When Do You Start Looking At The Coaching Staff?

[DMelt36]

The totally hypothetical "trade idea" that Hawkwriter initially posted indicated that Kruger would become center shutting down other teams top lines and that the trade would potentially bring in a legitimate 2 Center. The rationale being that Kruger and Bolland currently occupy the same roster spot- a defensive center. There is overlap right now.

It makes sense to me assuming you could find a deal.

My goofy idea was Bolland for Hodgson. Vancouver gets a veteran playoff performer that can play dirty (pretty much exactly what they need) and the Hawks get a young, promising offensive center to center the 2nd line between Hossa and Kane potentially.

Nobody is saying dump Bolland to dump Bolland. It's just that he's a potentially very valuable piece to a contending team and he can be viewed as somewhat replaceable within the Hawks lineup due to Kruger s emergence.

Last time the Hawks traded a proven commodity for an "emerging" player, we got Leddy as a top 4 defenseman. Hasn't worked out so well.

Remember where the Hawks were before and after Bolland's presence in the Vancouver playoff series last year? I'm not big on trading that type of player right now. Let Kruger center the 4th line for now. When the playoffs get here, give him a chance to be the defensive forward that Bolland has proven he can be. If Kruger succeeds, then make the move. But not before Kruger proves it on the ice.

And Sharp should be the 2nd-line center again, for now, but that's an argument for another time.

 

[Everyday I'm Byfuglien]

4th line belongs to Mayers and he's been all you can ask for from a 4th line center.

Kruger is proving it. Pretty much every night. As a 21 year old rookie making $900k.

And no, the Campbell trade doesn't hold in this situation. Campbell was traded for a forward who is now in Rockford. The proposed idea here is to move Bolland (center) for another center with Kruger (center) staying put.

Campbell deal: 1d for 1f with 1d already in the system. net result = 1d man, 1 forward

Proposed Bolland deal: 1c for 1c with 1c already in the system. net result = 2 centers

 

[southern_cross_116]

"Last time the Hawks traded a proven commodity for an "emerging" player, we got Leddy as a top 4 defenseman. Hasn't worked out so well."

If you are suggesting that trading Cam Barker and getting Leddy in exchage was a bad deal, I would beg to differ, as Cam Barker was a flop. Also if you claim that Cam Barker was a "proven commodity" I would suggest that his performance subsequent to being traded from the Hawks suggests otherwise.

 

[DMelt36]

4th line belongs to Mayers and he's been all you can ask for from a 4th line center.

Kruger is proving it. Pretty much every night. As a 21 year old rookie making $900k.

And no, the Campbell trade doesn't hold in this situation. Campbell was traded for a forward who is now in Rockford. The proposed idea here is to move Bolland (center) for another center with Kruger (center) staying put.

Campbell deal: 1d for 1f with 1d already in the system. net result = 1d man, 1 forward

Proposed Bolland deal: 1c for 1c with 1c already in the system. net result = 2 centers

The players involved in the trade were not my point. Campbell's trade was about freeing cap space, nothing else. If Olesz proved to be anything other than a waste of space, that was just icing in the cake. He wasn't, not a big loss.

My point is the after result. You're putting an awful lot of faith in a guy with 5 career playoff games. Don't forget that Kruger was SCRATCHED in Games 6 and 7. Bolland, meanwhile, has shown through 3 postseasons that he is a razor-sharp thorn in the sides of opponent's best players.

You think Kruger is capable of that after 58 total games in the NHL?

 

[DMelt36]

"Last time the Hawks traded a proven commodity for an "emerging" player, we got Leddy as a top 4 defenseman. Hasn't worked out so well."

If you are suggesting that trading Cam Barker and getting Leddy in exchage was a bad deal, I would beg to differ, as Cam Barker was a flop. Also if you claim that Cam Barker was a "proven commodity" I would suggest that his performance subsequent to being traded from the Hawks suggests otherwise.

No, not that. That deal was an absolute STEAL.

I'm referring to the Campbell trade which forced Leddy into a role that he's shown that he was not ready for. Leddy's going to be very, very good, with time. Just a bit overwhelmed right now.

 

[Everyday I'm Byfuglien]

My point is the after result. You're putting an awful lot of faith in a guy with 5 career playoff games. Don't forget that Kruger was SCRATCHED in Games 6 and 7.

