Wanna blog? Start your own hockey blog with My HockeyBuzz. Register for free today!
 
Forums :: Blog World :: Justin Lowe: What This Team Isn’t and What They Need To Be
Author Message
riozzo
Chicago Blackhawks
Location: Cornwallis Island
Joined: 06.17.2014

Mar 6 @ 1:30 PM ET
This board is truly living up to being the year of the dog...
DK002
Chicago Blackhawks
Location: Evanston, IL
Joined: 06.12.2012

Mar 6 @ 1:31 PM ET
come on Savvy. Q knows that he has an AHL level defense, AHL level goaltending, and a bottom tier NHL offense. Q knows that he has a guaranteed contract, so why would he have a care in the world about this sad state of affairs? If he gets fired, he gets paid AND doesn't have to deal with the embarrassing excuse for an "NHL Roster" that Bowman has assembled. We are both on the same page as far as Q's history of player usage, doghouse vs penthouse treatment, and overall stubborness....HOWEVER, I simply cannot pin the blame on Q this year. Rutta, Oesterle, Forsling, Gustafson, and Dahlstrom don't belong on NHL ice. Even Seabrook and Murphy have barely been performing at 3rd pair levels this year. Q can't go out there and make players better than they are. This season, and the following years of SUCK we should all be bracing ourselves for, falls squarely on the shoulders of Bowman, 19 and 7.
- EnzoD


Wait a minute Enzo you're making way too much sense...I was just catching up on the blog today when I just read that the Great Stan Bowman just overpaid another AHL dman and just spit out my lunch. How is this roster going to get any better with Stan who's already locked in the slipping vet core with those deals with full NMCs and then overpays with yet another guy who can't play.

And how bout Osterle against the Ducks on Sunday... was he getting his hair done in the crease and couldn't be bothered to make a play?...vintage Rundblad. Add to the fact that Bowman had no plan to get an actual NHL backup this season...well you've seen what happened. You think Stan would have thought about this based on Craw's last two seasons...well no. Forsberg, Berube, and Glass...oh my..

Meanwhile I can't blame the players for signing those deals- it's on the GM who handed them the money - the supposed capoligist.

Well its the Lanche tonight...I'm sure there's a video tribute to Gus scheduled for the first time out. Can't wait.
EnzoD
Chicago Blackhawks
Location: Denver, CO
Joined: 02.19.2014

Mar 6 @ 1:33 PM ET
Wait a minute Enzo you're making way too much sense...I was just catching up on the blog today when I just read that the Great Stan Bowman just overpaid another AHL dman and just spit out my lunch. How is this roster going to get any better with Stan who's already locked in the slipping vet core with those deals with full NMCs and then overpays with yet another guy who can't play.

And how bout Osterle against the Ducks on Sunday... was he getting his hair done in the crease and couldn't be bothered to make a play?...vintage Rundblad. Add to the fact that Bowman had no plan to get an actual NHL backup this season...well you've seen what happened. You think Stan would have thought about this based on Craw's last two seasons...well no. Forsberg, Berube, and Glass...oh my..

Meanwhile I can't blame the players for signing those deals- it's on the GM who handed them the money - the supposed capoligist.

Well its the Lanche tonight...I'm sure there's a video tribute to Gus scheduled for the first time out. Can't wait.

- DK002


Can't wait to see our defense group try to defend against Mackinnon-Rantanen-Landescog....that should be fun.
bogiedoc
Chicago Blackhawks
Location: VA
Joined: 09.27.2011

Mar 6 @ 1:34 PM ET
Man, starting to look at next year's roster, there is some room for optimism. I think I've read somewhere that $80m salary cap is possible.

Starting with this core:
9 forwards, $36.3m: Kane, Toews, AA, Saad, Schmaltz, Kampf, Hino, Duclair, Wingels. (I assume Duclair, Wingels and Hino all signed at $800k-$1.2m each)
5 D, $18m: Dunc, Seab, Murphy, Oesterle, Gus.
2 G, $6.75m: Craw and Forsling.

