• MattC86

    What does the Morrisey article say? Stupid title, but can’t see the rest of it.

    • TheRealBBOX

      A bunch of hand-wringing about the “media narrative” that Blackhawks management won the Cup and not the players. I only read like two graphs before I realized that continuing to do so would likely cause long-term brain damage.

  • cliffkoroll

    Nothing about Roszival? Too bad.

    • Accipiter

      In Friedman’s 30 Thoughts he mentioned that the Hawks are still interested in *Rozsival.

  • MattC86

    Apparently Phoenix is going to become the Arizona Coyotes?

    • HawkIPA

      My experience in the Phoenix “hockey market”:

      I was in Phoenix for work last year. I had a late evening flight, and got to the airport early to catch a meal at an airport bar and watch the Hawks play the Coyotes. All of the channels were tuned to college or NBA basketball, and no teams from Arizona were playing.

      I asked the bartender to put on the Coyotes, and he gave me a funny look, and said, “Sorry, we’re playing basketball right now, plus, we don’t even get that channel.”

      And you wonder why the jobing.com arena is more than half-empty for every home game. I am glad for Yotes fans that they still have a hockey team, but the organization should at least try to build up some buzz. It’s not like the Suns are anything worth cheering about.

      • cliffkoroll

        Interesting Rocky poor mouth propaganda piece:

        http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20130615/ISSUE01/306159983/why-the-blackhawks-are-losing-money

        There’s enough data in there for anyone to convince themselves that reaching the 2nd round is prolly ‘breakeven’ for the Hawks on an operating basis. But that’s not my point.

        The reason I mention it here:

        “The Blackhawks spend nearly $20 million on staff, coaches and payments to subsidize the league’s 10 lowest revenue-generating franchises as required under the NHL’s newly minted collective bargaining agreement.”

        You’re welcome, Arizona.

        • zacked

          I think Rocky is pretty close to the perfect sports owner (and so different from his dad that it frankly gives me whiplash). But this continued insistence on pretending that the hawks lose money is downright offensive.

          You have a team in one of the biggest markets in the country, selling out every night the biggest arena in the league. With some of the highest ticket prices. You own the arena outright, so there’s no lease expenses and you also get money from non-hockey events. You just signed a new, huge TV contact. You won the Stanley Cup. You have complete cost-certainty with your labor. Your main wage bill is artificially deflated by a hard salary cap. And we know the league makes money overall, because the salary cap keeps going up by leaps and bounds, and the cap is directly tied to league revenue.

          And you want us to pretend that one of the leagues FRIGGIN’ MODEL FRANCHISES is losing, or barely making, money? Fuck you. And double-fuck-you to all the sycophantic media turds that sell us that bullshit.

          • 334Rules

            And they own the liquor distributorship that supplies the arena.

          • Waylon

            The family is beyond wealthy, and since they’ve never been willing to actually open up their books so a forensic accountant can break all of their businesses out in order to determine the validity of their claims, it’s all nonsense. The constant poor – mouthing is assinine. I love him as an owner, but he always trots that shit out to justify their annual ticket price increases. Maybe McDonough’s behind all of this, who knows.

          • neo1978

            You don’t really need the books to understand the issue. Three teams in the league, the Leafs, the Canandians and the Rangers are making over 80% of the revenue:

            http://somekindofninja.com/nhl/usage.php?f1=2010_s&f2=5v5&f3=&f5=CHI&f4=C&f7=20-&bubbleType=corsiOn&yAxis=qoc&update-filters=Update+Results

            So 64M is NOT 50% of the Hawks overall revenue it is a much higher percentage than that. So just some ballpark numbers:

            -64M Players salaries
            -40M Team and operating expenses
            ——–
            -105

            +60M Season Ticket and Suite sales (from crane)
            +25M TV sales (from crane)
            +10M other
            ——–
            +95M

            And the Hawks have to share other building uses with the Bulls so they are not the primary tenet. This hurts outside revenue.

            Basically, until the Hawks reach the top range in ticket prices or hockey gets a real TV deal, the Hawks are around a break even team. And then only when they make the playoffs. And they still lose money because of having to pay off debt. So hockey isn’t as profitable as people think. And Wirtz isn’t blowing all that much smoke…

          • Paul the Fossil

            That Ninja link is for player usage charts.

            “Three teams in the league, the Leafs, the Canandians and the Rangers are making over 80% of the revenue” is an absurd statement. Forbes, which knows a little bit about business financials, shows those three franchises as totaling about 17% of the total revenues of the league as a whole. They estimated the Blackhawks as netting $20m/year before winning another Cup, and put them 4th in the league in market value.

            http://www.forbes.com/nhl-valuations/list/

          • neo1978

            http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2012/11/28/nhl-team-values-2012-maple-leafs-first-hockey-team-worth-1-billion/

            Direct quote from Forbes:

            “But the sport’s three most profitable teams–the Maple Leafs ($81.9 million), Rangers ($74 million), Canadians ($51.6 million)–accounted for 83% of the league’s income, while 13 of 30 teams lost money, before non-cash expenses and interest payments.”

          • Paul the Fossil

            You mean Cook County’s amusement tax, which is 1.5% of gross ticket sales? That’s not going to knock anything like $12 million off the Hawks’ bottom line — they do not have $840M/year in ticket sales.

            And anyway what makes you think that Forbes wouldn’t be factoring in taxes among the expenses when they estimate the net for an enterprise?

            You just proved my point about those three richest teams: they represent 83% of the league’s INCOME (net profit), not of REVENUE as you stated above.

            And the fact that those three teams make much greater net profits than the Hawks do does not change the fact that the Hawks do make a profit.

          • neo1978

            That 20M number is operating income. “Operating income is also called Earnings Before Interest and Taxes (EBIT).” So NO that does NOT include the amusement tax.

            And the amusement tax for large sporting events is different than the amusement tax for other events. For large sporting events in the city of Chicago, the amusement tax is 12%.

            So basically after taxes and after paying off the Hawks large debt, the Hawks aren’t making any money. And nothing you can say is going to change that fact. But by all means dude, believe what you want to believe…

          • cliffkoroll

            I think your $40 million is $5-$10 million too high.

            And 13 home playoff games means another $30 million this year (the article didn’t include any specifics on this.)

            It was a good year- healthy operating profit.

            And most clubs prolly count some concession money here, but it looks like for the Hawks, this all gets slotted under a different Wirtz arm.

            And none of this considers the increase in franchise value. This is fine, it’s not an operating profit, but it may be the biggest piece of value.

          • neo1978

            I think the 40M number is low actually. That number comes from two years ago. So there is some inflation since then. And the Hawks have beefed up their scouting, especially their professional scouting since then too.

            And that number includes AHL salaries for Montador and Olesz. So that number includes 6.7M last season and the 5M for Huet the previous couple. It probably should be 45M but I figure 40M was good enough to make the point.