:lol: He had played 7 total career NHL games before that series.

And he was a +2 in those 5 games. 3 of which were losses.

I get it, you don't think Kruger can fill in for Bolland. Got it. All I keep saying (over and over) is that Kruger helps make Bolland somewhat expendable assuming you can get a 2 Center for him (which is what this whole hypothetical situation has been about).

It's not just the idea of dumping Bolland for Kruger. It's the idea of getting a 2 center. Come on man.

 

[DMelt36]

:lol: He had played 7 total career NHL games before that series.

And he was a +2 in those 5 games. 3 of which were losses.

I get it, you don't think Kruger can fill in for Bolland. Got it. All I keep saying (over and over) is that Kruger helps make Bolland somewhat expendable assuming you can get a 2 Center for him (which is what this whole hypothetical situation has been about).

It's not just the idea of dumping Bolland for Kruger. It's the idea of getting a 2 center. Come on man.

A 2 center would be great. But I don't want one at the expense of Bolland. I'll respectfully disagree with your notion that Kruger helps make Bolland somewhat expendable. The Blackhawks were down 0-3 to Vancouver last year. Bolland came back, they forced a Game 7. You think Kruger can make that much of an impact?

It's obvious the Hawks need a 2 center. Personally, I'd like to see them add one in the offseason through FA. (No, I don't know who's going to be available. This is just what I'm hoping.)

 

[southern_cross_116]

No, not that. That deal was an absolute STEAL.

I'm referring to the Campbell trade which forced Leddy into a role that he's shown that he was not ready for. Leddy's going to be very, very good, with time. Just a bit overwhelmed right now.

Ah right - I follow you now.

 

[Diehardfan]

No, not that. That deal was an absolute STEAL.

I'm referring to the Campbell trade which forced Leddy into a role that he's shown that he was not ready for. Leddy's going to be very, very good, with time. Just a bit overwhelmed right now.

Yeah, he's like 20 years old. He should be down in Rockford honing his craft. Instead he's up here being "overwhelmed". Good choice of words. You can kill a young player's confidence running him thru the ringer like this.

 

[DewsSox79]

we lost 10 in a row in stanley cup run...u guys need to fucking relax

still think we are ok?

 

[Capt. Serious]

wastes 4 mins of Scott at forward..fucking idiot.

 

[DewsSox79]

he is kind of a waste of a roster spot imo

 

[Capt. Serious]

he is kind of a waste of a roster spot imo

he's Q's pet.

 

[Sunbiz1]

Then, when do you propose is a good time for panic?

I'm not there yet, but I've begun scoping out some nice, high cliffs for me throw myself from the top of, and I'm probably one more bad loss from making a a choice and hiking my way there.

This team is in a freefall. It'd be different if they were losing on last-second goals or by one/two goal deficits every night, but they're not. They were somewhat competitive for a period in San Jose, but then they completely laid an egg the next night in Phoenix.

It's not that they've lost so many games in a row. It's that they haven't shown any signs of winning one soon.

[Edit] After reading what I wrote, I'd like to change my beginning and say that yes, I'm joining the panic party as well. Off to find my ledge.

Off the ledge yet?. Most of you here can school me in hockey, I know very little, and can't even skate.

So I'll ask, what has changed during the past 2 games?. To be more specific, are they doing anything differently now than they were *prior to the losing streak...or was the streak caused by tinkering w/success?.

 

[DewsSox79]

Off the ledge yet?. Most of you here can school me in hockey, I know very little, and can't even skate.

So I'll ask, what has changed during the past 2 games?. To be more specific, are they doing anything differently now than they were *prior to the losing streak...or was the streak caused by tinkering w/success?.

ansewer: no.

are they good enough to make the playoffs? yes
Is the PP really bad? yes
Did they play the rangers minus the best goalies in the league? yes
did they just play the worst western conference team with the worst goalie? yes

2 games with still a lot of question marks. the sample size vs opponent skill level doesnt = for me atleast, backing off the ledge.

some casual fans and meatballs will say a win is a win without looking at the specific elements to these 2 games.

 

[Captain Iago]

It's decisions like putting Scott and Leddy as a PK pair against Detroit that makes ya wonder. Now that's some balls, sure, but any brains there?

