Trying to compare any team to the boatload of talent on that 2010 team is a fool's errand. That team was stacked and still was iffy when you got to the 3rd D pairing. That forward group was unreal. Every guy in the top played as a 1st liner either for the Hawks or another team at some point.

Nick (frank)ing Boynton was on the ice for the Cup winner, FFS. lol
- Elbows15

How does the current (including prospects) top six compare to the top six of current contenders?

Are you saying the team has enough at forward to be contenders?

My apologies had a few beverages tonight, listening to 461 oceans boulevard album and didn't finish reading your post. Damn with the salary cap what it is, i imagine it would be really difficult financially to have that as your 3rd line in 2 to 3 years.
- BetweenTheDots

Love me some Clapton!

Especially Cream.

Jesus Christ. If they lose 4 or 5 in a row you'll be back on the ledge as always. This team still lacks talent at forward. They work hard is the only difference from the last couple years
- GPHawksfan

Effort and compete level is there as a team they seem to play fast but overall are not. Also lack a of physicality and top six talent is missing. Defense is still a struggle and sustainable forecheck in the offensive zone is not consistent enough. To this year wins and losses don't mean as much as progression and development of young players.

Really? How many times did Sharp score 40? Point being I think Dinky can be ever bit as good as Sharp.

30 goal scorers are 3rd liners? How many times did Steeg, Ladd, Buff or Bickell do that?

I think you are underselling Kubalik. He is still developing at the NHL game. His improvements from last season are very noticeable.


People need to stop comparing in reality. Those were special teams.
- Elbows15

Kane is an all-star caliber forward. You think Cat is. Anyone else? The post I responded to alleged that the Hawks have six. Agree?

Cheers!
- HawkintheD

You're late, all I have left is Malort.

My apologies had a few beverages tonight, listening to 461 oceans boulevard album and didn't finish reading your post. Damn with the salary cap what it is, i imagine it would be really difficult financially to have that as your 3rd line in 2 to 3 years.
- BetweenTheDots

No worries, and I thought we all had adult beverages or who knows what when we came in here during evening hours. Now you know why I post half the crap I post.

How does the current (including prospects) top six compare to the top six of current contenders?

Are you saying the team has enough at forward to be contenders?
- mohel

I know you weren't asking me. But IMO we've got the #1 most important thing you need if you're trying to assemble a contending top 6: A bona fide Superstar. Not many teams have a player as good as Kane.

So start with that.

Then you've got 4 other players that if healthy are definitely top 6 caliber in a vacuum(Dach, Toews, Kubalik, DeBrincat). Dach has 1C written all over him. His play in his first ever post season series was nothing short of spectacular(aside from a few times where he passed on opportunities to shoot the puck).

That's 5 right there. And you've still got Strome, Suter, Kurashev, Nylander, and potentially Janmark(if re-signed) that can all plug into a top 6 role if need be. Some might end up being more effective than others. But the point is they have the skill sets to play that role.

So if you've got for instance:

Suter-Toews-Kane
DeBrincat-Dach-Kubalik

...going into next season as your top 6, I'd say it compares rather well to other contenders. Not the best but not the worst either. Lets say Suter goes on to lead rookies in goals(like he is currently). Then you're looking at a top 6 with the leading rookie goal scorer 2 years in a row being the 2 "worst" pieces of the bunch.

That's a top 6 that, if complimented by a legit bottom 6, will do just fine. Won't hold us back from contending IMO.

Toronto has had one of the most stacked top 6's in the NHL the past few seasons(not many teams can match Matthews, Marner, Tavares, Nylander)....and how many playoff series have they won? The point is the top 6 doesn't HAVE to be stacked at all 6 spots, and even if it is it doesn't mean poop unless the depth is there too. Like i said in a previous post, in last years "playoffs" we had a great top 6. The problem at forward was our 3rd line. And overall depth.

No worries, and I thought we all had adult beverages or who knows what when we came in here during evening hours. Now you know why I post half the crap I post.
- Angotti

Hahaha, i think for your plan to work we are going to have to be pretty lucky when it comes to the lottery ball or Bowman and Co are going to have to draft their asses off. Or maybe trade assets for draft picks and just build a young stable of talent, which will lead us back to Bowman and Co. Timing is everything

You're late, all I have left is Malort.
- mohel

yummy

I know you weren't asking me. But IMO we've got the #1 most important thing you need if you're trying to assemble a contending top 6: A bona fide Superstar. Not many teams have a player as good as Kane.

So start with that.

Then you've got 4 other players that if healthy are definitely top 6 caliber in a vacuum(Dach, Toews, Kubalik, DeBrincat). Dach has 1C written all over him. His play in his first ever post season series was nothing short of spectacular(aside from a few times where he passed on opportunities to shoot the puck).

That's 5 right there. And you've still got Strome, Suter, Kurashev, Nylander, and potentially Janmark(if re-signed) that can all plug into a top 6 role if need be. Some might end up being more effective than others. But the point is they have the skill sets to play that role.

