Cherry picking stats can be a dangerous thing but that said, the Hawks have gone 17-3 in the last 20 games. They have been the highest scoring team and given up the second fewest goals over that stretch. That's a 0.85 winning percentage and it's unrealistic to think that it will continue at that pace, even though there are only 10 games left ... so who knows. The point is there is probably a statistical correction coming and we Hawks fans shouldn't get too freaked out about if it should happen.
- EbonyRaptor

Agreed. I doubt we win 8 of 10 to close the season, but the way the wild are playing, 6 of 10 would be plenty to get home ice, and like you said, no reason to worry.

the next 10 games is about fine tuning and staying healthy. Then the real fun begins.

Vancouver at home after winning 4 straight and 17 of 20 is the definition of a Trap Game yet again. ESPECIALLY, after locking down a Playoff Birth. Hopefully Q and the Boys have Home-Ice throughout the West Playoffs as a goal and come out ready to play early to put this very mediocre Nucks squad down and out....

Vancouver at home after winning 4 straight and 17 of 20 is the definition of a Trap Game yet again. ESPECIALLY, after locking down a Playoff Birth. Hopefully Q and the Boys have Home-Ice throughout the West Playoffs as a goal and come out ready to play early to put this very mediocre Nucks squad down and out....
- EnzoD

Agreed....then I have to live with Canucks fans thinking they are just as good as the Hawks because the won one game.

Well they probably had that guy in Danault and chose to move him out, mainly because Kruger is the better hockey player overall (or was prior to injuries).

I just don't see the angst, the Hawks have 15 guys (not including Panarin) making under $1.0M / year. Considering where the team sits in the standings, that's pretty damn good player acquisition and development and cap management considering where the team sits in the standings. But instead of recognizing that, everybody wants to crush the little Kruger ladybug with a sledge hammer.

Every year there is going to be a couple of guys moved out, its the Bill Belichek NHL style way. Kruger may be next; Hossa may hang them up and asked to be bought out rather than play for a million per for the next 4 seasons; who knows with Darling. Bowman will figure it out.

And then the weeping and remorse will start when those new names are added to the list that includes Sharp, Saad, Buff, Bolland, Versteeg and Ladd.

Aint gonna be no Shane Doan/Jerome Iginla type celebrations around Chicago honouring long time service while the team sinks in the standings.
- RickJ

Every word of this. ^^^^^^^

I'm sorry. Can we focus on winning the Cup this year before we deal with the offseason purge? I'm enjoying this team and am hoping their play translates well to the playoffs. They need to flip the switch at the start of the game if they want to win. Especially against playoff teams.

How many players can they choose from for each game? Including black aces?

GO HOCKS
- hocktock

In that vein of thought, is this the year that coach Q should get serious consideration for coach of the year?

I think the story of Kruger and his salary per points scored has exhausted itself. I get it, everybody thinks he should be earning about the same as guys like Dominic Moore, Jay McClement, Eric Haula, Matt Cullen and Danault make.

Except none of those guys have ever been even close to being a significant contributor on a Stanley Cup winner(s). Right or wrong, #16 got some of his current salary for that and he is still with the team and pencilled in for an important (non scoring) role down the middle of the ice in this year's playoffs. They will need him.

In the offseason he may find himself elsewhere playing for a team like Arizona who needs to get to the cap floor. If it takes something extra to move him, so be it.
- RickJ

What some need to realize about Marcus Kruger, something we try to teach the Pee Wees I'm coaching: the value of play without the puck.

Anyone inclined to come back with "yeah buts" doesn't understand the actual value of play without the puck. The now Daily Mantra is, "yeah but, he doesn't score."

Which is something you don't do away from the puck.Yet play without the puck matters hugely, it's just not reflected in the box score, as much as the scoreboard.

Which leads to "yeah but, you can't pay a guy that much if he doesn't score."

Maybe not within the context of the Hawks' current salary structure. But . . .

8 years ago, Sami Pahlsson, who was essentially Marcus Kruger 1.0—never scored more than 26 points in a season— was paid $2.6 million a season (and that is not adjusted for a much lower salary cap).

I will concede though that Kruger's wrist troubles could be the beginning of the end for him because a big part of his value was (and hopefully still is) being 50%+ in the dot on critical d-zone draws and the PK.

Brian Hedger @BrianHedger
10m

#Blackhawks lines:

Hayden-Toews-Panik
Panarin-Schmaltz-Kane
Hartman-Kruger-Hossa
Rasmussen-Kero-Jurco

Brian Hedger @BrianHedger
10m

#Blackhawks lines:

Hayden-Toews-Panik
Panarin-Schmaltz-Kane
Hartman-Kruger-Hossa
Rasmussen-Kero-Jurco
- jt19

Calling it now....Jurco with his first goal as a Blackhawk tonight.