            And I had concessions as part of the other category. And was generous with that number too. Hawks don’t have the parking revenue of some teams.

            And I forgot to pull out the entertainment tax from the 60M Ticket sales so that number is more like 52M.

            And again, the primary tenet kickback for concerts and stuff is where a lot of teams make their money. Hawks don’t get that because of the Bulls.

            So in short, Rocky isn’t blowing smoke, imo. For the team to be long term sustainable, they need better revenue streams. You just can’t rely on having long playoff runs to be profitable.

            And sorry about the wrong link, I grabbed the data from the wrong tab. Here is a link to make up for it.

            http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/feature/?id=27138

          • cliffkoroll

            Yup. I also like Rocky (We like ALL our people!), but this is a bit tiring.

            I have to add: there was a shot from behind at the Grant Park celebration- Rocky’s ass is ginormous.

            Also, his speech. Obviously, he’s an extremely sharp guy, but his public speaking skills, wow! He wrote out his speech and delivered it word-for-word. Something about seeing a titan of industry like that flailing- I found it extremely endearing.

  • Accipiter
    • Oregon_hawk

      Thoughts for my thoughts….

  • HawkIPA

    “They still have no defense or goalie” applies to both Philly and the Pens. That Letang deal was a giant waste of money for a blueliner with as much defensive awareness as Nick Leddy.

    • zacked

      Letang isn’t as bad as it is now fashionable to pretend.

      • robondacob

        But he isn’t as good as his contract says he is

        • HawkIPA

          Exactly. A defender who is a liability in his own zone is not a $7.25m per year player.

          • http://www.lotsofbutterplease.com/ I am not Chico Maki

            He’s not a shutdown player, no, but he’s hardly a liability … and he’s only 26!

          • ‘hawks58

            Being 26 isn’t exactly a good thing when you’re talking about an 8 year deal. Most hockey players peak somewhere between 24-27. If the point-per-game pace he was on this year is not his offensive high mark, I’d be SHOCKED. It is more the 8 years that is the question than the cap hit.

            That’s a huge risk that in his 30s, he’s either the same offensive player he is now (not likely), or a better defensive player than he is now.

            By the same token, the ‘hawks will soon have to overpay for Toews and Kane.

          • http://www.lotsofbutterplease.com/ I am not Chico Maki

            I hear you, but I don’t agree with your age window, especially for defensemen. Maybe 10 to 15 years ago I’d agree … and 35+ is definitely a risk, but I wouldn’t have a problem with signing someone till 34 and expecting them to still be productive. Point taken, years 32, 33, and 34 might not be peak years. But tons of players these days play extremely well into their early thirties.

          • ‘hawks58

            The average peak in points per game is actually 25 – http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2010/1/21/1261318/nhl-points-per-game-peak-age

            I was being a little conservative with the 24-27 range because he’s a defenseman (most forwards’ peak point totals are 23-25)

          • http://www.lotsofbutterplease.com/ I am not Chico Maki

            Right. This is cool. But “peak” and “of no use” aren’t the only two options, and the decline doesn’t happen precipitously over the course of a season.

            A .455 PPG gives you 37 points over 82 games at 25 years old, and the .395 at 29 years old gives you 32 points over 82 … hardly a dangerous difference. And that’s for your average player; the average for offensive powerhouse players will be distinctly different. Scott Hannan at 34 will be quite different from Letang at 34.

          • ‘hawks58

            So if you could have Letang as a ‘hawk for that contract, would you take him and the cap ramifications?

          • http://www.lotsofbutterplease.com/ I am not Chico Maki

            No, not even close. But we don’t need him and a contract like that for us right now would kill us. I haven’t been arguing about his contract or cap hit, just saying he’s a damn fine defenseman, obviously a more offensive minded one, and that at 34 he still stands a very good chance, imo, at being among the better offensive d-men in the league, just as he is now.

          • zacked

            IMO, he’s not a liability most of the time. He had an awful series. He is also not a plus defender. He is a plus-plus offensive d-man.

            I think he is over-valued by his contract, but people talk like he’s not worth $3 million a year, because he had an awful series. I think $6 to $6.5 would have been fair.

          • MattC86

            Two awful series. The Isles ate him alive.

      • HawkIPA

        I’d take Keith, Seabrook, or Hjalmarsson over Letang. All have more complete games than Letang does.

        • zacked

          See below for more. I’d take Letang over Seabrook this year, or Hjalmarsson last year. So who knows in the future. Is 2013 Seabrook going to show up again? Is 2011 Hjalmarsson?

          I definitely prefer complete players to one-dimensional ones as well, but sometimes we can let that blind us when a guy is exceptional at that one thing. For example, I want to have all of Toews babies, but Crosby has still been a better player to date. We’ll see where injuries take us in the future.

          • HawkIPA

            No argument on Crosby over Toews. Still beg to differ on Letang. No doubt he’s an offensive talent–he can skate and has a beautiful stretch pass–but that’s not what Pittsburgh needs most. There’s room for an offense-only defenseman on a team with a shutdown pair. The Pens don’t have one, and an offense-only defenseman is not worth more than $5m. Letang has the skill set of Brian Campbell. Useful, but you shouldn’t bet the bank on him.

      • laaarmer

        I agree with this. He can play on my team.

  • Paul the Fossil

    The Flyers are hilarious right now, Emery is smart to not want any part of that scene. With whatever AHL-level defense pairs they end up using in front of Steve Mason they won’t get any closer to a playoff spot next spring than they did this time. They’ll score some goals with that group of forwards but will lose a lot of games 5-4 or 6-5, kind of a Penguins Lite. In their new division I put them 5th at best, and 6th or 7th wouldn’t be a big surprise.

    And then one ranking I just read of all 30 NHL teams’ prospect pools puts Philly…30th. Dead-ass last.

    Quite a comedown from where that franchise stood as of June 2010.

    • zacked

      My only guess is that Snider thinks he’s only got a few years left and he really wants a cup before that happens, so he’s really running the team. The problem for him is that hockey is buddhist: desire breeds suffering.

      If I’m wrong, and it’s Holmgren still running the show, and he thinks this is the best way to run a team, well then Holmes be cray-cray.

    • MySpoonIsTooBig

      For a team that has literally north of $33 million in salary cap space / $37 million in actual salary invested in their defense (including Pronger’s $4.9M cap hit that will go on LTIR for the next 4 years), the Flyers defense is fucking TERRIBLE. You’d think that a team 7 defensemen (6 of whom are actually alive) slated to earn at least $3.5M each would have, you know, some semblance of an actual defense. Wow.

  • RVWW

    The more ridiculous floundering I see from teams like the Flyers and Pens, the happier I get with Stan’s plan-all-along approach. Looking forward to seeing where this Hawks team is at in a few years.

