This may be a little thing, but...

LonghornBob

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Jul 2, 2011
Posts:
485
Liked Posts:
165
Location:
Texas
And by the way, I forgot to mention Versteeg who went for 20 and 24 and got summarily dismissed. So we have given up all these decent scorers for "grit players" and we're getting outhit evey game. The more I think about it the more it effing pisses me off...
 

icehogfan08

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 23, 2010
Posts:
5,227
Liked Posts:
1,551
Location:
Rockford, IL
And by the way, I forgot to mention Versteeg who went for 20 and 24 and got summarily dismissed. So we have given up all these decent scorers for "grit players" and we're getting outhit evey game. The more I think about it the more it effing pisses me off...

They are hits, we are winning, who cares. Those guys had to be moved because of cap issues. Sharp was the guy we kept over all of them. Would you have kept any of them over Sharp?
 

Jntg4

Fire Forum Moderator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 26, 2010
Posts:
26,017
Liked Posts:
3,297
Location:
Minnesota
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  2. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Fire
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Chicago State Cougars
  2. DePaul Blue Demons
  3. Illinois-Chicago Flames
  4. Loyola Ramblers
  5. Northern Illinois Huskies
  6. Northwestern Wildcats
They are hits, we are winning, who cares. Those guys had to be moved because of cap issues. Sharp was the guy we kept over all of them. Would you have kept any of them over Sharp?

Huet > Sharp
 

Tyler Juranovich

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Mar 2, 2011
Posts:
275
Liked Posts:
35
Location:
Northwest Indiana
Pretty soon nostalgia is going to hit Blackhawk fans and we'll remember Huet as the greatest goaltender of the last 20 years.

:beerbang:
 

southern_cross_116

New member
Joined:
May 24, 2010
Posts:
1,748
Liked Posts:
1,012
Location:
Australia
Okay, well both Byflugien and Ladd scored 17 in the regular season, which is what Brouwer had last year. That's pretty well 20, especially when you consider that Ladd put up something like 30+ assists.

My point, irrespective of a few goal difference, is that those guys scored, or were at least a THREAT to score, and these new guys seem to not have that kind of punch. If they aren't going to get that done I'd at least like to outhit someone...

And to the other point, why the hell does everyone going against us in a shootout look like they have at least one Datsyuk, and we get stoned every try?

No, that is 17 ... there is no rounding up. And the point is that last season the team was not hurting for goal scoring -and incidentally, they aren't this season either.

They could use a little better belt tightening in some defensive situations where they have given up goals where they probably ought not to have -like say have led to 2 shoot out losses.

Face it, all it takes is one guy getting a goal if no one puts one in during a shoot out... that doesn't make one Brett Hull or Wayne Gretzky. Although if the point is that scoring none in the 2 shootouts they have had makes it impossible to get that second point -well, ok- point made there ... pretty impossible standard to overcome.

As to why the skate up and a wrister? Well, that one is fairly obvious - in that you can actually deke the damned puck off of your own stick and get no shot off at all - so a lot of guys don't bother -they are going for the speed, and hoping for an open spot (obviously it hasn't worked up til now)- but it is a valid way of going about it. Although I am willing to bet that almost none of you have ever been in that position (on any level), meaning that I doubt my saying it will convince you. I do know that I found that fancy stickhandling was a really unnecessarily showy way of potentially screwing up (come to think of it - I am thinking of the coaching I got for breakaways ... same sort of idea though). No stickhandling- skate right at the goalie, pick your spot and drill it there. You'd be pretty surprised how well it can work (however I suppose if you don't know the book on the goalie - it probably works less well than if you -the shooter have an idea about a specific guy's tendencies... (scouting comes into play there).

I don't know how much time that coaching staffs spend on practicing penalty shots -during regulation it doesn't happen all that often... if you are doing it to prepare for shoot outs- it might be viewed as being less worthwhile than trying to manage a game for a regulation win -so I would not be surprised if coaches may not put a lot of priority on that aspect of the game. But listen to what the coaches say on that one -as it is only my educated guess (I do know back in the day -before the shoot out -- that it was said no one practiced that -as the penalty shot was so rare as to make it pointless... therefore the goalies had the advantage).