Assumes we've traded Hossa's contract.
$61m, 16 players.
Add 4 more players at $1m each to get to 20.
Then at $65m for 20 players, it leaves us about $5m each to add 3 players.
I would say a power forward left wing, a #2/#3 Center who could win draws, and a D.
How would you feel about 2018 season if the hawks could add a 1st pair level D, a strong 2-way C, and a left wing for Kaner?

- Cmonalready


way to optimistic...
z1990z
Chicago Blackhawks
Location: NW USA
Joined: 02.09.2012

Mar 6 @ 1:37 PM ET
way to optimistic...
- bogiedoc



Possibility too that players may not want to come here if Q is still here. Lame duck coach status is possible if this team falls flat to start the year. Need to make quick/hard decisions so that this team can have a fresh start for next season.

The entire league can see what a schit show this team is at the moment. Not a real attractive FA destination. Will be like days of old when Tallon had to throw big money to land good FA.
-Doh-
Location: VA
Joined: 10.05.2015

Mar 6 @ 1:42 PM ET
If the Hawks have 8 D up again next year, I quit. This whole situation was laughable. The best part was that we carried 8D for half the year and didn't really have a solid top 4.
- Chunk


I guess I am more concerned with the 6 on the ice. Having a young 7th defender that you rotate in and out of the bottom pairings is ok. Having an 8th defender that is a veteran of the Rosi or Brookbank (maybe even Franson) type in the press box with the understanding that they are there as insurance as your 8th defender is not terrible.
Hawks_49
Chicago Blackhawks
Location: Ottawa, ON
Joined: 04.28.2015

Mar 6 @ 1:44 PM ET
I didn't mean your post specifically, sorry, it was just the easiest to quote.

It just seems unlikely that anyone will be doing Bowman a favour and, honestly, I don't see why the Hawks need or even SHOULD to pursue a trade like that anyway.

- BINGO!


Fair enough.

I'm in agreement that they shouldn't even need to pursue a Hossa trade. Easy enough to work around.
-Doh-
Location: VA
Joined: 10.05.2015

Mar 6 @ 1:52 PM ET
You're giving up something big to get rid of Hossa's contract.
- BINGO!


The question is how much will you need to give up to move Hossa's contract. The trading partner will have plenty of cap space they will never use. The trading partner is only paying out $1 mil in cash for 3 years.

If your team is projected to have plenty of cap space over the next 3 years that you will not use you basically will be paying $3 mil for........ a draft pick or prospect. Would you buy an extra 3rd round draft pick this year or a 2nd next year for $3 mil cash outlay over 3 years. You could maybe add in a B level prospect to the pick. If the cap hits $80 mil in 2018/19 I think there are a few teams in this category.

A 1st round pick is off the table.
-Doh-
Location: VA
Joined: 10.05.2015

Mar 6 @ 1:56 PM ET
Should the cap go up to $80, that would bring the floor up to around $60 million.

The Hurricanes (new billionaire owner) and Coyotes are the only teams below that so far, both by less than $2 million.

- BINGO!


The cap floor is irrelevant. The cap ceiling is more relevant. How many teams will be far under the ceiling by their own choice (economic reasons like lower revenue streams, small markets, etc...)

If the cap hits $80 mil there could be 10 teams with excess cap room that they have no intention of using.

Plus the cap could increase further in 2019, 2020.
RaleighHawk
Joined: 03.29.2016

Mar 6 @ 2:43 PM ET
I think ~ $1.2 - $1.25 is a fair price for a 5 - 7 D. Maybe Gus develops into a second pairing, but I don't see that at this point.
- DarthKane


Yeah, you are right, but I guess it means if they keep him, he is up and not in Rockford.

Based on the "potential" for the current D, what is the best case scenario for what each one could be? This seems scary...

