Sounds like he is playing both sides of the fence

He realizes now how much winning is important but at the same time he has no issues getting 36 million dollars
- hawkeytalkman

That's the way I read it. All things being equal he'd still be here, but it is what it is. With other Hawks breaking the bank, why should players like Saad/Shaw and others take HTD, when no one else will.

I still think the Hawks have 2 years left in the window. In 2 or 3 years young teams like Phoenix, Edmonton and Calgary should pass the Hawks by as age and attrition take its toll. If the Hawks can get 1 more Cup that would be awesome and I still think they can.

The passing wasn't as good from anyone on the back end as in the past except for Seabrook. TVR wasn't an issue but no one filled the Oduya void-while Daley was here he was an awful passer. Hammer had his worst season that I can recall and Keith didn't look the same and was run down by the time the playoffs were here.

I agree Campbell should help a lot, but some of the blame does fall on the forwards as well.

On paper this is the best Hawks defense in the last 10 years, actually a lot longer than that.
- Al

It better be on the ice to...crawford faced alot of rubber the last few years and still was magnificant. They will need to lower the shots and the quality and have crow shut it down again to win cuz (I repeat myself again) as presently construed they will be a mediocre 5 on 5 and middle of the pack in scoring.

That's the way I read it. All things being equal he'd still be here, but it is what it is. With other Hawks breaking the bank, why should players like Saad/Shaw and others take HTD, when no one else will.

I still think the Hawks have 2 years left in the window. In 2 or 3 years young teams like Phoenix, Edmonton and Calgary should pass the Hawks by as age and attrition take its toll. If the Hawks can get 1 more Cup that would be awesome and I still think they can.
- kwolf68

For those of who have a better understanding of talent depth throughout the league, where does the Hawks organization fit in the rankings? For example, the Cubs were poor at the MLB-level and had an atrocious farm system when Epstein took over. Now they are playoff-quality in MLB and they also have a series of prospects that are highly-rated and being moved because they are stacked at MLB.

My fear is that when the "window" expires, you will have some albatross contracts for guys with no wheels (Hossa/Seabrook) and two superstars north of 30 (Toews/Kane) with no talented parts around them. How can Stan keep the team in the "window" while keeping the pipeline stocked? My impression is the pipeline is depleted.

It better be on the ice to...crawford faced alot of rubber the last few years and still was magnificant. They will need to lower the shots and the quality and have crow shut it down again to win cuz (I repeat myself again) as presently construed they will be a mediocre 5 on 5 and middle of the pack in scoring.
- bogiedoc

I think they instantly have some relief adding Campbell and hopefully playing less Roszival. Just from the fact that Campbell can skate the puck away from forecheckers and get it up the ice decently well. The Hawks last season had way too many poor breakouts that got to center ice and then turned around back into their zone. Either a poor pass from the D or just inability to get enough puck support.

I wish there was a stat on how often a player passes (or carries) a puck across their own blueline which results in gaining the offensive zone. I think it would be a really useful thing to know...

I have zero problem with that.

I also, in theory, can roll with:

XX-19-88
72-15-XX
XX-16-81

BUT, that comes back to the now age-old question. Who are those XX's and can they do the jobs assigned?

If I were Q, assuming I was starting with that, and with the "assets" currently available, I would go with Panik with Toews and Kane. With 19 and 88, you know that line won't suck anyway. Just hope Panik can create some space and be disruptive and not explode with the puck on his blade.

I would try Schmaltz with Panarin and AA. RW is his natural wing, his playmaking could—could theoretically—complement Panarin nicely. Who knows he might be better than AA in the dot (it's possible) and could bump him out of there in some situations.

And I would try either Motte or McNeill (or both) on Kruger's left side.

I would do so with some trepidation and the big worry would be Motte and Schmaltz being able to hack it over 200 feet against the best players int he world.

But it's worth a try in the absence of better options.
- John Jaeckel

If Q goes with two vets per line in the top 9 then I would agree with your choices, at least to start the season.

I thought you were against the idea of Hossa on the third line with Kruger?

I have zero problem with that.

I also, in theory, can roll with:

XX-19-88
72-15-XX
XX-16-81

BUT, that comes back to the now age-old question. Who are those XX's and can they do the jobs assigned?