    REPEAT!

    • Paul the Fossil

      This.

    • Sparky_The_Bard-barian

      Yes, idiocy abounds in Pennsylvania.

  • robondacob

    I hate to say it, but it looks like it’s time for me to give up on my 2C Free Agent dreams. If we pick up Weiss at a respectable 3.75 to 4 mil (a paltry amount compared to what most teams would pay for him), Rosy is almost certainly gone. And that is WITH our RFA’s signing for favorable deals. That means on defense, we would need to call up Olsen, or pick up a similarly priced defenseman in order to BARELY be under the cap ceiling. And that just isn’t Bowman’s style. The offseason sucks :(

    Here’s the Weiss roster I figured out, in case you want to see why my hopes and dreams are being ruined.

    FORWARDS
    Bryan Bickell ($4.000m) / Jonathan Toews ($6.300m) / Patrick Kane ($6.300m)
    Patrick Sharp ($5.900m) / Stephen Weiss ($4.000m) / Marian Hossa ($5.275m)
    Jeremy Morin ($0.887m) / Brandon Pirri ($0.870m) / Andrew Shaw ($0.578m)
    Brandon Saad ($0.894m) / Marcus Kruger ($1.200m) / Ben Smith ($0.563m)
    Brandon Bollig ($0.575m) / Daniel Carcillo ($0.825m) /

    DEFENSEMEN
    Brent Seabrook ($5.800m) / Duncan Keith ($5.538m)
    Niklas Hjalmarsson ($3.500m) / Johnny Oduya ($3.383m)
    Nick Leddy ($2.100m) / Sheldon Brookbank ($1.250m)
    Dylan Olsen ($0.870m) /

    GOALTENDERS
    Corey Crawford ($2.667m)
    Antti Raanta ($1.400m) [Note: Could be emery for similar price]
    ——
    CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter)
    (these totals are compiled with the bonus cushion)
    SALARY CAP: $64,300,000; CAP PAYROLL: $64,674,295; BONUSES: $852,500
    CAP SPACE (23-man roster): $478,205

    • Oregon_hawk

      Not seeing it. It isn’t a Stan type move.

      We’ve now won 2 cups without a full-time 2nd line center.

      And you could make the argument that Kruger is the defensive aspect of Bolland’s qualities.

      • robondacob

        Are you saying that Kruger should be in at 2C? At this point, it seems possible but I doubt it would work. He has shown flashes of brilliance that make me think he can do it, but I’m thinking he maxes out at 3C.

        And we’ve won 2 cups with stacked teams, meaning that the 2C position was essentially irrelevant. It doesn’t look like we’ll have the same luxury this year

        • Oregon_hawk

          No, i mean that Kruger might be/should be ready for 3C duties.

          We still don’t have a solid 2C answer. It is demonstrably true that that is a drag on the production of the 2nd line, but because of the amount of talent in the top6… that hasn’t been crippling.

          • robondacob

            If you mean Kruger should be given a checking role, then I agree. In my roster, the fourth line is given a checking role, similar to the role the Kruger/Bolland/Frolik line in the playoffs.

            If you mean Kruger should be given third line minutes, then I’m not sure I agree. I don’t know if his offense is good enough to justify the increase in playing time. I guess we’ll have to wait until training camp to see.

          • amontesawesome

            Is it demonstrably true that a lack of 2C is a drag on production? I’m not sure it is.

            Kane primarily played on the second line and had the best season of his career. Sharp had a less impressive season though he was injured for a good portion of the year and also had a shooting percentage about half of his career average.

            And last year when the second line was mostly Kruger-Sharp-Kane, Sharp had arguably his best season of his career.

          • roadhog

            This, and this again. We’ve had this same 2C discussion for how long? Five years? 2 cups? Look, I get it, the Hawks don’t have an obvious 2C (other than Sharp) on the roster. The question is what does prioritizing the 2C slot over any other slot gain us at this point? Don’t we already have two of the best two way forwards on the second line which are also lethal from the circles in? Are we just looking for more faceoff wins? Would a “legit” 2C have gotten us any further in 2011 or 2012? To me, with our transition game/talent, it’s all about responsible D, position, possession, breakout.

          • laaarmer

            So which of the current centers not named Toews is defensivle responsible enough to play the minutes Bolland played. Keep in mind, that when he plays Bolland’s minutes one of the others plays his.
            Kruger
            Shaw
            Smith
            Pirri
            Leblanc
            McNeil
            Danault
            The list goes on and on and on.

          • 2883

            Do you mean like… right this instant who could do it or like in 2-4 years?

            Cause both McNeill and Danault profile as defensively solid pivots.

          • Oregon_hawk

            For this reason, look for a classic Stan move for a veteran FA for a year or two.

          • laaarmer

            Well the games that will be played 4 years from now will happen after the games that are played now, so I’m thinking now.

          • 2883

            So everything you’re seeing is happening now? Now, now?

          • Oregon_hawk

            What about then?

          • 2883

            We’re past then

          • Accipiter

            Even the FO’s.

          • laaarmer

            Now is what is happening. the now is what is happening.

            I’m for letting guys play, but you have this team for 10 years 5 of which are gone. You have to win now.

          • 2883

            When will then be now though?

          • laaarmer

            How soon is now? Can you here it? It;s the new warm up song

          • 2883

            You’re clearly missing the reference here…

          • laaarmer

            No, I’m not missing any reference. Clearly, I’m choosing to make my own while seeing yours.

          • Oregon_hawk

            Losing Bolland has made the team very thin at center. Kruger is the only guy I’d want even on the ice in critical moments, much less to take key defensive faceoffs.

          • HawkIPA

            I love Bolland, but this is an exaggeration.

          • http://www.lotsofbutterplease.com/ I am not Chico Maki

            This is preposterous. Any critical moment, I don’t care what it is, you need five guys on the ice plus a goalie. Don’t be such a simpleton.

          • amontesawesome

            It’s not as big of a worry if Q uses his centers the way he did this year. Q already started primarily using Kruger in the defensive zone this year.

            Kruger started in the o-zone just 39.8% of the time compared to 49.6% for Bolland.

          • laaarmer

            Bolland is not on the team.
            Toews can only play about 25 minutes.

          • 2883

            I expect a ho-hum veteran signing of one of the few qualified centreman for under 2.5 mil per year. That’s my answer to your question.

          • laaarmer

            Lets hope so.

          • amontesawesome

            I am aware of both of those facts. But I don’t think it will be quite as hard replacing a center who, last year, wasn’t relied on to be the defensive super hero he had been the previous two seasons.

          • laaarmer

            Again I say lets hope so.

          • amontesawesome

            When Dave Bolland and Patrick Kane were on the ice together, which was nearly all of Bolland’s ice time, the opposition scored 57% of the goals. Next year’s 2C can allow the opposition to score 55% of the goals and still be better than Bolland last season.

