But they were correct in doing so, only the Blackhawks were wrong.
- DarthKane

If we're not smarter than Columbus and Ottawa we're in trouble. (Red font).

The LA Kings managed to play winning hockey and go seven games the first playoff round with a boatload of young players. Minus Doughty, too, the dmen were coached and helped by one Tr Yawney

Yawney doubtless is not coming here. Ditto Trotz landing here to coach. Both however would be able to guide a stable of young dmen and we have some promising dmen.

I don't know who our next coach will be but I do feel like we could see many new kids on defense this season .....at least by season end.
- jhawk59

We have Campbell > Yawney.

Is Scotty Bowman still a voice in the Blackhawks Organ-I-zation? If he is, I really think he needs to go. Unless there is proof that he is a positive to this team, I see no reason why he should be allowed to make any kind of suggestions.
- powerenforcer

Digging deep for material today are we?

Charlie Roumeliotis
@CRoumeliotis
·
33m
#Blackhawks top prospect Lukas Reichel has been added to Team Germany's roster for the 2022 IIHF World Championship.

Absolutely fans look at players differently depending on where they were drafted, the amount of money they make and the cost of acquiring them in a trade. IMO as they should giving the player and his production context and what value thy bring. ..... Especially so in a hard cap environment.

Theo, do you think KD is comfortable with his organIzational infrastructure to make Dcat or Kane trade? Trusts McGiver, Greenberg, head of scouting and scouts to properly evaluate the worth of Dcat to make a franchise changing deal like moving a 23 yr old 40 goal scorer?
- Mr Ricochet

To answer your question, yes, I think Davidson is comfortable or at least getting more comfortable over time as he builds up the hockey operations staff to make trades, sign free agents, and manage the draft.

The proof will be in the pudding, though. Davidson may be confident in his rebuild but the team however narrowly (players only and wins/losses) or broadly (including coaches, admin, pipeline, etc) still needs to generate positive results.

Only time will tell at that point. For instance, it's one thing for Davidson to tout that Greenberg will do all these great things with systems and whatnot but all of that needs to actually show net gains that sustainably help the franchise.

Absolutely fans look at players differently depending on where they were drafted, the amount of money they make and the cost of acquiring them in a trade. IMO as they should giving the player and his production context and what value thy bring. ..... Especially so in a hard cap environment.

Theo, do you think KD is comfortable with his organIzational infrastructure to make Dcat or Kane trade? Trusts McGiver, Greenberg, head of scouting and scouts to properly evaluate the worth of Dcat to make a franchise changing deal like moving a 23 yr old 40 goal scorer?
- Mr Ricochet

Not that I'm Theo, but why wouldn't he? He's made the hires.

From Roumeliotis' latest article:

Blackhawks associate GM Norm Maciver is overseeing the entire scouting operation, and his goal is to make sure the management group is prepared for all possibilities when the draft rolls around on July 7 and 8.

Greenberg is not going to be involved in any real player decisions. He is there - from what has been written thus far - to improve the data and flow of information within the organization.

Is your implication that KD is too green, and therefore "scared" to make a move? I would say all evidence to the contrary thus far. He moved the Hawks best 200' forward and a late pick for three high end assets and a decent 4th liner. Moved Fleury for a conditional 2nd with both hands tied behind his back.

First bolded was the point of my post.

I don't really care how the Hawks acquire the talent. I'm more concerned with what happens once the Hawks get them. True that the Hawks have not done well with D-men since Hammer, but:

TVR
Rutta
Kempny

These are all guys that hadn't sniffed the NHL. The Hawks signed them and ultimately tossed them, but they are all good NHL players.

We likely have to come to an agreement on the definition of the word "developed", but I find the second bolded to be BS. Look around the league and let me know which other team has "developed" defensemen better. They've certainly found better talent, but I don't see how they developed them better.