If I were Q, assuming I was starting with that, and with the "assets" currently available, I would go with Panik with Toews and Kane. With 19 and 88, you know that line won't suck anyway. Just hope Panik can create some space and be disruptive and not explode with the puck on his blade.

I would try Schmaltz with Panarin and AA. RW is his natural wing, his playmaking could—could theoretically—complement Panarin nicely. Who knows he might be better than AA in the dot (it's possible) and could bump him out of there in some situations.

And I would try either Motte or McNeill (or both) on Kruger's left side.

I would do so with some trepidation and the big worry would be Motte and Schmaltz being able to hack it over 200 feet against the best players int he world.

But it's worth a try in the absence of better options.
- John Jaeckel

These lines you proposed are what I envision given the current roster and need to roll 4 solid lines:

Panik - Toews - Kane
Panarin - Anisimov - Schmaltz
Motte/McNeill - Kruger - Hossa
Desjardins - Rasmussen - Tootoo

Other 13th forwards: Lundberg, Hartman
Possibly Kero, Baun
Of course there's Mashinter

Schmaltz has a similar skill set as Kane, so he could complement Panarin and Anisimov decently until he gains experience and confidence.

If Motte, McNeill, or another prospect excels, I could see them swapping with Panik from 3LW to 1LW.

so this asinine myth that Duncan Keith had an off year last year needs to stop immediately. He had one of the best years of his career.

His PPG was the third highest of his career. He had more D zone starts than any time in his career. By a significant margin. Yet he still drove play and at the second highest level of his career relative to his teammates.

All things considered, he had an exceptional season. He was tremendous in the STL series. Again.

Seabrook was awful with any defender not named Keith and was consistently beat around the boards with out someone faster to play safety for him. TVR was over matched in many situations and is atrocious with the puck on the back of his blade.

With the group they have back there he could put up +70 points this year and win another Norris because that's how that stupid award works.
- fattybeef

After Keith came back from his injury he lost at least one step...And for the first time I can recall he looked tired in a playoff series.

He's an elite athlete that doesn't have to be at 100% to be very good, but the workload caught up to him for once.

It better be on the ice to...crawford faced alot of rubber the last few years and still was magnificant. They will need to lower the shots and the quality and have crow shut it down again to win cuz (I repeat myself again) as presently construed they will be a mediocre 5 on 5 and middle of the pack in scoring.
- bogiedoc

Correct and that is the part many sell Crawford short on....He faces a lot of quality chances.

In the playoffs two years ago that point was made. Crawford was called upon to stop a lot of very good scoring chances-Probably more than any goalie that season in the playoffs.

Love the blogs JJ, thanks for all you do and I can't wait for the season to begin.

On a somewhat random note, I find it difficult finding fantasy hockey resources. Do you have any that you recommend?

Correct and that is the part many sell Crawford short on....He faces a lot of quality chances.

In the playoffs two years ago that point was made. Crawford was called upon to stop a lot of very good scoring chances-Probably more than any goalie that season in the playoffs.
- Al

Generally under valued and definitely under appreciated. Don't know for sure but my guess is Babcock makes him #2 on Team Canada ahead of Holtby.

Generally under valued and definitely under appreciated. Don't know for sure but my guess is Babcock makes him #2 on Team Canada ahead of Holtby.
- RickJ

I would...Babcock knows his resume and his progression.

After Keith came back from his injury he lost at least one step...And for the first time I can recall he looked tired in a playoff series.

He's an elite athlete that doesn't have to be at 100% to be very good, but the workload caught up to him for once.
- Al

I'm not sure it was the workload or if he just was not able to maintain his usual level of fitness due to the injury. To be fair the Blues physicality wore down the Hawks. It took its toll. Guys like Brouwer and Reeves hitting you leaves a mark. It is the type of hits the Hawks D men avoided in the past because they were able to get the puck out of their zone so quickly. In the Blues series they got pinned in their own zone so many times. That results in Blues forwards being able to lay more hits and big ones at that.

I have zero problem with that.

I also, in theory, can roll with:

XX-19-88
72-15-XX
XX-16-81

BUT, that comes back to the now age-old question. Who are those XX's and can they do the jobs assigned?