So if you've got for instance:

Suter-Toews-Kane
DeBrincat-Dach-Kubalik

...going into next season as your top 6, I'd say it compares rather well to other contenders. Not the best but not the worst either. Lets say Suter goes on to lead rookies in goals(like he is currently). Then you're looking at a top 6 with the leading rookie goal scorer 2 years in a row being the 2 "worst" pieces of the bunch.

That's a top 6 that, if complimented by a legit bottom 6, will do just fine. Won't hold us back from contending IMO.

Toronto has had one of the most stacked top 6's in the NHL the past few seasons(not many teams can match Matthews, Marner, Tavares, Nylander)....and how many playoff series have they won? The point is the top 6 doesn't HAVE to be stacked at all 6 spots, and even if it is it doesn't mean poop unless the depth is there too. Like i said in a previous post, in last years "playoffs" we had a great top 6. The problem at forward was our 3rd line. And overall depth.
- SimpleJack

Can i get this on an excel spread sheet SJ?

That would be nice but i think this could be a really good playoff team if Dach and Toews comeback and we actually had 4 over 20 minute dmen. To me the key is our young blue line, it'll be the difference between a bubble team and a cup team. We don't lose that game last night if we have the fantastic 4, prime ages of Keith, Seabrook, Hjalmarsson and Oduya
- BetweenTheDots

Not that JC tried to lose that game, but he was coaching for the long term. Why did Beaudin replace Keith on PP 1? Not like the power play sucked with Keith. He played Beaudin even after his poopy first period, just like he played Suter regular in the last game after his poopy first period.

3 1/2 minutes left he has Highmore out there with a one goal lead. If he is playing for now, he shortens his bench and probably puts Soderberg or Janmark out there with Kampf and Hagel for defense and experience.

yummy
- SimpleJack

I'm happy to share it with D. All of it, preferably.....

Can i get this on an excel spread sheet SJ?
- BetweenTheDots

How about hardcover? I've already sold 100 copies...

Not that JC tried to lose that game, but he was coaching for the long term. Why did Beaudin replace Keith on PP 1? Not like the power play sucked with Keith. He played Beaudin even after his poopy first period, just like he played Suter regular in the last game after his poopy first period.

3 1/2 minutes left he has Highmore out there with a one goal lead. If he is playing for now, he shortens his bench and probably puts Soderberg or Janmark out there with Kampf and Hagel for defense and experience.
- LAHawk

I hear what you're saying, he does give players a longer leash no doubt than Q did. He only had 11 forwards dressed though, I'm curious to see where Highmore is next game. JC might just be a more trusting, naive, coach because of his age. I don't need to tell you this but there's a reason companies hire employees with experience. So i don't think he was coaching to lose but i think he's young and more susceptible to giving players another chance.

How about hardcover? I've already sold 100 copies...
- SimpleJack

Hahaha i was thinking than a power point presentation, 100 copies nice

I know you weren't asking me. But IMO we've got the #1 most important thing you need if you're trying to assemble a contending top 6: A bona fide Superstar. Not many teams have a player as good as Kane.

So start with that.

Then you've got 4 other players that if healthy are definitely top 6 caliber in a vacuum(Dach, Toews, Kubalik, DeBrincat). Dach has 1C written all over him. His play in his first ever post season series was nothing short of spectacular(aside from a few times where he passed on opportunities to shoot the puck).

That's 5 right there. And you've still got Strome, Suter, Kurashev, Nylander, and potentially Janmark(if re-signed) that can all plug into a top 6 role if need be. Some might end up being more effective than others. But the point is they have the skill sets to play that role.

So if you've got for instance:

Suter-Toews-Kane
DeBrincat-Dach-Kubalik

...going into next season as your top 6, I'd say it compares rather well to other contenders. Not the best but not the worst either. Lets say Suter goes on to lead rookies in goals(like he is currently). Then you're looking at a top 6 with the leading rookie goal scorer 2 years in a row being the 2 "worst" pieces of the bunch.

That's a top 6 that, if complimented by a legit bottom 6, will do just fine. Won't hold us back from contending IMO.

Toronto has had one of the most stacked top 6's in the NHL the past few seasons(not many teams can match Matthews, Marner, Tavares, Nylander)....and how many playoff series have they won? The point is the top 6 doesn't HAVE to be stacked at all 6 spots, and even if it is it doesn't mean poop unless the depth is there too. Like i said in a previous post, in last years "playoffs" we had a great top 6. The problem at forward was our 3rd line. And overall depth.
- SimpleJack

We shall see. I am more comfortable with the potential to develop serious top four defensemen from the current crop than I am at forward. They need Toews to return and age well (he's 33 at season's end). And Dach to become a monster - I can see this. Kubalik needs to grow quite a bit, imo. Kane will be Kane for quite awhile. I like Suter, but as a 1LW? Big stretch at this point, in my book.

Back to the Malort.

You forget Sharp played center and wing, killed penalties early in his career led league in sh goals one year. 6' 200# full ice player, one of the fastest players in the league. Dinky isn't close to Sharp.
- rpeters01

Dinky had almost as many goals in one season as Sharp did for his 1st 4 seasons. Sharp didn't reach 20 goals in a season until he was 25. Let's see where Dinky is at when he is 25. It will be a lot closer than you are wiling to admit

How does the current (including prospects) top six compare to the top six of current contenders?

