- png, jpeg
- Recommended minimum size 800px by 800px
- Maximum size: 1MB
Jun 24, 2015
Posts per Day
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>exo2769</b></div><div>I hear what you're saying. But I can't support it. Look at how little time everyone else got in juniors/AHL. Dach 3 games. Boqvist 15 games. Ian Mitchell only has 5 games in Rockford...he's just riding the pine and not playing! I guess I'd like to give him time to develop. BUT on the other hand...If that move is literally the do or die moment for JC and/or Stan...I guess then do whatever it takes. Something's got to change.</div></div>
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Wadejos123</b></div><div>Let Reichel rip it up in Rockford all year. Not because he isn't ready for the big leages, but because that way Colliton can't ruin him. Maybe we fire Colliton after this year and save him from this mess.
Seriously though Strome needs to get in the lineup</div></div>
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Ledge_And_Dairy</b></div><div>Might be a good idea, Should also 100% play Strome, he's not gaining trade value sitting on the bench and something has to change
Still think this team needs defensive forwards</div></div>
Agree with all of you regarding Strome, not sure how much value they'll get out of that trade if he's continuously benched. I agree with Reichel, I just want them to give him 9 straight games and go from there. Looking at their schedule, i'm not sure if I can see them winning tomorrow night against NYI. They're already on the wrong side of the standings and played some of the weaker teams in the league. They need a spark, although I do understand the idea of not letting Colliton ruin him. I dunno, I'm on the fence with all this. They definitely need to find a way to improve their 5v5 play, if the coach isn't fired, it's going to have to be players stepping up.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CMcAvoy73</b></div><div>Listen pal, I just watched ritchie torpedo my favorite team for a while. He’s not an nhl player. He’s big, but he’s not physical. Kase is a solid player if healthy, but he’s a RW. Like you said, Kampf is a center. He’s also not very good, and not exactly a shut down guy. Better defensively than offensively, but nothing special. Bunting has a very small sample size of being alright. Pardon me if I’m not giddy over after 26 year old that has 29 games under his belt, after not getting much of a shot with one of the worst organizations in the league.
Ya. It’s miles worse, and it wasn’t enough in the first place</div></div>
I'd kill to have Kampf back in Chicago, but I agree with everything else you said. Ritchie is not a 1st liner, Bunting had an anomaly season, Kase is good, but like you mention, a RW. Toronto has virtually no options at LW. That odd thing about the construction of this team you mentioned in your first post is probably how there's over $55M tied up in 7 players (Big 4 up front, Rielly, Muzzin and Brodie) and virtually no money left to fill out the supporting cast. Quite a bold strategy that doesn't always lead to success.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Eli</b></div><div>For all your talk about not panicking so early in the season, and worrying about whether Jones was worth two first picks, you're actually going really easy on Bowman. I'll explain, but first, let's praise Bowman where he did well, this offseason:
Khaira, Johnson, and Caleb Jones are better than Keith, Seabrook, and Kampf, overall, in 21-22 through 23-24. That much was good cap management. More total points, over the last two or three seasons. Younger, overall. Fewer injuries. Can't knock any of that. Won't. He shopped two old cap dumps around and got slight positive value back for Keith and less negative value in the Seabrook trade. Bowman cleared cap space and got younger in each move. He found a UFA who has played 4C on a playoff team and can fit right in. Solid, solid moves, all three. Who knows how much Kampf was asking to stay in Chicago, when he had an offer from a division leader on the table. That's not on Bowman. Bowman gets an A on all of this stuff, so far. Some hockey reporters are even questioning how Edmonton let the Keith trade happen, and whether they might need to change management over it. A+ on dumping cap. Bowman understands what's happening, here. No one on this board could come up with deals this good because we don't let each other get away with them. Bowman is at the top of his game. He's an All-Star, so far.
But here's where random fans off the street, with 40 hours a week to discuss this, should have done better:
Under a flat cap, trading an ECHLer with no cap hit for unretained $7M cap dump Marc Andre Fleury, without getting a 1st and a 2nd round pick back for the cap space, was amateur nonsense. Pit paid a pick to dump Fleury's last contract. Fleury was younger and cheaper, then, and the cap wasn't flat. Some Caps fans on this board wanted to trade for Fleury last Spring, but most of us cringed.
Trade Strome and Johnson to Seattle, where Johnson is from, for Vanecek. Seattle lacks center depth and traded Vanecek for a 2nd. Vanecek's GAA is 1.44 right now. Fleury's is 7.06. That's almost one more touchdown allowed per game.
Seth Jones is starting out slightly better than Shane Gostisbehere, this year. Each is -1 per game played. Each is within one percent of 42% corsi. Neither looks good, defensively. Jones has one more point. Ghost hit his career high of 65 points the same year Jones hit his career high of 57, so the difference in value should be defense. Right now, it isn't. Philly paid a 2nd and a 7th to dump Ghost on Arizona this summer. With two teams bidding for that garbage, Chi gives up a 3rd to get Ghost and a 2nd.
Changing just the above moves--getting Ghost and Vanecek for a combined 5.3M cap hit instead of Johnson, Fleury, Strome and Jones for 20.5M cap this year--clears 15M of cap space. Dougie Hamilton signed in NJ at 9.5x7. Chi bids 10.5x7 and gets a guy who is +3 after one game with 66% corsi and one point. Then they don't need to convince anybody to make Werenski or Soucy available to help them out with puck possession. Hamilton has the puck.