            There doesn’t have to be much hope to it. It’s an awfully low bar.

          • laaarmer

            Lets hope so.

          • cliffkoroll

            …until you run up against a team like Boston.

          • 2883

            then you beat them in 6.

          • cliffkoroll

            sure, if you have the Hawks 2012-2013 roster.

          • 2883

            I know Bolland scored the GWG but I’m not sure that there are too many NHL’ers that miss that wide open half of a net with the puck on their stick in that situation. Literally, I think even Brandon Bollig could of scored standing right there…. BRANDON BOLLIG.

            The Hawks didn’t get thru because of Bolland’s play, he wasn’t dominating. He had an average Stanley Cup finals. He was terrible in the regular season. Now removing him from the roster opens up a hole… a big hole. And I liked Bolland a lot, but he’s in Toronto…. time to move on

          • Accipiter

            Brandon Bollig does not go to the puck area.

          • cliffkoroll

            …or lose Boychuck.

          • Z-man19

            Oh boy, don’t look cliff, there’s nothing to see here

          • 2883

            heh so there’s nothing factual about what I said?

          • Z-man19

            didn’t say that, I should have just not commented. Just ignore it please.

          • neo1978

            Bolland played against the top opponent lines until he got hurt. That has not been replaced. If Pirri takes on the 2C role, he will not take over for Bolland on the defensive side. That will fall on Toews. You can look at Toews’ year as before Bolland got hurt and after.

          • amontesawesome

            I don’t know why you keep harping on this. It’s not like Toews underlying numbers fell off at any point this year. He struggled to score mostly because he was unlucky. I’m not sure what Dave Bolland has to do with Toews shooting 4.3% in the playoffs. Or Toews’ low on-ice shooting percentage either.

          • neo1978

            When Q wanted to play Toews against the top line, he would play Hossa with him on RW. When Toews was playing with Kane, Q was using Bolland against the top line.

            The Toews/Kane combination was around 4.5 times as productive as the Toews/Hossa combination. Which is why I was harping on this all year. The Hawks, imo, won the cup this season with one hand tied behind their back…

          • cliffkoroll

            Y’all can feel free to diminish Dave’s role. He made a key play to help get the team out of the second round too, and he was excellent in the 4 Hawks wins against Boston.

            If anyone ragged on Kane for hitting three open nets in the clincher against LA, he’d be correctly beaten around the head.

            If the Hawks sign some guy for Bolland-type money and he has a shitty season but then replicates Bolland’s playoff, I’ll be very happy, but looking around, there doesn’t seem to be anyone who fits that job description.

          • 2883

            I don’t feel the Hawks will spend that much on a guy to replace Bolland… Or else why not just keep him…

            Bolland had 6 pts in the SCP. Not bad… and certainly better than his regular season.. But Markus Kruger who makes nearly 2 mil less (pending his contract) had 5 pts… our stay at home defensemen (27/4. had 8/5 respectively). Kane had 19. A snakebit Toews had 14.

            I like Bolland and what he brought to the Hawks night in night out. He destroyed Vancouver’s mind. and nearly brought the Hawks back from a 3-0 hole in 10/11. But to say that his departure ruins the Hawks is… not correct

          • cliffkoroll

            To me, the Boston series is the acid test- the other teams the Hawks faced weren’t that good, and didn’t test the Hawks depth in the same way. Here’s my subjective ranking of Hawk forwards in the SCF:

            G A P +/-
            Toews 2 3 5 5
            Kane 3 2 5 3
            Bickell 1 3 4 5
            Bolland 3 2 5 1
            Frolik 0 4 4 1
            Saad 1 1 2 3
            Shaw 1 1 2 2
            Handzus 1 1 2 1
            Hossa 0 2 2 0
            Kruger 1 1 2 -1
            Sharp 2 0 2 -3
            Stalberg 0 0 0 0

          • Waylon

            I won’t join in diminishing his role, at least for the playoffs. It’s all the little things that Bolland did that I’ll miss the most, the kinds of things that can change a game in a critical situation. It sucks.

          • neo1978

            Top lines playing against the Patricks? Yeah, that was all Bolland’s fault…

          • Accipiter

            But, but, think of the year Kane could have had if he wasn’t stuck with Bolland.

          • amontesawesome

            You joke, but when Kane was playing with Toews (also against top lines, btw) he averaged 2.6 GF/60 and .8 GA/60 and the Hawks scored 77% of all goals scored.

            Obviously this level of performance couldn’t be sustained long term, but, to quote one of America’s greatest scientists, “When [Toews is put with] 88, you’re gonna see some serious shit.”

          • neo1978

            No, not usually. When Kane played with Toews, most often Bolland had the top line.

            And where were you getting these numbers? I have Toews and Kane on the ice for 17 goals for and 10 goals against last season.

          • amontesawesome

            David Johnson’s site.

          • amontesawesome

            Regardless of where the fault lies, he was ineffective. That can’t be argued. I agree he wasn’t put in the best situation to succeed and that’s on Q, but the point remains Bolland was ineffective.

          • neo1978
          • Guest

            Yeah. Heaven’s knows it’s tougher to play hockey with Patrick Kane and Patrick Sharp than Bryan Bickell and Michael Frolik.

          • neo1978

            Seriously? Patrick Kane and Patrick Sharp are the epitome of two way and puck possession players.

            Toews Corsi numbers:
            with Kane 48.2%
            without Kane 58.9%

            with Sharp 46.4%
            without Sharp 57.7

          • amontesawesome

            And he got to start about half the time in the offensive zone with two of the team’s best offensive players. Isn’t that a better position than starting in the offensive zone about a third of the time and having to play with Fernando Pisani?

          • neo1978

            When matched against weaker lines yes. When matched against top lines, no.

            Patricks Rel QoC rankings for the top 12 skaters by year:

            With Bolland
            2012/13 2nd ,3rd

            Without Bolland
            2011/12 7th, 11th
            2010/11 8th, 10th
            2009/10 7th, 9th
            2008/09 8th, 9th

            And again, Bolland has been number one since 2009.

          • amontesawesome

            You believe there is any instance where it is preferable to have a line of Bolland-Pisani-Bickell (as was the case in ’11) to Bolland-Kane-Sharp?

            If those are your ONLY two options, you would really choose the former over the latter? You really believe that?

          • neo1978

            Kruger played second center in defensive zone draws. Hawks weren’t
            doing as much zone matchups as in the past. Laarmer is asking about QoC
            matchups. Nobody besides Toews and Bolland were playing against the
            other teams top lines.

          • amontesawesome

            You’re wrong about Kruger being the second center in those instances. He was the primary center.

