Welcome back JJ, hope all is well with you and yours........

The faceoff debate. Always worth the trouble IMO. As long as they played hockey you needed to be strong down the middle, at least 4 high quality Dmen and solid goaltending. Plenty of other truisms but these were tried and true and at the top of the list. Then comes the hard cap.

I agree there is a huge need to win faceoffs on this club, and in general, but if I have a solid 2C that checks most every box but faceoffs I'm not throwing the baby out with the bathwater especially with so much inexperience at 3 and 4C. And for the umpteenth time with my defense possibly/probably dressing 3 guys with a combined 50 NHL games experience I'm counting on the C position to be very strong defensively.

With my 2C having that weakness I'm looking to add a PP specialist as cheaply as possible in the bottom 6. A guy who will take the Dzone faceoff with the 2nd line while my 2C watches and hops over the boards when the chance comes. .........This simply can't be that difficult in the grand scheme of things but for some reason the Hawks let a lot of time go by without addressing it. I wonder if the Hawk internal fancy stats show winning faceoffs isn't as important as many fans think it is?

Geez man, dress a 13th forward just to go 50%+ at the dot if nothing else. Too simple to make sense so it tells me it's not a high priority for the Hawks.

I;m not one of the guys who dismisses the ability to win faceoffs - I think winning faceoffs is very important - especially in the d-zone when typically the opposing team has their best faceoff guy in there.

However, there is more to AA's game than simply sucking at faceoffs and those other aspects of his game are pretty good. If he could be replaced by a guy who was a good faceoff guy AND did the other things as well as AA - that would be great. But, the names I've seen rumored to be traded for AA are either not centers or part-time centers with worse faceoff efficiency.
- EbonyRaptor

that's in contention for line of the summer.

the comparison needs to who are the other two players on Kane's line now (AA and ??? Sharp? Hartman? Schmaltz?) versus who would be the two players on Kane's line after a trade. How do those two lines compare on all aspects of the game, including face-offs?

I;m not one of the guys who dismisses the ability to win faceoffs - I think winning faceoffs is very important - especially in the d-zone when typically the opposing team has their best faceoff guy in there.

However, there is more to AA's game than simply sucking at faceoffs and those other aspects of his game are pretty good. If he could be replaced by a guy who was a good faceoff guy AND did the other things as well as AA - that would be great. But, the names I've seen rumored to be traded for AA are either not centers or part-time centers with worse faceoff efficiency.
- EbonyRaptor

My perspective is similar. I'm supportive of trading Anisimov as long as the Hawks somehow find another center who can be as effective and win faceoffs at a better rate. But if Anisimov is replaced by a guy who has a better faceoff % and is a 0.5 PPG player, but be sub-par in some or many of the areas that Anisimov is great at (screening goalies, creating space for linemates), then is it really an upgrade?

If that is the case, then I prefer to stick with Anisimov and focus more on shoring up the blueline and finding a LW to play with Kane (if that LW isn't Schmaltz).

What about trade Artie for JVR window for hawks closing . one year commitment.This gives us LW and allows us to fill defensive need Hossa money?

Um ok, can someone with hockey smarts explain to the board why otherwise skilled players cannot win face offs? Is this a technique or skill that can't be taught? Or practiced? That some players are good at it and some will never be????
I just don't get it.
- Kewl1

Low center of gravity, strong core and arms, quickness—willingness and competitive ness.

Like anything else: a combination of physical attributes, skill that can be taught and desire to be good at it

[quote=Ogilthorpe2]Lemme get this straight....

For years you people cried about not having a legit 2C, and now that we have one, we want to trade him for a LW who might be able to kind of, sort of, sometimes, play center...all because the legit 2C that we finally DO have is only fair to middling at the dot?



Last I checked there is a whole hell of lot more to being a good NHL center-iceman than winning faceoffs. Of those "other" things Anisimov, when healthy, seems to excel at some, and is above average at most.

Trading AA without a proven NHL caliber C coming back in return makes absolutely no sense to me, and I find the sudden fixation on one of the more meaningless stats in the game to be amusing.
- John Jaeckel[/quote]



I find the fixation on this inaccurate premise even more amusing.

AA is a useful player. Big, responsible positionally, really good around the net, smart.

But there is also a reason in both New York and Columbus he was periodically moved out to left wing. Not least of which, he sucks at faceoffs.