If you look at the path of most good D-men, there isn't a ton of time the AHL. There is more time in Junior, overseas, or college. So is that developed or just waiting for them to mature enough (both physically and mentally) to handle being in the NHL.
- Chunk

The players listed are third pairing or extra guys. Kempny played above his talent level his first year with Washington other than that he's been a mediocre player his whole career.

In terms of drafting + developing: Nashville and Boston seem to be good at it. Colorado has Byram and Makar that were drafted and Girard was picked up as a prospect (from Nashville) so half their blue line.

Half of the Wild's blueline was drafted by them or developed (spurgen was picked up after being discarded by NYR).

Dallas drafted half of their blue line.

Most of the Islanders blue line was home grown and they were a good team before this year.

The Hawks haven't drafted any one of consequence on the blue line since Hammer and Keith was the last impact player. Between moving on from Leddy and picking up Jones, they haven't traded for, drafted or signed a free agent of significance on the blue line. Its very bad.

Certainly Tampa Bay, Carolina, Calgary, St Louis, Pittsburgh, Vegas, NYR (though they don't really defend) have all targeted players that fit in with what they want to do and get results.

Which the Hawks certainly haven't done either - albeit a lot of that is because they can't evaluate the talent in the first place.

The players listed are third pairing or extra guys. Kempny played above his talent level his first year with Washington other than that he's been a mediocre player his whole career.

In terms of drafting + developing: Nashville and Boston seem to be good at it. Colorado has Byram and Makar that were drafted and Girard was picked up as a prospect (from Nashville) so half their blue line.

Half of the Wild's blueline was drafted by them or developed (spurgen was picked up after being discarded by NYR).

Dallas drafted half of their blue line.

Most of the Islanders blue line was home grown and they were a good team before this year.

The Hawks haven't drafted any one of consequence on the blue line since Hammer and Keith was the last impact player. Between moving on from Leddy and picking up Jones, they haven't traded for, drafted or signed a free agent of significance on the blue line. Its very bad.

Certainly Tampa Bay, Carolina, Calgary, St Louis, Pittsburgh, Vegas, NYR (though they don't really defend) have all targeted players that fit in with what they want to do and get results.

Which the Hawks certainly haven't done either - albeit a lot of that is because they can't evaluate the talent in the first place.
- fattybeef

Right. I said that they haven't drafted acquired talent well. The three I specified were just ones that have at least become long time players. Kempny has been out mostly due to injury. My contention is with the word develop.

What is considered developed? One year in the AHL? Two? What if all of their development comes in Junior, overseas or college? The only thing the team did there was wait.

I did a not entirely exhaustive search and came up with: Pelech, Pulock and Lindell as guys that have spent notable time in the AHL.

The vast majority spend at most one year (and many none) in the AHL.

But they were correct in doing so, only the Blackhawks were wrong.
- DarthKane

Just like Nashville and Philly were correct in giving up on Hartman, but not the Hawks.

Not that I'm Theo, but why wouldn't he? He's made the hires.

From Roumeliotis' latest article:

Blackhawks associate GM Norm Maciver is overseeing the entire scouting operation, and his goal is to make sure the management group is prepared for all possibilities when the draft rolls around on July 7 and 8.

Greenberg is not going to be involved in any real player decisions. He is there - from what has been written thus far - to improve the data and flow of information within the organization.

Is your implication that KD is too green, and therefore "scared" to make a move? I would say all evidence to the contrary thus far. He moved the Hawks best 200' forward and a late pick for three high end assets and a decent 4th liner. Moved Fleury for a conditional 2nd with both hands tied behind his back.
- Chunk

No, I don't think KD is ascared, but I do get the feeling he's careful. ......... Before they hired Greenberg I thought if they were gonna tear the thing down NJ looked like a good fit for both squads for Dcat.

As I thought about it this can be a franchise defining move, gotta get it right. Then I thought KD understands this too, that Dcat is one of maybe 2 players that is franchise changing that he has to move. Then I wondered if he feels he's far enough into adding management pieces, for them to have become familiar with each other to properly evaluate a big move and if the organIzation is ready to pull the trigger on such a defining move.

