The biggest problem with all of the vaunted prospects is that I don't see a coaching staff from the minors on up to Q that has any history of actually developing players.

Q overplays his top eight or nine NHL roster guys as it is - reminiscent of Dusty Baker's tenure with the Cubs. Is there any evidence of actual mentoring/development going on with any of the Rockford guys?

This might be a good last year for a lot of things - coaches, players and GMs. Time reinvent the identity and direction of this team.

Oh, and Philip Danault being pushed inot the line up now doesn't really put this team over any humps.
He is never gonna be a big offensive contributer, just a solid hockey player.

No if one of the Icehogs could catch fire and score, check and skate at the major league level...then I agree.
- wiz1901

I think if you played him—at some point, not necessarily this year—with scoring wingers, like Hossa or Sharp, he would put up pretty big assist numbers. But I do agree, he will likely not score more than 20 goals a season (if that) in the NHL.

I don't think you can rule out his offensive game, simply because he is a superior defensive player.

I think if you played him—at some point, not necessarily this year—with scoring wingers, like Hossa or Sharp, he would put up pretty big assist numbers. But I do agree, he will likely not score more than 20 goals a season (if that) in the NHL.

I don't think you can rule out his offensive game, simply because he is a superior defensive player.
- John Jaeckel

Especially if he is projected as Bolland 2.0.

He is going to need time with the big club this season to prepare him for that role.

ANY team that has a solid team that made the playoffs last year can go farther in the Stanley Cup finals


They have a shorter time to play, but more games in less days.

Any team that avoids three game losing streaks and goes on extended winning streaks is positioned to be successful.

Any team with good team defense & adequate goal tending will be in a good psotion.

Any team that avoids big injuires, ditto.

The players will be fresher.

BUT....the pressure comes NOW to win, and how coaching staffs handle advesity will also
be the ones whose adjustments attitude & gamewise that will be succesful.

to me this is the perfect season to get a true grade of the entire hawks organization from GM, coaches, to players and farmhand.

I don't think you can rule out his offensive game, simply because he is a superior defensive player.
- John Jaeckel

John, I am not ruling out Danault's eventual ability to grow an NHL offensive game. he just simply doesn't have one at the present time.

In your article, you used him as your prospect who steps up now.

I think the Hawks organization would be much more comfortable elevating an AHL player IF one explodes and takes the NHL by storm.
Are we even sure Danault gets into camp? I know that there was talk that the CHL prospects might get that cahnce, but it is the middle of the season in their leagues.

In my dream sceanrio, Saad suddenly is a dominant NHL goalscorer and the feisty Beach is too...and both become well suited NHL centres.

The biggest problem with all of the vaunted prospects is that I don't see a coaching staff from the minors on up to Q that has any history of actually developing players.

Q overplays his top eight or nine NHL roster guys as it is - reminiscent of Dusty Baker's tenure with the Cubs. Is there any evidence of actual mentoring/development going on with any of the Rockford guys?

This might be a good last year for a lot of things - coaches, players and GMs. Time reinvent the identity and direction of this team.
- Return of the Roar

I don't see where Q's job is to develop personnel into NHL ready players. The reality of it is that NHL teams rarely even have sufficient time to practice during the season given the travel and number of games. It will be worse this season with the congested schedule.

Rockford and Toledo are a different matter - that's where the coaching and instruction are supposed to occur. Not sure the Hawks are well served by the staff they have in place in those places.

More importantly though, expecting 20 and 21 year old kids out of Junior or the NCAA to be world beaters and play like experienced veterans is a recipe for failure. Kids like Pirri, Kruger, Leddy, Saad, Olsen, McNeill can be nice players at the NHL level if given some time to learn and develop physically. There is payback in waiting for them, unfortunately waiting requires patience and nobody has time to waste on that.

(I just spent about 3 hours typing this on the OTHER blog, so I hope no one minds I shift it here...)

I have to agree that Stan has to be on the lookout for a NHL centre, and just let the futures develop.

But all this continued talk about "second line centre" amuses me...they are one hit away from lossing their franchise centre in any game, in any season for the rest of Tazer's contract. I am not saying it because I like it, wish it, but you cannot ignore it.

