What does the eye test say to you? Do you see a hungry Hawk group? Do you see a club that has bought in, executes and gives consistent effort? Have you been able to sit thru every game the last few yrs? Have you seen the GM get the coach players and not use them? Have you seen the coach not use players and two of them leave and play a BIG role in their team winning a cup that very same yr? Have you seen the Hawks develop a Dman since Hammer? Can you remember a GM risk being so thin at goalie that the clown show that the position devolved into last yr happened anywhere else? Have you seen a GM announce we are going to be younger and harder to play against and at the end of that same yr we see a 4th line of floaters in Jurco and Duclair?

I don't know the answer either LBR but it's not passing the eye test for me and hasn't for awhile, it's stale. At seasons end I thought one of Q or Stan should go no opinion which. My thought is its been so long, look at Detroilet, that this management group has been in place that there is very very very very little risk having new eyes on this thing that isn't passing the eye test. It's stale.
- Mr Ricochet

Let's start with that I watch probably 2/3s the games a season, give or take a few games, and some of them I watched more than once because I help with tracking projects as peer review (for more than one team). The eye test to me lineups pretty well with the stats - the team worked hard for the most part, did not get rewarded for it in terms of goals, we're less effective / responsible defensively than I would have liked, definitely had holes esp on special teams, and then started to get the wind knocked out of them by poor goaltending. I have most certainly not agreed with every player acquisition or trade nor the usage/deployment of certain players. But the players that left are not among them and leaving out the context of why those players' didn't play or left (asking for a trade) is kind of silly. But we don't need to open that discussion up again lol.

As for developing a d-man since Hjammer, they have not but they also haven't needed to until recent years. They had the same 4/5/6 d-man roster for years, after all. And now that they have need, the Hawks management group has replaced their old AHL development group and added coaches at the NHL level that do have experience specifically with young players to help with the transition. We've already seen improvements in Rockford. Are we not going acknowledge the context around the lack of new d-men and ignore giving credit to the Hawks management group for revamping their development group? Seems unfair. Could argue it came too late but I'll give some benefit of doubt there.

As for goalies, last year's goalie situation is pretty similar to how it's been over the years: the Hawks find a young FA option to serve as back-up with an older vet in Rockford to hold it down there. There was little depth behind Raanta originally and Darling just had Raanta behind him for the one season. They've always been weak in terms of goalie depth so that was nothing new and tbf they did have two good AHL goalies in Forsberg/Berube, similar to Darling. The difference was the health of the starter in this time. If you look at Forsberg's numbers to start after Crawford goes down and compare it to the time Darling had to be started previously, Forsberg had perfectly average numbers - it's only when it dragged on that it became a poop show. What worked for 2-3 seasons didn't work last year but it wasn't a bad plan imo. Now they're going to try the Emery / Khabibulin approach - worked out 50/50 so who knows.

As for the announcement of being younger / harder to play again, on paper they did do that. Traded Hjammer for a bigger / younger d-man in Murphy; traded a smaller finesse player in Panarin for a bigger / more defensive player in Saad; signed grinder types in Bouma and Wingels; and signed huge ass Franson for defense. The average age of the team went from like 26th in age in the league to 13th in one year and then was down to 6th youngest by the end of it as they rotated in more kids. They tried the harder to play against route, albeit incorrectly imo, and definitely went young. Again, did not agree with all those moves at all but I can't say they didn't try; can say it hasn't worked yet though. Do like most of the youth they kept, like the future potential there.

Anyway, I'll just repeat myself: I do not know if Bowman and/or Q are the correct guys for whatever is coming next, but I think the dismissive, entitled way some talk about them can be quite ridiculous. Not everyone but some lbh lol. I'm not trying to dictate to anyone to stop sprouting their opinions or anything, just pointing out how it comes across to me. But I 100% disagree that there is "little risk" with swapping out management or coaching - it could always get worse with the wrong selection. There's also risk staying the course. Again, dunno which is the correct path but ignoring the fact that both have risks and rewards is silly.