This ain't moving a 35 yr old MAF who wasn't coming back. This ain't moving a middle 6 guy in Hagel. This is moving a 24 yr old a franchise changing player by a brand new 33 yr old GM with a staff he put together, and probably is not done yet, over the last 2 months.

Simply said as I wondered about such a huge trade I wondered if KD did too.

No, I don't think KD is ascared, but I do get the feeling he's careful. ......... Before they hired Greenberg I thought if they were gonna tear the thing down NJ looked like a good fit for both squads for Dcat.

As I thought about it this can be a franchise defining move, gotta get it right. Then I thought KD understands this too, that Dcat is one of maybe 2 players that is franchise changing that he has to move. Then I wondered if he feels he's far enough into adding management pieces, for them to have become familiar with each other to properly evaluate a big move and if the organIzation is ready to pull the trigger on such a defining move.

This ain't moving a 35 yr old MAF who wasn't coming back. This ain't moving a middle 6 guy in Hagel. This is moving a 24 yr old a franchise changing player by a brand new 33 yr old GM with a staff he put together, and probably is not done yet, over the last 2 months.

Simply said as I wondered about such a huge trade I wondered if KD did too.
- Mr Ricochet

Interesting. What did the hiring of Greenberg change for you?

I'm a bit more matter-of-fact when looking at things like this. Considering KD's comments on the rebuild, his reiteration of such comments, and previous actions, I would say your description of careful is right on. That being the case, I don't think he is actively shopping ADB (which I wholeheartedly agree with). I think he is expecting to keep him as a centerpiece. If someone comes in and offers the moon, he will consider it, but I highly doubt that he is saying to teams I will send ADB to you if you give me XYZ.

He has said the timeline is what it is. They would like a first round pick this year, but they don't need one. The proof will be the acquisitions he makes. I fully support his demeanor and method thus far.

For what it's worth (probably the equivalent of a day old ham sandwich), I think the following are done on this team:

Kubalik
Strome
Murphy
Toews

I can see them taking some big dollar, underperforming assets back with some nice sweeteners.

https://www.crossingbroad...arry-trotz-on-friday.html

So if Trotz is willing to hear what the Flyers have to say maybe the Hawks will talk to him also.

I know he spoke with the WinniJets yesterday I believe.

Right. I said that they haven't drafted acquired talent well. The three I specified were just ones that have at least become long time players. Kempny has been out mostly due to injury. My contention is with the word develop.

What is considered developed? One year in the AHL? Two? What if all of their development comes in Junior, overseas or college? The only thing the team did there was wait.

I did a not entirely exhaustive search and came up with: Pelech, Pulock and Lindell as guys that have spent notable time in the AHL.

The vast majority spend at most one year (and many none) in the AHL.
- Chunk

I'm the last person to advocate for time in the AHL. But knowing when to bring players up or let them stay in college, junior or their overseas league for an extra year is important.

How development can look:


Hedman going from a 20-30 point minute muncher to a +50 point monster after his fifth year is development.

Duncan Keith was not especially good at defending his first two years and then grew into an outstanding player. His current partner stayed in the OHL an extra year and parts of seasons in the AHL and Sweden (not dissimilar to Seider) and looks ready now.

Brent Seabrook looked like a pro from his first game and zero AHL time.

Some guys like Debrincat or Patrick Kane are excellent to start and are self motivated and driven enough to work on the little things to become even better. Some other players need a bit more time and effort to realize their potential.

Part of the job is putting players in a position to have success and also pick players who are mentally tough enough to handle the rigors of a professional sport.

In terms of prospects or traded players, the Hawks haven't drafted, developed, whatever, anyone (of significance) on the blue line since Nick Leddy in terms of a prospect -> pro and Oduya being the veteran acquisition.

