<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Variable" data-cid="225850" data-time="1397584858">
<div>
Yes you are doing it. You did it in the very next paragraph. How can you look at those numbers and not take into account the teams those 2 goalies are on? Toronto is one of if not the worst puck possession teams in the league. They are godawful. They depend more on their goalies to bail them out more than just about every other team besides maybe Buffalo. They're horrible. The only reason they even made the playoffs last season was because of Reimer (and Scrivens, who is another guy who would fit well with the Hawks). The only reason they again even got close to making the playoffs was their goaltending this season. They just didn't do as good a job, but you can't expect that kind of performance from goalies every single game, throughout an entire season. I can't blame them for that, that is one of the worst run organizations in hockey.</p>
</p>
About moving Crawford, again the possible moves or goalies the Hawks could get I was talking about were all hypothetical, all of it is pretty much moot, none of it is really doable with the money and years they already committed to Crawford. I was just answering the question on what goalies I'd go with in lieu of Crawford. I don't know what they're going to be able to do if they wanted to trade him. Maybe they'd have to keep half or a certain percentage of the cap hit in a potential trade, who knows. But that's why I wouldn't have given it to him. I wouldn't have given a contract like that to any goalie if I was the GM of a team like the Hawks. I mean, I like Crawford. He's all the Hawks need. But not at the cost of a 6 million dollar cap hit and having to lose valuable players because of it.</p>
</p>
And how good is Saad really? Really? So you're going to do this too? Downplay the team? Saad is one of, if not the most important "secondary" player the Hawks have in moving forward. In just his second season, his first real full NHL season, he's shown vast improvement pretty much across the board and should only continue to improve. He's a great luxury the Hawks have right now with Sharp and Hossa still playing very well. But, as you say, when geriatrics catch up to Sharp and/or Hossa , that's where Saad is going to slide in. The Hawks would be fucking insane to lose that kid, same deal with Leddy. There are no replacements for these guys in their system. Shaw I believe can be replaced, but I don't see any reason why he can't have another 20 goal season next season, as long as he continues to get his PP time. There's nothing about him so far, albeit it's been a short sample, that screams "anomaly" about how he's played. It's pretty simple, he goes to the net, gets garbage goals.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Just because Reimer was bad on a shit team doesn't mean Reimer will be good on a great team. One does not necessarily preclude the other.</p>
</p>
Reimer may very well be better than he was on the Leafs *if* he was on the 'hawks, but is his numbers going to be more like Crawford or more like Raanta? That was my point. Niemi, Emery, and Crawford were both good on Chicago's squads, while Huet, Khabi, and Turco outright sucked. If the team in front of them was so good that they can make anyone look good, than Huet, Khabi, and Turco wouldn't have been nearly as-bad. Reimer on the 'hawks is a complete enigma. You canot say he
will be successful here any more than I can say he
will fail.</p>
</p>
As for Saad and Leddy, my issue with them is not how good they are with respect to Rockford prospects, Leddy and Saad in their own right are awesome and I was not insinuating that they aren't, but you can't keep everyone.</p>
</p>
The way I see it right now the core consists of Toews, Kane, Sharp, Hossa, Keith, Seabrook, Hammer, and Crawford. Their style of play, contract duration, and/or standing amongst the rest of the league determines that. IMHO *if* one of them goes it's because there is a 2nd tier player who is better, or somewhere else the damage from their departure is mitigated. If we lost Seabrook right now, there's no one in Rockford who can take his role on the team, There's no one that Keith can play with who's a righty and defensively responsible. So, someone who can be a Seabrook has to be coming back (a cheaper version), or we land another player in another role that covers for the deficiency.</p>
</p>
That being said, Leddy and Saad are approaching the place where guys like Buff and Ladd were in 2010. They are good enough to make enough money that the team cannot afford them. Some could argue Shaw being ion that cusp as well (Hey, how may big bodied guys *don't* go to the net while Shaw does fearlessly and actually cash in on?) Any way you slice it, the way I see it is that they either have to dethrone a core player, or we lose them.</p>
</p>
If there is any player Leddy can dethrone based on playing style, it's Keith. Leddy and Seabrook are about as different as unicorns and drowning in liquid pig shit. Leddy and Keith play similar games, even though Keith is far beyond Leddy at this point. Keith is also on a cap-friendly retirement contract. Seabrook's role and position is one that we can't mitigate losing--there are not righty defensive defenseman that are anywhere near Seabrook's level. That leaves Hammer, which is possible even though Hammer is underpaid at this point.</p>
</p>
From Saad's side of things, I think he goes or stays based on Hossa and/or Sharp. Saad is well below Toews and Kane--it's not even worth discussing or thinking about Saad being able to make those two superfluous unless under the influence of hardcore pharmeceuticals, but Sharp and Hossa are getting up in age. The thing about those two is that they just put up 30 goals seasons for the 'hawks, so one has to wonder what's left in the tank.</p>
</p>
IMHO Hossa might very well be cut from the same cloth as Selanne and Jagr--able to play in his 40's. He's shown he can still score, still skate, and is still one of if not the hardest guy to knock off the puck. He's just 5 points shy of 1000 and most likley HoF material. My gut tells me that Hossa will be top 6, if not top-9 servicable for the better part of the remainder of his contract. As long as he can score 20-30, not be slower than Cullimore, and still be nigh-impossible to knock off the puck he compliments the team game almost perfectly.</p>
</p>
Sharp, on the other hand, as much as I like him may be who Saad replaces--assuming his clip of goalscoring degrades. We'll have to see next year. If Sharp's performance degrades I think he's easier to replace with a guy like Saad than Hossa is.</p>
</p>
Sharp I think</p>
