Look at the Kings last year. Come playoff time they brought up Nolan and King and those two were bangers throughout the playoffs, very successful, chipping in a couple big goals as well. These are guys that we should have waiting in the wings in Rockford. IMO, this is where failure has come in scouting plan. Saad is dynamite and like you said there is a lot to like, but if he is an intrical part to a move that would bring a power forward from the East, you have to make that move. Saad is good but like i noted before, his skillset is not one in a million. You can find guys through the draft that do exactly the same things. Guys like Hossa and Kane and Toews have Skill sets that you cant just find year after year.
- nickmo2699

I'll say this: Saad has impressed me a great deal with two things he does: one is jumping pucks and passes in open ice and the other is using his burst to get by defenders. Those are not skills you'll find in guys every day.

As far as his shot and finish, he looks like he is just throwing stuff at the net whenever and wherever he can and has gotten lucky with a couple of them. The goalthe other night was a GREAT athletic play, that hit Fasth in the shoulder. He also really does not look like a guy who is going to make those around him better with passes or physical play (in spite of some of the hype thats been out out there). And the tougher the going gets along the walls, the less effective he becomes. Right now. But he's 20 playing against 25 and 30 year olds.

Some or all of that could change. But right now, the Saad phenomenon is an opportunistic eye for open ice turnovers and a nice burst he knows how to use to get by defensemen—and good defensemen to boot. It's certainly something to build on, and not easily acquired, but not grounds to project him as a Hall of Famer (not even close) either.

The question was who do you prefer as your 2C. O'Reilly is a 2C. Bolland is a very, very good 3C.
- John Jaeckel

Last I checked, like it or not, Bolland is your 2C is he not? Unless O'Reilly signs here cheaper than what he's asked for thus far, I have no interest.

No-BRAINER??????

You actually THINK O'Reilly is THAT good a player all around?

Really .... ?

Those 39 goals O'relly has scored in three seasons, and those 18 last year must have sold you. Bolland had 40, and 19 lasy year. Granted the point totals of last year when OReilly played top two line minutes.

And you actually believe O'Reilly is quick enough afoot to do all the things Bolland does ?

I think that if they were on the same club O'Reilly plays behind Bolland, unless you actually DO have pay him 2nd line centre money, because then the team is sorta forced to play him where he is paid.

I just think this is another no-brainer reaction to a possible available player that the home town fans want to make into a better player than he is...it is Evander Kane all over...It is Kyle Burris all over.

If you TRADE for him, you are telling his agent, we are gonna pay him.

Tell you what I love bubblebutt(OReilly) too, but NOT for Bolland, not as Bolland' replacement.
- wiz1901

Yes, I do think O’Reilly is a better player than Bolland and a good all-around player that would fit nicely with this team.
The problem is, of course and like you said, the money he wants and feels he deserves it.

Last I checked, like it or not, Bolland is your 2C is he not? Unless O'Reilly signs here cheaper than what he's asked for thus far, I have no interest.
- Ogilthorpe2

I answered a hypothetical question.

No-BRAINER??????

You actually THINK O'Reilly is THAT good a player all around?

Really .... ?

Those 39 goals O'relly has scored in three seasons, and those 18 last year must have sold you. Bolland had 40, and 19 lasy year. Granted the point totals of last year when OReilly played top two line minutes.

And you actually believe O'Reilly is quick enough afoot to do all the things Bolland does ?

I think that if they were on the same club O'Reilly plays behind Bolland, unless you actually DO have pay him 2nd line centre money, because then the team is sorta forced to play him where he is paid.

I just think this is another no-brainer reaction to a possible available player that the home town fans want to make into a better player than he is...it is Evander Kane all over...It is Kyle Burris all over.

If you TRADE for him, you are telling his agent, we are gonna pay him.

Tell you what I love bubblebutt(OReilly) too, but NOT for Bolland, not as Bolland' replacement.
- wiz1901

I don't know man. Depends on the team and the role. The second line has not been what I would call cohesive or very effective. He is the most minus player on the team (hate that stat but it is an outlier). Maybe we have been over valuing Bolland... Especially with how well Shaw and Kruger seem to have stepped into that role when necessary.

Kane's points are coming on the power play or when he ends up out there with Toews or Hossa it seems. (Half of Sharp's points are on the PP) Something isn't working there and not being able to win a draw is a massive massive massive problem.

I answered a hypothetical question.
- John Jaeckel

Fair enough, I guess, but without considering the cost comparison it's kind of a silly question to begin with.

