It's tough to quantify, other than to say that certain players are "scorers". They have an innate ability to put the puck in the net. Not always the fastest, strongest, best shot, best hands, etc. but t the end of the day they always seem to have scored or created a goal.

There are a lot of facets that go into being a scorer, some can be worked on and "tuned", like the way Kane has worked to improve something every year, whether it be his shot, his positioning, or whatever and other facets are just "there". Knowing or sensing where to be when and understanding where others should or shouldn't be .

Take a guy like Gretzky (and this doesn't mean I am in any way comparing DeBrincat to Gretzky). He was never the fastest, biggest, hardest shot, best passer or any of the other measurables, but when the game was done he would be all over the scoresheet. You can look at individual skills and say, yeah he can shoot/pass/skate/hit but never be able to put a scale or number on the intangibles that make certain players consistent scorers
- TheTrob

I agree as well as vision and reading the play and anticipating where to be.

The Hawks cap mismanagement, and I will keep calling that now on, is what will haunt this team. Can they do a quick retool the way Pittsburgh did to win another cup? I don't know but their high end dollars to so many players and very few viable IN HOUSE replacements in the top 4 on D, or top 6 at F is going to cost them very soon.

Huge turning point in Bowman's career here. You can make a case for any of the big dollar guys as to having very little to replace them and technically doing the "steal from Peter to pay Paul" routine.....including 15 or 16 to start with.

Panik is the only guy worth worrying about, even then I wouldn't expect he'd leave unless Vegas made him an offer he couldn't refuse.
- DarthKane

Hawks still have the ability to match RFA'S that sign offer sheets with Vegas??

Hawks still have the ability to match RFA'S that sign offer sheets with Vegas??
- riozzo

I don't believe so, but I'm not 100% sure.

Very curious to see how the next 53 days play out.

Especially at the draft. What is even more interesting is LeBruns notes about Vegas being able to negotiate with pending UFAs and RFAs starting around 6/21 AND clubs getting zero compensations if they are signed. So guys like Kempny, Rasmussen, Jurco, Panik come to mind.

I have no idea what bowman is or isn't up to. All reports are that this summer/off season will be crazy as you have stagnant (slightly up) cap, expansion, and lots of names out there.

For me, watching this 2nd round, it's evident to me that the Hawks had no chance to go deep. Edmonton is fast and skilled. Pittsburgh/Washington would wipe them clean, and the team that beat them.....may not be done next round either.

Even losing Darling, and adding in bonus overages to players hitting the cap next year, and then seeing the RFAs above that have to be signed AND fitting holes left by veteran D men......AND getting younger and faster....I have to wonder how this all plays out.

IT's going to take more then just Marcus Kruger to free up money and even then....I'm not so sure they can make the bold moves necessary to continue to be a legit threat because Nashville and Edmonton aren't going away any time soon.....
- SteveRain

Bowman needs to hit a couple of home runs this offseason. I don't think one trade (unless it was a really big, multi-player or multi-team type thing) will do it.

All that said, a guy like Matt Duchene checks a couple of big boxes—assuming you don't lose too much in terms of veteran talent going the other way. Then you add in a couple of shrewd lower budget bottom six moves, with the common denominator being speed and difficulty to play against, and the Hawks could be right back in business next year.

It's not like they suck or don't still have a lot of talent. They are just too thin upfront and missing a couple of key forward components.

You're right. No changes needed. Roll with what you got, you really didn't get swept by the Preds, it was all just very lucky.

Did you know you paid Toews $215, 500 a point last year? 5 points buys quite a house, even in Chicago. 15 points and the average man could retire. I know you pay him for his defense but -5 in 4 games.

I wonder who we get in Round 3?
- VopatsRash

I see you made it back out of your double wide TROLL. Go away man nobody cares about you or anything you have to say. You still haven't won anything until then STFU. Trashville still sucks and I doubt you get any further then the next round. Until then keep dreaming about winning the cup.

