Blackhawks 2010-2011 season

[squally1313]

I just think it's a bit early to write off this season.

 

Maybe it is, but by the deadline you have to make the decision on at least Seabrook. If you resign him you are more or less committing yourself to coming back next year with the same roster. And soon enough, the cheap young talent filling spots at the back of the roster are going to get their own raises. Guys like Pisani, Skille, Stalberg and Brouwer are either UFA or RFA, as well as Crawford. If you keep Seabrook and Sharp you have to more or less start over in the process of restocking the rest of the roster. If you trade Seabrook and Sharp you get payroll relief immediately and over the next two years, plus you should get a massive infusion of talent to help fill those roles. I would much rather strengthen this team's chances in 2011/2012 and beyond than try and hold on too long to what is left from 2009/2010.

 

As good as he was in the early going, Sharp has 1 goal in December when the team has needed the secondary scoring with the other losses. And for what it is worth, despite leading the team in points he is somehow a -8, the 3rd worst on the team.

 

Campbell has been the most steady defensive player on the team. Seabrook has been a disappointment and the team has to be questioning the idea of signing him longterm, unless they can get him cheaply.

 

It is December now. You can wait until the deadline, but so far this team hasn't looked anything like a playoff team, let alone a contender. Hockey teams need a kick in the pants from time to time and I think while a trade of those two may hurt them in the short-term, it is the best decision long-term. And it may be the only realistic thing they can do to wake them up. If they sneak into the playoffs with this roster and even win a series, it's a disappointment and they won't be any better off next year. If they make the move they could conceivably still sneak into the playoffs this year, and they will be better off going forward.

 

Again, there is nothing wrong with the way we've played in the last 7 or 8 games. You can overreact to Seabrook's game last night all you want, and forget when he carried Keith the first month or so of the year, when he was the only real defenseman we had. You can look at Sharp's -8 over, again, 32 games, or his 1 goal in the last 5 games if you really want to use that. Throw the last two seasons out the window. Or maybe just consider the fact that this team played 104 games last year, without even including the Olympic games, and had the shortest time off of any team in hockey. One year ago today the Fliers were 15-15-1. The Hawks were 20-8-3. They ended up in the same spot.

 

The hockey playoffs are pretty much as much of a crapshoot as baseball playoffs, maybe even more so. If you honestly don't think we can make the playoffs, then sure, blow the team up. But I really don't think you can say that about a team with the talent that we have.

[UMFan83]

One year ago today the Fliers were 15-15-1. The Hawks were 20-8-3. They ended up in the same spot.

 

It's a good point, but had to mention that the Flyers record last year wouldn't have even gotten them a sniff of the playoffs last year. And the West seems to be going that way again this year.

[jersey cubs fan]

Again, there is nothing wrong with the way we've played in the last 7 or 8 games. You can overreact to Seabrook's game last night all you want, and forget when he carried Keith the first month or so of the year, when he was the only real defenseman we had. You can look at Sharp's -8 over, again, 32 games, or his 1 goal in the last 5 games if you really want to use that. Throw the last two seasons out the window. Or maybe just consider the fact that this team played 104 games last year, without even including the Olympic games, and had the shortest time off of any team in hockey. One year ago today the Fliers were 15-15-1. The Hawks were 20-8-3. They ended up in the same spot.

 

The hockey playoffs are pretty much as much of a crapshoot as baseball playoffs, maybe even more so. If you honestly don't think we can make the playoffs, then sure, blow the team up. But I really don't think you can say that about a team with the talent that we have.

 

You are making a very large mistake by pretending I am only taking into account last night or even just this season's games. Trading Seabrook has to have been on the table for a long time. You can keep the core, but the core can't be that big for that long if you want to have a full team. And Sharp has been the best trade piece on the team since before they started selling, giving his production, reputation and cost certainty.

 

The fact that they played so many games last year isn't going to change as the season goes on. They aren't going to get a break that other people don't experience to get caught up on rest. They've been mediocre, at best, all year long for a veriety of reasons. One of them is Seabrook and Keith have both been disappointing, but Seabrook is the only one of the two who is a realistic trade bait.

[squally1313]

Again, there is nothing wrong with the way we've played in the last 7 or 8 games. You can overreact to Seabrook's game last night all you want, and forget when he carried Keith the first month or so of the year, when he was the only real defenseman we had. You can look at Sharp's -8 over, again, 32 games, or his 1 goal in the last 5 games if you really want to use that. Throw the last two seasons out the window. Or maybe just consider the fact that this team played 104 games last year, without even including the Olympic games, and had the shortest time off of any team in hockey. One year ago today the Fliers were 15-15-1. The Hawks were 20-8-3. They ended up in the same spot.

 

The hockey playoffs are pretty much as much of a crapshoot as baseball playoffs, maybe even more so. If you honestly don't think we can make the playoffs, then sure, blow the team up. But I really don't think you can say that about a team with the talent that we have.

 

You are making a very large mistake by pretending I am only taking into account last night or even just this season's games. Trading Seabrook has to have been on the table for a long time. You can keep the core, but the core can't be that big for that long if you want to have a full team. And Sharp has been the best trade piece on the team since before they started selling, giving his production, reputation and cost certainty.

 

The fact that they played so many games last year isn't going to change as the season goes on. They aren't going to get a break that other people don't experience to get caught up on rest. They've been mediocre, at best, all year long for a veriety of reasons. One of them is Seabrook and Keith have both been disappointing, but Seabrook is the only one of the two who is a realistic trade bait.