I'm as big of a Bolland fan as you will find, but even I would consider a trade package that included Bolland for O'Reilly...if the $ made sense. Anything over about $4.25 per is not worth it, and ideally you'd want a short enough deal to keep him as an RFA next time around.

I don't know man. Depends on the team and the role. The second line has not been what I would call cohesive or very effective. He is the most minus player on the team (hate that stat but it is an outlier). Maybe we have been over valuing Bolland... Especially with how well Shaw and Kruger seem to have stepped into that role when necessary.

Kane's points are coming on the power play or when he ends up out there with Toews or Hossa it seems. (Half of Sharp's points are on the PP) Something isn't working there and not being able to win a draw is a massive massive massive problem.
- fattybeef

He's -2...and has been a plus player his entire NHL career, so i think that's a false negative. He's also more of a money player. Agree though, that we could do better with a more offensive 2nd line center between 10-88...but don't see a saviour internally.

I'll take Bolland at $3.375 over O'Reilly at $5+.
- Ogilthorpe2

Agreed. Again..Scary.

O'Reilly's stats dont' warrant anything of that. If O'Reilly gets 5 million, Bolland should hire his agent.

I don't know man. Depends on the team and the role. The second line has not been what I would call cohesive or very effective. He is the most minus player on the team (hate that stat but it is an outlier). Maybe we have been over valuing Bolland... Especially with how well Shaw and Kruger seem to have stepped into that role when necessary.

Kane's points are coming on the power play or when he ends up out there with Toews or Hossa it seems. (Half of Sharp's points are on the PP) Something isn't working there and not being able to win a draw is a massive massive massive problem.
- fattybeef

As much as I've criticized the line juggling in the past, I wouldn't mind seeing a few shifts with Hossa and Kane flipped. Bolland and Hossa have shown some great chemistry in the past, and Toews with Kane is never a bad idea. Hate to mess with it when they are winning though, but maybe if they get up, or down big in a game try it just to see if a change maybe jump starts Bolland and/or Sharp.

I'm as big of a Bolland fan as you will find, but even I would consider a trade package that included Bolland for O'Reilly...if the $ made sense. Anything over about $4.25 per is not worth it, and ideally you'd want a short enough deal to keep him as an RFA next time around.
- Ogilthorpe2

This!

As much as I've criticized the line juggling in the past, I wouldn't mind seeing a few shifts with Hossa and Kane flipped. Bolland and Hossa have shown some great chemistry in the past, and Toews with Kane is never a bad idea. Hate to mess with it when they are winning though, but maybe if they get up, or down big in a game try it just to see if a change maybe jump starts Bolland and/or Sharp.
- Ogilthorpe2

If they lose a couple in a row I would think Q will revert back to form and start juggling.

As much as I've criticized the line juggling in the past, I wouldn't mind seeing a few shifts with Hossa and Kane flipped. Bolland and Hossa have shown some great chemistry in the past, and Toews with Kane is never a bad idea. Hate to mess with it when they are winning though, but maybe if they get up, or down big in a game try it just to see if a change maybe jump starts Bolland and/or Sharp.
- Ogilthorpe2

As much as I've criticized the line juggling in the past, I wouldn't mind seeing a few shifts with Hossa and Kane flipped. Bolland and Hossa have shown some great chemistry in the past, and Toews with Kane is never a bad idea. Hate to mess with it when they are winning though, but maybe if they get up, or down big in a game try it just to see if a change maybe jump starts Bolland and/or Sharp.
- Ogilthorpe2

And that could very easily solve the problem.

I agree pretty much with what you said above. No qualms with it.

My disagreement with your position is your reference to first round blowouts and this idea that there is some quantum leap to get to the cup.

First, there was no first round blow out last year, or the year before. So the idea that they lost because they were cowering children is hyperbole. The fact is they actually showed a lot of heart coming back vs Van in 2011 and forced a game 7. And were a PP goal away from moving on there.

Second, last year, you were 2 or 3 PP goals over a series from winning. Sure it is cool to say that if we were this or that (this tough physical team) that it would all have been different. But there is no promise that 10 hits = 1 goal. Last year you lost Hossa and Shaw was suspended for most of the series.

I do get it, no matter how you skin it losing is losing. And I do not doubt that some moves will be done to help give the team a little more toughness and depth. I prefer to be more measured and less emotional in evaluating the situation. More so than in any other sport, chemistry in hockey trumps talent. That is, the marginal efforts of one guy can be mitigated often by lesser talent. We have more talent then anyone, getting the team to have chemistry is more of a key to success then looking for answers outside the room.
- TrueGrit

Agreed for the most part, but those are excuses as to why they didn't advance. They still were down 3-0 to Vancouver, and you could argue Vancouver airmailed in 2 of those games, and only really showed up in Game 6 (loss), and Game 7. It took a herculean effort by Toews to get them to OT in game 7. Sharp fires a one timer back door into Luongo's chest, Campoli turns it over...done. Great they showed up for 4 games. Where were they in games 1-3?