            Def FO Totals:
            Kruger- 269
            Toews-190
            Handzus-154

          • neo1978

            When Toews took a defensive zone draw, Saad would often be substituted by Kruger. Feel free to say that Kruger was the center instead of Toews, all you want…

          • amontesawesome

            Dude, I added up the d-zone FO win/loss totals…

            Look them at Behind The Net.

          • neo1978

            I’m going to have to ask Gabe how he is calculating zone starts. He seems to have a different methodology for centers than he does for wingers. As an example, timeonice has Kruger with a 42% offensive zone start and Bolland with a 45% offensive zone start.

            And my original statement stands. Kruger has been used often as a second center in defensive zone draws. So center numbers can get skewed. Now Gabe seems to be calculating that differently depending on whether a center gets kicked out and another center takes the draw.

          • roadhog

            Out of the available choices, Kruger or Pirri get their shot. Either can lug the minutes, I’m not sure we are any worse off at the dot (Sharp can take some if need be.) Bolland had a tough year, not sure about his advanced stats, but I’m guessing Stan is going to sit pat and hope for the pleasant surprise. A deadline move seems more likely if a 2C is needed for the stretch run.

          • Paul the Fossil

            When we say “Bolland’s minutes” do we mean the theoretical minutes of a regular who could stay healthy or the actual minutes Bolland is able to play in a typical season? He missed more than half of the 09/10 season due to injury, then 21 games the next season, then 6 games the next season, then 13 games (out of 48) this season. Was also out for the first round of the playoffs. (To put that in perspective Hossa has played in more games than Bolland in every one of those seasons.)

            At some point it becomes rational to conclude that a guy just can’t stay healthy enough to play full-time at the level we’re talking about.

          • trois murs

            I’d take roszival for a favorable contract rather than splurging on a 2C for exactly what you mentioned. We’ve won 2 cups without a legit 2C. Sharp has slotted into faceoffs sometimes(not nearly enough for my or other peoples liking), and the defense is actually the foundation of our team. Without solid D play to provide possession for our offense, we don’t even come close to sniffing the cup.

          • roadhog

            I’m on board, get Leddy and Rozy tied up. Run the same back end, platoon the crap out of 2C in camp until one sticks. As amontesawesome said, the bar for the 2C slot isn’t that high given Bolland had a tough year. I think we are going to see some inspired play from the kids. The other fear I have is signing a 2C at the expense of something else, and they get injured. Better to push the kids, then make the move if need be at the deadline for a 2C who only needs to be health/productive for the stretch. This by the way counters my dream of Kesler.

    • HawkIPA

      I’d put Saad on the third-line, Morin on the fourth, Clendening in for Olsen, and Carcillo in Rock Vegas (a man can dream, can’t he?). Weiss would be a great addition. Experience says it’s not going to happen though, and we’ll see Pirri or Kruger centering the second line in October.

      • robondacob

        My goal whenever I create a capgeek roster is to make two terrific top-6 lines, with an offensive minded third line and a defensive minded fourth line. This roster follows the 2012-13 model that Q had with Shaw as the offensive line and Kruger/Bolland as the defensive/checking line. The system worked wonders for us, and I would like to keep it.

        Thus, I stacked the third line with offensive-minded players that can be given sheltered minutes by Q and loaded the fourth line with defensive-minded players. What makes the fourth line great is that Saad is gifted in offense and defense, which means that fourth line has a chance to be better than the Kruger/Bolland/Frolik line, which is a tremendous advantage to have. Unfortunately, my plan depends on attaining a legitimate 2C, which seems impossible at the moment

    • 2883

      1). I don’t think Weiss is worth 4 coming off of injury, I wouldn’t offer him 4.

      2). I still don’t see Leddy signing that cheaply. I’m going to say he gets 4 for 10 mil or 2.5 annually.
      3). Not sure you put Pirri at C and Shaw on the wing. Pirri IIRC wasn’t the best at faceoffs either..

      4). I’d be a little worried going into this season with Brookbank/Olsen as 6/7. Olsen’s star had dimmed a little after his cup of coffee with the Hawks in 11/12.

      • Paul the Fossil

        Pirri won 48% this past season, which doesn’t seem encouraging for his chances against NHL centers.

      • robondacob

        1. That is a good reason to be skeptical of Weiss. I think it’s unrealistic to imagine him settling for anything less than 3.75 though

        2. You’re probably right, but that would definitely put my “legitimate 2C” dreams out of reach so I hope you’re wrong.

        3. Shaw isn’t that great at faceoffs either. Plus, Pirri is a natural center while Shaw is more experienced on the wing. If Pirri turns out to be a disaster on faceoffs, you could always have Shaw take the faceoffs while Pirri plays the center position afterwards.

        4. I would be worried as well, which is why I’m skeptical of this whole 2C thing happening now. Looks like we’re plugging in Kruger/Pirri at 2C and picking up a Boyd Gordon type for 4C

        • Oregon_hawk

          The assumption that Bickell slots into the top 6 moves Saad down the lineup, and sets up a nice little AHL-graduate line of Saad-Shaw-Morin, which, while of questionable defensive acumen (not personally knowing anything about Morin), certainly has some scoring sense.

          • 2883

            Morin’s added some physicality to his game. He’d be a good fit on a scoring bottom 6 role imo. I don’t know if I want Shaw cetnering that line but it could work. Saad/ Shaw/Morin…

          • putmeinthemadhouse

            i think that line would be pretty gnarly. badass forecheck, saad with budding two-way play, all three with a scoring touch and pretty tenacious playing style.

          • 2883

            I thought the Saad Shaw Stalberg line might actually be a good representation of what that line may look like. All 3 of these guys like going hard to the net… Could generate some scoring.

          • neo1978

            Morin and Saad are both LWs. The Hawks have made an effort in not playing wingers on their off side.

          • robondacob

            Morin is not much of a 2-way player as far as I know. That line could definitely be sheltered by Q though.

            What is your fourth line if the third is Saad/Shaw/Morin?

          • 2883

            Kruger or FAC is on it.

          • robondacob

            who ends up in 2C then? if it’s a FA in 4C, does kruger play 2C?

          • 2883

            Pirri would have to play 2C in that scenario

          • Oregon_hawk

            Pirri is going to get the opportunity to play 2C. I hope stan has a backup.

          • robondacob

            He is going to get the opportunity, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. It’s more likely Kruger would end up at 2C then Pirri.