I will go with what coaches and scouts say, over interwebs truisms and analytics jockeys, faceoffs matter. Especially on special teams.

Sure, if that's all you do, like say Paul Gaustad or Never Panic Yanic himself, meh, not much use there. But you combine it with a guy who does other things . . . like a Toews or a Bergeron or a Duchene, among many others, it helps make a player much more of a total package and a weapon who can be used in more situations..

By the way, add this to your extensive repertoire of knowledge:

Artem Anisimov has won zero Cups anywhere, ever. Michal Handzus and Brad R=ichards, two legitimate NHL centers the Hawks had on kane's line in the last 5 years, and both of whom were better on draws than the great Artem Anisimov, have one a piece in Chicago.

Talk about short memories.

Burn

Low center of gravity, strong core and arms, quickness—willingness and competitive ness.

Like anything else: a combination of physical attributes, skill that can be taught and desire to be good at it
- John Jaeckel

What would Anisimov's FO stats be if he had two skaters on his side who were better at going into the scrum and getting the 50/50 draws? It seems that FO stats are attached to an individual, but most are determined by the team getting those that aren't clearly won or lost.

If Perrault can't teach Anisimov to win draws more directly, can't he at least teach him how to turn them into 50/50s instead of direct losses?

The Ducks signed Rasmussen.

Low center of gravity, strong core and arms, quickness—willingness and competitive ness.

Like anything else: a combination of physical attributes, skill that can be taught and desire to be good at it
- John Jaeckel

Good list. I'd add adapting on the fly to that. If someone is/was beating me, I'd usually figure out what they were doing & adjust to take it away.

AA to my eyes doesn't seem to get as low as he often could...dunno

Two things people need to consider is...

A.) Not a lot of teams are ready and willing to just jump in and help the Hawks outta their cap problems outta the goodness of the heart. I'm sure there are TONS of teams that enjoy seeing us struggle to manage the cap and lose players. Only way we get them to help US help them get to the floor is by putting a sweetener or TWO (i.e. a pick AND a player) in there. Otherwise they could overpay for an average FA on a one year deal to get to the floor and manage that until they have to pay out some of the guys on their rookie deals.

B.) I don't think we're talking THAT big of a price. Maybe like a 3rd and a Vinnie Hinostroza type of player. It really comes down to having confirmation that Hossa is not coming back and they don't have to worry about that player actually being a part of their team. Once a team knows that for sure the ball will get rolling on it.

C.) For anyone who doesn't really wanna pay that kind of price, would you rather have for example a 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc. and player A than get the caps space to fill the needs we need i.e. 2LW, 3RD, and a C that can win draws? Because it's likely to be one or the other. And if this carries over into the Season than your looking to pay A LOT more to fill all three of those holes through trade than being able to sign a FA
- Savetheembers33

If you are an owner who wants to spend as little as possible, there is floor to how little you can pay your team collectively. If you acquire Marian Hossa's salary, you absorb a $5.275 million salary while only paying him $1million actual dollars. Thus if there were to be a team that would like to circumvent the Floor, there would be an actual savings of $17million to operate your team for the next 4 years. I am not saying that there is such a team, but I am saying that its not impossible to suggest that an organization would want Hossa's contract.

What would Anisimov's FO stats be if he had two skaters on his side who were better at going into the scrum and getting the 50/50 draws? It seems that FO stats are attached to an individual, but most are determined by the team getting those that aren't clearly won or lost.

If Perrault can't teach Anisimov to win draws more directly, can't he at least teach him how to turn them into 50/50s instead of direct losses?
- StLBravesFan

Agreed Sage. That was my main issue with the construction of the PAK line in the playoffs. I thought the second line needed a guy better at bird-dogging the puck

Good list. I'd add adapting on the fly to that. If someone is/was beating me, I'd usually figure out what they were doing & adjust to take it away.

AA to my eyes doesn't seem to get as low as he often could...dunno
- grinder10

Some people just stink at things.

Some people just stink at things.
- kwolf68

True enough

Low center of gravity, strong core and arms, quickness—willingness and competitive ness.

