toews centering him.

Kane plus one of those two centers is a scoring line. He makes everyone else around him better.

Because they have proven so much offensively in the NHL. We don't even know if Schmaltz will make the team.
- John Jaeckel

But again, they have the tools/skill sets that make sense for a top 6 role. Kruger does not.

The first two guys have 5 Cups between them and are two of the best face-off guys in the league.

ALL of those guys with the possible exception of Lundberg (who we know nothing about in the dot) are better than AA on draws.

And AA is not exactly a dynamic draw and dish center man. His game is all work and grind below the circles, something he can do just fine on the wing.
- John Jaeckel

List the playoff calibre teams with worse center depth than that. I can't think of any. Maybe one.

People need to remember how good Kane was before Panarin came along. The guy has been dragging around borderline Top 6 guys around his entire career. If you are going to put an inexperienced wing with someone in the top 6 it should be Kane.

Panarin has a year under his belt and should be acclimated. I think he will do just fine away from Kane.

Why? Kane has had lesser line mates and done just fine. He dragged Handzus around for a while. He had Versteeg and Richards and that line tore it up for a stretch. Kane's line often dominates when Q double shifts him with 4th liners. He will be just fine as long as he has Anisimov or Toews centering him.

Kane plus one of those two centers is a scoring line. He makes everyone else around him better.
- bhawks2241

Handzus I get, but I'm fairly certain you could say that Versteeg + Richards (neither of which were ever on any team's 4th line) are WAYYYY better than Panik and a rookie who hasn't played a single game in the NHL yet. You saddle him with Panik and Schmaltz, and I bet he has a 55-65 point year.

Before he was "discovered" by some Hawk fans last year, The Great AA was painted with that brush to a degree. But you knew that, right?

The issue is not so much a lower line C, but who takes defensive zone draws, and there would be an issue regarding Kruger getting overused or making Q's changes a bit wonky.

But McNeill, Desi, Rasmussen can all take draws and are probably better in the fit than AA.

Round and around we go.
- John Jaeckel

Does Q trust any of those guys to take defensive zone draws. Rasmussen was sent down for the playoffs, which tells me they aren't sure on him, but maybe he fits. McNeill is still kind of an unknown at the NHL level. Desi is okay, but already he was playing like 3/4 of the time in the Dzone and after Kruger was top in PK minutes. (most total because Kruger was hurt)

I think who plays where is going to come down to how ready they feel the "new guys" are defensively. My gut is telling me this team won't score the pants off the opposition and the Hawks are going to need to be air tight defensively. If Kruger is the best option defensively at C, then they will need him defending.

People need to remember how good Kane was before Panarin came along. The guy has been dragging around borderline Top 6 guys around his entire career. If you are going to put an inexperienced wing with someone in the top 6 it should be Kane.

Panarin has a year under his belt and should be acclimated. I think he will do just fine away from Kane.
- bhawks2241

Agreed.

And furthermore, the reason this Hawks team shouldn't feel too worried about their 4th best top 6 winger being Schmaltz or Panik is because of how good its other top 6 wingers are. Name a team with a better trio of wingers than the Hawks Kane/Panarin/Hossa(hint: there are none).

So, why go out of our way to take AA out of his center position and move him to LW while also taking Kruger out of his natural role putting him at 2C with Kane on a scoring line?

Handzus I get, but I'm fairly certain you could say that Versteeg + Richards (neither of which were ever on any team's 4th line) are WAYYYY better than Panik and a rookie who hasn't played a single game in the NHL yet. You saddle him with Panik and Schmaltz, and I bet he has a 55-65 point year.
- Murph76

Why is he playing with Schmaltz and Panik? Leave Kane with Anisimov. Fill in with lesser wing.

Does Q trust any of those guys to take defensive zone draws. Rasmussen was sent down for the playoffs, which tells me they aren't sure on him, but maybe he fits. McNeill is still kind of an unknown at the NHL level. Desi is okay, but already he was playing like 3/4 of the time in the Dzone and after Kruger was top in PK minutes. (most total because Kruger was hurt)

I think who plays where is going to come down to how ready they feel the "new guys" are defensively. My gut is telling me this team won't score the pants off the opposition and the Hawks are going to need to be air tight defensively. If Kruger is the best option defensively at C, then they will need him defending.
- breadbag

Rasmussen wasn't going to play after the acquisition of Ladd, Weise, and Fleischmann and I'm sure he was sent down to help Rockford in the playoffs rather than sit on the bench in Chicago.