But if you look up and down the NHL rosters, there simply isn't a surplus available, unless you make a blockbuster deal, or sudden;y one of the early choices like Strome and Huberdeau waltz into Isles & Panther camps and TAKE away a centre position.

I really think the plan in both cities is to start them as wings, because they skate well enough to become stop/start players as well as the can play fluid always moving centreman.
Then I take a step back, see that Huberdeau wilted, disapppeared and disappointed as a World Junior wing, and the highly skilled shooter Strome plays undisplined against under twenties.

I have combed the NHL rosters for some time and the guy I liked more than a season ago, Frans Niesen of the Islanders had a 17 goal season and probably pumped his value past the point where he could be acquired without significant trade payout.
He's about 28, and really good with the puck, and has good touch, instincts, and sniperablity. More of a finese player, but certainly no wussy.
But again there would have to be a total Brooklyn Isle commit to Ryan Strome as a major league centre position for his to even be thought of as a chip they could trade.

The same concept of "some young rookies steps up before the vet centre becomes a trading chip" applies to Florida.

and also to Ottawa.
Mika Zibanejad would HAVE to be ready for prime time. (They already told him to not got to the world Juniors so he could play minor pro and develop.)
The Senators plan on Jakob Silfverberg to PLAY here and play on the top two as a RW.
Both Swededs are at Binghamton (AHL) but the almost three year older Silfverberg is leading the team in scoring and Zibanejad has ONE goal.

I just don't see JJ suggestion of Zack Smith for hawk players as a possibly, since that weakens THEIR middle much more than one of our defenseman strengthens their back end.

The Hawks purposefully brought in to penalty-killing defenseman in Brookbank and Rozsival for one reason: they take away much of the duties from the others.

The FIVE others get to play even strength more.

Whomever suggested the hawks suit up seven defenders a game may be on the right track. If they don't get fair and eaqual return on any of the group, I don't suppose they are bargain basementing them.

Long term they have to be concerned about developing a top line centre.
Teraveinen (a year younger than most participants) played Left wing and a few shifts at RW when they double shifted wing Armia & the later injured centre Miro Aaltonen.

(the younger Granlund also played wing in his tourney and was then eleveated to centre.)

But at this juncture TT is a good stop start. reposition, fluid mover, but not a guy who ever plans to go into the corners to win puck battles.
Don't get me wrong I saw him strip both US & canada defenseman of pucks they were trying to pass out, but it wasn't with physiclal engagement.
McNeill has the physical part but they hands may be along time coming, and Danault is a defense first centreman.

Whether you play Beach, Saad, or older Hayes at pivot to see them as more "motion players" as opposed to wings, there doesn't seem like the Toews replacement guy is in the system, just slowly developing.

I think whenever the chance permits they will take a run at Ryan Getzlaf.
They will ask, wait, ask again later...no dire need in Bowman's tone.

But whether you see Getzlaf as declining, full of two plus seasons of barin farts, he still is you best alternative to a long term fill if the the worst happens to Jonathan Toews.

I really believe the Cap will never be an issues on acquiring him. They will just make space.
- wiz1901

Wasn't a suggestion so much as a very good tip I got that the Hawks were talking to OTT over the summer about Hjalmarsson for Smith. Something happened and a deal that supposedly was very close to happening didn't. And I do think a guy like Smith would help the Hawks immensely. That said, it doesn't mean OTT wanted to deal him, top your point.

Which gets at the second line C issue. I agree completely on Toews and as Al C. pointed out a few days ago, their dogged pursuit of Parise might in fact have had a lot to do with Toews' head trauma issues. As hard as it it is to face, there is a real possibility that Toews' career could be cut short and that leaves the Hawks in a real bind.

IMO, none of Hayes, Saad or Beach will pan out as a C. My experience and what everyone else always says is it is much easier to go from C to W than the other way around. In fact, I don't really recall any good pro C who came to the NHL as a career-long W. And there's the issue. the Hawks' presently have a 1C (JT), a 3C (Bolland) and a 4C (sort of—Mayers). Guys like Kruger, Kane, Sharp or Frolik you could possibly spot in the 2C role as they have some meaningful experience at the C position. But arguably all 4 of those guys—except maybe Kruger—have enough flaws as a C (be it faceoffs, defense or instincts) that they should be wings over the course of their careers.