I don't care about the worlds.....that production means nothing to the improvement in Chicago. Just hoping whoever went over don't sustain any LT injuries.
- SteveRain

USA vs Sweden -- about a minute in and Schmaltz gets to the slot, toe drags, shoots, and gets run over by a late hit. Couldn't get to the bench by himself.

USA vs Sweden -- about a minute in and Schmaltz gets to the slot, toe drags, shoots, and gets run over by a late hit. Couldn't get to the bench by himself.
- 6628

GIF

https://twitter.com/ryanb...status/861647088672620545

I agree as well as vision and reading the play and anticipating where to be.

The Hawks cap mismanagement, and I will keep calling that now on, is what will haunt this team. Can they do a quick retool the way Pittsburgh did to win another cup? I don't know but their high end dollars to so many players and very few viable IN HOUSE replacements in the top 4 on D, or top 6 at F is going to cost them very soon.

Huge turning point in Bowman's career here. You can make a case for any of the big dollar guys as to having very little to replace them and technically doing the "steal from Peter to pay Paul" routine.....including 15 or 16 to start with.
- SteveRain

Except the Pittsburgh retool was not exactly quick in the sense that people here think. 7 years between Cups. That was time to keep their top end, and allow their "young guys" to actually not be so young when they began to contribute.

Except the Pittsburgh retool was not exactly quick in the sense that people here think. 7 years between Cups. That was time to keep their top end, and allow their "young guys" to actually not be so young when they began to contribute.
- TheTrob

I have not posted here for a long time but if anyone watched Hawks series and the other series you would see how physical they are. There is no way the Hawks with the team they have now playing only the speed game, nothing physical, will ever move forward in the division they are in. There is no way they can beat either the Preds or the Blues, they just are physically inept. Just saying. I am not talking about fighting so please don't attack me on that front

1) John your article is all over the map. 2) You don't give someone credit for "targeting". It is like saying well I thought about taking the garbage out. "Do or do not there is no try" is how many describe it. 3) It is a no-brainer to think well it would be nice to have Duchene.

The coaching staff was abominable. 4) Q talks about "playing the right way" and "playing with pace" but then doesn't allow thd team to actually play that way. There was a time when the team came in waves and predictably out-shot the opposition by a large margin, game after game. Even back then Q would stumble and I'd beg for him to get out of the team's way. How this manifests itself is the Hawks never build on leads, seem to always let other teams back into games and have trouble turning the offensive switch on when needed. 5) With players that are highly skilled offensively let them control the puck in the offensive zone. The other team cannot score from there so it is actually the best defence.

6) Anisimov destroys Kane snd Panarin. Playing him between them is ludicrous. Kane and Panarin are puck possession magicians but never get the puck as Anisimov can't win a face-off. This is awful all over the ice but especially in the offensive zone. Kane and Panarin line up then immedietely skate back to their own zone. Awful.

7) Speaking of Anisimov the Saad trade was a disaster. Hawks got Anisimov and Dano. Q immedietely hated Dano of course. Remember Dano was the centre-piece of the trade for the Hawks. Dano gets traded along with the Hawks First Round Draft Choice for Ladd in another disastrous trade. So the trade turns out to be Anisimov for Saad and a savings of only a few million as 8) Anisimov is for some reason paid a lot of money too.

The Hawks' young prospects are good players but Q isn't the guy. 9) How Motte went from leading the youth pack to being buried in Rockford is but one example. Probably one of the things Dineen complained about.

Q has many MANY failings but if he has a leading failing it is this - he cannot comprehend how game scores work. He has the belief that unless scoring comes from many lines you can't win a game. For example if Toews centers Kane and Panarin winning face-offs and creating incredible puck possession that is a thing to be frowned upon. The rational is that it is not a true 5-0 win if all 5 goals came from one line.

Another Q failing is that salary dictates playing time. 10) There are times when the goalies behind Crawford have actually outplayed Crawford but 6M Crawford plays. I remember Raanta said he wasn't just in Chicago to be the back-up but to fight for #1. This, of course, got him traded to the Rangers, for a bag of used pucks, where he has actually played ahead of future Hall of Famer Lundquist for stetches. Crawford is no future Hall of Famer. The aforementioned Anisimov certainly fits in this category. 11) I see no reason Anisimov slots as the #2 Centre based on merit. What kind of Centre can't win a face-off? More importantly what kind of Coach keeps playing him in key situations. See Nashville Series.