 

[southern_cross_116]

It's decisions like putting Scott and Leddy as a PK pair against Detroit that makes ya wonder. Now that's some balls, sure, but any brains there?

It really does seem like an oxymoron to be such a slave to the 4 forward lines, 3 pairs defensemen system - yet, juggle line personnel all over the place.

It just seems, inconsistent.... I suppose in that, there is a gray area when this happens - where you're either a genius or the opposite of that.

Is it compelling? Well.... in thinking about it, not to me -- it seems a bit like watching 60 Minutes, and noticing that they gave Andy Rooney's segment to the guy that used to be married to Demi Moore (the guy other than Brice Willis)... seems inconsistent to me... but ...well, maybe that's just me...

Maybe I am a rebel ... I want to use 1 more character than Twitter allows -so until they give in, I'm not signing up. . . or :talktohand:


Oh sorry... er, the point is - seems a bit inconsistent.

 

[DewsSox79]

this PP situation has a lot to do with coaching and strategy in game. Im not sure who has their hands in more in this aspect of their game, but it has to improve. 0/30 is not bad, its putrid. This has to be fixed before the playoffs.

 

[DMelt36]

Off the ledge yet?. Most of you here can school me in hockey, I know very little, and can't even skate.

So I'll ask, what has changed during the past 2 games?. To be more specific, are they doing anything differently now than they were *prior to the losing streak...or was the streak caused by tinkering w/success?.

Hahaha off the ledge now, thanks. Just in time, too. It was starting to get awfully windy up there.

First off, from the first period of that Rangers game, the Blackhawks suddenly rediscovered their swagger, which is nice. Never helps to have confidence behind you.

Goalie play has improved in a HUGE way. Crawford is making just about every save he should and even a few more he probably shouldn't have. The biggest thing, I think, is he's not giving up the soft goals at crucial times that break his team's back. Seemed to happen every night during the 9-game skid to him and Emery.

Team defense is also a lot better. Every forward is back-checking his ass off, including (for the meatheads that wanted him traded) Kane. The D-men are also playing much smarter hockey.

Turnovers in the neutral zone have been kept to a minimum, which has prevented opponents from having great chances in the opposite direction. Those quick counter-attacks were killing the Blackhawks.

The top line of Sharp-Toews-Kane (and now Sharp-Kane-Hossa) has been deadly. The second line of Bickell-Bolland-Stalberg has wreaked havoc on opposing defenses with their ruthless forecheck. Stalberg's speed, in particular, has forced a lot of turnovers lately. And secondary scoring has been huge. The freaking fourth line came through with both goals in their win over Detroit. Hayes-Kruger-Brunette worked their asses off to light the lamp twice.

The tl;dr version? They're doing pretty much the opposite of what they were doing in the previous nine games.

 

[Sunbiz1]

Hahaha off the ledge now, thanks. Just in time, too. It was starting to get awfully windy up there.

First off, from the first period of that Rangers game, the Blackhawks suddenly rediscovered their swagger, which is nice. Never helps to have confidence behind you.

Goalie play has improved in a HUGE way. Crawford is making just about every save he should and even a few more he probably shouldn't have. The biggest thing, I think, is he's not giving up the soft goals at crucial times that break his team's back. Seemed to happen every night during the 9-game skid to him and Emery.

Team defense is also a lot better. Every forward is back-checking his ass off, including (for the meatheads that wanted him traded) Kane. The D-men are also playing much smarter hockey.

Turnovers in the neutral zone have been kept to a minimum, which has prevented opponents from having great chances in the opposite direction. Those quick counter-attacks were killing the Blackhawks.

The top line of Sharp-Toews-Kane (and now Sharp-Kane-Hossa) has been deadly. The second line of Bickell-Bolland-Stalberg has wreaked havoc on opposing defenses with their ruthless forecheck. Stalberg's speed, in particular, has forced a lot of turnovers lately. And secondary scoring has been huge. The freaking fourth line came through with both goals in their win over Detroit. Hayes-Kruger-Brunette worked their asses off to light the lamp twice.

The tl;dr version? They're doing pretty much the opposite of what they were doing in the previous nine games.

Chicago Blackhawks: As defense improves, so too does Blackhawks' results - chicagotribune.com

From what I can tell, seems like a pretty good article. Only the Trib buried it on the back page behind even HS hoops.