Another possibility is Hossa, who has played some C and has the elite hockey sense to sub there reasonably. And I suspect his concussion issues are actually not as bad as Toews. But he would be a stop gap, not a one year or long term answer.

Where the Hawks may have screwed the pooch was in drafting McNeilland Danault, assuming one or the other could be a 1C. Again, until I really see otherwise, I still hold on to the suspicion that Danault might be a 2C in the NHL. Might be. But McNeill is very likely going to be a W in the NHL.

Bowman has dropped a LOT of picks on defensemen, wings and defense first centermen (like Nordstrom, another guy in the Danault/Kruger/Bolland mold who should not be ruled out of the picture either). But how many 3Cs can a team have?

He has not drafted a potential #1 goalie or 1-2 center (except maybe outside chance Danault). Arguably the two most important positions on the ice.

I don't see where Q's job is to develop personnel into NHL ready players. The reality of it is that NHL teams rarely even have sufficient time to practice during the season given the travel and number of games. It will be worse this season with the congested schedule.

Rockford and Toledo are a different matter - that's where the coaching and instruction are supposed to occur. Not sure the Hawks are well served by the staff they have in place in those places.

More importantly though, expecting 20 and 21 year old kids out of Junior or the NCAA to be world beaters and play like experienced veterans is a recipe for failure. Kids like Pirri, Kruger, Leddy, Saad, Olsen, McNeill can be nice players at the NHL level if given some time to learn and develop physically. There is payback in waiting for them, unfortunately waiting requires patience and nobody has time to waste on that.
- RickJ

I think we agree - the issue may be with the lower league staffs. As for my Q comment, assuming you get someone who is NHL ready from the farm, he has not shown any proclivity to effectively use new players - even veterans. He just sticks to the same old bench shortening formula that exhausts and injures key players.

the feisty Beach.
- wiz1901

If only someone could mold him to become a fraction of Steve Ott.....

John, I am not ruling out Danault's eventual ability to grow an NHL offensive game. he just simply doesn't have one at the present time.

In your article, you used him as your prospect who steps up now.

I think the Hawks organization would be much more comfortable elevating an AHL player IF one explodes and takes the NHL by storm.
Are we even sure Danault gets into camp? I know that there was talk that the CHL prospects might get that cahnce, but it is the middle of the season in their leagues.

In my dream sceanrio, Saad suddenly is a dominant NHL goalscorer and the feisty Beach is too...and both become well suited NHL centres.
- wiz1901

I don't see Saad or especially Beach as centers in the NHL. Saad has some pretty decent hockey sense but I have no idea how he'd be on draws or as a playmaker of any competency. Seems a LOT to ask a guy who is really kind of middling as a wing in the AHL right now to be a competent center in the NHL.

Which leads to your point about Danault's readiness. I have watched a lot of Victoriaville games this year. For sure, Spott said to him at the WJCs: you are our shut-down guy, defense first. But I have seen him play enough (albeit against juniors) to say he has some offensive upside, especially as a distributor and a guy who will dig pucks out of the corners. This, as I understand it, was Chris Block's take on Danault in a late stint at Rockford last year—which is more telling, a) because it is pro hockey and he was just 19, and b) because Chris doesn't throw compliments like those around lightly.

My concern about Danault right now would be his size (although he appears to be a legit 185-190 right now) and adjustment to the speed of the NHL game. That said, he plays at a very high tempo in the juniors. But from the stnadpoint of heart, speed, competitiveness and offensive instincts, I think he could play and contribute in the NHL, possibly as a center, this year.

Wasn't a suggestion so much as a very good tip I got that the Hawks were talking to OTT over the summer about Hjalmarsson for Smith. Something happened and a deal that supposedly was very close to happening didn't. And I do think a guy like Smith would help the Hawks immensely. That said, it doesn't mean OTT wanted to deal him, top your point.

