I agree, but I was just talking about that particular play. Otherwise, I agree completely. It was a good d play forcing a rookie to make a decision quickly. Normally, they aren' tgoing to be able to do that, and he didn't.
- CanOCorn

I think most young guys coming into the lineup have force fed 19/88/81 the puck more than once just bc of who they are and how much they respect them. Can't imagine being a 19 year old kid playing on a line with Marian Hossa. Talk about surreal.

"Does this fuel the argument—an argument that, like internet conspiracy theories, is out there—that the Hawks are fine or even better without Toews?"

- excerpt from the blog



It is not really a case of whether or not they are fine or better without Toews. It is more of a question of, with 10.5 million dollars to work with, would they be better with the players they could get to replace Toews with. I am not suggesting that the Blackhawks should consider this, I am merely stating that Toews on ice production (and the leadership that is understandably considered in the equation) is not currently fair value to the amount of Cap space that he is occupying. That assessment in it of it self can be answered yes without then assuming the team is better off trading him. However, if you take the small sample of games he has missed, add 2 top tier players that cost 5 mil each (or some combination thereof), it becomes more than just a bonehead internet conspiracy theory... it may actually have some merit.

For the record, I love Toews and everything he brings, which in my book the leadership and on ice production are both considered. And also understand that the contract he is currently under is a reward for past performance and accolades, both individual and team related. That does not change the fact that when analyzing how this current year's team could be better, it must do so knowing that his contract in particular is hindering the ability to make improvements that are - agreed upon by most - needed to really contend for a Cup.

1) When you have 2 guys on your roster taking up approximately 29% of a hard salary cap, it leaves very little margin for error in regards to filling roster spots with guys who can make up for a lack of statistical production by either of the 2 big guns. I know a lot of fans don't want to equate dollars to point production, but in a league that restricts compensation of the total roster, contract value cannot be ignored. This isn't baseball, where a team can afford to give its right fielder a 8 year / 184 million dollar contract and win a championship despite his horrendous offensive output.

Once again, I love Tazer. Love him for what he has meant to us in the past; love him now; love him for what he can still accomplish in the future; would love to see him retire in the Indian head sweater and enter the HOF as a career Chicago Blackhawk. Not suggesting the team should trade him, just saying that some of the "internet theories" out there may not be that far off base when considering all options with and without any player.

Thank you for your time. 2) I will not be back to read the mass criticism that is sure to follow this post, as I have learned just how snotty and clicky this group can be when an "outsider" expresses his/her thoughts. Enjoy cutting this post up.

Go Hawks!
- Katana777

1) Agreed completely
2) Nahhh, better things to do. Your opinion is but one of many.

It should scare the poop out the rest of the league that despite not yet reaching elite status(or playing their best), the Hawks are STILL on top the league standings, and have fewer flaws than just about all other teams. I think we upgrade and improve as the season goes along, and nobody will want any part of us in a 7 game series.
- SimpleJack

Not picking on you, Jack, because I think there is a fair amount of over-confidence surrounding this team right now by some fans, kinda of exemplified in the first part of your post.

Let me also caveat. NO SANE NHL COACH is taking the Hawks for granted as playoff pushovers.

But I think we need to apply some logic before we anoint the Hawks as anything beyond a good or perhaps very good team, now or in the future, barring some other move or unforeseen development.

War-game it out.

If I am Ken Hitchcock, Peter DeBoer, Lindy Ruff, Paul Maurice or Todd McLellan, based on what I've seen of the Hawks this year, in a 7-game series, I staple my two best defensemen to the AK72 line, and take my chances from there. There is ZERO evidence the Hawks can score consistently on more than that one line (or some variant of it).

You can argue the Hawks are conversely improved defensively, but while the depth MAY be better, i would argue the top 4 is still not what it was in 2015. Oduya was flat out better at stopping pucks from going your net than Campbell is. Campbell has not been a huge lift to the offense (overall) thus far either.

And on the other hand, the Hawks are probably weaker upfront than they were in round 1 of the playoffs last year (unless you believe the "rookies" as a group are as good as or better than Ladd, Shaw and TT—which I don't, not at this point, even with Ladd having a bad start to this season).