In that vein of thought, is this the year that coach Q should get serious consideration for coach of the year?
- walleyeb1

I'm thinking Dineen being here had a lot to do with the youngsters progress. I could be wrong but if i recall he coached the Olympic womens team and did well with a young panther team. Is there an award for franchise of the year or is tjat the stanley cup?

To answer your question, if not he, who. Perhaps Patrick Roy for walking away.

GO Q

Every word of this. ^^^^^^^
- John Jaeckel

Whether the Hawks win another Cup in the next 5 years or not they perfected the miodel of identifying the core and locking them up. The other essential is to be able to fill in around the core, which they have done with modestly priced player.

What I recognized awhile ago and have to remind myself from time to time is you can't underestimate the benefit of winning know how and the determination/will of a group of elite players. As long as Q steers and Father Time isn't in the mix it's wise to never sell this group short.

Big overpay for Panik. I can see him getting 2 years @ 1.75-2.0 max. I think Darling ends up at 3-3.5 as well. Every penny counts!!
- tyweb69

When I said Saad will sign for 5-5.5 based on his age, projected durability and production, that got immediately shut down... So yeah, we'd like for Panik and Darling to come in lower... but that won't happen unless Panik is willing to offer a discount to the team that resurrected his failed career or Darling offers a hometown discount in order to fulfill his dream of being the starter for his hometown team.

Panik is worth at least 3m if he projects to produce as he is this year, and nothing about Darling's body of work the past 3 years would counter-indicate him excelling as a top 10-15 starter in the league, so if he leaves, he should get offers of 4+ especially as a UFA.

When I said Saad will sign for 5-5.5 based on his age, projected durability and production, that got immediately shut down... So yeah, we'd like for Panik and Darling to come in lower... but that won't happen unless Panik is willing to offer a discount to the team that resurrected his failed career or Darling offers a hometown discount in order to fulfill his dream of being the starter for his hometown team.

Panik is worth at least 3m if he projects to produce as he is this year, and nothing about Darling's body of work the past 3 years would counter-indicate him excelling as a top 10-15 starter in the league, so if he leaves, he should get offers of 4+ especially as a UFA.
- busmaster

I hear you, but Panik doesn't hold as much leverage as Saad did. While anything is possible I highly doubt anyone will offersheet Panik. Luckily for Stan there are some major RFA who will get a lot more attention than Panik and hopefully drive down his price:

- Ryan Johansen
- Ondrej Palat
- Tyler Johnson
- Tyler Toffoli
- Evgeny Kuznetsov
- Alex Galchenyuk
- Tomas Tatar
- Nino Niderrieter
- Tanner Pearson
- Mika Zibanejad
- Alexander Wennerberg
- David Pastrnak
- Jonathan Drouin
- Bo Horvat
- Leon Draisaitl
- Mikael Grandlund
- Viktor Arvidsson

Neither of us know the final cap figure for next year but you can be sure Bowman has a plan and some inside information, especially about his own team. Bottom of the roster players with contract renewals upcoming are all dispensible, they can all be replaced if their requested salary number doesn't fit.

I don't know if the re-capture rules prevent the team from buying Marian Hossa out at the end of this year, but I sure have a hard time believing #81 is going to want to play for $1M per for the next 4 seasons. He may be a surprise name who won't be with the team next year, who knows. But if he isn't, that changes a lot of things. And if he still needs to make more money, buying him out is goodwill and gives him the freedom to sign with Florida or somebody like that and make $4 or $5M for a year or 2.

Lots of crazy player movement gonna happen by June 30.
- RickJ

Per capfriendly.com, Hawks would take a huge cap hit recapture ($4.6M/year for 4 years, then $ 333,333/year for another 4 years if Hossa retired after this year. Therefore, Hossa (who by the way is still a great player, mentor and example to his teammates) won't retire, out of loyalty to the organization. The only way he would if injured and Hawks get injury relief, or recapture rules are changed (or twisted like for Pronger, Datsyk).

I'm thinking Dineen being here had a lot to do with the youngsters progress. I could be wrong but if i recall he coached the Olympic womens team and did well with a young panther team. Is there an award for franchise of the year or is tjat the stanley cup?

To answer your question, if not he, who. Perhaps Patrick Roy for walking away.

GO Q
- hocktock

I think you're correct on Dineen, I'm sure he had an influence on Q. But that's all part of the head coach's job, to make best use of their talent and relying on their input.

Team Canada (2013–2014)
On Tuesday December 17, 2013, Kevin Dineen was named head coach of Team Canada's women's national ice hockey team. On February 20, 2014, he led the women's squad to a fourth consecutive Olympic gold medal in the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia.