Realistic forwards: as above, but why worry if Kampf wants to play somewhere else? Sign E. Staal and you replace most of Fleury's playoff experience at league minimum. Can still lowball Khaira for depth, if he's available.
Realistic blue line:
C. Jones Zadorov*
*one more year before these two leave as UFAs, opening up $8M in cap space. Can trade away as deadline rentals, if there's no future cap coming back.
Realistic UFA target next summer, if they still want him: :halo SETH JONES! :halo With 12M of cap space, Chicago can sign Jones next year at the same 10.5Mx7 they paid Hamilton, give Vanecek a raise to 2M for a few years, let Carpenter walk, and give Kubalik a tiny raise, too, even if the cap stays flat.
When you say Bowman gave up Suter, Boqvist two high 1sts and a 2nd to land Seth Jones, I'm saying he actually gave all that up just to miss out on Hamilton and Vanecek. Jones said he would play in Chicago and he was clearly a year away from free agency. Just tell him the job will be there, and go about building a winning team he'll want to join, that will have cap space for him. If he signs in Columbus first, have such a good team that he begs to be traded to Chicago like Hall begged to go to Boston. There's no reason that Chicago can't have Seth Jones, with or without the trade.
So the choice is: Jones, Johnson, and Fleury or Jones, Hamilton, Vanecek, Gostisbehere, Suter, Boqvist and two high 1st round picks. If you take Seth Jones off of each side, since it's the same Seth Jones, and take out P. Suter and T. Johnson since I think they're pretty close in value, Bowman essentially traded Dougie Hamilton, Vitek Vanecek, Shayne Gostisbehere, Adam Boqvist, the 2021 12th overall pick, and another 1st round pick for Marc-Andre Fleury, who currently has a 7.06 goals against average and a $7M cap hit.
At that point, yes, I think you could do better, even if you're too hung up on Suter and Kampf.
But I agree, it's too early to panic. :)</div></div>
There are a million different ways to correct what happened this offseason. Near the end of last season, there seemed to be good chemistry finally being built with Suter and Kampf on their expected lines. The hawks haven't had consistent chemistry in years, and it ties back to this constant hemorrhaging of role players before they can get fully settled in. Both Suter and Kampf we're perfectly serviceable at a good price. I don't mind Fleury and McCabe adds. I think they'll improve quickly. Bringing in Johnson and Khaira up front (As well as Toews returning) means they have to restructure the entire offense including creating new lines for these new arrivals. Most teams can do that in 6 preseason games, but the Blackhawks are clearly still stuck figuring it out.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>dopplsan</b></div><div>From CBJ’s perspective, they were going to ride out Werenski until he told them he wanted out. I.e. he wouldn’t have been available this past offseason absent a big overpay. If he really did follow through on the “I want to go home to DET” rumors, he would have been a TDL or off-season move.
And I get it when it comes to the general frustration of front-office league makeup. On one end, you will never see an outright job posting on these positions because the qualifications to handle them go far beyond what anyone in these boards can fathom. It’s easy to post ACGM’s and play MMQB, so to speak, it’s much more difficult to handle the personalities and bureaucracy behind the scenes - quite similar to being a politician, except it isn’t a matter of just casting single votes.
These GM jobs are so exclusive because there is only 32 of them in the world, and owners want people with the experience already; so, either people who have worked NHL front offices already, or former players. And when they make these hires, money drives everything - I think we often overestimate the amount of involvement team owners have. Unless you are, say, the Jerry Jones’ of the world, most of them just want to hire someone who will take the reins on the team, and until the bottom-line starts hurting, or they otherwise feel pressure mounting to the point of being unable to ignore it, most will let it ride. Coming from a CBJ fan, this has largely been how the team has been run, for better (Jarmo and JD) and worse (basically every other front office hire ever).
That being said, it’s difficult for me to really accord whatever is going on in CHI’s office. Bowman creates a dynasty and, as is inevitable, it ended due to age and expense. He finally makes the right move, admits to a rebuild, but then pivots to a bunch of win-now trades (Jones, Flower, releasing an affordable and productive Suter). Perhaps it’s because of, shall we say, attention off-ice with the Blackhawks, but it felt like Bowman swung hard for the fence on moves that, by his estimation, will either (a) lead to wins and make him look like a genius; or, (b) be the next guy’s problem.
Maybe CHI ownership has an astounding amount of faith in Bowman, or maybe they are doing the whole “3D chess” thing we often joke about. But if I were ownership, I would have reined in some of these moves. Then again, like I said above, most of these guys may very well just not be as involved in team construction as a bunch of Very Online hockey nerds like us.
And, FWIW, most of these critiques are not just CHI, but could apply to many other teams at one time or another.
Sorry for the short novel. Damn, I didn’t realize I had written this much.</div></div>
I understand what you're saying, but it's very hard to believe that the scouting roles, the managerial roles, the advisor roles are that complex. Watching the Leafs series on prime video, a large majority of these roles is communicating within work groups, something a large portion of the general population already does. The other part being player evaluation and financial, but they use private software for that (Like most companies).
It's frustrating how none of these jobs are posted online. How does that not violate EEOC labor laws? Doesn't seem like there's any equal opportunity in that.