All of that is fwiw.:shrug:
 

southern_cross_116

New member
Joined:
May 24, 2010
Posts:
1,748
Liked Posts:
1,012
Location:
Australia
You know Bob you can add in whoever you want to your list -- but expect to get the same thing Joe got.

Please explain, by using math (and no hindsight), how it is that you keep your guys while staying within the salary cap, otherwise - this just ends up being a lot of baseless stuff. Hindsight is always 202/20 if you care to make it so - but in this case, the history also has a mathematical, and economic aspect to it.

See, my point here being that Joe never did come up with an explanation on pretty much a similar set of topics... if you want to go there, then since guys asked him what he would have done differently, it is only fair to Joe that the same topic set gets the same response.

No offense meant.

Although, frankly calling Ben Eager an offensive threat is a bit of a stretch.
 

LonghornBob

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Jul 2, 2011
Posts:
485
Liked Posts:
165
Location:
Texas
I'll grant you that calling Eager a scoring threat is a stretch, but here's something funny: Dude was a scoring machine in the minors. Seriously. He went for like 25 and 27 one year. Oh well, that's the minors.

Were I the GM of this team I'd have kept Versteeg over Olesz. We could have bought out Olesz for something like 400k early on, and his cap hit is actually slightly higher than Versteeg's.

I'd have kept Brouwer over Carcillo (though I'd have beaten him with a skillet if he kept getting STUPID penalties in the offensive end - he had a couple of games where I thought he WAS Ben Eager ;-) ), by just plain not signing O'Donnell. The cap difference between Troy and Carcillo is 250k. We signed O'Donnell for 1.25. I could have found SOMEONE who isn't 39 years old who can be a 7th defenseman for a million bucks. Hell, if nothing else I'd have risked calling someone up from the Rock.

So my plan gets us Versteeg, Brouwer and a call-up or $1mm defenseman over Carcillo, Olesz and Montador.

I'll take that...
 

icehogfan08

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 23, 2010
Posts:
5,227
Liked Posts:
1,551
Location:
Rockford, IL
I'll grant you that calling Eager a scoring threat is a stretch, but here's something funny: Dude was a scoring machine in the minors. Seriously. He went for like 25 and 27 one year. Oh well, that's the minors.

Were I the GM of this team I'd have kept Versteeg over Olesz. We could have bought out Olesz for something like 400k early on, and his cap hit is actually slightly higher than Versteeg's.

I'd have kept Brouwer over Carcillo (though I'd have beaten him with a skillet if he kept getting STUPID penalties in the offensive end - he had a couple of games where I thought he WAS Ben Eager ;-) ), by just plain not signing O'Donnell. The cap difference between Troy and Carcillo is 250k. We signed O'Donnell for 1.25. I could have found SOMEONE who isn't 39 years old who can be a 7th defenseman for a million bucks. Hell, if nothing else I'd have risked calling someone up from the Rock.

So my plan gets us Versteeg, Brouwer and a call-up or $1mm defenseman over Carcillo, Olesz and Montador.

I'll take that...

You couldn't keep Versteeg over Olesz because Steeger was forced to be traded a whole year before Olesz was brought in. Again guys had to be moved because of the salary cap.

Patrick Sharp
Andrew Ladd
Kris Versteeg
Ben Eager
Dustin Byfuglien
Brent Sopel

All but one of those guys had to be traded. I think the right choice was made. It's time to let those guys go and move on.
 

tbo41fan

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 26, 2010
Posts:
15,922
Liked Posts:
2,701
Location:
Chicago, IL
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Fire
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Arizona Wildcats
wait.....wait.....are there still people arguing over the offseason from over a year and a half ago?