Like anything else: a combination of physical attributes, skill that can be taught and desire to be good at it
- John Jaeckel

Hey John, do I remember correctly that Hartman played center in his younger days?
He would be a great third line center in my opinion. Strong, defensively able, seems like a good solution. Kind of like Danault but more skill. He was a first rounder. Trade Anisimov for Galenchyk. Maybe a line-up like this:

Saad - Toews - Panik
Galenchyk - Schmaltz - Kane
Sharp - Hartman - Wingels
Hayden - Daupin/Kero - Jurco/Bouman

The Ducks signed Rasmussen.
- DarthKane

If the deal is $1m or less, then Bowman will have let a better player walk away for nothing to be able to sign an anchor in Bouma.

Hey John, do I remember correctly that Hartman played center in his younger days?
He would be a great third line center in my opinion. Strong, defensively able, seems like a good solution. Kind of like Danault but more skill. He was a first rounder. Trade Anisimov for Galenchyk. Maybe a line-up like this:

Saad - Toews - Panik
Galenchyk - Schmaltz - Kane
Sharp - Hartman - Wingels
Hayden - Daupin/Kero - Jurco/Bouman
- Gary0301

Hartman was tried at center last year briefly but was not good and said after that he was much more comfortable at wing.

Hey John, do I remember correctly that Hartman played center in his younger days?
He would be a great third line center in my opinion. Strong, defensively able, seems like a good solution. Kind of like Danault but more skill. He was a first rounder. Trade Anisimov for Galenchyk. Maybe a line-up like this:

Saad - Toews - Panik
Galenchyk - Schmaltz - Kane
Sharp - Hartman - Wingels
Hayden - Daupin/Kero - Jurco/Bouman
- Gary0301

They tried Hartman at centre last season, he was better on the wing. Anisimov can't be traded unless Stan also acquires another legit centre. Beyond Toews and Anisimov there's not a lot of NHL experience down the middle. I'm hoping Schmaltz can become the 3C and either Kero or Dauphin emerge as the 4C.

If the deal is $1m or less, then Bowman will have let a better player walk away for nothing to be able to sign an anchor in Bouma.
- L_B_R

Ya... I don't know why Stan would elect to go with Bouma vs Rasmussen.

They tried Hartman at centre last season, he was better on the wing. Anisimov can't be traded unless Stan also acquires another legit centre. Beyond Toews and Anisimov there's not a lot of NHL experience down the middle. I'm hoping Schmaltz can become the 3C and either Kero or Dauphin emerge as the 4C.
- DarthKane

Any chance for Luke Johnson? Projects as a bottom 6 and is very good in the dot.

Um ok, can someone with hockey smarts explain to the board why otherwise skilled players cannot win face offs? Is this a technique or skill that can't be taught? Or practiced? That some players are good at it and some will never be????
I just don't get it.
- Kewl1

Here's a few pointers
https://youtu.be/NwKIZfh8s6c

Any chance for Luke Johnson? Projects as a bottom 6 and is very good in the dot.
- kwolf68

Maybe in a year or two.

Sure. Anyone can. And, in theory, anyone can be "replaced."

But who's the available/obtainable "replacement?" Not for his "offensive production," but the actual value/role he fulfilled?
- John Jaeckel

If we got Vanek on a cheap deal and used him in a purely sheltered/PP/OZ role, it would payoff huge. Guy doesn't particularly want more than 12 minutes a night, still is very dangerous and has the hands. 33 ain't dead.

What would Anisimov's FO stats be if he had two skaters on his side who were better at going into the scrum and getting the 50/50 draws? It seems that FO stats are attached to an individual, but most are determined by the team getting those that aren't clearly won or lost.

If Perrault can't teach Anisimov to win draws more directly, can't he at least teach him how to turn them into 50/50s instead of direct losses?
- StLBravesFan

Great point, Sage. Many times winning the puck off a draw is a 2-3 man effort. And as you mention if your going up a guy you can't beat tie the puck up and let the battle begin......... Another thing overlooked at times as far as AA is with Panarin and Kane as his wingers he did the heavy work of winning pucks along the wall. AA does a lot of ugly work for this club as well as understanding his own zone and a good chance that will continue with Panarin's replacement.

Ya... I don't know why Stan would elect to go with Bouma vs Rasmussen.
- DarthKane

It'll be interesting to see what they signed him for.

If the deal is $1m or less, then Bowman will have let a better player walk away for nothing to be able to sign an anchor in Bouma.
- L_B_R

1 year, $725,000. Strange that the Hawks wouldn't re-sign Rasmussen.