Last year...Hot goalies happen. Shaw was out, but if you are banking on Shaw to be a pivotal factor in your cup chances...mercy. I'll give you Hossa. Again though, they were the better team but they lost. Phoenix held Toews, Sharp, and Kane in check and Crawford flat out blew 2 games in OT by giving up goals Peewees don't allow.

The better team on paper doesn't always win. Chemistry is all well and fine, but great chemistry can also brood complacency. SHould we be shocked that with Carcillo's immediate return, Bryan Bickell turned in one of his better performances since 2010? Nope. Think he may have gotten a message? Think Frolik isn't thinking the same thing or been spoken to?

Bottom line...Stan Bowman has tried the exact same formular for past 2 years, and hasn't won a playoff series. And this is pretty much the EXACT same team with a few new role guys mixed in, so chemistry isn't the issue....

3 reasons the Hawks are 10-0-3

1. Corey Crawford is playing lights out
2. Better defensive zone coverage/PK emergence
3. Health...no major injuries.

At any time those 3 variables could morph back into what has killed this team the past 2 years.

Agreed for the most part, but those are excuses as to why they didn't advance. They still were down 3-0 to Vancouver, and you could argue Vancouver airmailed in 2 of those games, and only really showed up in Game 6 (loss), and Game 7. It took a herculean effort by Toews to get them to OT in game 7. Sharp fires a one timer back door into Luongo's chest, Campoli turns it over...done. Great they showed up for 4 games. Where were they in games 1-3?

Last year...Hot goalies happen. Shaw was out, but if you are banking on Shaw to be a pivotal factor in your cup chances...mercy. I'll give you Hossa. Again though, they were the better team but they lost. Phoenix held Toews, Sharp, and Kane in check and Crawford flat out blew 2 games in OT by giving up goals Peewees don't allow.

The better team on paper doesn't always win. Chemistry is all well and fine, but great chemistry can also brood complacency. SHould we be shocked that with Carcillo's immediate return, Bryan Bickell turned in one of his better performances since 2010? Nope. Think he may have gotten a message? Think Frolik isn't thinking the same thing or been spoken to?

Bottom line...Stan Bowman has tried the exact same formular for past 2 years, and hasn't won a playoff series. And this is pretty much the EXACT same team with a few new role guys mixed in, so chemistry isn't the issue....

3 reasons the Hawks are 10-0-3

1. Corey Crawford is playing lights out
2. Better defensive zone coverage/PK emergence
3. Health...no major injuries.

At any time those 3 variables could morph back into what has killed this team the past 2 years.
- SteveRain

Sharp's try here was pretty good considering it was a rolling puck.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJQ3NWJplFc

Agreed for the most part, but those are excuses as to why they didn't advance. They still were down 3-0 to Vancouver, and you could argue Vancouver airmailed in 2 of those games, and only really showed up in Game 6 (loss), and Game 7. It took a herculean effort by Toews to get them to OT in game 7. Sharp fires a one timer back door into Luongo's chest, Campoli turns it over...done. Great they showed up for 4 games. Where were they in games 1-3?

Last year...Hot goalies happen. Shaw was out, but if you are banking on Shaw to be a pivotal factor in your cup chances...mercy. I'll give you Hossa. Again though, they were the better team but they lost. Phoenix held Toews, Sharp, and Kane in check and Crawford flat out blew 2 games in OT by giving up goals Peewees don't allow.

The better team on paper doesn't always win. Chemistry is all well and fine, but great chemistry can also brood complacency. SHould we be shocked that with Carcillo's immediate return, Bryan Bickell turned in one of his better performances since 2010? Nope. Think he may have gotten a message? Think Frolik isn't thinking the same thing or been spoken to?

Bottom line...Stan Bowman has tried the exact same formular for past 2 years, and hasn't won a playoff series. And this is pretty much the EXACT same team with a few new role guys mixed in, so chemistry isn't the issue....

3 reasons the Hawks are 10-0-3

1. Corey Crawford is playing lights out
2. Better defensive zone coverage/PK emergence
3. Health...no major injuries.

At any time those 3 variables could morph back into what has killed this team the past 2 years.
- SteveRain

I'm most happy about this. Having solid goaltending from CC solves a major concern.

