It sounds like the league is tinkering around with ideas for the draft in June. The lottery rules are different, the highest the Hawks could get to would be 5th.
- DarthKane

Yes I have heard that ,seems kind of strange to be changing the rules like that just before the draft ,but these are strange times indeed .Glad the HAWKS moved up last year .

Who cares about skating my man. Everyone is a great skater. You dont have to be a Bure to be good
- just69sayin

There is s few things to expand upon as far as the skating issue. You are correct though: while skating is always a desired strength it dies not necessarily rule out taking a Lundell with a top ten pick. Whether he projects as a too two or as a #3 center is paramount. Look at Tavarez: not a good skater. May play more wing as he gets older and the league trends to faster skating. But if you can play and you have the smarts, speed is not an over riding concern. Speed sometimes means a skill player is a career minor leaguer. But if you are good enough...well you can say there is Tavarez and there was Rib Brown, Penguins. Remember him. He actually had some gaudy scoring numbers but he didn't last.

You know there is always some GM's who will not take a Lundell that early. Or at all. The Phoenix GM has a hard on for speed. Speed kills, skating means a lot to him and he prices it with his drafting and building. He wanted Schmaultz over Strome in part because iof speed

Now you have Lundell whom some scouts have as high as #5. He does a lot of things well. Smarts, reliable defensively, talented, good in the dot. May be able to ascend to NHL sooner than later. Ah...but the skating....so with him your scouts have to determine if he is genuine #2 line. Some may say yes; some say n no

The Blackhawks know whom they like. Whether that is Lundell or not....who knows. I would not be afraid to take him but not too five and probably not at #9. If we traded down or had the #12 or #13 maybe I would choose him

My concern is not so much his skating as his being a top six forward. I also see Strome and Barrett on this roster in the future so I do not want another slower skater. If I know I am trading Strome but Strome is too good to leave unprotected for Expansion Draft.

Drafting Lundell too high is debateable and I would stay away. But at #12 or #13 you .might just take him. At #9 no.

I would like to hear how Rick feels about selecting Lundell

And BTW how good do you think R Pulock would be in that system with Trotz. At age 25 he might be ready to blossom. Big shot I expect he could become an even bigger force offensively but unsure if the rest of his game could approach elite.

So if they have the draft in June, does that mean no trades? How can you trade a player before the season and playoffs end?

So if they have the draft in June, does that mean no trades? How can you trade a player before the season and playoffs end?
- LAHawk

It's a farce .The NHL is just looking to be the biggest clown in the show . Trade no trades .Trades that have been made ,FA in July are teams going to be able to sign a player in the middle of the so called playoffs .Player A starts the series on team B but ends up scoring the Winning goal for team C, to win the series .Bettman has suck almost all the integrity out of this once great game for the all mighty Dollar .Please for all that is Good shut the season down ,start planning to maybe start next season on time .Have a Draft FA give the players a training camp .No Betman the little weasel will be 1st in line for some government bailouts ,and some bogus playoff scenario to satisfy nobody but corporate America .
Well I guess the old adage The Show must go on !!

So if they have the draft in June, does that mean no trades? How can you trade a player before the season and playoffs end?
- LAHawk

Whatever they do the 2020 draft will be different. Maybe they allow only trading draft picks. Maybe they reopen the trade deadline with some restrictions.

I know the owners will want to do whatever makes the most money. But I still say shut down the season. Hold the draft virtually in late June. Start free agency in early July and resume hockey in the fall.

There is s few things to expand upon as far as the skating issue. You are correct though: while skating is always a desired strength it dies not necessarily rule out taking a Lundell with a top ten pick. Whether he projects as a too two or as a #3 center is paramount. Look at Tavarez: not a good skater. May play more wing as he gets older and the league trends to faster skating. But if you can play and you have the smarts, speed is not an over riding concern. Speed sometimes means a skill player is a career minor leaguer. But if you are good enough...well you can say there is Tavarez and there was Rib Brown, Penguins. Remember him. He actually had some gaudy scoring numbers but he didn't last.