Are you saying the team has enough at forward to be contenders?
- mohel

I don't know who you consider top contenders. Very few teams have a true top 6. The Hawks didn't in 2 of their Cup years. Unless you consider the corpse of Brad Richards and Zus 2Cs.

With or without Toews and Dach? That is 2 right there. I agree they could use more. My point is they aren't as far away as some believe.

Kane is an all-star caliber forward. You think Cat is. Anyone else? The post I responded to alleged that the Hawks have six. Agree?
- mohel

All Star? Nah. Who cares about that.

. Toews has been an All-star. Dach and Kubalik have the potential to be All-Stars if that is the criteria being used.
Truth is IDGAF about All-Stars. Spots are limited and names will get them more than not.

My question to you is how many teams have a true top 6?

I don't know who you consider top contenders. Very few teams have a true top 6. The Hawks didn't in 2 of their Cup years. Unless you consider the corpse of Brad Richards and Zus 2Cs.

With or without Toews and Dach? That is 2 right there. I agree they could use more. My point is they aren't as far away as some believe.
- Elbows15

Didn't you tell me to quit comparing to the Cup teams? A team with three HoF players in the top six, plus Sharp (who was very good) can put Richards or Zus at 2C. But this team won't have that luxury, right?

You know prospects and projecting talent better than me, so if you think that Cat and Kubalik are going to develop the all-around game to be real live top sixers, then I'll join Simple Jack at the optimist table. My non-unicorn side suspects they're still short up front.

All Star? Nah. Who cares about that.

. Toews has been an All-star. Dach and Kubalik have the potential to be All-Stars if that is the criteria being used.
Truth is IDGAF about All-Stars. Spots are limited and names will get them more than not.

My question to you is how many teams have a true top 6?
- Elbows15

All of them. Generally teams with better top sixes and top fours do better than teams with lesser top sixes and top fours. (Note - this does not mean the other spots are not important). Talent wins, right? The best players play most of the game against the other team's best players. Are the Hawks best players (in 2/3 years) good enough to win those matchups against the better teams in the league? Or do the need to add?

We shall see. I am more comfortable with the potential to develop serious top four defensemen from the current crop than I am at forward. They need Toews to return and age well (he's 33 at season's end). And Dach to become a monster - I can see this. Kubalik needs to grow quite a bit, imo. Kane will be Kane for quite awhile. I like Suter, but as a 1LW? Big stretch at this point, in my book.

Back to the Malort.
- mohel

Suter as a 1LW in a vacuum is a stretch. But if he's playing with Toews and Kane, or Dach and Kane(or anyone and Kane lol)....then its not really a stretch. Its just a way to spread around the depth and plug guys in where they'll be able to maximize their potential.

Like i said earlier, who has a top 6 with 6 all-star caliber players? Nobody. Vrana and Wilson compliment the Caps "big 4" forwards nicely. Boston has their "perfection" line, and then Krejci is usually flanked by a couple players that, in a vacuum, wouldn't exactly be top 6 caliber. DeBrusk is close. Kase hasn't worked out. Ritchie definitely belongs in the bottom 6. I could keep going on and on looking at other contenders. The point is, we aren't far off unless Dach doesn't pan out(which is possible, but HIGHLY unlikely given what we've seen. Everything screams TOP SIX/1C material). Kane, Dach, Cat, Kubalik, and possibly Toews too. Suter/Kurashev/Hagel/Janmark/Nylander/Strome/Shaw?(most likely not at this point, but ya never know)....those guys can and most likely will be our version(s) of Ritchie, Smith, Kase, deBrusk, Wilson, Vrana, etc.

Didn't you tell me to quit comparing to the Cup teams? A team with three HoF players in the top six, plus Sharp (who was very good) can put Richards or Zus at 2C. But this team won't have that luxury, right?

You know prospects and projecting talent better than me, so if you think that Cat and Kubalik are going to develop the all-around game to be real live top sixers, then I'll join Simple Jack at the optimist table. My non-unicorn side suspects they're still short up front.
- mohel

Obtuse doesn't suit you. Bickell was a top 6 player on a Cup winner. That is for perspective. Do you think Kubalik and Dinky have the potential to be better than Bickell or at least as good as Versteeg? Both of whom played top 6 on Cup contenders.
Again. If you consider it a comparison, then fine. I using to highlight that Top 6 isn't a concrete term.

All of them. Generally teams with better top sixes and top fours do better than teams with lesser top sixes and top fours. (Note - this does not mean the other spots are not important). Talent wins, right? The best players play most of the game against the other team's best players. Are the Hawks best players (in 2/3 years) good enough to win those matchups against the better teams in the league? Or do the need to add?
- mohel

So, you don't have an answer?

Dinky had almost as many goals in one season as Sharp did for his 1st 4 seasons. Sharp didn't reach 20 goals in a season until he was 25. Let's see where Dinky is at when he is 25. It will be a lot closer than you are wiling to admit
- Elbows15

Let's see what year Dinky gets his 287th goal not even counting the rest of the things Sharp brought to the table.