As much as I've criticized the line juggling in the past, I wouldn't mind seeing a few shifts with Hossa and Kane flipped. Bolland and Hossa have shown some great chemistry in the past, and Toews with Kane is never a bad idea. Hate to mess with it when they are winning though, but maybe if they get up, or down big in a game try it just to see if a change maybe jump starts Bolland and/or Sharp.
- Ogilthorpe2

Great post. And even though there winning, realistically the top six are not firing as a whole. Kane is getting his points but Toews and Hossa I feel are being mis used right now. PLay Hossa with Kaner and have Bolland in between and have Atoews Sharpy Saad line that is going to come at you all night.

please explain what was ridiculous about it? ott and neil play the EXACT same type of game, and have very similar point production.

was ott not traded for derek roy.....so expecting neil to be had for some plugs is pretty ridiculous.l
- sensarmy_11

By EXACT same type of game you mean they both hit. You do realize that Ott does more than just that, right?

Uhhh, Ott is/was 4 years younger, scores twice as many goals, well over twice as many points, skates over 5 more min per game, is a center, is great a faceoffs, plays on the PK, need I go on? Hell the ONLY thing they are roughly equal at is hits.

Also, Roy was considered pretty much a salary dump.

Valid argument on your point, but honestly, I don't quite equate Neil to Ott, though they are similar style players.
- John Jaeckel

By valid, you mean invalid, right? Yeah, invalid is a great word to capture his argument, regardless of pronunciation.

Agreed for the most part, but those are excuses as to why they didn't advance. They still were down 3-0 to Vancouver, and you could argue Vancouver airmailed in 2 of those games, and only really showed up in Game 6 (loss), and Game 7. It took a herculean effort by Toews to get them to OT in game 7. Sharp fires a one timer back door into Luongo's chest, Campoli turns it over...done. Great they showed up for 4 games. Where were they in games 1-3?

Last year...Hot goalies happen. Shaw was out, but if you are banking on Shaw to be a pivotal factor in your cup chances...mercy. I'll give you Hossa. Again though, they were the better team but they lost. Phoenix held Toews, Sharp, and Kane in check and Crawford flat out blew 2 games in OT by giving up goals Peewees don't allow.

The better team on paper doesn't always win. Chemistry is all well and fine, but great chemistry can also brood complacency. SHould we be shocked that with Carcillo's immediate return, Bryan Bickell turned in one of his better performances since 2010? Nope. Think he may have gotten a message? Think Frolik isn't thinking the same thing or been spoken to?

Bottom line...Stan Bowman has tried the exact same formular for past 2 years, and hasn't won a playoff series. And this is pretty much the EXACT same team with a few new role guys mixed in, so chemistry isn't the issue....

3 reasons the Hawks are 10-0-3

1. Corey Crawford is playing lights out
2. Better defensive zone coverage/PK emergence
3. Health...no major injuries.

At any time those 3 variables could morph back into what has killed this team the past 2 years.
- SteveRain

You could argue that outside of CC's play, that the most important factor has been the dominant play of Patrick Kane.

I'm most happy about this. Having solid goaltending from CC solves a major concern.
- DarthKane

I said it during the summer (hope you guys were listening): the additions of Oduya, Rozsival and Brookbank AND an improved PK would make a huge difference for Crawford. He's settled back down, much more confident, holding his crease, because of the PK and the number of shots the Hawks are blocking—something all three d-0men added since march do very well. Hawks are 2nd in blocks, 2nd in takeaways, 1st in PK.

Defense over 200 feet of ice is really why this team is 10-0-3.

"Defense over 200 feet of ice is really why this team is 10-0-3. "
JJ

Could not agree with this more. They do a great job positioning to take away plays and passing lanes up and down the ice. That is where puck control starts when you can't get it off face offs, and despite some weakness in the latter, they are doing the former very very well.

You could argue that outside of CC's play, that the most important factor has been the dominant play of Patrick Kane.
- furso27

And you would be 110% right. Kane is showing the consistency of the skill we always knew was there. He's also as quiet as a mouse off the ice. Great to see...

Sharp's try here was pretty good considering it was a rolling puck.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJQ3NWJplFc
- philco28

Oh yeah...I remember that well. Sitting in my living room I jumped up thinking it was a goal. For once Sharp didn't fire it high. Helluva save by Roberta.

per the Score, Emery to start tomorrow night vs the Sharks and Q says Hossa will be one of the shooters in the next shootout..
- Glenman12

Odd...given his recent shootout choices I thought he'd be tinkering with:

1) Sharp
2) Mayers
3) Emery