Please excuse any typos or run-ons or incoherency, I just got back from a long happy hour lol

Sikura can make plays some that the Hayden's, Martinsen's, Wingels's (no longer) Bouma, etc can only dream of!
- D2D

Sikura should be in rockford developing. Along with edjisell and any other young prospects for the future. Sign wingles and letestu

Sikura should be in rockford developing. Along with edjisell and any other young prospects for the future. Sign wingles and letestu
- Scott1977

Agreed on Wingels and letting the you guys develop in the AHL. See what you have and bring the young guys up when they’re ready.

Let's start with that I watch probably 2/3s the games a season, give or take a few games, and some of them I watched more than once because I help with tracking projects as peer review (for more than one team). The eye test to me lineups pretty well with the stats - the team worked hard for the most part, did not get rewarded for it in terms of goals, we're less effective / responsible defensively than I would have liked, definitely had holes esp on special teams, and then started to get the wind knocked out of them by poor goaltending. I have most certainly not agreed with every player acquisition or trade nor the usage/deployment of certain players. But the players that left are not among them and leaving out the context of why those players' didn't play or left (asking for a trade) is kind of silly. But we don't need to open that discussion up again lol.

As for developing a d-man since Hjammer, they have not but they also haven't needed to until recent years. They had the same 4/5/6 d-man roster for years, after all. And now that they have need, the Hawks management group has replaced their old AHL development group and added coaches at the NHL level that do have experience specifically with young players to help with the transition. We've already seen improvements in Rockford. Are we not going acknowledge the context around the lack of new d-men and ignore giving credit to the Hawks management group for revamping their development group? Seems unfair. Could argue it came too late but I'll give some benefit of doubt there.

As for goalies, last year's goalie situation is pretty similar to how it's been over the years: the Hawks find a young FA option to serve as back-up with an older vet in Rockford to hold it down there. There was little depth behind Raanta originally and Darling just had Raanta behind him for the one season. They've always been weak in terms of goalie depth so that was nothing new and tbf they did have two good AHL goalies in Forsberg/Berube, similar to Darling. The difference was the health of the starter in this time. If you look at Forsberg's numbers to start after Crawford goes down and compare it to the time Darling had to be started previously, Forsberg had perfectly average numbers - it's only when it dragged on that it became a poop show. What worked for 2-3 seasons didn't work last year but it wasn't a bad plan imo. Now they're going to try the Emery / Khabibulin approach - worked out 50/50 so who knows.

As for the announcement of being younger / harder to play again, on paper they did do that. Traded Hjammer for a bigger / younger d-man in Murphy; traded a smaller finesse player in Panarin for a bigger / more defensive player in Saad; signed grinder types in Bouma and Wingels; and signed huge ass Franson for defense. The average age of the team went from like 26th oldest in the league to 13th in one year and then was down to 6th by the end of it as they rotated in more kids. They tried the harder to play against route, albeit incorrectly imo, and definitely went young. Again, did not agree with all those moves at all but I can't say they didn't try; can say it hasn't worked yet though. Do like most of the youth they kept, like the future potential there.

Anyway, I'll just repeat myself: I do not know if Bowman and/or Q are the correct guys for whatever is coming next, but I think the dismissive, entitled way some talk about them can be quite ridiculous. Not everyone but some lbh lol. I'm not trying to dictate to anyone to stop sprouting their opinions or anything, just pointing out how it comes across to me. But I 100% disagree that there is "little risk" with swapping out management or coaching - it could always get worse with the wrong selection. There's also risk staying the course. Again, dunno which is the correct path but ignoring the fact that both have risks and rewards is silly.

Please excuse any typos or run-ons or incoherency, I just got back from a long happy hour lol
- L_B_R

And what about when he doesn’t have the puck in open ice with time and space? Can he win a 50/50 puck? Can he go to the net? Can he win board battles? Can he protect the puck at 165lbs? How many little guys can one team have???
- EnzoD

That's why you give him a chance and play with skill guys so that your possession means less time in your D zone. I watched him at NE and he was better than he brother at Dartmouth. On his cup of coffee he showed poise, awareness, and good decision making with the puck. I agree with the little guys that you have stated but how many "big" guys can skate with great edges, hands to make plays; just like those little guys. Tom Wilson will be on this bucket list.