Maybe Ian Mitchell doesn't suck but shoot does Byram look like a composed player while Makar and Girard have continued to improve as well.

Some teams seem to breed success and others are where prospects go to fizzle out.

More connected to comments than the post itself...so many of you seem to think that getting the number 1 pick next season will change the course of Blackhawks history. For that I ask these few questions...how many Cups has McDavid won? ZERO and he is an already PROVEN generational talent not some kid with superstar POTENTIALLY written next to his name...how many Cups did Gretzky will AFTER leaving Edmonton? ZERO and he was arguably the greatest player ever, more proof that ONE player...or even two or three, cannot and will not bring stability let alone a Cup to the city. We (the Hawks) won 3 Cups in 6 years not ONLY because of Kane and Toews but more so because of the supportive cast. We all need to stop hinging the future on the hopes of drafting ONE player. Win as a team, lose as a team, the top pick next year means nothing if he becomes another Alexander Daigle.

I'm the last person to advocate for time in the AHL. But knowing when to bring players up or let them stay in college, junior or their overseas league for an extra year is important.

How development can look:


Hedman going from a 20-30 point minute muncher to a +50 point monster after his fifth year is development.

Duncan Keith was not especially good at defending his first two years and then grew into an outstanding player. His current partner stayed in the OHL an extra year and parts of seasons in the AHL and Sweden (not dissimilar to Seider) and looks ready now.

Brent Seabrook looked like a pro from his first game and zero AHL time.

Some guys like Debrincat or Patrick Kane are excellent to start and are self motivated and driven enough to work on the little things to become even better. Some other players need a bit more time and effort to realize their potential.

Part of the job is putting players in a position to have success and also pick players who are mentally tough enough to handle the rigors of a professional sport.

In terms of prospects or traded players, the Hawks haven't drafted, developed, whatever, anyone (of significance) on the blue line since Nick Leddy in terms of a prospect -> pro and Oduya being the veteran acquisition.

Maybe Ian Mitchell doesn't suck but shoot does Byram look like a composed player while Makar and Girard have continued to improve as well.

Some teams seem to breed success and others are where prospects go to fizzle out.
- fattybeef

So the teams themselves aren't really doing anything to develop them outside of surrounding them with competence (at a minimum) and giving them time to gain experience.

Then, yeah, the Hawks suck at that. They traded away anyone who didn't become a notable producer within about a year and a half max, or drafted guys that weren't worth much to begin with.

Boqvist
Krys
Joki
Rutta
Kempny
Forsling
Carlsson (sort of)
Holl
Johns
Dahlbeck
Dahlstrom (sort of)
Clendening
Olsen
Pokka

More connected to comments than the post itself...so many of you seem to think that getting the number 1 pick next season will change the course of Blackhawks history. For that I ask these few questions...how many Cups has McDavid won? ZERO and he is an already PROVEN generational talent not some kid with superstar POTENTIALLY written next to his name...how many Cups did Gretzky will AFTER leaving Edmonton? ZERO and he was arguably the greatest player ever, more proof that ONE player...or even two or three, cannot and will not bring stability let alone a Cup to the city. We (the Hawks) won 3 Cups in 6 years not ONLY because of Kane and Toews but more so because of the supportive cast. We all need to stop hinging the future on the hopes of drafting ONE player. Win as a team, lose as a team, the top pick next year means nothing if he becomes another Alexander Daigle.
- Chisoxhawk

Stop it with your logic and reason. All they have to do is lose more than anyone else so that they can have a <20% chance at the 1st overall pick so they can draft a kid who is 16 years old right now. Perfectly reasonable strategy.

So the teams themselves aren't really doing anything to develop them outside of surrounding them with competence (at a minimum) and giving them time to gain experience.

Then, yeah, the Hawks suck at that. They traded away anyone who didn't become a notable producer within about a year and a half max, or drafted guys that weren't worth much to begin with.