You know there is always some GM's who will not take a Lundell that early. Or at all. The Phoenix GM has a hard on for speed. Speed kills, skating means a lot to him and he prices it with his drafting and building. He wanted Schmaultz over Strome in part because iof speed

Now you have Lundell whom some scouts have as high as #5. He does a lot of things well. Smarts, reliable defensively, talented, good in the dot. May be able to ascend to NHL sooner than later. Ah...but the skating....so with him your scouts have to determine if he is genuine #2 line. Some may say yes; some say n no

The Blackhawks know whom they like. Whether that is Lundell or not....who knows. I would not be afraid to take him but not too five and probably not at #9. If we traded down or had the #12 or #13 maybe I would choose him

My concern is not so much his skating as his being a top six forward. I also see Strome and Barrett on this roster in the future so I do not want another slower skater. If I know I am trading Strome but Strome is too good to leave unprotected for Expansion Draft.

Drafting Lundell too high is debateable and I would stay away. But at #12 or #13 you .might just take him. At #9 no.

I would like to hear how Rick feels about selecting Lundell

And BTW how good do you think R Pulock would be in that system with Trotz. At age 25 he might be ready to blossom. Big shot I expect he could become an even bigger force offensively but unsure if the rest of his game could approach elite.
- jhawk59

If Lundell doesn't skate well I don't want him. The Hawks already have a center who doesn't skate well and he was chosen #3 overall in his draft year.

What I like are big rangy centers with huge wing spans and strides. All he has to have is about 60% of Mario Lemeiux's talent. Anybody out there that fits that description?
I suspect not.

The kid I want is Jamie Drysdale but he won't be there when the Hawks are on the board.

If Lundell doesn't skate well I don't want him. The Hawks already have a center who doesn't skate well and he was chosen #3 overall in his draft year.

What I like are big rangy centers with huge wing spans and strides. All he has to have is about 60% of Mario Lemeiux's talent. Anybody out there that fits that description?
I suspect not.

The kid I want is Jamie Drysdale but he won't be there when the Hawks are on the board.
- RickJ

That doesn't narrow it down.

That doesn't narrow it down.
- I Am The Breadman

It does for 50% of the BOD.

It does for 50% of the BOD.
- Angotti

Good point. It's Toews!

Good point. It's Toews!
- I Am The Breadman

Was thinking more along the lines of all of them.

I know one of the knocks on Dach was supposed to be his skating which was a pleasant surprise that that wasn't the case at all.

Very generous of you.

Like the former blogger, would you have given them a puncher's chance after 2010? I know I bought into his narratives to a degree and wouldn't have til the team stormed out of the gate in 2013. Just curious...
- HawkintheD

After the first cup Chicago was so loaded with young talent currently on the team and its farm system . Stan made the right moves at the time by trading and letting players walk.

They had a young promising goalie in crawford .

Everyone keeps saying the price of winning is sacrificing the depth and long term viability of the team.

I realize your draft positions determine the quality of your best possible choice, however while this team got more worn down and older the talent Stan traded away and the returns never even came close to working out or building up their depth in Rockford.

Stan IMO lost his focus after their 2nd cup in making the right moves . I'm not knocking Bickells MS what I'm pointing out is his regular season stats showed that even though he was the hero in 2013 cup run just like 2010 when Stan had choices of who stays and who goes Bickell IMO should have been cut .

After the first cup Chicago was so loaded with young talent currently on the team and its farm system . Stan made the right moves at the time by trading and letting players walk.

They had a young promising goalie in crawford .

Everyone keeps saying the price of winning is sacrificing the depth and long term viability of the team.

I realize your draft positions determine the quality of your best possible choice, however while this team got more worn down and older the talent Stan traded away and the returns never even came close to working out or building up their depth in Rockford.

Stan IMO lost his focus after their 2nd cup in making the right moves . I'm not knocking Bickells MS what I'm pointing out is his regular season stats showed that even though he was the hero in 2013 cup run just like 2010 when Stan had choices of who stays and who goes Bickell IMO should have been cut .
- Taylorst1

You’re (your) funny.