Three cups were terrific but now that's history. It's just about as useful to point to these as still being relevant for today as it it is to point to the 1961 cup still being relevant for today. NHL hockey is played year by year in the present not in the past. This is what we have to deal with. Change is inevitable but a successful mgt replenishes assets as needed and does not devastate the team as badly as this one has been devastated because of mgt failure after mgt failure. What is it they say about doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results? Wake up Rocky.

That's why you give him a chance and play with skill guys so that your possession means less time in your D zone. I watched him at NE and he was better than he brother at Dartmouth. On his cup of coffee he showed poise, awareness, and good decision making with the puck. I agree with the little guys that you have stated but how many "big" guys can skate with great edges, hands to make plays; just like those little guys. Tom Wilson will be on this bucket list.
- D2D

Well that’s the paradox, isn’t it? I agree, they are hard to find. But, if you exclusively sign and draft players in a small/speed/skill mold, you have no chance to find those power forward diamonds in the rough. Did Smith-Pelley sign in WSH? You don’t need those tough players to be Tom Wilson size 6’4” 225lbs, but 6’1” and 205lbs + will almost always outmuscle the 175lb guy. Hawks are too easy to play against. Name a softer team in the entire NHL??

Well that’s the paradox, isn’t it? I agree, they are hard to find. But, if you exclusively sign and draft players in a small/speed/skill mold, you have no chance to find those power forward diamonds in the rough. Did Smith-Pelley sign in WSH? You don’t need those tough players to be Tom Wilson size 6’4” 225lbs, but 6’1” and 205lbs + will almost always outmuscle the 175lb guy. Hawks are too easy to play against. Name a softer team in the entire NHL??
- EnzoD

The Hawks are the easiest team to defend in the NHL . This is correct. Even with the man advantage the Hawks keep themselves on the perimiter.

And what about when he doesn’t have the puck in open ice with time and space? Can he win a 50/50 puck? Can he go to the net? Can he win board battles? Can he protect the puck at 165lbs? How many little guys can one team have???
- EnzoD

Sikura was solid in his 5 game cup of coffee, he has the potential to be a solid middle six forward. That’s not to say he wouldn’t benefit from some time in Rockford but I’d expect to see him contribute regularly contribute by the end of the season.

I think we need to move away from being concerned about a players size. It seems the league is all moving towards smaller players.

DeBrincat and Hinostroza may be small but they don’t play small. Hayden will size and physicality, I expect him to be on the opening night roster. Id guess that Ejdsell makes the team too, but I’m less optimistic that he sticks. IF he does then there’s some size added to the roster (although his not overly physical).

It’s funny that some fans are clamouring for size they calling for Anisimov to be traded (not direct at you).

The Hawks are the easiest team to defend in the NHL . This is correct. Even with the man advantage the Hawks keep themselves on the perimiter.
- mrpaulish

I know it’s not going to happen, but wouldn’t it be nice to pry Stone away from Ottawa.

Sikura was solid in his 5 game cup of coffee, he has the potential to be a solid middle six forward. That’s not to say he wouldn’t benefit from some time in Rockford but I’d expect to see him contribute regularly contribute by the end of the season.

I think we need to move away from being concerned about a players size. It seems the league is all moving towards smaller players.

DeBrincat and Hinostroza may be small but they don’t play small. Hayden will size and physicality, I expect him to be on the opening night roster. Id guess that Ejdsell makes the team too, but I’m less optimistic that he sticks. IF he does then there’s some size added to the roster (although his not overly physical).

It’s funny that some fans are clamouring for size they calling for Anisimov to be traded (not direct at you).
- DarthKane

Darth you’re a Canadian so I’m surprised to hear this from you. Yes, the speed/skill is more valued and effective in the NHL as it ever has been. Yet, there will always be a man vs man, who wants it more, physical aspect of hockey. Along the boards, in front of the net...those are areas the Hawks severely lack at both the defensive and offensive end. Opposing teams establish residence in front of the Hawks net and the Hawks forwards pass the puck around the outside with virtually no net front presence. You are correct, it is counterintuitive to want to trade Anisimov as he does go to the net and have length. However, at 6’4” 199lbs, he is tall and skinny and injury prone with slow feet approaching 30. I suggest him for trade as he actually possesses value that could get the Hawks young players or picks back. Would rather move 7 but nobody wants a 5D at $7mil....