Keith (1)
Seabrook (3)
Gus (4)
Oesterle (5)
Murphy (4)
Ruuta (5)
Forsling (4)
Dahlstrom (not yet)
Cmonalready
Joined: 07.02.2012

Mar 6 @ 2:47 PM ET
For a rebuilding/retooling team those picks are assets you probably should keep, no?

Why not just LTIR Hossa again?

- BINGO!


The issue the way I understand the LTIR to work is flexibility to do any real long term upgrade.

I think (emphasize "think", as I am not an expert, but have read up on this a lot) that the Hawks need to carry Hossa against the cap through the summer to Day 1 of the season. Same for every summer for next couple years. Then after day 1, they can put him on LTIR and free up his $5.3m. But at that point, they would either need to sign a player (who is worthwhile and sitting out unsigned into the season?) or trade for a player (which team is carrying a big salary into the season to make a trade w Hawks after they LTIR Hossa?) . Both of those are tough scenarios to manage for our GM. So easier way to manage it for more flexibility is to just trade his contract. Flexibility is why you need to trade him.

They were able to do the delayed signing scenario w Franson this past year. But can they expect to do that with a top pair level D guy? Unlikely.
BlazinMike
Chicago Blackhawks
Location: Chicago, IL
Joined: 05.08.2013

Mar 6 @ 2:50 PM ET
Yeah, you are right, but I guess it means if they keep him, he is up and not in Rockford.

Based on the "potential" for the current D, what is the best case scenario for what each one could be? This seems scary...

Keith (1)
Seabrook (3)
Gus (4)
Oesterle (5)
Murphy (4)
Ruuta (5)
Forsling (4)
Dahlstrom (not yet)

- RaleighHawk


Have a bunch of top 4 D men isn't a bad thing by any means, as long as they play like top 4 D men. Having a bunch of top 4 potential d men playing out of position and making stupid mistakes all season...sucks.
Cmonalready
Joined: 07.02.2012

Mar 6 @ 2:54 PM ET
The cap floor is irrelevant. The cap ceiling is more relevant. How many teams will be far under the ceiling by their own choice (economic reasons like lower revenue streams, small markets, etc...)

If the cap hits $80 mil there could be 10 teams with excess cap room that they have no intention of using.

Plus the cap could increase further in 2019, 2020.

- -Doh-


Agreed. The key to the Hossa salary dump is his actual cash salary is only $1m for each of next three years (and a cap hit of $5.275m). I believe it wouldn't take a "big player" to get rid of Hossa's contract. Some middling prospect, or a 3rd/4th round pick, in my opinion. Better yet, I think they can dump him as part of a throw in to another trade. Last year was too early in his diagnosis to trade him. The league hadn't even approved LTIR yet. But if the Hammer/Murphy trade was being made this year, they could have added Hossa into that trade with little impact (actually $3m cash impact).
Cmonalready
Joined: 07.02.2012

Mar 6 @ 2:57 PM ET
Yeah, you are right, but I guess it means if they keep him, he is up and not in Rockford.

Based on the "potential" for the current D, what is the best case scenario for what each one could be? This seems scary...

Keith (1)
Seabrook (3)
Gus (4)
Oesterle (5)
Murphy (4)
Ruuta (5)
Forsling (4)
Dahlstrom (not yet)
- RaleighHawk


Have a bunch of top 4 D men isn't a bad thing by any means, as long as they play like top 4 D men. Having a bunch of top 4 potential d men playing out of position and making stupid mistakes all season...sucks.



Exactly the issue. Take this list and drop in a solid #2 D. It completely changes how I feel about this D.
Seab on top pairing, hate it.
Murphy anchoring 2nd pair, hate it.

But add a really solid #2d, and its Seab anchoring 2nd pair, and Murphy anchoring 3rd pair or as a solid #4. I feel much better about the group.

Like starting pitching rotations.
RaleighHawk
Joined: 03.29.2016

Mar 6 @ 3:05 PM ET
Yeah, you are right, but I guess it means if they keep him, he is up and not in Rockford.