The playoffs are all about depth and match ups created by depth and as far as that goes, the Hawks are this year what they were last year: a one-line reliant team, searching for answers for a consistently potent second line. And if, like St. Louis or San Jose last year, I go 4-deep with quality NHL blue liners, I like my chances versus a team like that. At least to make a 7-game series of it.

The Hawks remain uncharacteristically (for them, or for a really good NHL team) weak on shot margins (and they no longer block that many shots either), and a pedestrian to weak 5-on-5 team (which makes them, like last year, a good regular season team and a weaker playoff team, hopefully that doesn't need explaining).

What is also a little uncharacteristic is this:

Corey Crawford 2016-17
.928 save% (career .917), 2.23 GAA (career 2.34)

Meaning, unless Crawford ends up having a career/Vezina year, especially facing the kind of shot totals he is, he is going to somewhat revert to norm at some point.

Like I keep saying, there is time to develop and hope Schmaltz or Hartman becomes that elusive missing piece in the top 6, or to make a deal, and overall the lower lines develop some chemistry that makes them somewhat able to pitch in offensively. But failing that, the hawks are not as good as their record. And the regular season record (after 82 games mind you) only matters as far as home ice in the playoffs.

It should scare the poop out the rest of the league that despite not yet reaching elite status(or playing their best), the Hawks are STILL on top the league standings, and have fewer flaws than just about all other teams. I think we upgrade and improve as the season goes along, and nobody will want any part of us in a 7 game series.
- SimpleJack

It should scare the poop out of us that they've managed to score only 13 goals in their last 8 games (4 wins 4 losses) and 6 in their last 5 (2-3).

Small sample size? Yeah, sure - but last year's team struggled all year to score goals, especially 5x5 (only averaged 1.3 per game with both teams at full strength) - and this year's team lost 27 goals in Teravainen and Shaw - without replacing them. Maybe ultimately this year a combination of some of the rookies will become scorers - maybe....

I get roundly criticized when I opine that last year's team rode a 12 game mid-season winnng streak to the play-offs - they were a .500 team (35-35) on both sides of it - the recent 8 game winning streak probable secured them a tournament spot - hope the goal scoring picks up dramatically - Crawford probably won't be able to maintain a 95% save percentage 5x5 all year.

I normally don't care about such things, but I couldn't believe Panik was not one of the three stars of the game last night.

Also, I thought 88 and 72 were very frustrated with Florida's clogging of the blue line, and it showed in their play. I know dump and chase is not their game, but you have to take what the other team is giving you, and then pick your spots for the highlight play.

I normally don't care about such things, but I couldn't believe Panik was not one of the three stars of the game last night.

Also, I thought 88 and 72 were very frustrated with Florida's clogging of the blue line, and it showed in their play. I know dump and chase is not their game, but you have to take what the other team is giving you, and then pick your spots for the highlight play.
- Hank_Greenberg

I was thinking the same thing. Lone goal scorer and scores the SO winner and doesn't get a star. Had to be a mistake.

Not picking on you, Jack, because I think there is a fair amount of over-confidence surrounding this team right now by some fans, kinda of exemplified in the first part of your post.

Let me also caveat. NO SANE NHL COACH is taking the Hawks for granted as playoff pushovers.

But I think we need to apply some logic before we anoint the Hawks as anything beyond a good or perhaps very good team, now or in the future, barring some other move or unforeseen development.

War-game it out.

If I am Ken Hitchcock, Peter DeBoer, Lindy Ruff, Paul Maurice or Todd McLellan, based on what I've seen of the Hawks this year, in a 7-game series, I staple my two best defensemen to the AK72 line, and take my chances from there. There is ZERO evidence the Hawks can score consistently on more than that one line (or some variant of it).

You can argue the Hawks are conversely improved defensively, but while the depth MAY be better, i would argue the top 4 is still not what it was in 2015. Oduya was flat out better at stopping pucks from going your net than Campbell is. Campbell has not been a huge lift to the offense (overall) thus far either.