Which gets at the second line C issue. I agree completely on Toews and as Al C. pointed out a few days ago, their dogged pursuit of Parise might in fact have had a lot to do with Toews' head trauma issues. As hard as it it is to face, there is a real possibility that Toews' career could be cut short and that leaves the Hawks in a real bind.

IMO, none of Hayes, Saad or Beach will pan out as a C. My experience and what everyone else always says is it is much easier to go from C to W than the other way around. In fact, I don't really recall any good pro C who came to the NHL as a career-long W. And there's the issue. the Hawks' presently have a 1C (JT), a 3C (Bolland) and a 4C (sort of—Mayers). Guys like Kruger, Kane, Sharp or Frolik you could possibly spot in the 2C role as they have some meaningful experience at the C position. But arguably all 4 of those guys—except maybe Kruger—have enough flaws as a C (be it faceoffs, defense or instincts) that they should be wings over the course of their careers.

Another possibility is Hossa, who has played some C and has the elite hockey sense to sub there reasonably. And I suspect his concussion issues are actually not as bad as Toews. But he would be a stop gap, not a one year or long term answer.

Where the Hawks may have screwed the pooch was in drafting McNeilland Danault, assuming one or the other could be a 1C. Again, until I really see otherwise, I still hold on to the suspicion that Danault might be a 2C in the NHL. Might be. But McNeill is very likely going to be a W in the NHL.

Bowman has dropped a LOT of picks on defensemen, wings and defense first centermen (like Nordstrom, another guy in the Danault/Kruger/Bolland mold who should not be ruled out of the picture either). But how many 3Cs can a team have?

He has not drafted a potential #1 goalie or 1-2 center (except maybe outside chance Danault). Arguably the two most important positions on the ice.
- John Jaeckel

I don't have a problem with Bowman drafting McNeill and Danault where he did.

I do have an issue drafting Clendening ahead of Boone Jenner, John Gibson and even Vincent Trocheck. Maybe Clendening will prove me wrong, I just don't see anything exceptional in him right now.

Help a dumb old guy understand the


New CBA :

If Marain Hossa (under the back-diving deal) is never traded, but retires before the end of his deal, the blackhawks get charged the cap savings spread evenly over the remaining years of the deal. (This is almost word for word what is stated in the ESPN article.)

Someone intrepret this for me. Moylander, i just am not sure you and I are reading this correctly.

Let's say I own the Hawks and a broken down Hossa decides after the 2016 season wants to retire early or is considering it.
I offer him a management job.
He resigns as a player.

Does the remainder go against the CAP even though he retired?
His contract was for performance. Retirement means he choosed to opt out of the contract and of course the hawks would let that be permitted if he can't perform at a high level.

These exact figures
2015-16: $7,900,000 » $5,275,000
2016-17: $4,000,000 » $5,275,000
2017-18: $1,000,000 » $5,275,000
2018-19: $1,000,000 » $5,275,000
2019-20: $1,000,000 » $5,275,000
2020-21: $1,000,000 » $5,275,000

would stand if he plays-but does he still get paid if he doesn't play? I say No.

How could that cap hit still exist whether it is 1 mil or 5.275 mil ?

I am completely confused.

I don't know why my last post doubled itself.

but I will used the already taken board space to ask:

why haven't there already been a few trades?

and i am betting that any tarde the hawks make now will be to re-acquire a second or thrid rounder for the draft in June.

I don't know why my last post doubled itself.

but I will used the already taken board space to ask:

why haven't there already been a few trades?

and i am betting that any tarde the hawks make now will be to re-acquire a second or thrid rounder for the draft in June.
- wiz1901

No trades until the agreement is ratified by both sides.

Help a dumb old guy understand the


New CBA :

If Marain Hossa (under the back-diving deal) is never traded, but retires before the end of his deal, the blackhawks get charged the cap savings spread evenly over the remaining years of the deal. (This is almost word for word what is stated in the ESPN article.)

Someone intrepret this for me. Moylander, i just am not sure you and I are reading this correctly.