Based on the "potential" for the current D, what is the best case scenario for what each one could be? This seems scary...

Keith (1)
Seabrook (3)
Gus (4)
Oesterle (5)
Murphy (4)
Ruuta (5)
Forsling (4)
Dahlstrom (not yet)
- RaleighHawk


Have a bunch of top 4 D men isn't a bad thing by any means, as long as they play like top 4 D men. Having a bunch of top 4 potential d men playing out of position and making stupid mistakes all season...sucks.



Exactly the issue. Take this list and drop in a solid #2 D. It completely changes how I feel about this D.
Seab on top pairing, hate it.
Murphy anchoring 2nd pair, hate it.

But add a really solid #2d, and its Seab anchoring 2nd pair, and Murphy anchoring 3rd pair or as a solid #4. I feel much better about the group.

Like starting pitching rotations.

- Cmonalready


Has to be the focus, because none of these are going to be a solid #2
Z3Hawk
Chicago Blackhawks
Joined: 05.04.2017

Mar 6 @ 3:45 PM ET
That's not true.

They can just hold onto him and place him on LTIR and get that cap space anyways if they can't find a trading partner.

However, Datsyuk was traded to Arizona for a swap of picks... 16 for 20 and 53 and he was owed more money in that one season than Hossa is owed the rest of his deal.

Dave Bolland was traded with Lawson Crouse to the Coyotes in exchange for a 3rd round pick and a conditional 2nd round pick.

The narrative that the Hawks will have to give up an important asset to move the Hossa contract is off base.

- Hawks_49


If Hossa’s contract is moved it will be moved as an independent issue. Assuming Blackhawks stay at or close to Cap Hawks will always get Hossa’s contract written off.
Z3Hawk
Chicago Blackhawks
Joined: 05.04.2017

Mar 6 @ 3:54 PM ET
I think any contract that can be fully buried in the AHL is "acceptable"
- Slofire94


He’s 26. If there is now even the slightest chance the Hawks might need to “bury” his contract in Rockford he shouldn’t even be signed.
BINGO!
Carolina Hurricanes
Location: I'll always remember the last words my grandfather ever told me. He said, "A Truck!", SK
Joined: 09.21.2009

Mar 6 @ 3:56 PM ET
He’s 26. If there is now even the slightest chance the Hawks might need to “bury” his contract in Rockford he shouldn’t even be signed.
- Z3Hawk


This.

There's a limit to the number of contracts a team can carry. What's the point of keeping one that, if he isn't an NHL player, isn't going to develop into one?
powerenforcer
Chicago Blackhawks
Location: Wheeling, IL
Joined: 09.24.2009

Mar 6 @ 4:01 PM ET
He’s 26. If there is now even the slightest chance the Hawks might need to “bury” his contract in Rockford he shouldn’t even be signed.
- Z3Hawk


SEATTLE.
StLBravesFan
Season Ticket Holder
Chicago Blackhawks
Location: IL
Joined: 07.03.2011

Mar 6 @ 4:20 PM ET
SEATTLE.
- powerenforcer


When does Seattle come in?

If his contract is through 2019-20, will the draft be in June, 2020 - after his contract ends and he's a UFA (I would guess)?
EnzoD
Chicago Blackhawks
Location: Denver, CO
Joined: 02.19.2014

Mar 6 @ 4:21 PM ET
This.

There's a limit to the number of contracts a team can carry. What's the point of keeping one that, if he isn't an NHL player, isn't going to develop into one?

- BINGO!


Gustafson (frank)ing sucks at the most important function of his job...actually defending against NHL forwards. Sure he is a good skater and can handle the puck, but he is smallish, soft, and has bad defensive instincts. Eric Gustafson playing every night is a big reason the Hawks are last place in the division. So, naturally, Stanley Bowman decides his play is worth a 2 year extension at double his current salary. (frank)ing terrible.