And on the other hand, the Hawks are probably weaker upfront than they were in round 1 of the playoffs last year (unless you believe the "rookies" as a group are as good as or better than Ladd, Shaw and TT—which I don't, not at this point, even with Ladd having a bad start to this season).

The playoffs are all about depth and match ups created by depth and as far as that goes, the Hawks are this year what they were last year: a one-line reliant team, searching for answers for a consistently potent second line. And if, like St. Louis or San Jose last year, I go 4-deep with quality NHL blue liners, I like my chances versus a team like that. At least to make a 7-game series of it.

The Hawks remain uncharacteristically (for them, or for a really good NHL team) weak on shot margins (and they no longer block that many shots either), and a pedestrian to weak 5-on-5 team (which makes them, like last year, a good regular season team and a weaker playoff team, hopefully that doesn't need explaining).

What is also a little uncharacteristic is this:

Corey Crawford 2016-17
.928 save% (career .917), 2.23 GAA (career 2.34)

Meaning, unless Crawford ends up having a career/Vezina year, especially facing the kind of shot totals he is, he is going to somewhat revert to norm at some point.

Like I keep saying, there is time to develop and hope Schmaltz or Hartman becomes that elusive missing piece in the top 6, or to make a deal, and overall the lower lines develop some chemistry that makes them somewhat able to pitch in offensively. But failing that, the hawks are not as good as their record. And the regular season record (after 82 games mind you) only matters as far as home ice in the playoffs.
- John Jaeckel

I agree completely - except - perhaps Crawford can maintain .925-.930 - his 5x5 percentage will probably (certainly) regress, but his PK percentage should be going up.

Shouldn't it?

I agree, but I was just talking about that particular play. Otherwise, I agree completely. It was a good d play forcing a rookie to make a decision quickly. Normally, they aren' tgoing to be able to do that, and he didn't.
- CanOCorn

A split second hesitation is all it takes in the NHL for a Dman or goaltender to take a play away from a forward. Call it a mental or habit thing, but Schmaltz is probably working on trying to overcome his first inclination which is to pass the puck - every single freaking time.

NHL defenceman are far too smart to not know that - they will snuff him every time if he doesn't start to shoot occasionally or take the biscuit hard to the net himself.

Compared to how Vinny looked the 1st ten games, I think comparing him to a career NHL Center on Playoff Teams is far from selling short. Hartman I like more and more each game and I think when he feels the leash loosen a bit, he will start laying more hits. I think he is (rightfully) scared to commit a stupid penalty for fear of The Stache. Schmaltz clearly has high-end talent but once again passed up a prime SOG and forced a pass to Kaner on the 2v1. Kempny has had the roughest start to the season, as evidenced by Q going with Rosival much more the last 2 weeks. I still don't know if his feet/instincts are good enough to be more than a #6 NHL dman. As for Forsling, yes he is small and has had his mistakes...but this kid has high end puck skill, passing, and his shot from the point gets through traffic, on net, and in a hurry. Yet another steal by StanBo.
- EnzoD

On first glance, I thought the same thing. Eddie mentioned the pass was the right move, but wanted him to make the pass earlier (the correct move in hindsight). After I saw the replay, it was just a really good play by the Dman. If he took the shot it would've been from an OK angle with a solid chance it gets blocked is he shoots anything other than short side.

The Hawks were steadily improving their CF%, but these past few games without Toews its been hard to properly judge the team.

Not gonna overreact to a lack of scoring or puck possession over the past 5-6 games, a lot of that without Toews. Still got enough points to maintain position in the standings.

Is Campbell better than Oduya no. But the defense 4-6 is a thousand times more mobile and effective in cleaning up mistakes and getting out of troublesome situations in our own end. That was the problem last year with guys like Scuderi, TVR, Svedberg, and Rundblad.

The depth issue is at forward, and it will be solved over the course of the season as the rookies continue to get better, we make an add via trade, and we figure out the line combos.

When Toews gets back i want to see more time with he and Kane/Hossa playing with one of those rookies. Looked promising at times and didn't get to see it enough until he got hurt. I think the top 6 has potential to breakout if that happens.

I normally don't care about such things, but I couldn't believe Panik was not one of the three stars of the game last night.