On March 20, 2014, Dineen was named head coach of Canada’s National Men’s Under-18 Team for the 2014 IIHF World U18 Championships.[5] The team finished third, winning the bronze medal.

Every word of this. ^^^^^^^
- John Jaeckel

I don't really see how people not "appreciating the development and cap management" and people dogging Kruger are mutually exclusive...

I wish the best for him, and his salary is completely valid because it was an agreement for Stan to take care of him after he signed the one year bridge deal. Its testament to why the front office is a reason people would want to play here.

However, I think they did over-estimate his offensive contributions and they do matter, if for no other reason than to spend less time in our zone... Ultimately, would we rather have Kruger at 3.1 for the next 2+ years or would we rather have the 3.1 to spend on our FA's, knowing there are options in the pipeline who can do a reasonable imitation of his role for 6-900k? (Kero, Moose, Motte, etc.)

What some need to realize about Marcus Kruger, something we try to teach the Pee Wees I'm coaching: the value of play without the puck.

Anyone inclined to come back with "yeah buts" doesn't understand the actual value of play without the puck. The now Daily Mantra is, "yeah but, he doesn't score."

Which is something you don't do away from the puck.Yet play without the puck matters hugely, it's just not reflected in the box score, as much as the scoreboard.

Which leads to "yeah but, you can't pay a guy that much if he doesn't score."

Maybe not within the context of the Hawks' current salary structure. But . . .

8 years ago, Sami Pahlsson, who was essentially Marcus Kruger 1.0—never scored more than 26 points in a season— was paid $2.6 million a season (and that is not adjusted for a much lower salary cap).

I will concede though that Kruger's wrist troubles could be the beginning of the end for him because a big part of his value was (and hopefully still is) being 50%+ in the dot on critical d-zone draws and the PK.
- John Jaeckel

Yeah, but, doesn't his cap hit have to be analyzed within the Hawks current salary structure? Just like every other move the Hawks make or contemplate?

Per capfriendly.com, Hawks would take a huge cap hit recapture ($4.6M/year for 4 years, then $ 333,333/year for another 4 years if Hossa retired after this year. Therefore, Hossa (who by the way is still a great player, mentor and example to his teammates) won't retire, out of loyalty to the organization. The only way he would if injured and Hawks get injury relief, or recapture rules are changed (or twisted like for Pronger, Datsyk).
- BMWChiFan

The re-capture rule is definitely very punitive and is the reason Hoss will not retire. In fact, if he was traded and retired before the contract was up, the re-capture hit comes back to the Blackhawks. Same thing with Luongo and Vancouver.

My question is whether they can buy him out at the end of this year and avoid the re-capture penalties?

What some need to realize about Marcus Kruger, something we try to teach the Pee Wees I'm coaching: the value of play without the puck.

Anyone inclined to come back with "yeah buts" doesn't understand the actual value of play without the puck. The now Daily Mantra is, "yeah but, he doesn't score."

Which is something you don't do away from the puck.Yet play without the puck matters hugely, it's just not reflected in the box score, as much as the scoreboard.

Which leads to "yeah but, you can't pay a guy that much if he doesn't score."

Maybe not within the context of the Hawks' current salary structure. But . . .

8 years ago, Sami Pahlsson, who was essentially Marcus Kruger 1.0—never scored more than 26 points in a season— was paid $2.6 million a season (and that is not adjusted for a much lower salary cap).

I will concede though that Kruger's wrist troubles could be the beginning of the end for him because a big part of his value was (and hopefully still is) being 50%+ in the dot on critical d-zone draws and the PK.
- John Jaeckel

Thanks for enlightening all of us dummies who happen to disagree with you about Kruger.

I hear you, but Panik doesn't hold as much leverage as Saad did. While anything is possible I highly doubt anyone will offersheet Panik. Luckily for Stan there are some major RFA who will get a lot more attention than Panik and hopefully drive down his price:

- Ryan Johansen
- Ondrej Palat
- Tyler Johnson
- Tyler Toffoli
- Evgeny Kuznetsov
- Alex Galchenyuk
- Tomas Tatar
- Nino Niderrieter
- Tanner Pearson
- Mika Zibanejad
- Alexander Wennerberg
- David Pastrnak
- Jonathan Drouin
- Bo Horvat
- Leon Draisaitl
- Mikael Grandlund
- Viktor Arvidsson
- DarthKane

True and good point. Though they might if they feel we are too strapped to match the deal, like with Hammer.

I think you're correct on Dineen, I'm sure he had an influence on Q. But that's all part of the head coach's job, to make best use of their talent and relying on their input.