Darth you’re a Canadian so I’m surprised to hear this from you. Yes, the speed/skill is more valued and effective in the NHL as it ever has been. Yet, there will always be a man vs man, who wants it more, physical aspect of hockey. Along the boards, in front of the net...those are areas the Hawks severely lack at both the defensive and offensive end. Opposing teams establish residence in front of the Hawks net and the Hawks forwards pass the puck around the outside with virtually no net front presence. You are correct, it is counterintuitive to want to trade Anisimov as he does go to the net and have length. However, at 6’4” 199lbs, he is tall and skinny and injury prone with slow feet approaching 30. I suggest him for trade as he actually possesses value that could get the Hawks young players or picks back. Would rather move 7 but nobody wants a 5D at $7mil....
- EnzoD

What does the fact that I’m Canadian have to do with anything?

I agree that the team needs more size, but they shouldn’t shy away from talent of the player is small. DeBrincat is only one of many examples of smaller players finding success in the NHL.

What does the fact that I’m Canadian have to do with anything?

I agree that the team needs more size, but they shouldn’t shy away from talent of the player is small. DeBrincat is only one of many examples of smaller players finding success in the NHL.
- DarthKane

Canadians are all size queens, didn't you know? lol jk

Canadians are all size queens, didn't you know? lol jk
- L_B_R

I see what you did there...

Canadians are all size queens, didn't you know? lol jk
- L_B_R

Sounds like LBR was pounding suds at happy hour.

Since we all waiting for bowman to awake from his nap since he was asleep at the wheel on sunday here are a couple trade proposal for discussion until maybe something happens.

Hawks trade AA
Islanders trade a 2nd and 3rd

Hawks trade 2nd and 5th
Winnipeg trades Lowery Lemieux

Hawks trade hossa's contract 3rd forsling and hino
Carolina trades faulk and 5th/zykov
Hawks get a center in lowery plus a bottom 6 lw with grit and edge sign Lowery 4 years at 3.5 million per also hawks get a top 4 rd in faulk and hossa's contract of the books. Got give to get.

Thoughts and your trade proposals welcome
- Scott1977

I actually like all of these. I think Lou might be hesitant to sell any picks, but maybe we’d get a cheaper roster player or prospect for AA

I actually like all of these. I think Lou might be hesitant to sell any picks, but maybe we’d get a cheaper roster player or prospect for AA
- ObeseOprah

Anyone is tradeable, I’d move Anisimov but only for the right return. After losing Tavares for nothing the Islanders should be in the market for a centre. AA would make sense to New York but what do they have to offer?

Darth you’re a Canadian so I’m surprised to hear this from you. Yes, the speed/skill is more valued and effective in the NHL as it ever has been. Yet, there will always be a man vs man, who wants it more, physical aspect of hockey. Along the boards, in front of the net...those are areas the Hawks severely lack at both the defensive and offensive end. Opposing teams establish residence in front of the Hawks net and the Hawks forwards pass the puck around the outside with virtually no net front presence. You are correct, it is counterintuitive to want to trade Anisimov as he does go to the net and have length. However, at 6’4” 199lbs, he is tall and skinny and injury prone with slow feet approaching 30. I suggest him for trade as he actually possesses value that could get the Hawks young players or picks back. Would rather move 7 but nobody wants a 5D at $7mil....
- EnzoD

What you are looking for Enzo is a player or 2 on the roster who plays like Patric Hornqvist, Radek Faksa, Michael Ferland, Gabe Landeskog or even young versions of Scott Hartnell or Andrew Ladd. Some size and skill, bangs some bodies, plays abrasive and nasty every shift and goes to the paint in a hostile mood.

Last guy they had like that was Andrew Shaw - and what was he 5'9"? Dumbell Ryan Hartman didn't cut it. When he was hungry and appreciated the free breakfasts McD gave him, Richard Panik looked like he had the potential to deliver that type of game. And then he got the nice contract and got all confused and Stan had to trade him for that 'Canadian' stiff Anthony Duclair.

Don't think it's lost on Stan or Q that they need one or a couple of players like that. Come on down Brandon Saad, how about you trying to play that way. If you can't do it, we're down to past draftee Graham Knott, maybe he can.