Let's say I own the Hawks and a broken down Hossa decides after the 2016 season wants to retire early or is considering it.
I offer him a management job.
He resigns as a player.

Does the remainder go against the CAP even though he retired?
His contract was for performance. Retirement means he choosed to opt out of the contract and of course the hawks would let that be permitted if he can't perform at a high level.

These exact figures
2015-16: $7,900,000 » $5,275,000
2016-17: $4,000,000 » $5,275,000
2017-18: $1,000,000 » $5,275,000
2018-19: $1,000,000 » $5,275,000
2019-20: $1,000,000 » $5,275,000
2020-21: $1,000,000 » $5,275,000

would stand if he plays-but does he still get paid if he doesn't play? I say No.

How could that cap hit still exist whether it is 1 mil or 5.275 mil ?

I am completely confused.
- wiz1901

wiz -

I'm just as confused but this is how I read it.

2009-10: $7,900,000 » $5,275,000
2010-11: $7,900,000 » $5,275,000
2011-12: $7,900,000 » $5,275,000
2012-13: $7,900,000 » $5,275,000
2013-14: $7,900,000 » $5,275,000
2014-15: $7,900,000 » $5,275,000
2015-16: $7,900,000 » $5,275,000
2016-17: $4,000,000 » $5,275,000
2017-18: $1,000,000 » $5,275,000
2018-19: $1,000,000 » $5,275,000
2019-20: $1,000,000 » $5,275,000
2020-21: $1,000,000 » $5,275,000

Let's say he played for the hawks and then retired a hawk after the 2013-14 season (as bolded). The 'cap savings' while he played for the hawks would be $7.9-$5.275 = $2.675 * 5 seasons = $13.125 in total. They would then take that figure and divide by the remaining 7 seasons on the contract. So that would be a $1.875 AAV cap penalty each year from 2014-15 thru 2020-21 ($13.125 divided by 7).

Scenario 2: Let's say the Hawks trade Hossa to Philly after the 2013-14 season and he plays 2 more seasons in philly before retiring after the 2015-16 season. The Hawks would still be on the hook for their $13.125 in cap savings and the flyers for $5.35 million (2.675 each for 2 seasons he played there). Both teams would take those cap savings and divide by the # of years he did not fulfill of the contract (which would be 5). So the Hawks would have a 5 season AAV penalty of $2.625 AND the Flyers would have a 5 season $1.07 AAV penalty ($5.35 / remaining 5 seasons)

Its a penalty only if he does not finish out his contract... ie retires. Thats my understanding.

wiz -

I'm just as confused but this is how I read it.

2009-10: $7,900,000 » $5,275,000
2010-11: $7,900,000 » $5,275,000
2011-12: $7,900,000 » $5,275,000
2012-13: $7,900,000 » $5,275,000
2013-14: $7,900,000 » $5,275,000
2014-15: $7,900,000 » $5,275,000
2015-16: $7,900,000 » $5,275,000
2016-17: $4,000,000 » $5,275,000
2017-18: $1,000,000 » $5,275,000
2018-19: $1,000,000 » $5,275,000
2019-20: $1,000,000 » $5,275,000
2020-21: $1,000,000 » $5,275,000

Let's say he played for the hawks and then retired a hawk after the 2013-14 season (as bolded). The 'cap savings' while he played for the hawks would be $7.9-$5.275 = $2.675 * 5 seasons = $13.125 in total. They would then take that figure and divide by the remaining 7 seasons on the contract. So that would be a $1.875 AAV cap penalty each year from 2014-15 thru 2020-21 ($13.125 divided by 7).

Scenario 2: Let's say the Hawks trade Hossa to Philly after the 2013-14 season and he plays 2 more seasons in philly before retiring after the 2015-16 season. The Hawks would still be on the hook for their $13.125 in cap savings and the flyers for $5.35 million (2.675 each for 2 seasons he played there). Both teams would take those cap savings and divide by the # of years he did not fulfill of the contract (which would be 5). So the Hawks would have a 5 season AAV penalty of $2.625 AND the Flyers would have a 5 season $1.07 AAV penalty ($5.35 / remaining 5 seasons)

Is that correct?
- moylander

If that's correct—and it seems to make sense‚—then it is in the Hawks' best interest for him to stay healthy and play as many years as possible, thereby minimizing their cap hit after he retires, which everyone has always known he would.