If I were Q, assuming I was starting with that, and with the "assets" currently available, I would go with Panik with Toews and Kane. With 19 and 88, you know that line won't suck anyway. Just hope Panik can create some space and be disruptive and not explode with the puck on his blade.

I would try Schmaltz with Panarin and AA. RW is his natural wing, his playmaking could—could theoretically—complement Panarin nicely. Who knows he might be better than AA in the dot (it's possible) and could bump him out of there in some situations.

And I would try either Motte or McNeill (or both) on Kruger's left side.

I would do so with some trepidation and the big worry would be Motte and Schmaltz being able to hack it over 200 feet against the best players int he world.

But it's worth a try in the absence of better options.
- John Jaeckel

Still think Hartman is going to be a bigger player for time than most are predicting.

I have zero problem with that.

I also, in theory, can roll with:

XX-19-88
72-15-XX
XX-16-81

BUT, that comes back to the now age-old question. Who are those XX's and can they do the jobs assigned?

If I were Q, assuming I was starting with that, and with the "assets" currently available, I would go with Panik with Toews and Kane. With 19 and 88, you know that line won't suck anyway. Just hope Panik can create some space and be disruptive and not explode with the puck on his blade.

I would try Schmaltz with Panarin and AA. RW is his natural wing, his playmaking could—could theoretically—complement Panarin nicely. Who knows he might be better than AA in the dot (it's possible) and could bump him out of there in some situations.

And I would try either Motte or McNeill (or both) on Kruger's left side.

I would do so with some trepidation and the big worry would be Motte and Schmaltz being able to hack it over 200 feet against the best players int he world.

But it's worth a try in the absence of better options.
- John Jaeckel

JJ I agree. I would go a step further and say it does not really matter who you put with Toews and Kane as long as they have some hockey skill. The issue is who do you put at 2RW. I don't think you can trust Panarin and Anisimov to carry the line. They must have an adequate winger.

I'm not sure it was the workload or if he just was not able to maintain his usual level of fitness due to the injury. To be fair the Blues physicality wore down the Hawks. It took its toll. Guys like Brouwer and Reeves hitting you leaves a mark. It is the type of hits the Hawks D men avoided in the past because they were able to get the puck out of their zone so quickly. In the Blues series they got pinned in their own zone so many times. That results in Blues forwards being able to lay more hits and big ones at that.
- bhawks2241

I don't know what it was but the overriding point, and I think you will agree is it wasn't his usual level of performance.

Every playoff series teams go out and pound the Hawks dmen...But in the past they survived and didn't flinch. Not the case last year and if they were a step slower, or reacted a second slower that's the difference between getting squared up and brushing off a big hit.

Still think Hartman is going to be a bigger player for time than most are predicting.
- vabeachbear

Could be true, but he will have to have gained smarts and composure over the summer.
I hear he was a loose cannon too often in Rockcity last year.

JJ I agree. I would go a step further and say it does not really matter who you put with Toews and Kane as long as they have some hockey skill. The issue is who do you put at 2RW. I don't think you can trust Panarin and Anisimov to carry the line. They must have an adequate winger.
- bhawks2241

I definitely think Panarin can carry that line. He's an elite level winger. Successful anywhere he plays.

Could be true, but he will have to have gained smarts and composure over the summer.
I hear he was a loose cannon too often in Rockcity last year.
- Al

Everyone has to grow up and mature (hell, I'm thinking about it pretty soon).

Seriously though, he brings something the others youngin's mentioned don't. I'm sure they've been in his ear for a while now, what he has to do to stick.

Hoping he gets it, not saying he's Shaw, but he has the potential to be more than the others.

Also think Hinostroza is going to stick to for some reason.

Let's simplify things.
The Hawks were 6th in goals scored. 234
The Hawks were 10th in goals against. 207
The Hawks tied for the 6th best goal differential in the league. 27
The Hawks tied for the 5th best record in the league. 103pts

Barring injury we all expect the goaltending to be about the same, the defense to be a little better, and the offense to be a little worse (though getting more offense from Toews, Hossa and more offense the defense could compensate).

So they still are a very good team. If they can avoid injury and get increased contributions from Kruger, Panik, and have one or two of the younger guys become regular contributors it would make the Hawks even better.

