We replaced Burish, Eager, Ladd, Buff, Versteeg, Brouwer with....

Frolik, Bickell, Brunette, Stalberg, Mayers, Kruger

This is your story... a major problem when your core is mostly skill players
- ilinkhawk

1.15+1.11+4.40+5.20+3.08+2.35=17.29
2.33+.875+2.0+.875+.550+.900=7.53

There is a 10 million dollar disconnect there. $$$ isn't everything in player evaluating but 4/6 of them should be making 1st or 2nd line money, which they are and aside from being a cool dude to hang out with Burish and even Eager (though never bumped into him on the town) should be very replaceable assets.

Terrible special teams, awful defense and the glut of odd man rushes this team gives up is beyond comprehensible. Means they don't have the hockey sense to see what is in front of them = bad or they are coached to play recklessly = bad or they don't care = bad or they only care sometimes = not much better than not caring at all.

The simple, don't clear the puck up the middle of the ice or exit the zone early stuff you learn when you're 8 are not being applied at all or sparingly at best. Regardless of how terrible or not the team has been filled out, losing 8 games they way they have (looking like they are otw to 10) is unacceptable for ANY TEAM in the NHL regardless of talent level.

Why would a beat writer admit - in public - that he / she is afraid of being "punished" by the team being covered?
- StLBravesFan

It's a good question. Only Sassone knows what he meant. I will retract/qualify what I said earlier if he tells me (or someone else for that matter) he was being merely sarcastic. I don't honestly know. neither do you. Only he does.

That said, it is naive and likely inaccurate to dismiss the notion that the beat people are hesitant to be very critical of the team for political reasons.

That is not a knock on them, rather the organization they cover and the rules it plays by. They're just doing their jobs.

Let's put this to rest, OK? I am not trying to criticize the beat guys at all.

Not true...Holland became GM of the team in 1997 when he inherited the defending Champions. He then won the Cup in his first year as GM, then 4 years later in 2002 and then 6 years again after that in 2008.
- andru2797

Good catch. Devellano I believe was GM prior.

I think Bruno at 2 million on a 1 year deal is a good value. The problem, in my opinion, is this:

The ideal situation for him is to play 4th line 5-on-5 minutes and provide a net presence on the PP.

The problem is for any type of net presence to be effective, a power-play has to be a shooting power-play, which these Hawks are not. They like to pass the puck side to side a lot and look for the back door play, which makes Bruno completely useless. He scores most of his goals on tip-ins or from within the crease. For that to happen, you need a point man who can get pucks through on a consistent basis. The Hawks a) don't have a real shooter on the point and b) refuse to do it most nights anyway.
- andru2797

Agree on the hawks shooting issues on the PP. Regardless of being a shooting power play, one thing I have noticed is that there are times where the opposing teams penalty kill will trap our entry so we are forced to dump. Now here is my issue with Brunette. He is the lowest man in the zone on the power play so he is responsible to get the dump in or force pressure, BUT, he is too slow and can not fulfill that obligation, therefor Kruger belongs in his spot and he is completely useless.

1.15+1.11+4.40+5.20+3.08+2.35=17.29
2.33+.875+2.0+.875+.550+.900=7.53

There is a 10 million dollar disconnect there. $$$ isn't everything in player evaluating but 4/6 of them should be making 1st or 2nd line money, which they are and aside from being a cool dude to hang out with Burish and even Eager (though never bumped into him on the town) should be very replaceable assets.

Terrible special teams, awful defense and the glut of odd man rushes this team gives up is beyond comprehensible. Means they don't have the hockey sense to see what is in front of them = bad or they are coached to play recklessly = bad or they don't care = bad or they only care sometimes = not much better than not caring at all.

The simple, don't clear the puck up the middle of the ice or exit the zone early stuff you learn when you're 8 are not being applied at all or sparingly at best. Regardless of how terrible or not the team has been filled out, losing 8 games they way they have (looking like they are otw to 10) is unacceptable for ANY TEAM in the NHL regardless of talent level.
- fattybeef

Q did recently admit that he and the coaching staff let the defense slide a bit when things were going well.

Again, I'm trying to stick to the subject and because my opinions are different, they're called ridiculous, by someone who evidently didn't read my whole post.

What I said is that IF the rumors of the SB taking orders were true...IF.

As for what moves are hits: Jamal Mayers, Viktor Stalberg, Re-signing Brent Seabrook, Ray Emery as a backup for that price, Andrew Shaw, drafting Brandon Saad, Barker-for-Leddy, the trade, not the re-signing, of Frolik for Skille because it's better to take a chance on a 23-year-old who has scored 20 goals than one who hasn't...I believe all these were successful moves.

It's interesting that you just blew off my statement about Holland needing 4 years, then 6 to build Cup Winners when that is a fact.
- andru2797

I didn't blow off your Ken Holland statement, I said it was ridiculous to compare Stan Bowman with Holland. Granted, the Wings were upset a couple of times in the playoffs as big favourites but they have won Cups with a frequency Stanbow can only aspire to. Holland would get another job in a hearbeat if he were ever fired, Bowman I seriously doubt it. He's Chicago's version of John Ferguson Jr. IMO - in over his head.

Mayers was a hit? He was on the scrap heap, no big accomplishment signing him.

Saad - little lucky him being available at #42, he may turn out great, who knows? Same with Shaw.

Leddy will be fine; Frolik who cares, has done diddly squat so far; Emery was looking desperately for a job, not much to that signing. And you conveniently skipped over Montador.

Like I said, Bowman has presided over a transformation that has seen his team get older, slower and much softer. Not a good template.

I think Bruno at 2 million on a 1 year deal is a good value.

- andru2797

Brunette was a waste of 2 mil not 'good value'.

The man is DONE.

Agree on the hawks shooting issues on the PP. Regardless of being a shooting power play, one thing I have noticed is that there are times where the opposing teams penalty kill will trap our entry so we are forced to dump. Now here is my issue with Brunette. He is the lowest man in the zone on the power play so he is responsible to get the dump in or force pressure, BUT, he is too slow and can not fulfill that obligation, therefor Kruger belongs in his spot and he is completely useless.
- nickmo2699

It's a valid point on the forecheck issue, but I still think if you have two guys willing to do that, Bruno can be useful, at least on a 2nd PP unit.

That said, when the Hawks do dump it in, their dump-ins are terrible and that becomes exceedingly evident against a goalie who can really handle the puck, like Mike Smith in PHO.