Boqvist
Krys
Joki
Rutta
Kempny
Forsling
Carlsson (sort of)
Holl
Johns
Dahlbeck
Dahlstrom (sort of)
Clendening
Olsen
Pokka
- Chunk

More or less. Its a not good list.

Just like Nashville and Philly were correct in giving up on Hartman, but not the Hawks.
- 333inthe3rd

via GIPHY

So the teams themselves aren't really doing anything to develop them outside of surrounding them with competence (at a minimum) and giving them time to gain experience.

Then, yeah, the Hawks suck at that. They traded away anyone who didn't become a notable producer within about a year and a half max, or drafted guys that weren't worth much to begin with.

Boqvist
Krys
Joki
Rutta
Kempny
Forsling
Carlsson (sort of)
Holl
Johns
Dahlbeck
Dahlstrom (sort of)
Clendening
Olsen
Pokka
- Chunk

A veritable HOF

A veritable HOF
- rpeters01

... of turd burglars.

More connected to comments than the post itself...so many of you seem to think that getting the number 1 pick next season will change the course of Blackhawks history. For that I ask these few questions...how many Cups has McDavid won? ZERO and he is an already PROVEN generational talent not some kid with superstar POTENTIALLY written next to his name...how many Cups did Gretzky will AFTER leaving Edmonton? ZERO and he was arguably the greatest player ever, more proof that ONE player...or even two or three, cannot and will not bring stability let alone a Cup to the city. We (the Hawks) won 3 Cups in 6 years not ONLY because of Kane and Toews but more so because of the supportive cast. We all need to stop hinging the future on the hopes of drafting ONE player. Win as a team, lose as a team, the top pick next year means nothing if he becomes another Alexander Daigle.
- Chisoxhawk

Superstars win Cups. There hasn't been a team to win without top tier talent.

So yes, teams 100% need superstars. They also need a complimentary cast. With out Kane, Toews, Keith and Seabrook - those Cups don't happen. As they had shown over the course of three (and as Pittsburgh, Tampa and Boston have demonstrated) the supporting cast is largely replaceable.

Superstars win Cups. There hasn't been a team to win without top tier talent.

So yes, teams 100% need superstars. They also need a complimentary cast. With out Kane, Toews, Keith and Seabrook - those Cups don't happen. As they had shown over the course of three (and as Pittsburgh, Tampa and Boston have demonstrated) the supporting cast is largely replaceable.
- fattybeef

The supporting cast is largely replaceable in the sense that, by definition, there are more equal quality players available on the market. The problem is fitting those players in as the cost of your superstars begins to skyrocket. Hjalmarsson was no superstar, but an immense part of the success. Same with Oduya, Sharp, Frolik, etc.

You need depth, and superstars, and a goalie, and a good coach, and some luck. There isn't a team that has won without all of these things.

https://www.crossingbroad...arry-trotz-on-friday.html

So if Trotz is willing to hear what the Flyers have to say maybe the Hawks will talk to him also. My pick for a coach would start with Rick Tocchet.

I know he spoke with the WinniJets yesterday I believe.
- Rota's Rooter

https://www.crossingbroad...arry-trotz-on-friday.html

So if Trotz is willing to hear what the Flyers have to say maybe the Hawks will talk to him also.

I know he spoke with the WinniJets yesterday I believe.
- Rota's Rooter

Winnipeg and Philly aren't Cup contenders and we all know where the Hawks stand. IMO unless Trotz wants to stay on the East coast or go back home to Winnipeg he'll want to win another Cup soon. It's possible he's just creating a market for himself before his next interview in Vegas so he can tell McKrimmon what the Jets and Flyers offered him and get the Knights to offer him a longer contract at a higher salary.

I have a question.

Davidson said in a recent interview that the team is developing a profile of what they want in the next coach. Then he says King would be considered for the vacancy.

So how to they know King fits the profile if it hasn't been created yet?