Also, I thought 88 and 72 were very frustrated with Florida's clogging of the blue line, and it showed in their play. I know dump and chase is not their game, but you have to take what the other team is giving you, and then pick your spots for the highlight play.
- Hank_Greenberg

I was at the game and it was of the worst games Kane has played. He might have been fighting a flu bug or something but he had no compete level at all. That is something you can only really see live when he doesn't have the puck. But even when he had the puck he didn't look engaged at all.

I was at the game and it was of the worst games Kane has played. He might have been fighting a flu bug or something but he had no compete level at all. That is something you can only really see live when he doesn't have the puck. But even when he had the puck he didn't look engaged at all.
- FourOrr

Funny you say that, I thought that was the worst game I've seen 72 play. Tried to do too much, didn't shoot, and bad turnovers.

"Does this fuel the argument—an argument that, like internet conspiracy theories, is out there—that the Hawks are fine or even better without Toews?"

- excerpt from the blog



It is not really a case of whether or not they are fine or better without Toews. It is more of a question of, with 10.5 million dollars to work with, would they be better with the players they could get to replace Toews with. I am not suggesting that the Blackhawks should consider this, I am merely stating that Toews on ice production (and the leadership that is understandably considered in the equation) is not currently fair value to the amount of Cap space that he is occupying. That assessment in it of it self can be answered yes without then assuming the team is better off trading him. However, if you take the small sample of games he has missed, add 2 top tier players that cost 5 mil each (or some combination thereof), it becomes more than just a bonehead internet conspiracy theory... it may actually have some merit.

For the record, I love Toews and everything he brings, which in my book the leadership and on ice production are both considered. And also understand that the contract he is currently under is a reward for past performance and accolades, both individual and team related. That does not change the fact that when analyzing how this current year's team could be better, it must do so knowing that his contract in particular is hindering the ability to make improvements that are - agreed upon by most - needed to really contend for a Cup.

When you have 2 guys on your roster taking up approximately 29% of a hard salary cap, it leaves very little margin for error in regards to filling roster spots with guys who can make up for a lack of statistical production by either of the 2 big guns. I know a lot of fans don't want to equate dollars to point production, but in a league that restricts compensation of the total roster, contract value cannot be ignored. This isn't baseball, where a team can afford to give its right fielder a 8 year / 184 million dollar contract and win a championship despite his horrendous offensive output.

Once again, I love Tazer. Love him for what he has meant to us in the past; love him now; love him for what he can still accomplish in the future; would love to see him retire in the Indian head sweater and enter the HOF as a career Chicago Blackhawk. Not suggesting the team should trade him, just saying that some of the "internet theories" out there may not be that far off base when considering all options with and without any player.

Thank you for your time. I will not be back to read the mass criticism that is sure to follow this post, as I have learned just how snotty and clicky this group can be when an "outsider" expresses his/her thoughts. Enjoy cutting this post up.

Go Hawks!
- Katana777

Really are we going down this route again on this blog. In hindsight the Hawks probably overpaid Toews $1 mil to $2 mil per year. Hardly anyone on this blog disputes that. Lets move on!

I am not sure what your standard is for top tier players. But look at the players making under $5 mil per year. http://www.spotrac.com/nhl/rankings/.There could be a combination of 2 players that I would take instead of Toews. But the combination is very limited and who is to say the Hawks could have signed them. Hindsight and general managing from the living room couch is so easy.

Not picking on you, Jack, because I think there is a fair amount of over-confidence surrounding this team right now by some fans, kinda of exemplified in the first part of your post.

Let me also caveat. NO SANE NHL COACH is taking the Hawks for granted as playoff pushovers.

But I think we need to apply some logic before we anoint the Hawks as anything beyond a good or perhaps very good team, now or in the future, barring some other move or unforeseen development.

War-game it out.

If I am Ken Hitchcock, Peter DeBoer, Lindy Ruff, Paul Maurice or Todd McLellan, based on what I've seen of the Hawks this year, in a 7-game series, I staple my two best defensemen to the AK72 line, and take my chances from there. There is ZERO evidence the Hawks can score consistently on more than that one line (or some variant of it).