If Rasmussen is this 4C then I don't have any real issues with his game. If I had to nit-pick I would like to see his face offs improve (47% last season).

This is how to describe the hole in the Hawks top 6 right now...(until something changes)

Why is he playing with Schmaltz and Panik? Leave Kane with Anisimov. Fill in with lesser wing.
- bhawks2241

He's not, nor should be be. I misread Jack's post a few pages back and that's how that potential poop-show of a line got formed

Rasmussen wasn't going to play after the acquisition of Ladd, Weise, and Fleischmann and I'm sure he was sent down to help Rockford in the playoffs rather than sit on the bench in Chicago.

If Rasmussen is this 4C then I don't have any real issues with his game. If I had to nit-pick I would like to see his face offs improve (47% last season).
- DarthKane

Right, but then they gave ice-time to Mashinter at forward to start the series... I mean...Rasmussen would have been playing W on that 4th line if they wanted him there.

Right, but then they gave ice-time to Mashinter at forward to start the series... I mean...Rasmussen would have been playing W on that 4th line if they wanted him there.
- breadbag

Mashinter also played over Weise, Panik and Fleishmann. Mashinter playing at all during the playoffs is a major head scratcher.

Mashinter also played over Weise, Panik and Fleishmann. Mashinter playing at all during the playoffs is a major head scratcher.
- DarthKane

Rozsival must have been unable to feel anything below the waist for Rundblad to play in Game 7 vs the Blues instead of him.

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.
- Al

Exactly what that line or a Toews/Kane line needs. And I think we can all agree that this player won't be a prototypical LW1, that person is just not here. But maybe, just maybe, someone can set their sights on a simple and supportive role and it may work out for Q.

Barring any notable additions, who on the roster can attempt to live up to that role?

Panik - might have the best skillset to succeed in a puck retrieval and cycle game. He's fast and physical enough to get in the zone first. Now, if he finds a little finishing jam in during the season, he may work.

Anisimov - if he's moved up, is he fast enough? He's damn good at protecting, cycling and finishing.

Hartman - here's one... I would have thought the Hawks brass might have told Dent to try him out at LW in RFD. I know he was a C/RW coming up and has primarily played RW in the AHL but they did tell him to work on his board game, he's got some speed and lots of grit. The dumb penalties will keep him on a short leash regardless of what line, but it would be magnified in the top 6. Eli, can you confirm if Hartman has ever been tried on the left side in RFD?

McNeill - also a C/RW but might have a shot to get a look their. I still feel he's not a "Q" guy and will not have a long look but hopefully comes in and surprises. The guy has paid his dues. Not sur eif he's quick enough for the top 6, but has the tools to play 2-way and solid along the boards.

Motte - granted I have not watched a lot of him, but if he can use his speed to get in the zone, use his stocky frame to be physically adept... if it's Toews and Kane, he may have an addition in the top 6. He'll have to win hearts of the coaching staff in training camp though.

Lundberg - never seen him play and it sounds like he has 0 finishing skills, but sounds like a fast, gritty player that may get the Ryan Garbutt look in the top 6 if Q fancies him.

Hard to say, especially with Kessel going down.

Nashville has improved a lot and are not as bad upfront as their perennial reputation might lead some to believe.

I will have to think on it a bit more.

I will tell you this. If you think the Hawks, as constructed today are a SCF team, I will take that action.
- John Jaeckel

Little unfair action ,as you get 29 teams and we get 1 .But I will still say many teams will have holes to fill with a flat cap .And young players are going to be the best and only way for many . Nas I think Rinne has not been the same since his hip injury ,and their D took a step back with Suppan .. D wins Championships and the HAWKS took some big steps in that direction

Eli, can you confirm if Hartman has ever been tried on the left side in RFD?
- TyCamScore

I can probably count the number of times Hartman has lined up at LW on one hand. It's an extremely rare occurrence, and on the PP only (from what I can recollect).

McNeill is in the same boat (rare occurrence), but I've seen McNeill take shifts at LW at even strength, and probably three times the instances Hartman has taken a shift at LW.