Stop living in the past...this isnt the Cubs (and I am a cubs fan)
 

nwfisch

Hall of Famer
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '21
Joined:
Nov 12, 2010
Posts:
25,053
Liked Posts:
11,503
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Minnesota United FC
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Notre Dame Fighting Irish
I agree with the point about the shootouts, I hate seeing the Blackhawks piss away 2 well earned points.
 

icehogfan08

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 23, 2010
Posts:
5,227
Liked Posts:
1,551
Location:
Rockford, IL
I agree with the point about the shootouts, I hate seeing the Blackhawks piss away 2 well earned points.

The only problem is it is the same shooters over and over. when does Frolik get a chance, or Hossa. Bickell had a great move in the AHL.
 

LonghornBob

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Jul 2, 2011
Posts:
485
Liked Posts:
165
Location:
Texas
As long as we're on the subject of shootouts, why do we ever even GET to one?

We should have a HUGE advantage in 4 on 4 situations. We're a skill team, a skating team, that should thrive on open ice. Toews and Hoss can work both ways when they're shifting and our defensemen like Keith and Seabs and Hjalmarsson should be skating damned near as well as the other teams' forwards.

We should really rock 4 on 4. I don't see why we ever HAVE to go to a shootout.
 

HawkWriter

New member
Joined:
Aug 18, 2011
Posts:
3,491
Liked Posts:
1,341
^^^ Because even though it is 4 on 4, it is only 5 minutes. Other teams have a whole lot of skill to throw out too. Avs had Duchene, Landeskog, Hejduk, Stastny to throw out there - those guys aren't slouches.

It is is hard to score in the NHL...
 

LonghornBob

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Jul 2, 2011
Posts:
485
Liked Posts:
165
Location:
Texas
Hejduk is a hundred. They're good but I'd take Toews, Kane or Sharp centering, and Hoss and Keith or Seabs against just about anybody.

It's a good point that everyone has talent, but we really are built to dominate 4 on 4.
 

Everyday I'm Byfuglien

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Oct 8, 2010
Posts:
3,194
Liked Posts:
1,463
I also used to think that about the Hawks playing 4 on 4.

However, I can't remember the exact numbers but I know last year they absolutely gave up more than they score in regulation 4 on 4... like it wasn't even close. Something like 8 to 4.

They sucked 4 on 4.
 

Captain Iago

Giver of Occular Proof
Donator
Joined:
May 24, 2010
Posts:
5,905
Liked Posts:
1,974
I agree with the point about the shootouts, I hate seeing the Blackhawks piss away 2 well earned points.

Surely. They pissed away the point against Boston and that's saying something (defense played poorly in the third), but, they really didn't deserve the point against Colorado (even though they had a lead with a couple of minutes left).
 

southern_cross_116

New member
Joined:
May 24, 2010
Posts:
1,748
Liked Posts:
1,012
Location:
Australia
If one team ever to actually dominate 4 on 4's- then the league might well change the rules - this statement, based upon precedent, when in the early to mid 80's the Edmonton Oilers dominated 4 on 4 play so much that the league changed the rule on coincidental minors - meaning that it meant no change in strength on the ice (ie 5 on 5 instead of 4 on 4 or 3 on 3 situations).

And some say that the league wasn't wide open in the 80's -well, some teams could pot the puck at a higher clip than any team out there right now... and it isn't even close.

I miss the old Stadium, and the Chuck Norris Division -even though the Hawks couldn't even blackmail their way past the Oilers in the Conference Finals.
 
Last edited:

Gunzaan

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Mar 27, 2011
Posts:
5,224
Liked Posts:
1,865
They did great on the shootout tonight, although I don't know about having Bolland second. Toews and Kane ftw.
 

ClydeLee

New member
Joined:
Jun 29, 2010
Posts:
14,829
Liked Posts:
4,113
Location:
The OP
Troy Brouwer used to get a good share of ice time on 4 on 4 before... although last season I think he was out there a lot less but I think the presence of more than just the playmakers made impacts.
 

Top