You can argue the Hawks are conversely improved defensively, but while the depth MAY be better, i would argue the top 4 is still not what it was in 2015. Oduya was flat out better at stopping pucks from going your net than Campbell is. Campbell has not been a huge lift to the offense (overall) thus far either.

And on the other hand, the Hawks are probably weaker upfront than they were in round 1 of the playoffs last year (unless you believe the "rookies" as a group are as good as or better than Ladd, Shaw and TT—which I don't, not at this point, even with Ladd having a bad start to this season).

The playoffs are all about depth and match ups created by depth and as far as that goes, the Hawks are this year what they were last year: a one-line reliant team, searching for answers for a consistently potent second line. And if, like St. Louis or San Jose last year, I go 4-deep with quality NHL blue liners, I like my chances versus a team like that. At least to make a 7-game series of it.

The Hawks remain uncharacteristically (for them, or for a really good NHL team) weak on shot margins (and they no longer block that many shots either), and a pedestrian to weak 5-on-5 team (which makes them, like last year, a good regular season team and a weaker playoff team, hopefully that doesn't need explaining).

What is also a little uncharacteristic is this:

Corey Crawford 2016-17
.928 save% (career .917), 2.23 GAA (career 2.34)

Meaning, unless Crawford ends up having a career/Vezina year, especially facing the kind of shot totals he is, he is going to somewhat revert to norm at some point.

Like I keep saying, there is time to develop and hope Schmaltz or Hartman becomes that elusive missing piece in the top 6, or to make a deal, and overall the lower lines develop some chemistry that makes them somewhat able to pitch in offensively. But failing that, the hawks are not as good as their record. And the regular season record (after 82 games mind you) only matters as far as home ice in the playoffs.
- John Jaeckel

Crawford has been at .924 the last two seasons (not including this one) which is incredible actually.

His even strength save percentage is at .958 which is ridiculous and somehow only 3rd in the league. But it is an outlier career wise. There may be a point or two to give there.

Anyway, Marcus Kruger isn't a 30 point player and that doesn't help. The rookies are rookies and will probably hit a wall soon enough. I think a sensical pairing of Keith and Seabrook with Hammer and Soup with maintenance days for some of the veterans wouldn't be a terrible idea for when they need to win games.

Not a whole lot of room at the inn for a top 6 player of any calibre.

And while they're not heads and tails above everyone they're top 10 or 12ish 5v5 in Corsi Share, total shots attempted, shots when close and that crap. That changes when leading, however, they have won 15 games, 12 when scoring first so some of those numbers may be related to sitting on a lead. They're not so great at coming back and part of that is teams sitting on whatever line is stacked.

If you factor in the intangible value Toews brings then they get a lift from that alone in the playoffs. (Some sarcasm but there is something to be said about guys who know how to win)

All in all, they're a good but not great team. Big question is are they good enough and that is relatively impossible to predict with how volatile the NHL is.

The Hawks were steadily improving their CF%, but these past few games without Toews its been hard to properly judge the team.

Not gonna overreact to a lack of scoring or puck possession over the past 5-6 games, a lot of that without Toews. Still got enough points to maintain position in the standings.

Is Campbell better than Oduya no. But the defense 4-6 is a thousand times more mobile and effective in cleaning up mistakes and getting out of troublesome situations in our own end. That was the problem last year with guys like Scuderi, TVR, Svedberg, and Rundblad.

The depth issue is at forward, and it will be solved over the course of the season as the rookies continue to get better, we make an add via trade, and we figure out the line combos.

When Toews gets back i want to see more time with he and Kane/Hossa playing with one of those rookies. Looked promising at times and didn't get to see it enough until he got hurt. I think the top 6 has potential to breakout in that happens.
- SimpleJack

Agree. The Hawks two goaltenders and seven dmen might be the best back end in the NHL right now. The offense is not firing on all cylinders. Through 24 games the young forwards have proven they belong in the NHL. Now the question is can they raise their game or is this all they got. I think we will see some of them elevate their games.

As a young person that has had chronic back issues I can tell you they are frustrating to deal with. Some days you feel ok other days you feel like you are 90 years old. As tough as Toews is he probably tried to play through it. I hope he takes whatever time he needs to get well.