            Sample roster if Kruger ends up in 2C (3rd line is checking line):

            FORWARDS
            Bryan Bickell ($4.000m) / Jonathan Toews ($6.300m) / Patrick Kane ($6.300m)

            Patrick Sharp ($5.900m) / Marcus Kruger ($1.200m) / Marian Hossa ($5.275m)

            Brandon Saad ($0.894m) / Boyd Gordon ($1.400m) / Ben Smith ($0.563m)

            Jeremy Morin ($0.887m) / Brandon Pirri ($0.870m) / Andrew Shaw ($0.578m)

            Brandon Bollig ($0.575m) / Daniel Carcillo ($0.825m) /

            DEFENSEMEN
            Brent Seabrook ($5.800m) / Duncan Keith ($5.538m)
            Niklas Hjalmarsson ($3.500m) / Johnny Oduya ($3.383m)
            Nick Leddy ($2.400m) / Michal Rozsival ($2.400m)
            Sheldon Brookbank ($1.250m) /

            GOALTENDERS
            Corey Crawford ($2.667m)
            Ray Emery ($1.400m)
            ——
            CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter)
            (these totals are compiled with the bonus cushion)
            SALARY CAP: $64,300,000; CAP PAYROLL: $63,904,295; BONUSES: $377,500
            CAP SPACE (23-man roster): $773,205

          • Fleshrifle

            ^ This will be the banner raising lineup.
            My guess after reading the Herald article…this will be the opening day lineup. I’m still hoping for a Tim Brent signing for depth and a Kyle Brodziak for prospects trade. This is still a pretty good lineup.

          • neo1978

            If Pirri is up and a Boyd Gordon type is signed I agree with this that Shaw would be a winger.

            The question in any of this is “will Q play two prospect lines in the bottom half? People keep posting Saad, Shaw, Morin and Smith as the bottom four wingers. I mean Q had a total lobotomy in going from a matchup coach to one roling lines. But will he have another and give up the enforcer/specialist fourth line?

          • robondacob

            Knowing Q, the fourth line will probably have carcillo/bollig in there to start the season just to prevent what you’ve mentioned. I think that our prospects are well-developed enough that we will be fine with a roster like that. The three rookies have all played NHL games before and Saad is a proven NHL player. The only player I’m concerned about is Ben Smith because I don’t know if he can fill in the Frolik role, but I think he can.

          • Z-man19

            No, not in the regular season. Carillo or Bollig will play IMHO

          • Oregon_hawk

            it’d have to be Kruger, Optimus, and… a guy

          • AMR

            In the AHL Morin consistently played on the PK so I think he will be okay in a defensive role. Besides Q didn’t utilize the third line this season like he did in 2010. In other words the third line isn’t expected to shut down the oppositions first line

  • Oregon_hawk

    No thanks, on emery.

    But whaaatever.

    • robondacob

      if he’s willing to accept raanta money, then why not?

      • Oregon_hawk

        i’m non-committal on him, and my wife doesn’t like him.

        So I don’t like him.

        • zacked

          What if his contract mandates one goalie fight per season?

          • Oregon_hawk

            She’s pretty night and day about hockey players. She wouldn’t like him if he pitched a shutout every night.

          • robondacob

            I can imagine emery getting close to the end of the season and trying to pick fights with random goalies because of the mandatory fight clause, but all the other goalies are too cowardly to fight with him.

          • MattC86

            Against the Blues? PLEASE GOD AGAINST THE BLUES.

            Jackman! Come get yo’ whuppin!

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxL3ZNTnCY4

          • putmeinthemadhouse

            would love that, cause it would make the blues fans all shut the fuck up about emery talking shit from the bench.

            in fact, i think its the reason razor wants to come back.

            unfinished bidness.

          • Sparky_The_Bard-barian

            He can start both games against Phoenix

    • cliffkoroll

      Yup. 17-1. I saw it, but I still don’t believe it.

      I’ll take Ray at $1 million. Whaddya say Ray?

      “I like playing a lot but I like winning too. It’s really exciting being on a championship team. If you can repeat a championship, that’s something I’d take in any role.”

      • roadhog

        2C?

  • laaarmer

    Still no word on Kesler?

  • 334Rules

    Morrissey is the poor-man’s Jay Mariotti: not as good a writer, not as inflammatory, but just as dumb. I know he probably didn’t write the headline, but the column is ridiculous if for no other reason than he’d have been ripping on “poor management decisions” if the Hawks hadn’t won the Cup. He’s said maybe 3 intelligent things about hockey the whole time he’s on the job.

    • DJ

      You lost me to whatever extent you believe Mariotti is a good writer; he’s not. As to your point on Morrissey’s stupidity, I’m in full agreeance. Right down there with Kass.

      • http://www.lotsofbutterplease.com/ I am not Chico Maki

        I’m not making (mean) fun, but I gotta say it, “agreeance” is definitely my word of the month.

      • 334Rules

        “Good writer” in the sense that he utilized words to create effective prose. The fact that it was sheer idiocy doesn’t detract from his talent with the language. And the problem with Kass is that he still thinks he’s as good as Royko.

    • yinkadoubledare

      He says dumb stuff but in the “dumb things people said about the Hawks moves” department Wilbon saying that Frolik was a key power play contributor for the Hawks has to be the champion. Frolik’s total power play time in the playoffs: 29 seconds.

      • MySpoonIsTooBig

        Wilbon knows about as much about hockey as I do about about synchronized diving in the Olympics – vaguely aware that it exists, but couldn’t tell you anything about it including a single participant’s name without reading off of a card…

        • http://www.lotsofbutterplease.com/ I am not Chico Maki

          This comparison doesn’t fly with me. Did you know that there are divers in synchronized diving? There. Comparison with Wilbon falls apart.

      • mazer_rackham

        if you count a penalty shot as a man advantage it bumps his time up to 34 seconds

      • 2883

        In fairness to Wilbon, I think Frolik scored one of the 3 PP goals we had in the entire Stanley Cup finals, so in terms of efficiency, Frolik was our best PP player :)

        • Accipiter

          Frolik scored zero goals in the SCF.

          • 2883

            read: Stanley Cup Playoffs… not SCF

          • Accipiter

            Okay, he had a SHG, no PPG.

          • 2883

            the PSG = a PPG in the above reference

      • 334Rules

        If he wrote it, it’s dumb (by him and his editor). If he said it, I can understand inadvertently mixing up PP and PK.

  • laaarmer

    Youth is served regarding centers.
    This is our current center selection

    Toews
    Kruger
    Shaw/Smith
    Pirri
    Leblanc

    Based on this it is mandatory that a center is signed that is defensively responsible. He doesn’t need to score in bunches, although that would be nice.

    Take a look at the Hawks centers. VOMIT

    • Z-man19

      There’s a name in my head, but I can’t quite think of it

      • laaarmer

        Madden? Handzus?

        • Z-man19

          no

          • roadhog

            Favre or Tebow?

          • Z-man19

            Tebow, he can do anything

          • roadhog

            2C?

          • Z-man19

            We’ll have a great running game

          • roadhog

            He could do his pose for his celebration move . . .

          • Z-man19

            I just puked a little

      • 2883

        Hello, is it me you’re looking for?

        http://2.cdn.nhle.com/capitals/v2/photos/mugs/8469483.jpg

      • http://www.lotsofbutterplease.com/ I am not Chico Maki

        Is it me?!? Am I the name???!! I love guesses!

