Marty Reasoner, we hardly knew ye (HAWKS acquire Taffe)

[Guest]

Again no one has said it's going to be easy. It never is. That said this team could very well be more talented than last years. You never know. As for the Depth, we do have depth, which is why you have the ability to be as good as last years team. If there were no depth, then you could very well have some problems.



Camp will tell a lot this year as these guys finally get a chance to compete for roster spots that are definitely open. Unlike other years when they could have made the team only to have a vet, already under contract, get the spot anyway.



Taffe was signed for Rockford IMO in an attempt to free up more money to sign guys like Bickell and more money for Niemi's arbitration.



And since you threw Skille out there having a hard time producing remind me what Burish, who Skille will most likely be replacing, produced last year? Makarov will be playing with Toews, Hossa, or Kane, Sharp and you are worried about production there? Really?



You need to relax, remember we WON THE CUP, and see how it plays out before predicting "I told you so" scenarios. They'll be fine.

 

[PatrickShart]

And 2 years ago, Toews and Kane were 19/20 year olds...Havlat was injury prone, Bolland - the second line center, only had 39 gms under his belt, Brouwer (too slow), Byfuglien (never played forward), Versteeg was a rookie....Hjarllmarsson wasnt with the club....people hated Khabibulin....



And they ended losing in the Conf Finals....

 

[PatrickShart]

Oh..and the "depth" callups that year - that "pushed" all those rookies -

Forwards - Skille, Pelletier, Brent, Dowell

Defense - Hendry ....



Things worked out pretty good...but again, I guess its better to look at the dark side of things, to be able to say "I told you so"

 

[Gemini13]

[quote name="pmxc12873"]And 2 years ago, Toews and Kane were 19/20 year olds...Havlat was injury prone, Bolland - the second line center, only had 39 gms under his belt, Brouwer (too slow), Byfuglien (never played forward), Versteeg was a rookie....Hjarllmarsson wasnt with the club....people hated Khabibulin....



And they ended losing in the Conf Finals....[/quote]









[quote name="pmxc12873"]Oh..and the "depth" callups that year - that "pushed" all those rookies -

Forwards - Skille, Pelletier, Brent, Dowell

Defense - Hendry ....



Things worked out pretty good...but again, I guess its better to look at the dark side of things, to be able to say "I told you so"[/quote]



Wow, you my friend are using way to much logic and reasoning in your posts.

 

[Maiden]

[quote name="R K"]Again no one has said it's going to be easy. It never is. That said this team could very well be more talented than last years. You never know. As for the Depth, we do have depth, which is why you have the ability to be as good as last years team. If there were no depth, then you could very well have some problems.



Camp will tell a lot this year as these guys finally get a chance to compete for roster spots that are definitely open. Unlike other years when they could have made the team only to have a vet, already under contract, get the spot anyway.



Taffe was signed for Rockford IMO in an attempt to free up more money to sign guys like Bickell and more money for Niemi's arbitration.



And since you threw Skille out there having a hard time producing remind me what Burish, who Skille will most likely be replacing, produced last year? Makarov will be playing with Toews, Hossa, or Kane, Sharp and you are worried about production there? Really?



You need to relax, remember we WON THE CUP, and see how it plays out before predicting "I told you so" scenarios. They'll be fine.[/quote]



Maybe you have forgotten that Burish spent most of the season rehabilitating a bad knee injury. Even though Burish was a 4th line player I thought he played his role perfectly. I suppose we will find out Burish's offensive capabilities playing on a poor Stars team this winter.

 

[Guest]

[quote name="Maiden"]



Maybe you have forgotten that Burish spent most of the season rehabilitating a bad knee injury. Even though Burish was a 4th line player I thought he played his role perfectly. I suppose we will find out Burish's offensive capabilities playing on a poor Stars team this winter.[/quote]



Maybe you weren't quick enough to see that's what I was implying. Didn't appear they missed him much eh.... LOL!\



I will miss his character no doubt about it. If Skille doesn't, or isn't able to make up for the loss of Burish then yes, Skille doesn't belong here.

 

[Variable]

Adam Burish doesn't even really have the talent to play on a bad Dallas team. I guess they could've offered him a locker room mascot type of position, but other than that, no big loss.



I like the idea of the salary cap, they just have to implement it a shit ton better. It's to the point where teams are basically getting punished for finding good young talent and then losing them simply because they're too good. It's not "buying" a team, like people argue that the Yankees or Red Sox do, this is not what the NHL is stopping by hamstringing teams like they do with the cap. Parity? How about teams getting better scouts of talent, how about stop giving big contracts to the Jeff Fingers of the league. And stop this horseshit with bonus penalties against the cap for SUCCEEDING in the game. I don't get that one at all. It's like they're saying "You've just won the toughest championship in sports, now let's make it even harder for you next year by penalizing you for your accomplishment." No, that's not parity, that's bullshit.

 

[Shredder]

The Hawks weren't "punished" for finding great young players. They were punished because they signed guys like Campbell, Huet and Hossa to monster deals. Take those three out and all the young players are probably still there. But we'd have one less Stanley Cup brag about.

 

[Guest]

Campbell 7 mil

Toews 6.3 mil

Kane 6.3 mil

Huet 5.6 mil



I suppose if you want to add Hossa, you can also add Keith as well.