We need a healthy Toews, a healthy Anisimov, and some progress from the young forwards if we are going stay near the top of the West and be considered serious Cup contenders.

It's evident that Panik can score goals. People keep saying he was in a slump, well its hard to score playing 7 minutes a night.
Give the guy a regular shift and he will score some dirty goals.
I still think he is a 20 goal guy if he plays some meaningful minutes.

The Hawks were steadily improving their CF%, but these past few games without Toews its been hard to properly judge the team.

Not gonna overreact to a lack of scoring or puck possession over the past 5-6 games, a lot of that without Toews. Still got enough points to maintain position in the standings.

Is Campbell better than Oduya no. But the defense 4-6 is a thousand times more mobile and effective in cleaning up mistakes and getting out of troublesome situations in our own end. That was the problem last year with guys like Scuderi, TVR, Svedberg, and Rundblad.

The depth issue is at forward, and it will be solved over the course of the season as the rookies continue to get better, we make an add via trade, and we figure out the line combos.

When Toews gets back i want to see more time with he and Kane/Hossa playing with one of those rookies. Looked promising at times and didn't get to see it enough until he got hurt. I think the top 6 has potential to breakout in that happens.
- SimpleJack

I just can't understand why Q flopped Kane and Hossa back, right before the Circus Trip. I don't have the numbers in front of me but it sure seemed like 72-15-81 was every bit as productive as 72-15-88. That is not to say Hossa is Kane's equal. He's not. But you have to think, and certainly there's evidence going back a few years that Kane and Toews can be highly productive together.

I think they needed to give that a bit more time, as that was when the team as a whole wa splaying it's best hockey of the season.

Bottom line, the big "obstacle" remains the same, getting consistent scoring from more than one line, especially with the amount of quality forwards they do have, even if they are all centers and right wings with one exception.

It's evident that Panik can score goals. People keep saying he was in a slump, well its hard to score playing 7 minutes a night.
Give the guy a regular shift and he will score some dirty goals.
I still think he is a 20 goal guy if he plays some meaningful minutes.
- Boisy12

Ehhh, maybe. I think they have him slotted just fine. And if he scores 12-15 goals but leaves some marks on opponents and slows down their scoring lines, playing with Kruger and Ras, then I like him better there than I do as a "maybe" 20-goal guy playing in the top 6.

I just can't understand why Q flopped Kane and Hossa bad, right before the Circus Trip. I don't have the numbers in front of me but it sure seemed like 72-15-81 was every bit as productive as 72-15-88. That is not to say Hossa is Kane's equal. He's not. But you have to think, and certainly there's evidence going back a few years that Kane and Toews can be highly productive together.

I think they needed to give that a bit more time, as that was when the team as a whole wa splaying it's best hockey of the season.

Bottom line, the big "obstacle" remains the same, getting consistent scoring from more than one line, especially with the amount of quality forwards they do have, even if they are all centers and right wings with one exception.
- John Jaeckel

I 100% agree with this. I liked the way both Schmaltz and Hinostroza looked with 19 and 88. We should go back to that, and back to using 72-15-81 as the "2nd" line. Thats a solid formula for creating a legit top 6 with a roster that doesn't include 2 true top 6 LWs.

Not one of the new faces have been a bust, and I think we can say more than one has pleasantly surprised us.

I fully expected Hartman to be in Q's doghouse, but he is under control and making me miss Shaw a bit less. I was certain Hino would be sent back to the Rock, but he is constantly improving and skates like he is chasing Kelly McGillis with his hair on fire. Kempny is a beast for his size, and Schmaltz looks to be a future potential stud.

I find all this very exciting - it's a good time to be a Hawks fan.
- ItHossaGood

I was about to write that I've been surprised that no one on the team has emerged as a scapegoat this year but while it seems true that Q's doghouse has been thus far unoccupied, The Captain is getting the brunt of the blame on this board.

Agree. The Hawks two goaltenders and seven dmen might be the best back end in the NHL right now. The offense is not firing on all cylinders. Through 24 games the young forwards have proven they belong in the NHL. Now the question is can they raise their game or is this all they got. I think we will see some of them elevate their games.