Team Canada (2013–2014)
On Tuesday December 17, 2013, Kevin Dineen was named head coach of Team Canada's women's national ice hockey team. On February 20, 2014, he led the women's squad to a fourth consecutive Olympic gold medal in the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia.

On March 20, 2014, Dineen was named head coach of Canada’s National Men’s Under-18 Team for the 2014 IIHF World U18 Championships.
- walleyeb1[5] The team finished third, winning the bronze medal.

Hey fish, for the first time I agree about Q. Never been huge fan of Q or his blender (when there is no injuries) and I said here before the year that this season he will have to use everything he has available to him to be sucessful. And for the first time it seems to me that he has. Jimmy Waite's contribution has been obvious, and I agree completely about Dineen. I'm big on both of those guys and have been. Some here may recall my prediction of the Canadian women's team winning gold in Sochi after having their butts kicked all season by the US women simply because Dineen was named coach with just enough time to make the difference. Not easy to make me look like a genius but he did. So I'm giving it up for Q for delegating to the right guys and apparently giving them the leash to do what they do. Big swing in outlook for me, but have to give credit when I believe it's due.

I think you're correct on Dineen, I'm sure he had an influence on Q. But that's all part of the head coach's job, to make best use of their talent and relying on their input.

Team Canada (2013–2014)
On Tuesday December 17, 2013, Kevin Dineen was named head coach of Team Canada's women's national ice hockey team. On February 20, 2014, he led the women's squad to a fourth consecutive Olympic gold medal in the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia.

On March 20, 2014, Dineen was named head coach of Canada’s National Men’s Under-18 Team for the 2014 IIHF World U18 Championships.
- walleyeb1[5] The team finished third, winning the bronze medal.

Thanks for having my back, bro.

GO WALLEYE

Per capfriendly.com, Hawks would take a huge cap hit recapture ($4.6M/year for 4 years, then $ 333,333/year for another 4 years if Hossa retired after this year. Therefore, Hossa (who by the way is still a great player, mentor and example to his teammates) won't retire, out of loyalty to the organization. The only way he would if injured and Hawks get injury relief, or recapture rules are changed (or twisted like for Pronger, Datsyk).
- BMWChiFan

I still feel that the recapture rule is just a threat to stop contracts from being written moving forward. I can't see the union allowing the league to damage a team with that penalty. Plus, the thing that is never mentioned, when Hossa and Chicago signed the contract, it was a valid contract. Unions do not change things without members taking a vote to change them. Wouldn't a contract need to be signed with those rules in place to have that clause be valid?

I still feel that the recapture rule is just a threat to stop contracts from being written moving forward. I can't see the union allowing the league to damage a team with that penalty. Plus, the thing that is never mentioned, when Hossa and Chicago signed the contract, it was a valid contract. Unions do not change things without members taking a vote to change them. Wouldn't a contract need to be signed with those rules in place to have that clause be valid?
- powerenforcer

I don't know whether the NHLPA agreed to the recapture rule subsequent to the contract being signed. In any case, the union is weak, and probably the last priority it has is to fight the league so the Blackhawks don't get screwed. I think it's more likely that the league itself would find a way around penalizing the Hawks if Hossa retired, since they are the NHL's #1 showcase team.

True and good point. Though they might if they feel we are too strapped to match the deal, like with Hammer.
- busmaster

Maybe, and as much as we like Panik I don't think he's worth a $3 million + offer sheet like Hammer was. If another team is looking to offer sheet and RFA they'll look to one of the guys on my list and maybe start with Drouin. Panik does have arbitration rights, so that could make things interesting.

I still feel that the recapture rule is just a threat to stop contracts from being written moving forward. I can't see the union allowing the league to damage a team with that penalty. Plus, the thing that is never mentioned, when Hossa and Chicago signed the contract, it was a valid contract. Unions do not change things without members taking a vote to change them. Wouldn't a contract need to be signed with those rules in place to have that clause be valid?
- powerenforcer

The Union was in on this as far as I know there was never a point of contention made. Hossa's contract was the poster boy because the cost to the Hawks really dropped off the edge of the table the last few years.

Evidently the Union was focused on escalating the salaries of players rather than the the effect on a franchise....In reality that is their mission.

What you need to understand is there was a ton of time for the last CBA to be made better-Instead it seems much of it was written over a long weekend, actually that is more true than not most likely. If the lockout didn't end when it did there wasn't going to be a season, there were arena committments in many cities that couldn't be changed.

If one line would have been added saying-in the last three years of a contract a certain percentage of salary had to be paid out, or something to that effect this wouldn't be an issue now.

The tradeoff so to speak which happened later was a team trading a player could retain salary but there wasn't any contention I know of about the rules pertaining to Hossa's contract.