So how's that on Stanbo? Idk that I blame Q for that one either. It went 7 games and one bounce our way could have tilted the thing in the Hawks favor.

Won't rehash everything but the Danualt trade was bad, Seabs deal was bad, but most of the rest of your thoughts are of the same hindsight, revisionist nonsense I keep reading from you.

So let's say they kept Panarin. How do you keep him when he was looking to be the highest paid guy on the team? Maybe in retrospect they sold low, but at the time that was considered to be a good trade. Who knew little Artie could carry a team a la Kane (debatable)?

The Bickell deal would have been fine except of course for his MS which was common knowledge before the Hawks MedStaff knew and Bowman signed him.

Dale drafted the Core. Stan identified who to hitch his wagon to and replenished the depth. How hard is that to understand?

This "nibbled around the edges" narrative is laughable nonsense. The depth sucks now that the Hawks are losing, but when they were winning it wasn't that important because of the Core. The Core was there in '11 and '12 and didn't win Cups. So what changed? JFC Taylor! You either appreciate two more Cups or you don't.

It's ok to appreciate Dale while appreciating what Bowman's done, while also acknowledging you'd like to see a change of direction with Bowman either punted to the curb or given a different position within the organization.

There, I've given you the roadmap...
- HawkintheD

Actually, if you did two columns, and put down the players from the 3 cup teams that Dale drafted, and you made a second column, I'm not so sure you would make the statement "Dale drafted the core".

While obviously very important players he did draft, as a whole, not really sure that's the case.

After the first cup Chicago was so loaded with young talent currently on the team and its farm system . Stan made the right moves at the time by trading and letting players walk.

They had a young promising goalie in crawford .

Everyone keeps saying the price of winning is sacrificing the depth and long term viability of the team.

I realize your draft positions determine the quality of your best possible choice, however while this team got more worn down and older the talent Stan traded away and the returns never even came close to working out or building up their depth in Rockford.

Stan IMO lost his focus after their 2nd cup in making the right moves . I'm not knocking Bickells MS what I'm pointing out is his regular season stats showed that even though he was the hero in 2013 cup run just like 2010 when Stan had choices of who stays and who goes Bickell IMO should have been cut .
- Taylorst1

You’ve mentioned it a couple times but please share the depth that was sitting on the farm in 2010.

There was Kruger and Crawford. Bickell was already up.

So it wasn’t on the farm was it? For some of Dale’s great drafts there were also the misses that left them short of talent/depth after the purge. For all the heat the current regime takes for not being able to find dmen, the Builder was able to draft one. Albeit a good one in Hammer but that’s it.

They shed 10 players I believe from that Cup team and it took two years to replenish the depth because that’s what they had to get rid of.

Stan traded for Oduya, Stalberg, Frolik and Zus. Blockbuster moves? No, but ones necessary to restock the depth. Draft picks like Shaw and Saad helped too. Backup goalies like Emery and Darling.

I don’t think Bowman lost his focus. The team got older and there was a price to be paid for winning.

I’m good with them punting on McD and if they decide to do so with Bowman, that’s fine too, as long as they get someone better or someone who starts them on a new run.

Not sure who that is and also wouldn’t mind if Bowman is given a different role.

Just like with Chelsea Dagger though, careful what you wish for. I believe Chiarelli is unemployed and waiting in the Wings to trade Dach for a 2020 version of Loui Eriksson.

Actually, if you did two columns, and put down the players from the 3 cup teams that Dale drafted, and you made a second column, I'm not so sure you would make the statement "Dale drafted the core".

While obviously very important players he did draft, as a whole, not really sure that's the case.
- vabeachbear

Agree with you in that Mike Smith along with Stan had a huge hand in it as well, but I think it’s part of the narrative to minimize anything done outside of Dale’s moves.