12) Bowman traded Sharp for nothing - he took the approach that he didn't want draft picks and got nothing. Bowman then traded the players he got for Sharp also for nothing. Super valuable Saad for Anisimov. Awful. Ladd trade a Disaster. Is Z-Minus a Grade?

Q and Bowman arguably should both go if one analyses them objectively.
- Z3Hawk

From the top.

1) Your opinion is welcome. So are you. But be careful, I think you're a little all over the map too, my friend. To wit:

2) I can give credit to whoever I want for whatever I want. But that's beside the point.

3) Do you realize how many "experts" (here on this board and elsewhere) thought going after guys like Drouin, Boedker and even Duchene were "bad" ideas? I repeat, I give credit to Bowman for recognizing the real need (elite speed and skill on the wing) and working to fix it, even if he didn't get it done. HE can't control other GMs asking prices—and other GMs aren't exactly out there waiting to help the Hawks out.

4) Playing with pace? With Anisimov, Desjardins, Rasmussen, Campbell, van Riemsdyk? You make the point yourself. Anisimov is a boat anchor. Who traded for him? Q? Talk about all over the map, bro.

5) You mean like Andrew Shaw (who was very strong in o-zone possession), Brandon Saad, etc? Ever see how Schmaltz wilts under pressure along the wall? Again, is that on Q?

6) There is an argument there. IMO, Bowman paying him that kind of money with a year left on his old deal was D-U-M. Judging by your join date, you may not have read that here previously, but I've said it. This blog is about the last year.

7) What better deal was out there? Tell me. Curious what info. you have. What was Bowman gonna do if ANA or COLO made the offer sheet they were (LIKELY) going to make. I had good info. Bowman had two offers—CBJ and PIT (involving Pouliot, but there was more involved from both teams) and he took the better of the two. Anisimov is a useful player, in spite of his shortcomings.

8) But I do agree, he knee-jerk overpaid him.

9) Really? Ever see the absolute clown car the break-out was when Hinostroza, Motte and Schmaltz were on the ice early in the season? If it weren't for Crawford and Darling the Hawks would have lost some games 10-0. That's why I turn the "tire-pumping" down and watch the (frank)ing game. Motte may yet end up being a decent player, but aside from a lot of goals ONE YEAR in the CCHA what exactly leads you to believe he was some kind of can't miss prospect? A bunch of message board hype? Oh and by the way, he has a BAD habit of keeping his head down that you can get away with in Ann Arbor, not so much in big boy games. His next concussion could land him selling Pirellis back home at Belle Tire.

10) There were stretches when: Ray Emery, Raanta, and Darling outplayed Crawford. No question. And Crawford over his career, for the same money, and in the estimation of 30 NHL GMs, hundreds of scouts, etc is the better goalie. And a legit, top 10 #1. It's all a cost-value trade off.

11) I'm with ya on Anisimov—if you have a better #2. But . . . ya don't . . . right now. Not Schmaltz—though, I'll grant you, if he gets stronger, that could change. Not Kruger. Not Kero. So who else was he going to play?

12) Agreed. he waited too long and got snookered on Sharp. That's what I alluded to in the blog.

Bowman needs to hit a couple of home runs this offseason. I don't think one trade (unless it was a really big, multi-player or multi-team type thing) will do it.

All that said, a guy like Matt Duchene checks a couple of big boxes—assuming you don't lose too much in terms of veteran talent going the other way. Then you add in a couple of shrewd lower budget bottom six moves, with the common denominator being speed and difficulty to play against, and the Hawks could be right back in business next year.

It's not like they suck or don't still have a lot of talent. They are just too thin upfront and missing a couple of key forward components.
- John Jaeckel

yeah, I hear you but they need a few more bodies.....their forward depth is a joke and their team speed is declining rapidly.