What you are looking for Enzo is a player or 2 on the roster who plays like Patric Hornqvist, Radek Faksa, Michael Ferland, Gabe Landeskog or even young versions of Scott Hartnell or Andrew Ladd. Some size and skill, bangs some bodies, plays abrasive and nasty every shift and goes to the paint in a hostile mood.

Last guy they had like that was Andrew Shaw - and what was he 5'9"? Dumbell Ryan Hartman didn't cut it. When he was hungry and appreciated the free breakfasts McD gave him, Richard Panik looked like he had the potential to deliver that type of game. And then he got the nice contract and got all confused and Stan had to trade him for that 'Canadian' stiff Anthony Duclair.

Don't think it's lost on Stan or Q that they need one or a couple of players like that. Come on down Brandon Saad, how about you trying to play that way. If you can't do it, we're down to past draftee Graham Knott, maybe he can.
- RickJ

Knott = McNeill 2.0.

Anyone is tradeable, I’d move Anisimov but only for the right return. After losing Tavares for nothing the Islanders should be in the market for a centre. AA would make sense to New York but what do they have to offer?
- DarthKane

NYI actually has a strong pool. Wahlstrom and Dobson are the two blue chips right now, untouchable. Keiffer Bellows is highly regarded, also not an option. Josh ho-sang and Michael dal Colle were big names 3-4 Year’s ago but I haven’t heard of much progress.

Gudlevskis is my favorite goalie just because of one game... scaring the crap out of team canada in 2014 while standing on his head. He’s that guy. They likely don’t need him because Sorokin is their heir apparent from Russia.

You're the cock eyed optimist, and a dotard.
- BMWChiFan

You're right. We're all winners.

Go Everyone.

Anyone is tradeable, I’d move Anisimov but only for the right return. After losing Tavares for nothing the Islanders should be in the market for a centre. AA would make sense to New York but what do they have to offer?
- DarthKane

If you were looking for a straight hockey swap, I don't think that the isles have anyone we would want as a return for AA.
We'd need another centre coming back, and they have Anders Lee, Casey Cizikas, Valtteri Filppula, Mathew Barzal and Brock Nelson listed as players who play C. They have a few younger guys coming through like Ho-Sang I'm sure, but I dont think AA will get you a reasonable return in terms of someone to play centre well enough to slot straight into our line-up, stand in front of the goalie and do all the other little things he does

If you were looking for a straight hockey swap, I don't think that the isles have anyone we would want as a return for AA.
We'd need another centre coming back, and they have Anders Lee, Casey Cizikas, Valtteri Filppula, Mathew Barzal and Brock Nelson listed as players who play C. They have a few younger guys coming through like Ho-Sang I'm sure, but I dont think AA will get you a reasonable return in terms of someone to play centre well enough to slot straight into our line-up, stand in front of the goalie and do all the other little things he does
- AusHawk

I think Ottawa makes more sense. They’ll need a cost effective forward and have assets the Hawks would be interested in.

Knott = McNeill 2.0.
- DarthKane

[url]
Not necessarily. We are playing long ball with him and Stan knew that when we drafted him.

I really like the idea of Toews at 3C.

I think he's earned it, not saying that's a good thing, but it is what it is. His play reflects that of a Cup caliber 3C, rather than 1C.

The Hawks will have to use the explosive powers of Kane to anchor their top line, with Schmaltz serving as the Center. Those 2 have obvious chemistry there is no denying. Is 8 a comparable 1C to most Cup contenders? Of course not. But then again, who thought William Karlsson was either? The idea is to spread out the depth. DeBrincat is CLEARLY a top 6 caliber talent IMO, put him with AA(they played together a bit last season) on the 2nd line and hope AA stays healthy and hungry in front of the net.

Hinostroza-Schmaltz-Kane
DeBrincat-Anisimov-Sikura
Saad-Toews-Hayden
Kunitz-Kampf-Kahun
Ejdsell

Keith - Murphy
Forsling - Rutta
Manning - Seabs
Gus

Crawford
Ward

Thats the best i can do

How good can this team be? Meh....its hard to honestly believe they'd stand a chance, but hey, crazier things have happened i suppose. If you looked at Vegas's roster before the season started last year....did anyone think they'd do what they did? I guess that's the best possible mind set to have right now if you're still hopeful this team can go on another run.