[A] Player Evaluation: Michael Frolik

[R K]

I don't mind him. Goals or not, many times last year, I at least saw him working hard on the ice, when others seem to be either floating or waiting to make the highlight reel. 3rd line may be his place. I don't see him as a grinder, but I also don't quite see him in the top 6. Maybe a little line consistency would do him good, which won't happen here.

Salmelanian busted his ass too.. Just saying.

 

[R K]

I can't wait to beat off later.

small job but someones gotta do it......

 

[PatrickShart]

Let's fix some of your post.



I don't think Bolland is a 2nd line center. I think Bolland is a 3rd line center. I'm not in that following that thinks Bolland is better than he is. In my Bolland article, I said many people wonder why he was never given a chance on the 2nd. I explained why as he is a good 3rd line center.



Q gave Frolik his chance, and Frolik was in a slump and never got out of it.



I remember Frolik getting a lot of chances during the season, the main issue was he wasn't capitalizing on those chances. Yet, he still was creating the chances. Stalberg capitalized on his empty nets chances. I don't remember saying, and I could be wrong, man Frolik looks like shit. More like, man Frolik just can't finish.

Frolik has been in a slump since coming to Chicago. He has 8 goals in 91gms - 2 of them empty net goals. Out of his 58 career goals...4 are game winners (none of his 8 6 were game winners). And the empty net goals Stalberg has? 33 in 2 years as a Hawk, 9 gwg. So who's goals are "empty"?



Slumps don't last 91gms.



Maybe you didn't say Bolland should be the 2nd line center...but some think he is, just isn't given the chance. Just as some think Frolik should be a top 6 winger in the league. I thought Frolik would be better too when he came here. After near 100gms as a Hawk, he's been a disappointment, IMO

 

[Shantz My Pants]

Stalberg game winners? Seriously!?



4 were against Columbus (Wins of 6-1, 5-2, 4-1, 5-2).

One was against the ever unstoppable Minnesota (5-2 win).

The only meaning one was the 5-4 win against Nashville.

 

[PatrickShart]

So they don't count? Or don't mean anything? Got it.



What teams do they have to be against to matter?



How many did Frolik have against those 'bad' teams?

 

[Shantz My Pants]

Give me a break pmxc, you know as well as I do that a goal scored on a shitty team in a blow out is a joke to be called the game winning goal. The 5th goal in a 5-4 win has more value than the 2nd goal in a 6-1 win.

 

[PatrickShart]

Give you a break? You had to pull a highlight from 3yrs ago to find Frolik around the net.



Goals in the NHL vs Anyone matter. When the game is 1-1, how the hell does anyone know it's going to end 6-1? That second goal does matter. Game winners do matter as scoring goals at the time when the game is tied/close or being at a decisive time. The fact that in the 2 years Stalberg's been here -

GWG -

Sharp - 14

Toews - 12

Stalberg - 9

Hossa - 8

Kane - 7



And how much PP time does he get?



BTW - you brought up Stalberg, not me.



And Frolik's 8 6 goals with the Hawks?

1 - in a 5-2 loss to....CLB

1 - in a 6-2 loss to ...VAN

1 - in a 4-3 win vs the every unstoppable MIN (as you put it)

1 - in a 4-3 loss to DET

1 - in a 5-3 win vs TOR

1 - in a 6-4 win vs CAL



Yeah...way more impressive than Stalberg, since 4 of his GWG were against CLB.

 

[Shantz My Pants]

Empty net chances were in reference to Kane doing all the work and setting up stalberg who was wide open.



Imo a GWG in a blowout is valued differently than the GWG in close game such as a tied 3rd period goal or OT.

 

[Ton]

You can't really compare Frolik and Stalberg. Stalberg IMO is a better top six forward while I think of Frolik more of a checking line winger (not that he hits, but hes better defensively while Stalberg is better offensively)



That said, I agree that a GWG in a 6-1 win pretty much means jack shit.

 

[Shantz My Pants]

I won't disagree with you PMXC that Frolik hasn't been exciting for the Hawks. He got his chance during the regular season and messed it up. But watching him play and seeing the numbers he put on a poor Panthers team, plus realizing that he's still only 23; I still believe he could be a very good player and hasn't reached his potential yet.

 

[jakobeast]

Salmelanian busted his ass too.. Just saying.

Not like Frolik. Salmo had speed. I don't remember him hitting anyone, going for the puck, or anything like that.

 

[Shantz My Pants]

Salmo looked like a water bug on the ice. Outside of that he was worthless.

 

[sniper]

i dont think frolik will last the year on the hawks. hes already had a lot of chances, id bet hes gone before the trade deadline if there is a season.

 

[Shantz My Pants]

i dont think frolik will last the year on the hawks. hes already had a lot of chances, id bet hes gone before the trade deadline if there is a season.

I don't either. I believe he could get traded to a team in need of a skilled forward. That's when I bet the real production kicks up.