There are your monster contracts

 

[Variable]

[quote name="Shredder"]The Hawks weren't "punished" for finding great young players. They were punished because they signed guys like Campbell, Huet and Hossa to monster deals. Take those three out and all the young players are probably still there. But we'd have one less Stanley Cup brag about.[/quote]



Or if the NHL had a "soft" cap or if they let players renegotiate contracts or any number of things, we wouldn't to worry about losing some of those players. They'd be able to keep players like Ladd and Versteeg instead of them becoming cap casualties. I don't know, I don't see that as making the sport more "exciting" knowing that any time you get that far, you finally win the Cup, chances are that team is going to take some big losses because of stupid bullshit policies that essentially punish you for winning, for succeeding. I don't see that as encouraging parity. If you get that far, if you accumulate that kind of talent through years of trades and deals and drafts, all that hard work for maybe ONE really good chance and then risk having to lose important players because of finally making it? Now we have teams like the Hawks with Hossa last year and Devils with Kovy signing these monster long term deals just to try and get around it. It's become a joke.

 

[Shredder]

It may feel like a joke to the franchise it's affecting, but I'm sure the Canucks, Sharks and Wings fans aren't losing too much sleep watching the Hawks get dismantled (relatively speaking).



The writing was on the wall as soon as those huge contracts started getting handed out. The Hawks gambled and spent like drunken sailors, but it paid off. Now the hangover has arrived. In the end, it may not be that severe, though. The team is still plenty good.



The problem of the super long contract will hopefully be dealt with in the upcoming CBA.

 

[Larmer83]

[quote name="Ton"]

Makarov is one of the guys that is a lock to make the team.

[/quote]

Lock is a bit strong.



Consideration needs to be given to re-entry waivers which is also important when looking at competition.



Skille, Dowell, and Bickell are subject to re-entry waivers. They are locks in the sense that going to the minors means the Hawks would lose them at recall. I believe Stalberg has 20 more NHL games to play before being subject to re-entry waivers.



Given the 7 returning regulars and Scott as the 13th forward/7th dman, that leaves one roster spot open for Makarov to take.

 

[Variable]

[quote name="Shredder"]It may feel like a joke to the franchise it's affecting, but I'm sure the Canucks, Sharks and Wings fans aren't losing too much sleep watching the Hawks get dismantled (relatively speaking).



The writing was on the wall as soon as those huge contracts started getting handed out. The Hawks gambled and spent like drunken sailors, but it paid off. Now the hangover has arrived. In the end, it may not be that severe, though. The team is still plenty good.



The problem of the super long contract will hopefully be dealt with in the upcoming CBA.[/quote]



There's an easy solution. Make it a soft cap. It basically allows you to go over the cap limit to re-sign your own players, not go on a Yankee spending spree and snatching up all the prized free agents. It's that simple. As it is now, it's way too restricted. Baseball and hockey are at the opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to the salary cap and it doesn't really work for either sport.

 

[Guest]

[quote name="Shredder"]It may feel like a joke to the franchise it's affecting, but I'm sure the Canucks, Sharks and Wings fans aren't losing too much sleep watching the Hawks get dismantled (relatively speaking).



The writing was on the wall as soon as those huge contracts started getting handed out. The Hawks gambled and spent like drunken sailors, but it paid off. Now the hangover has arrived. In the end, it may not be that severe, though. The team is still plenty good.



The problem of the super long contract will hopefully be dealt with in the upcoming CBA.[/quote]



It really sucks having so much talent you must pay them. I agree other teams aren't upset at any other teams Cap issues. Especially the team that's parading around with the Stanley Cup. If the Wings could have afforded it they'd have kept Hossa last year. The Sharks have a couple of guys not signed and arent too far from the Cap themselves. Had they signed Hjarmarsson two of those other players were leaving because of Cap space.



I'm pretty sure on the same note EVERY other team would love to have these problems, because not one that you mentioned has the core talent the Hawks do. Not even close.

 

[Shredder]

[quote name="Variable"]There's an easy solution. Make it a soft cap. It basically allows you to go over the cap limit to re-sign your own players, not go on a Yankee spending spree and snatching up all the prized free agents. It's that simple. As it is now, it's way too restricted. Baseball and hockey are at the opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to the salary cap and it doesn't really work for either sport.[/quote]

You don't really need a soft cap as long as you don't go on a UFA spending binge like the Hawks did. They could've re-signed and kept all of their young stars, but not without staying away from guys like Campbell and Hossa. You can't have it both ways.



That said, no team is going to draft $60 million worth of young talent and you need veteran signings to win. The $18 million of cap room going to Campbell, Hossa and Huet is the reason Buff, Versteeg, Ladd and Barker aren't with the team anymore. The Toews bonus penalty is a bit of a kick in the nuts, but it could've been planned for. Instead, the Hawks decided to operate with about five cents of cap space during last season and now have to pay for it.



But hey, we won.

 

[roshinaya]

The Hawks gambled, went all-in and luckily it paid off. With that said, all teams work under the same rules, so you got to live with it. I don't like either that bonuses eat the cap, but that's the way it is. No one forced the Hawks to spend up until the cap and defer bonuses until the next year.

Lets just be glad the Hawks won the Stanley Cup. That fact will never change no matter how many guys get moved.

 

[JTalarico328]

Look at it this way: The bonus situation this year may have had a direct impact on Wirtz's decision to eat Huet's contract. He was left with no choice.



Without those bonuses against the cap, its possible Wirtz wouldnt have wanted to do it.

 

[roshinaya]

And I have a feeling that the playoff revenue all but paid for the lost money on Huet and then some.

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

Ok I can't believe I have to ask this... Huet's contract has already been bought out? I miseed it somehow...

 

[PatrickShart]

No STU, just the fact that he's going away is a forgone conclusion