Re: 2009 Chicago Blackhawks

[The1Tab]

i won't argue that he's not a good offensive d-man. that's never been an issue. the issue is how much of that value he gives back with his loose defense and constant horrible turnovers.

 

he has been a lot better this season than last, though.

 

He hasn't made the dumb mistakes this year. You need to watch more hockey me thinks

[The1Tab]

The thing is, they really needed that when they went after him. This team was dull and without any offensive weapons. It just so happened that right after they acquired him all the talented young players started breaking out, thus immediately making his services less valuable to the team.

 

Totally correct - the Hawks didn't know if Keith would become a 40-50 point guy before last year, so they decided to overpay for Campbell. But, again, if you look at where contracts are going for defensemen, Campbell isn't going to be so grossly overpaid in a couple years. I would rather keep Campbell for two more years and then deal him when his salary's appropriate to the market then unloading him for nothing this summer.

 

And, again, what nobody wants to own in this discussion of dumping Campbell is that nobody's going to take on a $7M cap number without sending salary back. I suggested the Hawks buy out Campbell back in October, but his play has completely changed my mind on him this year. He's playing like a guy that's worth $7M. The problem shouldn't be with his performance on the ice, but his salary, and yet there are people on here that are trying to discredit his play because of his cap hit. That's ridiculous, naive, and either uninformed or stubborn.

 

The Blackhawks cannot unload Brian Campbell for nothing and replace him internally. The Blackhawks cannot trade Campbell without taking a pretty good cap hit back in exchange, which kills any reason to move him if it isn't helping the bottom line. So, IMO, stop saying Campbell should go away because it isn't realistic.

[brinoch]

Actually, I've made the point that we can't trade Campbell without taking someone back, but since we're in agreement on his value your point still holds.

 

The more I think about the future, the more I think we'll see Versteeg, Byguflien and Barker traded.

[kujay]

i won't argue that he's not a good offensive d-man. that's never been an issue. the issue is how much of that value he gives back with his loose defense and constant horrible turnovers.

 

he has been a lot better this season than last, though.

 

He hasn't made the dumb mistakes this year. You need to watch more hockey me thinks

 

DM said he's been better than last year. He does still make mistakes, but I have to say I've seen Seabrook make more bad plays this year than Campbell.

[TruffleShuffle]

I can argue that his contract isn't good. But I think as piece on the roster -- disregarding the $$$ -- he's alright. I agree he's not a complete defenseman. He's kind of an oddball; pushing the puck, joining the offense, etc. We seem to be able to use that effectively, though.

 

I'd like to get his contract off the books.

 

The thing is, they really needed that when they went after him. This team was dull and without any offensive weapons. It just so happened that right after they acquired him all the talented young players started breaking out, thus immediately making his services less valuable to the team.

 

yeah i agree with that, plus that was the offseason immediately after the passing of dollar bill. they really needed to make a big signing like that... campbell is a good player but the signing was as much symbolic as it was a sound hockey move. it showed blackhawk fans that rocky wirtz wouldn't be leading the team in the same way his dad did.

[Soul]

I can argue that his contract isn't good. But I think as piece on the roster -- disregarding the $$$ -- he's alright. I agree he's not a complete defenseman. He's kind of an oddball; pushing the puck, joining the offense, etc. We seem to be able to use that effectively, though.

 

I'd like to get his contract off the books.

 

The thing is, they really needed that when they went after him. This team was dull and without any offensive weapons. It just so happened that right after they acquired him all the talented young players started breaking out, thus immediately making his services less valuable to the team.

 

yeah i agree with that, plus that was the offseason immediately after the passing of dollar bill. they really needed to make a big signing like that... campbell is a good player but the signing was as much symbolic as it was a sound hockey move. it showed blackhawk fans that rocky wirtz wouldn't be leading the team in the same way his dad did.

 

Yeah, I don't find myself hating Campbell. I'd like the contract gone, but I'm not sitting there wishing he wasn't on the ice or anything. I'm not up to speed on every team's situation but I'm sure lots of teams have a guy like this on their roster. It shouldn't mean we can't find a way to use him, and be successful.

[17 Seconds]

i won't argue that he's not a good offensive d-man. that's never been an issue. the issue is how much of that value he gives back with his loose defense and constant horrible turnovers.

 

he has been a lot better this season than last, though.

 

He hasn't made the dumb mistakes this year. You need to watch more hockey me thinks

 

brb guys, gotta go watch the lightning/panthers game to get a better perspective on why campbell still turns the puck over too much

 

like i said though, he's been good this year and a lot better than last. i'm just saying that he still does it quite a bit.

Edited January 15, 2010 by 17 Seconds

[17 Seconds]

i won't argue that he's not a good offensive d-man. that's never been an issue. the issue is how much of that value he gives back with his loose defense and constant horrible turnovers.