Actually, if you did two columns, and put down the players from the 3 cup teams that Dale drafted, and you made a second column, I'm not so sure you would make the statement "Dale drafted the core".

While obviously very important players he did draft, as a whole, not really sure that's the case.
- vabeachbear

For everyone:
Regarding the role of Dale Tallon in helping build the Blackhawks into their 2010 team
From 1998-2002 he was Director of Player Personnel
From 2003-2005 he was assistant GM
From June 21, 2005 to his departure he was GM

I am pretty sure that in these roles, he had considerable input into the construction of the Hawks 2010 team.

For everyone:
Regarding the role of Dale Tallon in helping build the Blackhawks into their 2010 team
From 1998-2002 he was Director of Player Personnel
From 2003-2005 he was assistant GM
From June 21, 2005 to his departure he was GM

I am pretty sure that in these roles, he had considerable input into the construction of the Hawks 2010 team.
- FourOrr

By that logic, so did Stan....

From Wiki:
“Bowman joined the Chicago Blackhawks in 2001 as a special assistant to the general manager for four seasons. For the next two years, he would serve as the director of hockey operations. Afterwards, Bowman was promoted to assistant general manager of hockey operations”

You’re (your) funny.
- Ogilthorpe2

You are, you're, your, too, to, two kind.

He was a lot more right on this subject than a lot of guys here would like to believe right from the get go.
- 6628

And he never got tired of letting everyone know it either. For the handful of times he was right, he was frequently wrong, and God forbid you mentioned it.

Was thinking more along the lines of all of them.

I know one of the knocks on Dach was supposed to be his skating which was a pleasant surprise that that wasn't the case at all.
- HawkintheD

That was the first comment & how it was meant. Then I made my narrowed guess ...

You’ve mentioned it a couple times but please share the depth that was sitting on the farm in 2010.

There was Kruger and Crawford. Bickell was already up.

So it wasn’t on the farm was it? For some of Dale’s great drafts there were also the misses that left them short of talent/depth after the purge. For all the heat the current regime takes for not being able to find dmen, the Builder was able to draft one. Albeit a good one in Hammer but that’s it.

They shed 10 players I believe from that Cup team and it took two years to replenish the depth because that’s what they had to get rid of.

Stan traded for Oduya, Stalberg, Frolik and Zus. Blockbuster moves? No, but ones necessary to restock the depth. Draft picks like Shaw and Saad helped too. Backup goalies like Emery and Darling.

I don’t think Bowman lost his focus. The team got older and there was a price to be paid for winning.

I’m good with them punting on McD and if they decide to do so with Bowman, that’s fine too, as long as they get someone better or someone who starts them on a new run.

Not sure who that is and also wouldn’t mind if Bowman is given a different role.

Just like with Chelsea Dagger though, careful what you wish for. I believe Chiarelli is unemployed and waiting in the Wings to trade Dach for a 2020 version of Loui Eriksson.
- HawkintheD

Most everyone bemoans the trade of Leddy to the Islanders, but forget the trade that Stan made to obtain Leddy, that included a certain high #1 draft choice by the builder.

- Beaver-Warrior

TY

Was thinking more along the lines of all of them.

I know one of the knocks on Dach was supposed to be his skating which was a pleasant surprise that that wasn't the case at all.
- HawkintheD

Those knocks were by people who didn't take the time to actually watch Dach.

With MC gone my gut tells me - Bowman & JC will not be here much longer.

If Lundell doesn't skate well I don't want him. The Hawks already have a center who doesn't skate well and he was chosen #3 overall in his draft year.

What I like are big rangy centers with huge wing spans and strides. All he has to have is about 60% of Mario Lemeiux's talent. Anybody out there that fits that description?
I suspect not.

The kid I want is Jamie Drysdale but he won't be there when the Hawks are on the board.
- RickJ

I don't think so either. I am starting to come around on Jake Sanderson a bit but not sure I want him at 9-ish.

I like Holloway, Mercer and if one of Holtz/Raymond fell to them. Holloway played at Wisc as a 17 year old.