Hoping/banking on a bounce back year health wise from 2/19 is one thing, but what if those 2 don't bounce back and Keith's difference making quickness is gone?

If you look at 2/4/7/15/19/72/81/88 it's very easy to make a case that they all leave a hole even in if dealt. I intentionally left off 16 as I assume he's a given to be gone at this point, much like 36 was following 2013.


I don't envy Bowmans position and while everyone can say Q hates young guys, I'm sorry guys like Motte, Schmaltz, Frosling, Kempny etc do very little in my eyes in their ability to fill in for a high salaried guy.

Fact is this team has gone 1-4 at home the past 2 years in the playoffs and is 3-8 overall with no advancement. Something more then a tweak is needed here and I still contend their is another factor at play here with chemistry to something else because they way they played uninspiring hockey in the playoffs was the biggest red flag IMO

yeah, I hear you but they need a few more bodies.....their forward depth is a joke and their team speed is declining rapidly.

Hoping/banking on a bounce back year health wise from 2/19 is one thing, but what if those 2 don't bounce back and Keith's difference making quickness is gone?

If you look at 2/4/7/15/19/72/81/88 it's very easy to make a case that they all leave a hole even in if dealt. I intentionally left off 16 as I assume he's a given to be gone at this point, much like 36 was following 2013.


I don't envy Bowmans position and while everyone can say Q hates young guys, I'm sorry guys like Motte, Schmaltz, Frosling, Kempny etc do very little in my eyes in their ability to fill in for a high salaried guy.

Fact is this team has gone 1-4 at home the past 2 years in the playoffs and is 3-8 overall with no advancement. Something more then a tweak is needed here and I still contend their is another factor at play here with chemistry to something else because they way they played uninspiring hockey in the playoffs was the biggest red flag IMO
- SteveRain

They're all valid points and questions.

JJ, broken record here regarding all grades here, but spot on and eerily consistent with my (humble) observations of the state of the franchise.

If we are talking about the Hawks making one or more “significant” moves that are “hockey” trades, could you envision a scenario that has Hawks dealing Panarin and Anisimov as a package deal? Maybe you think I’m a bit nuts for thinking of dealing 2/3 of the most productive offensive line, but hear me out: AA’s lack of faceoff wins and footspeed is counter to the Hawks possession game. Panarin is gifted and an “effort-plus” guy, especially in the o-zone, but his role of being a perimeter guy is redundant with a lot of other guys on the Hawks that can’t attack the blue paint or give multiple dimensions. While I point out flaws, maybe there is a partner with $10M of salary that could come back to the Hawks in some combination (3 out of 4) of the following: Top 4-6D, Top 9LW, C that wins faceoffs, NHL-ready bottom 6 physical presence at forward. Would you do something like this?

You're right. No changes needed. Roll with what you got, you really didn't get swept by the Preds, it was all just very lucky.

Did you know you paid Toews $215, 500 a point last year? 5 points buys quite a house, even in Chicago. 15 points and the average man could retire. I know you pay him for his defense but -5 in 4 games.

I wonder who we get in Round 3?
- VopatsRash

I totally get that you have to try to provoke hockey talk here after a big second series win and not able to gin up 15 home posts on your forum. Must be lonely not having anywhere to take that excitement, which is too bad, because you have a good team.

Also, congratulations on making the Stanley Cup final.

http://screengrabber.dead...-are-in-the-st-1795001697

I have not posted here for a long time but if anyone watched Hawks series and the other series you would see how physical they are. There is no way the Hawks with the team they have now playing only the speed game, nothing physical, will ever move forward in the division they are in. There is no way they can beat either the Preds or the Blues, they just are physically inept. Just saying. I am not talking about fighting so please don't attack me on that front
- Maggie

Agreed.

They were very easy to play against, stayed to the outside, failed to engage, failed to clear the crease and they were given a rightful fate.