As a young person that has had chronic back issues I can tell you they are frustrating to deal with. Some days you feel ok other days you feel like you are 90 years old. As tough as Toews is he probably tried to play through it. I hope he takes whatever time he needs to get well.

We need a healthy Toews, a healthy Anisimov, and some progress from the young forwards if we are going stay near the top of the West and be considered serious Cup contenders.
- -Doh-

Ehhhh, I think there are at least some "robust" arguments there. Nashville, Montreal . . .

You guys may want to heap shade on Rinne or Montreal's defensive depth, but the Hawks 5-7 is two rookies who are very up and down and a guy I can out skate. And like I said, Campbell is not exactly what you'd call "shutdown" or "spectacular" at this point of his career.

I 100% agree with this. I liked the way both Schmaltz and Hinostroza looked with 19 and 88. We should go back to that, and back to using 72-15-81 as the "2nd" line. Thats a solid formula for creating a legit top 6 with a roster that doesn't include 2 true top 6 LWs.
- SimpleJack

I agree. Schmaltz' possession numbers have been the best in that role or last time I checked, FWIW.

Crawford has been at .924 the last two seasons (not including this one) which is incredible actually.

His even strength save percentage is at .958 which is ridiculous and somehow only 3rd in the league. But it is an outlier career wise. There may be a point or two to give there.

Anyway, Marcus Kruger isn't a 30 point player and that doesn't help. The rookies are rookies and will probably hit a wall soon enough. I think a sensical pairing of Keith and Seabrook with Hammer and Soup with maintenance days for some of the veterans wouldn't be a terrible idea for when they need to win games.

Not a whole lot of room at the inn for a top 6 player of any calibre.

And while they're not heads and tails above everyone they're top 10 or 12ish 5v5 in Corsi Share, total shots attempted, shots when close and that crap. That changes when leading, however, they have won 15 games, 12 when scoring first so some of those numbers may be related to sitting on a lead. They're not so great at coming back and part of that is teams sitting on whatever line is stacked.

If you factor in the intangible value Toews brings then they get a lift from that alone in the playoffs. (Some sarcasm but there is something to be said about guys who know how to win)

All in all, they're a good but not great team. Big question is are they good enough and that is relatively impossible to predict with how volatile the NHL is.
- fattybeef

Meh, he's on pace for 20, FWIW, not that it really matters and not that you should really measure him that way. But to my eye, his game is picking up, for now at least. And I like the chemistry he's had with 14, 70 and 64 for that matter.

As far the "no room at the Inn" theory, yeah, but things change and there are a lot of ways to skin a cat anymore come deadline time. If you had said at this point of the season two years ago the Hawks would be able to easily fit Vermette in, everyone would have said "no room at the Inn."

Right? Right.

Necessity is the mother of invention.

Just can't see a deal from a cap perspective .I thought the HAWKS were a lot closer to beating ST,L last year then most I know .And Dallas well could see them getting by them last year and SJ would have been tough but not unheard of .Pitt well who knows .But if they are A Tick better this year , just keep developing this young squad of players ..
- oldduffman

It would probably require dropping the roster to 22. Capfriendly.com says they'll have $220K cap space, add to that the salary of the 23rd player dropped from the roster and the 22nd player who the new guy would replace, and you could get close to $2m of cap space for a new player. The trading team could keep up to half of the incoming salary, so that's a rental with a salary as much as $4m. Such a player could help a lot for a Cup run, especially if they can play top 6 LW. It'd be nice to add that player sooner rather than later so he could develop some chemistry with new line mates and the Q system.

Ehhhh, I think there are at least some "robust" arguments there. Nashville, Montreal . . .

You guys may want to heap shade on Rinne or Montreal's defensive depth, but the Hawks 5-7 is two rookies who are very up and down and a guy I can out skate. And like I said, Campbell is not exactly what you'd call "shutdown" or "spectacular" at this point of his career.
- John Jaeckel

Fair enough. I like Montreal's and Nashville's back end too. In my defense I did say "might be".