 

he has been a lot better this season than last, though.

 

He hasn't made the dumb mistakes this year. You need to watch more hockey me thinks

 

DM said he's been better than last year. He does still make mistakes, but I have to say I've seen Seabrook make more bad plays this year than Campbell.

 

you think so? i haven't really noticed that, but i haven't been paying heavy attention to seabrook. i've noticed that keith has been turning the puck over a lot more than usual though.

[17 Seconds]

does byfuglien have the yips or something? i cant believe how often he misses the net

[UMFan83]

The team looks sloppy tonight. Passes aren't on target, players aren't showing as much speed as they do in the past, etc.

[17 Seconds]

The team looks sloppy tonight. Passes aren't on target, players aren't showing as much speed as they do in the past, etc.

 

i think they look good. they should probably have like 3 goals

[17 Seconds]

wow, horrible so far in the second. a couple of badddddd turnovers

[UMFan83]

Man we keep taking good shots and getting nothing from it.

[17 Seconds]

awesome shift there

[17 Seconds]

oh gtfo byfuglien

[Garwilly]

Good game tonight, crowd was good, not great.

[UMFan83]

Good news...with the Hawks win tonight coupled with losses by New Jersey and San Jose (SO), for the first time that I can remember the Hawks have a slight edge over NJ for most Points Per Game in the league. They are also slightly ahead of NJ for least goals allowed per game, and tied for 2nd in the league in goals scored (although 16 goals behind Washington for 1st). As expected they are +14 ahead of Washington in goal differential so they pretty much own that category.

[Soul]

Why can't Huet just play like that more consistently? Some pretty good saves out there last night.

 

When he's on, he's alright. When he's not.......he's really not.

[jersey cubs fan]

Why can't Huet just play like that more consistently? Some pretty good saves out there last night.

 

When he's on, he's alright. When he's not.......he's really not.

 

When he's on he's alright?

 

He's not Martin Brodeur, but he's a good goalie. I really don't get all the constant concern about Huet.

[kujay]

Why can't Huet just play like that more consistently? Some pretty good saves out there last night.

 

When he's on, he's alright. When he's not.......he's really not.

 

When he's on he's alright?

 

He's not Martin Brodeur, but he's a good goalie. I really don't get all the constant concern about Huet.

 

Because he's the weakest link on a championship caliber team, and a giant question mark as to how he's going to perform in the playoffs on a nightly basis. He goes into a funk and we're toast.

 

But that's what I liked about last night's game. He didn't let the last game bother him and he bounced back. Maybe he's improving.

[jersey cubs fan]

Why can't Huet just play like that more consistently? Some pretty good saves out there last night.

 

When he's on, he's alright. When he's not.......he's really not.

 

When he's on he's alright?

 

He's not Martin Brodeur, but he's a good goalie. I really don't get all the constant concern about Huet.

 

Because he's the weakest link on a championship caliber team, and a giant question mark as to how he's going to perform in the playoffs on a nightly basis. He goes into a funk and we're toast.

 

But that's what I liked about last night's game. He didn't let the last game bother him and he bounced back. Maybe he's improving.

 

He's a question mark only because people are obsessed with the notion of a goalie who has done it before, even though the Stanley Cup playoffs are always filled with surprise goalies who haven't done it before and proven goalies fall left and right. He's been good this year, calm the funk down.

[Soul]

Why can't Huet just play like that more consistently? Some pretty good saves out there last night.

 

When he's on, he's alright. When he's not.......he's really not.

 

When he's on he's alright?

 

He's not Martin Brodeur, but he's a good goalie. I really don't get all the constant concern about Huet.

 

Because he's the weakest link on a championship caliber team, and a giant question mark as to how he's going to perform in the playoffs on a nightly basis. He goes into a funk and we're toast.

 

But that's what I liked about last night's game. He didn't let the last game bother him and he bounced back. Maybe he's improving.

 

He's a question mark only because people are obsessed with the notion of a goalie who has done it before, even though the Stanley Cup playoffs are always filled with surprise goalies who haven't done it before and proven goalies fall left and right. He's been good this year, calm the funk down.

 

He's 24th in save percentage. All I was asking was why he can't play more like last night, more often.

[17 Seconds]

Why can't Huet just play like that more consistently? Some pretty good saves out there last night.

 

When he's on, he's alright. When he's not.......he's really not.

 

when he's on, he's great. last night he was great.

 

we give huet a lot of creap, but the guy is not a bad goalie. overall i'd say he's about average with tendencies to have great games and terrible games.

[kujay]

What a first period. Easily could have scored six, including two posts.

 

Pat and Eddie were right. They had so many pretty chances it started to look like the Globetrotters.

 

And it's only 3-2.

[17 Seconds]

lots of defensive lapses this period. was only a matter of time before they tired it.