BINGO!
Carolina Hurricanes
Location: I'll always remember the last words my grandfather ever told me. He said, "A Truck!", SK
Joined: 09.21.2009

Mar 6 @ 4:23 PM ET
When does Seattle come in?

If his contract is through 2019-20, will the draft be in June, 2020 - after his contract ends and he's a UFA (I would guess)?

- StLBravesFan


That's the current expected timetable, yes.
savvyone-1
Chicago Blackhawks
Location: I'm singing the Blues!, IL
Joined: 03.04.2011

Mar 6 @ 4:38 PM ET
Gustafson (frank)ing sucks at the most important function of his job...actually defending against NHL forwards. Sure he is a good skater and can handle the puck, but he is smallish, soft, and has bad defensive instincts. Eric Gustafson playing every night is a big reason the Hawks are last place in the division. So, naturally, Stanley Bowman decides his play is worth a 2 year extension at double his current salary. (frank)ing terrible.
- EnzoD


Yes it is.
Said it before.
Blowman must go.

This is Rundblad Ver 2.
NO reason to sign the guy now.
Seriously, what has he done that makes his signing now SO important?
Not like he's one of the fastest guys in the league or one of the best skaters.
He's OK skating-wise -- nothing great, certainly nothing special.

He's Cam Barker without the big shot. Nothing more.
Blowman is cementing his legacy here in Chicago.
Overpaying "core" players and adding in NMC's when no home discount is given.
Term? Sure, the more the better.
Seabrook until he's in a wheelchair at 39.

Meanwhile, young guys with ability get shipped off.
Blowman succumbing to Q's peccadilloes with various defensemen:
Leddy
Stephen Johns
Kempny

3 capable young guys Blowman had to ship off because of Q. Maybe Q was jealous because every one of them actually skates well.

Meanwhile, guys that have no business playing at this level seem to meet Q's tough standards:
TVR
Oesterle
Gus
Dahlstrom

There is no light at the end of this tunnel except for the train that buries both Blowman and Q. It will get them both. Hopefully soon because as a fan and student of the game for over 50 years, these guys must go.
EnzoD
Chicago Blackhawks
Location: Denver, CO
Joined: 02.19.2014

Mar 6 @ 5:05 PM ET
Yes it is.
Said it before.
Blowman must go.

This is Rundblad Ver 2.
NO reason to sign the guy now.
Seriously, what has he done that makes his signing now SO important?
Not like he's one of the fastest guys in the league or one of the best skaters.
He's OK skating-wise -- nothing great, certainly nothing special.

He's Cam Barker without the big shot. Nothing more.
Blowman is cementing his legacy here in Chicago.
Overpaying "core" players and adding in NMC's when no home discount is given.
Term? Sure, the more the better.
Seabrook until he's in a wheelchair at 39.

Meanwhile, young guys with ability get shipped off.
Blowman succumbing to Q's peccadilloes with various defensemen:
Leddy
Stephen Johns
Kempny

3 capable young guys Blowman had to ship off because of Q. Maybe Q was jealous because every one of them actually skates well.

Meanwhile, guys that have no business playing at this level seem to meet Q's tough standards:
TVR
Oesterle
Gus
Dahlstrom

There is no light at the end of this tunnel except for the train that buries both Blowman and Q. It will get them both. Hopefully soon because as a fan and student of the game for over 50 years, these guys must go.

- savvyone-1


It really makes no sense whatsoever. He has been objectively NOT GOOD! He is a key reason the Hawks (frank)ing suck this year. The San Jose game was probably the point StanBo knew he had to have this guy back. The Hawks have got to be tanking on purpose (without telling the fans or locker room leaders) for the next 2 years committing to this AHLer.
bhawk1s
Joined: 06.27.2014

Mar 6 @ 6:06 PM ET
He's not good at playing defense in the NHL is the bottom line. Bowman needs to be replaced as his ability to assess defense talent is clearly terrible. I see no reason why this had to be done...and for two years??
- EnzoD

Hey 2 year deal gives us cost certainty
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17  Next