How this team regroups and learns from that remains to be seen

I agree in that its not just hits, its an overall game and system that is needed that will be competitive and sustainable in the PLAYOFF'S. Over many playoff runs the Blues as an example have hit super hard but lost gas in the playoffs. And Reeves does belong in the WWE.
- riozzo

I agree. It's not about hitting everybody Going out of your way just to make a hit can create odd man rushes. Make a hit to gain puck possession

From the top.

1) Your opinion is welcome. So are you. But be careful, I think you're a little all over the map too, my friend. To wit:

2) I can give credit to whoever I want for whatever I want. But that's beside the point.

3) Do you realize how many "experts" (here on this board and elsewhere) thought going after guys like Drouin, Boedker and even Duchene were "bad" ideas? I repeat, I give credit to Bowman for recognizing the real need (elite speed and skill on the wing) and working to fix it, even if he didn't get it done. HE can't control other GMs asking prices—and other GMs aren't exactly out there waiting to help the Hawks out.

4) Playing with pace? With Anisimov, Desjardins, Rasmussen, Campbell, van Riemsdyk? You make the point yourself. Anisimov is a boat anchor. Who traded for him? Q? Talk about all over the map, bro.

5) You mean like Andrew Shaw (who was very strong in o-zone possession), Brandon Saad, etc? Ever see how Schmaltz wilts under pressure along the wall? Again, is that on Q?

6) There is an argument there. IMO, Bowman paying him that kind of money with a year left on his old deal was D-U-M. Judging by your join date, you may not have read that here previously, but I've said it. This blog is about the last year.

7) What better deal was out there? Tell me. Curious what info. you have. What was Bowman gonna do if ANA or COLO made the offer sheet they were (LIKELY) going to make. I had good info. Bowman had two offers—CBJ and PIT (involving Pouliot, but there was more involved from both teams) and he took the better of the two. Anisimov is a useful player, in spite of his shortcomings.

8) But I do agree, he knee-jerk overpaid him.

9) Really? Ever see the absolute clown car the break-out was when Hinostroza, Motte and Schmaltz were on the ice early in the season? If it weren't for Crawford and Darling the Hawks would have lost some games 10-0. That's why I turn the "tire-pumping" down and watch the (frank)ing game. Motte may yet end up being a decent player, but aside from a lot of goals ONE YEAR in the CCHA what exactly leads you to believe he was some kind of can't miss prospect? A bunch of message board hype? Oh and by the way, he has a BAD habit of keeping his head down that you can get away with in Ann Arbor, not so much in big boy games. His next concussion could land him selling Pirellis back home at Belle Tire.

10) There were stretches when: Ray Emery, Raanta, and Darling outplayed Crawford. No question. And Crawford over his career, for the same money, and in the estimation of 30 NHL GMs, hundreds of scouts, etc is the better goalie. And a legit, top 10 #1. It's all a cost-value trade off.

11) I'm with ya on Anisimov—if you have a better #2. But . . . ya don't . . . right now. Not Schmaltz—though, I'll grant you, if he gets stronger, that could change. Not Kruger. Not Kero. So who else was he going to play?

12) Agreed. he waited too long and got snookered on Sharp. That's what I alluded to in the blog.
- John Jaeckel

GIF

https://twitter.com/ryanb...status/861647088672620545
- pdx2ord

Dirty hit

From the top.

1) Your opinion is welcome. So are you. But be careful, I think you're a little all over the map too, my friend. To wit:

2) I can give credit to whoever I want for whatever I want. But that's beside the point.

3) Do you realize how many "experts" (here on this board and elsewhere) thought going after guys like Drouin, Boedker and even Duchene were "bad" ideas? I repeat, I give credit to Bowman for recognizing the real need (elite speed and skill on the wing) and working to fix it, even if he didn't get it done. HE can't control other GMs asking prices—and other GMs aren't exactly out there waiting to help the Hawks out.

4) Playing with pace? With Anisimov, Desjardins, Rasmussen, Campbell, van Riemsdyk? You make the point yourself. Anisimov is a boat anchor. Who traded for him? Q? Talk about all over the map, bro.

5) You mean like Andrew Shaw (who was very strong in o-zone possession), Brandon Saad, etc? Ever see how Schmaltz wilts under pressure along the wall? Again, is that on Q?