That said, they have to weigh the shorter term costs of a compliance buy out (which I am assuming still counts to some measure against the cap)—with zero return— versus the cost of letting him play to retirement, then spreading the hit out a la the above formula. Seems to me, a shorter term buy out is not necessarily the way you want to go.

The other issue with a compliance buy out and a player like Hossa is—if he's healthy and still wants to play, a conference rival could snatch him up and he could come back to haunt you come playoff time in a bad way.

As far as trading him, under the old CBA or the new one, any trade value Hossa has will be determined by how healthy he is.

I don't have a problem with Bowman drafting McNeill and Danault where he did.

I do have an issue drafting Clendening ahead of Boone Jenner, John Gibson and even Vincent Trocheck. Maybe Clendening will prove me wrong, I just don't see anything exceptional in him right now.
- RickJ

Don't get me wrong, I like both McNeill and Danault. But, in the context of what I posted, it's now pretty clear that neither is a 1C, as many felt they were not when they were drafted.

If that's correct—and it seems to make sense‚—then it is in the Hawks' best interest for him to stay healthy and play as many years as possible, thereby minimizing their cap hit after he retires, which everyone has always known he would.

That said, they have to weigh the shorter term costs of a compliance buy out (which I am assuming still counts to some measure against the cap)—with zero return— versus the cost of letting him play to retirement, then spreading the hit out a la the above formula. Seems to me, a shorter term buy out is not necessarily the way you want to go.

The other issue with a compliance buy out and a player like Hossa is—if he's healthy and still wants to play, a conference rival could snatch him up and he could come back to haunt you come playoff time in a bad way.

As far as trading him, under the old CBA or the new one, any trade value Hossa has will be determined by how healthy he is.
- John Jaeckel

So Bettman allowed the small market owners to stick it to the big market teams when finalizing this CBA? So none of these big contracts were grand-fathered in, correct?

1 down, 1 to go.
- Ogilthorpe2

This!!!!!

Don't get me wrong, I like both McNeill and Danault. But, in the context of what I posted, it's now pretty clear that neither is a 1C, as many felt they were not when they were drafted.
- John Jaeckel

That's the situation with most first rounders, people expect them to jump into the lineup on the first line but that usually doesn't happen.

If McNeill and Danault can fill the 2C and 3C roles that would be a huge success. Although, while I think Danault will be a centre in the NHL I think McNeill will end up on the wing. By no means am I an expert with these things, but that's just my gut feeling.

Pre-lockout you had a lot of trade grumblings JJ. Now that they are waiting for ratification, have you heard of any irons in the fire?

Tim Sassone just tweeted:

We have our answer about which guys are coming from Rockford with Kruger, Shaw and Bollig at Johnny's today.

how coaching staffs handle adversity will also
be the ones whose adjustments, attitude & game-wise that will be successful.
- wiz1901

Bingo. Wiz, you hit the nail on the head.

Q has shown, certainly over his Blackhawks head coaching career (if not his entire career) to be very bull-headed/stubborn regardless of the players lining his bench.

Q's inability to adjust in-game is maybe his biggest flaw, with several others running close behind. I also believe his inability to appropriately and adequately prepare his team with the "right" game plan is something that, like Lovie, will be his downfall. Stubborn insistence on puck possession and cycling will no ability or smarts to adjust to a competitor's defensive scheme is what has pissed me off for so long about Q.

Ogie's point that a monkey could have guided the Stanley Cup winning team to victory isn't far off the mark.

Serious inquiry, what are the mechanics of a buyout? Specifically, if a guy is bought out, does he become a free agent. And if he is resigned, what becomes the status of the buyout?

Tim Sassone just tweeted:

We have our answer about which guys are coming from Rockford with Kruger, Shaw and Bollig at Johnny's today.
- Beaver-Warrior

I'm not surprised about the list of forwards, but no Leddy?