        • Z-man19

          Yes

      • cliffkoroll

        Heh. Yeah, let’s not pollute every thread with my temper tantrums.

        • 334Rules

          Why not? It’s worked so far.

      • Accipiter

        Bolland ?

        • Z-man19

          no, sorry cliff

          • Accipiter

            No, that’s not it either.

          • Z-man19

            There’s gotta be Cliff FA centre out there somewhere

          • cliffkoroll

            Well, it should be.

          • cliffkoroll

            Also, I stripped you of your upboat, so…

          • Z-man19

            but am I alive, in the circle of trust? The hell with the upboat

          • cliffkoroll

            Yeah. I can’t stay mad at you. Just look at that face.

            Thanks for noticing my ‘Attention CNS: I’m trolling you.” comment.

            What the hell! Upboats all around!

          • Z-man19

            Good thing I put my dog there. Who doesn’t love trolling CNS?

    • http://www.lotsofbutterplease.com/ I am not Chico Maki

      C’mon laarms, Pirri deserves a look. The toppest AHL scorer this year deserves a something or other.

      • laaarmer

        I agree he deserves a look and he’s going to get it.
        So, he gets it and plays wherever he plays and then we have to play VAN 6 times and Kesler and Sedin eat his fucking liver. Then we go to LA and Richards and Kopitar eats his head. Pirrii is in deep. He’s going to need some help for a while.

        • putmeinthemadhouse

          hoss and sharp are more than capable of providing that help.

          • laaarmer

            AHHHH. That is perfect planning. It’s good that Stan is in charge rather than us.

        • 2883

          The Kids Aren’t Alright

          • Waylon

            I think it was Branch Rickey who said that the reason you develop prospects is either to have them make the big club or trade them for better players. Seems simple enough.

        • http://www.lotsofbutterplease.com/ I am not Chico Maki

          There’ll be growing pains, no doubt. But every player on the team had them in their first year. You sign a veteran, that’s cap space, and that’s another year Pirri doesn’t get a look. At some point you gotta give him a look. Any vets that would fit on our roster at a cap hit we could absorb … they’ll all have issues of some sort or another, too.

          • Z-man19

            Well said

          • laaarmer

            What my point is, and I agree with you for the most part, that they don’t all have to play at the same time.
            Pirri
            Morin
            Smith

            That is 3 rookies at the same time. How many were playing at the same time last season? 1
            How many in 2010?
            How many for LA 2012?
            How many for Boston 2011?
            PIT 2009
            DET 2008

          • http://www.lotsofbutterplease.com/ I am not Chico Maki

            I gotcha. I can get a little more on board with that perspective. But I would add, none of the teams above had the seasoned rookies we do now, nor the need to play them even if they did.

          • laaarmer

            I am all for playing Pirri based on the salaries we are seeing. If Pirri struggles playing with Sharp and whoever, what do you do? Or if Kruger does in the same slot, you will be flipping those two. What I am saying, and I understand that you not chico can comprehend, is that The Hawks need another option. It should have been Vinny, but it is not, so let’s get a player who knows how to play in the NHL.

            My next comment regarding this is, Handzus had a broken wrist and torn MCL or ACL. Pirri, Hayes, Smith, and Morin were all ready to go for most if not all the playoffs. Yet the old hobbled guy, thankfully, continued to play. Bollig even played. Smith got to play when Hossa went down, not Morin. Bolland was brutal, by all accounts for the season, yet he continued to play even though there was some $ available to bring up a player. Ringing endorsement from Stan this is not.

            Furthermore, most commenters on here seem to think that Pirri, Smith, Morin, Hayes, and one or more defensman from Rockford will also make the roster. That will be idiotic and a waste of time.

          • Waylon

            I think that two out of that grouping will make it – and one of those will not be Hayes.

          • laaarmer

            I think it’s Pirri and Smith.

          • Z-man19

            Pick what you want.

            1. Pirri at 2C, a veteran at checking C and possibly Rosz on D,

            2. a veteran 2C, a rookie checking C (or Kruger) and Leddy plus a rookie or Moonpie on D.

            Both options include another rookie at wing

            Honestly, I don’t see the money for a veteran 2C

          • laaarmer

            Except for Toews, the centers are all the same, not that good. Where they play will not make much difference. Shaw is one tough customer, but can he handle anything nore than what he does? Kruger is established PK guy, but can he handle more? Smith, well I don’t know what his problem has been. Pirri wil be the next whatever we need and will be given too much rope by this board. Can he handle it? hope he does well.
            No Bolland and No Handzus for next year, and that is bad. Too many what ifs for a team that bills itself as a cup contender.

            Whatever the roster, I will watch and look for the best.

          • Accipiter

            Smith was injured much of the last two seasons and wasn’t available to try to make the team at the starts of both seasons. Why he never got called up ? Don’t know, I guess Bollig and Carello were better options in the opinion of who ever decides that shit.

          • Z-man19

            All these questions and more, will be answered next season, same hawk time, same hawk channel.

          • Joe Banks

            “Honestly, I don’t see the money for a veteran 2C”

            I’ll drink to that!

          • MattC86

            Look, if the kids spit the bit, Stan goes shopping at the deadline with the room saved from not having spent it all on UFAs.

            Besides, the only one we’re really worried about is the 2C position, and it will be a 21 year old kid who led the AHL in points last year playing with, likely, two of the better two-way forwards in the sport.

            He’ll be ok, and if he’s not, StanBow will go shopping. It’s not like Brandon Pirri at 2C is going to put us on the edge of not making the playoffs. We just won the Stanley Cup with fucking Barbero as the 2C.

            What, too soon?

          • robondacob

            2008: Filpulla, Howard, Kopecky
            2009: Goligoski
            2010: Hjalmarsson, Niemi, Bickell
            2011: Seguin, Marchand
            2012: Nolan,Dwight King, Voynov

          • Z-man19

            so it’s possible?

          • robondacob

            It’s more than possible. If the trend from 2010 continues, having skilled, cheap rookies can make a team a Cup contender

          • Joe Banks

            Like… “SAAD”???

          • laaarmer

            Bickell? No.

          • laaarmer

            Howard and Niemi are goalies.
            Voynov and Hjammer are d men. If you would like to include Stanton, or some other deer in the headlights rookie defenseman to go along with the 3 or 4 rookie forwards most are calling for then this team might not make the playoffs.

          • robondacob

            Why does the position of the rookies matter?

            And you act as if Morin and Smith are raw rookies. They’ve played NHL enough to know what it’s like. Morin played 15 NHL games for us, even playing 9 consecutive games for us in 2010-11 before being sent down to keep an extra year on his ELC. Smith has played 28 games, 8 of which were in the playoffs, and has scored 7 goals.