6) There is an argument there. IMO, Bowman paying him that kind of money with a year left on his old deal was D-U-M. Judging by your join date, you may not have read that here previously, but I've said it. This blog is about the last year.

7) What better deal was out there? Tell me. Curious what info. you have. What was Bowman gonna do if ANA or COLO made the offer sheet they were (LIKELY) going to make. I had good info. Bowman had two offers—CBJ and PIT (involving Pouliot, but there was more involved from both teams) and he took the better of the two. Anisimov is a useful player, in spite of his shortcomings.

8) But I do agree, he knee-jerk overpaid him.

9) Really? Ever see the absolute clown car the break-out was when Hinostroza, Motte and Schmaltz were on the ice early in the season? If it weren't for Crawford and Darling the Hawks would have lost some games 10-0. That's why I turn the "tire-pumping" down and watch the (frank)ing game. Motte may yet end up being a decent player, but aside from a lot of goals ONE YEAR in the CCHA what exactly leads you to believe he was some kind of can't miss prospect? A bunch of message board hype? Oh and by the way, he has a BAD habit of keeping his head down that you can get away with in Ann Arbor, not so much in big boy games. His next concussion could land him selling Pirellis back home at Belle Tire.

10) There were stretches when: Ray Emery, Raanta, and Darling outplayed Crawford. No question. And Crawford over his career, for the same money, and in the estimation of 30 NHL GMs, hundreds of scouts, etc is the better goalie. And a legit, top 10 #1. It's all a cost-value trade off.

11) I'm with ya on Anisimov—if you have a better #2. But . . . ya don't . . . right now. Not Schmaltz—though, I'll grant you, if he gets stronger, that could change. Not Kruger. Not Kero. So who else was he going to play?

12) Agreed. he waited too long and got snookered on Sharp. That's what I alluded to in the blog.
- John Jaeckel

JJ,

Have you heard anything specifically about the Hawks kicking the tires on Duchene again?

We are not watching the same games. Hawks beat every team from the East. if Hawks play Oilers Hawks dominate them. A sweep causes an extreme reaction - an emotional reaction. You forget what you objectively watched. Hawks should've won Game 1. Hawks should've won Game 3. If Crawford doesn't suck Hawks have a chance in Games 2 and 4 too. Rinne totally outplays Crawford. Crawford even admits this. This leaves Hawks no chance to win as Q won't go to Darling as any non-Moron would do.
- Z3Hawk

The Hawks were absolutely DESTROYED by Washington. Worst regular season loss by the Hawks in years. They struggled against Columbus, who made them look bad April of '16, too. Tampa Bay exposed them in March.

None of the four games except I believe Game 2 was THAT close, dude.

Rinne is back to the top of his game, when he has been a top 5-top 10 goalie, and good for him.

Crawford was not the reason the Hawks got smoked.

They couldn't get pucks through the neutral zone or deep or maintain o-zone possession. And when Nashville came back the other way, the Hawks' D (as it was in the St. Louis series last year) was way back on its heels.

I have not posted here for a long time but if anyone watched Hawks series and the other series you would see how physical they are. There is no way the Hawks with the team they have now playing only the speed game, nothing physical, will ever move forward in the division they are in. There is no way they can beat either the Preds or the Blues, they just are physically inept. Just saying. I am not talking about fighting so please don't attack me on that front
- Maggie

Glad you're back.

Agreed.

They were very easy to play against, stayed to the outside, failed to engage, failed to clear the crease and they were given a rightful fate.

How this team regroups and learns from that remains to be seen
- SteveRain

Rain man

Do you think Q is against physical hockey?

JJ,

Have you heard anything specifically about the Hawks kicking the tires on Duchene again?
- frafra

I was under the impression in February it would be revisited again after the season.

Rain man

Do you think Q is against physical hockey?
- Maggie

He doesn't like guys getting out of position to make a hit/finish a check and he will have d-men use their stick before taking the body in a lot of instances.

- riozzo

I'm here all week.