Speaking of injury... If one of their high salaried stars are injured, and the Hawks are able to keep their head above water (as they have in the past when Kane, Keith, Toews, Hossa were injured at different times) it could give them more cap flexibility at the TDL. I am not wishing for an injury, but we have seen how that can work to a team's advantage.

Lace them up boys. It should be fun.

Crawford was the main reason the Hawks won one if not both of the last two Cups....The players know that as well.
Now, that's not to say Crawford will never be dealt but Darling will have to be given the opportunity to play a lot of games this season and do very well. Where I sit unless Crawford is injured for quite awhile I wouldn't bet both will happen.
- Al

Until posters here realize this, there will continue to be all the CC average too much money banter...



Dearling ready to be a full time horse or even tandem with some unnamed other goalie...that doens't seem to win you games...just save money.

Until posters here realize this, there will continue to be all the CC average too much money banter...



Dearling ready to be a full time horse or even tandem with some unnamed other goalie...that doens't seem to win you games...just save money.
- wiz1901

I think what becomes undeniable, is that you can't win a cup without goaltending getting you over the top. I can't think of a cup winning team that doesn't have to give a ton of credit to their goalie. You need goaltending at the right time.

For the Hawks, it was Neimi in 2010 (specifically against SJ), 2013 Crawford was pretty darn consistent and again in 2015 Darling/Crawford responded against Nashville when needed and then Crow was locked in pretty well.

I think for the Hawks, it comes down to a gamble at one end of the ice or another in regards to how then spend their cash. Right now, the safe bet is to keep Crawford because you know he can backstop a team to the cup.

I think what becomes undeniable, is that you can't win a cup without goaltending getting you over the top. I can't think of a cup winning team that doesn't have to give a ton of credit to their goalie. You need goaltending at the right time.

For the Hawks, it was Neimi in 2010 (specifically against SJ), 2013 Crawford was pretty darn consistent and again in 2015 Darling/Crawford responded against Nashville when needed and then Crow was locked in pretty well.

I think for the Hawks, it comes down to a gamble at one end of the ice or another in regards to how then spend their cash. Right now, the safe bet is to keep Crawford because you know he can backstop a team to the cup.
- breadbag

Agreed, I always found the "Detroit - Chris Osgood model" theory rather incorrect.

I don't know what it was but the overriding point, and I think you will agree is it wasn't his usual level of performance.

Every playoff series teams go out and pound the Hawks dmen...But in the past they survived and didn't flinch. Not the case last year and if they were a step slower, or reacted a second slower that's the difference between getting squared up and brushing off a big hit.
- Al

Agreed. He put up points but he looked off otherwise. He is the guy for this team. The Hawks needs him at 100% even with this years depth.

I think what becomes undeniable, is that you can't win a cup without goaltending getting you over the top. I can't think of a cup winning team that doesn't have to give a ton of credit to their goalie. You need goaltending at the right time.

For the Hawks, it was Neimi in 2010 (specifically against SJ), 2013 Crawford was pretty darn consistent and again in 2015 Darling/Crawford responded against Nashville when needed and then Crow was locked in pretty well.

I think for the Hawks, it comes down to a gamble at one end of the ice or another in regards to how then spend their cash. Right now, the safe bet is to keep Crawford because you know he can backstop a team to the cup.
- breadbag

That's another thing I don't think Crawford gets enough credit for, or rather the larger implications of it are overlooked. To put on the performance he did after falling apart and getting yanked in the NSH series is pretty incredible. Someone earlier mentioned that Crow outplaying Anderson was one of the biggest difference makers in the WCF - I don't know that a ton of goalies could have had the first series Crawford did and then come back so strong and stay strong for the rest of the run. We all know his numbers, the skill is there, the ability to step up when most needed, plus the impressive mental strength - to me that is elite.

I'm not sure it was the workload or if he just was not able to maintain his usual level of fitness due to the injury. To be fair the Blues physicality wore down the Hawks. It took its toll. Guys like Brouwer and Reeves hitting you leaves a mark. It is the type of hits the Hawks D men avoided in the past because they were able to get the puck out of their zone so quickly. In the Blues series they got pinned in their own zone so many times. That results in Blues forwards being able to lay more hits and big ones at that.
- bhawks2241

Apparently, that injury is still with him - 11 months after the procedure, and after a long 5 month off-season.

I fear this will not be resolved soon - lingering effects well into (or thru) the season.