            These kids can play, they just haven’t had a chance yet. The only questionable rookie is Pirri, and the reason is that he’s had the least NHL experience and people expect him to play 2C

          • laaarmer

            We are about to find out, I’m afraid.

          • MattC86

            It seems pretty simple to me in the salary cap era. You sign free agents or you develop young players. If you sign free agents, great, but if you keep doing it (given market prices) you eventually paint yourself into a corner and have to make some brutal choices. E.g., Toews or Kane?

            I would rather the Hawks throw Pirri, Smith, Hayes, and Morin to the proverbial wolves and the Hawks don’t win the Cup (or even get past the second round) than they go out and sign UFAs this year and next year who eventually create core-busting cap havoc.

            All of the teams you listed made a few things clear. You win with a corps of stars and a deep roster of cheap, budding young talent. The Hawks had more money in their bottom 6 forwards this year than some of these other teams (Kelly, Peverley, Jordan Staal, etc) but they made up for it with cheaper goaltending, which after next year they may not have.

            Morin, Smith, Pirri, and Hayes may not be the guys who help the Hawks raise the next Cup, but we’re going to find out. And I bet you it’s not going to be half as terrible as you think.

          • MattC86

            Messed that up, it was supposed to be “but so have other teams (Kelly, Peverley, etc)

          • AMR

            Also its not like they are all going to be on the same line. Its not going to be an all rookie 2nd line. Pirri is going to be centering Hossa and Sharp or Kane and Sharp. Either way Sharp and hossa are very responsible defensively and Kane has vastly improved in that area. Pirri will have some hiccups but he will have some help in that area

    • Joe Banks

      I think Danault may surprise you…

      • Accipiter

        When he is ready.
        When is he ready ?

        • mad-hatter

          I think the hope is 2015, when Bolly’s contract would have expired.

  • robondacob

    any chance we pick someone up from the flyers? they have 6 centers, and we have 3.

    • roadhog

      If we make a move now rather than at the deadline, which I’m kind of against . . . I like Couturier . . . young, cheap, under appreciated in Philly. But they’d need to move him 5x for it to make a dent in their payroll.

      • robondacob

        They need to move one of the following: Cobourn, Voracek, or Meszaros. Knowing Philly, they’ll probably end up trading Schenn

        • 2883

          EDM is interesting in Coburn. Also remember that Philly can hide Pronger’s salary by placing him on the LTIR right?

          • robondacob

            Pronger’s LTIR will give them around 3 million to sign a goalie. The problem is that their forwards bottom-6 is filled with rookies/AHL players. Things aren’t looking too good right now, especially if they don’t find some better defense

  • Paul the Fossil

    A nice rundown of the cap-busting contracts (e.g. Hossa’s and Keith’s) around the league.

    http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/67639/were-any-long-term-nhl-contracts-a-good-idea-2

    • Why

      He’s awesome. Probably the funniest guy writing about hockey. I still don’t buy the logic that:

      1. A player has to recreate or beat his best season point wise to be worth his contract.

      2. The way to measure whether or not a long term contract was a good deal is whether or not the player was worth the value of the contract in the last years of the deal.

      Shorter version, if Keith and Hossa retired tomorrow, both of those deals would still be good ones. Not as good, obviously, but still good.

  • DesertHawk

    Fucking suntimes…

  • ‘hawks58

    Not in today’s links, but the NHL announced their 1st and 2nd team all stars today. There are more Alex Ovechkins than Chicago Blackhawks.

    • Why

      Congratulations to what I’m now terming the “Tuuka Rask” all-stars. They’re all great, it’s just that there teammates aren’t very good. Yep. That’s the problem. It’s also strictly a regular season award.

      And the two Ovechkins is embarrassing.

    • DesertHawk

      The NHL can keep fellating the East Coast, we’ll just keep bringing cups to the West.

    • lizmcneill

      Kaner was robbed. Mind you, if everyone who voted for him actually knew what position he plays….

    • justforkicks

      the fuck does kane have to do for pete’s sake. lead the west in points in both playoffs and in the regular season, while in the latter he might as well have been playing with paper bags for linemates post injury, and playing some of the highest QoC pre injury.

      • lizmcneill

        “lead the west”. You know, that inferior conference where they don’t play defense….

        One of the Boston blogs was saying Horton should go to the west as “it’s an easier style of play” and he’s a power forward and been injured a lot. Er, what? I know Scum Jr don’t tend to make it far in the playoffs, but you’d think they’d have noticed LA.

        Anyway, Poor Kaner. The Conn Smythe is a bit pointy to cuddle for comfort. Maybe if he gets riled enough he’ll go into permanent FU Mode next year?

        • justforkicks

          people are so delusional about the east.

          i basically anticipate everyone is going to struggle next year, so don’t have high hopes for that, haha.

          • lizmcneill

            I don’t think it’ll be as bad as 2011, but yeah. I hope Kaner does well if less spectacularly than this year because the conversations get so tedious when he doesn’t.

          • justforkicks

            the conversations happen even when he’s doing well. so i’ve just come to terms with being angry all the time.

  • RVWW

    Mark Lazerus ‏@MarkLazerus2 Jul
    Agent for Kruger and Emery expects to initiate talks with #Blackhawks today. Kruger got his qualifying offer, but would like a 2-year deal.

  • laaarmer

    You guys below.
    If the Hawks are .500 at the trade deadline and Toews is injured because he has been targeted for the entire season, and why wouldn’t you as no other center is a threat, a real threat, you are fucked for real. Good luck to you getting someone to deal at the deadline, and you miss the playoffs.

    Bolland was a very good player. Very good.

    • http://www.lotsofbutterplease.com/ I am not Chico Maki

      What if we’re .510 … no, wait. What if we’re .400?

      • laaarmer

        at .510 we win it all, at .400 Kaner gets traded

    • MattC86

      So in that situation you’re saying Bolland would have been the #1 center and would have kept the Hawks afloat.

      Bullshit.

      • lizmcneill

        No, what Bolly did was divert attention and take on the top defensive responsibility so that Toews didn’t have to. His job wasn’t to score all the points, it was to stop other people from doing that and let Toews have a slightly easier life.
        It might not be a coincidence that Bolly got hurt so much…

        • MattC86

          This is not true last year. Not at all. The second line with Bolland did not have that kind of QualComp. Q fought fire with fire all year long with the Toews line. In 2010 I would have agreed, even 2011.

      • laaarmer

        Eat shit bullshit

        • laaarmer

          Let me expand on that.

          I am saying that Bolland, or a guy like Bolland, if there is one available, which there is not, makes life easier for Toews, Kruger, and Shaw. This is why Handzus was brought in to the Chagrin of almost everybody, but not me. So you go with your qualcomp horsepiss bullshit stupid fucking crap all goddam day. Sing it.

          • lizmcneill

            Qualcomp actually supports your argument.