 

Sharp has been the best trade piece on team since before they started selling because he is the best player out of all the options to get traded. Just because they are tradeable doesn't mean that you have to trade them. I've read articles from people who know a hell of a lot more about this than I do, and they seem to think we should be fine looking up Seabrook. Despite what we've seen from Morin and Stalberg, I still don't think, at the time, we got fair value in our offseason trades. And I think that was because teams knew we were desperate. If we do the same thing now, I think the same thing happens, and I don't think we get as lucky as we got with Stalberg, turning a third string guy on Edmonton to a first string guy on our team.

 

And my point with the games played wasn't really about the rest. I probably shouldn't even have thrown in the point about having the shortest offseason. My point was that I think a lot of them were kinda gassed by the playoffs, and they struggled against teams that frankly they shouldn't have struggled against, given their regular season performance. And they saw a lot of teams make it into the playoffs that maybe didn't belong to be there, and even do well (Montreal, hell, even the Fliers). Maybe they subconsciously came to the conclusion that as good as they were last year, they can go 80% during the regular season (a la the Red Wings last year), and save their energy for the important time of the year. Yeah, they might have miscalculated on how good they believe they are, but I think they realized you don't have to have a regular season like they did last year to get to the Cup.

[jersey cubs fan]

Sharp has been the best trade piece on team since before they started selling because he is the best player out of all the options to get traded. Just because they are tradeable doesn't mean that you have to trade them.

 

But the salary cap implications and future health of the franchise means you do.

 

Maybe they subconsciously came to the conclusion that as good as they were last year, they can go 80% during the regular season (a la the Red Wings last year), and save their energy for the important time of the year.

 

And maybe that is the most ridiculous thing I've heard. The salary cap is real and matters. You can't keep an 8 man core all making multi millions longterm. The team is playing like crap anyway so it is a perfectly good excuse to improve your chances going forward instead of tryng to make magic happen next summer.

 

Trading Sharp and Seabrook has to be on the table. If it is not then the team is doing itself a disservice.

[squally1313]

Sharp has been the best trade piece on team since before they started selling because he is the best player out of all the options to get traded. Just because they are tradeable doesn't mean that you have to trade them.

 

But the salary cap implications and future health of the franchise means you do.

 

Maybe they subconsciously came to the conclusion that as good as they were last year, they can go 80% during the regular season (a la the Red Wings last year), and save their energy for the important time of the year.

 

And maybe that is the most ridiculous thing I've heard. The salary cap is real and matters. You can't keep an 8 man core all making multi millions longterm. The team is playing like crap anyway so it is a perfectly good excuse to improve your chances going forward instead of tryng to make magic happen next summer.

 

Trading Sharp and Seabrook has to be on the table. If it is not then the team is doing itself a disservice.

 

I think maybe you quoted the wrong thing the second time given your response. Or you just disregarded it and went back to the salary cap discussion. Either way, a couple things.

 

1. Again, how are we playing like crap? We're missing our second and third best forwards, the two best creators on the team. And we've still played really well in the last 8 or 9 games. I completely agree that we played like crap earlier in the year (the Edmonton games, the Devil game, etc) but I think our play and our record shows that we've picked it up since then.

 

2. I'm hesitant to continue talking about the salary cap issues because I really don't know all that much about it. I read SCH pretty much daily, and I remember in the offseason them saying Sharp wasn't really necessary, and then more recently saying that given what other defensemen have gotten, locking down Seabrook for just a moderate raise shouldn't be too difficult, and shouldn't cripple our cap situation. I think my whole point to the argument is that if you believe this team has a reasonable chance to compete for the Cup, as I do, you don't trade Sharp and Seabrook for draft picks and guys making the minimum. If you think we suck this year, as it looks like you do, then sure, go for it. But I disagree.

[jersey cubs fan]

http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/12/kane-back-on-ice-for-hawks.html

 

Patrick Kane, who has missed three games with a left ankle injury, participated in the Blackhawks' morning skate Wednesday and could return to action as early as Friday.

 

"I'm feeling pretty good," Kane said after the skate as his teammates prepared to face the Avalanche on Wednesday night at the United Center. "For the time line, we'll see how things go. I'll try and get a good team practice in Thursday but overall (Wednesday) I thought I felt pretty good."

 

Note also says Bolland is playing tonight, Hossa is still skating and rehabbing, plus Morin was recalled.

[squally1313]

This is Morin's 9th game tonight, and with Kane trying to be back for Friday, I'd say this could realistically be the last time we see Morin for the rest of the year. Enjoy him....really like watching him play.

[Soul]

All I want to see is a solid game where we don't have a late goalgasm and blow ourselves up.

[Butterscup1679666578]

that 4-minute penalty was such [expletive] [expletive].

[Soul]

Welp, we suck now.

 

Nite everyone.

[Wilson A2000]

The Hawks have the 9th seed now tied with 2 others (7th and 8th seeds) points wise. Those teams have played fewer games. Missing the playoffs would destroy so much momentum this organization had.

[UMFan83]

The Hawks have the 9th seed now tied with 2 others (7th and 8th seeds) points wise. Those teams have played fewer games. Missing the playoffs would destroy so much momentum this organization had.

 

It's hard to kill the momentum a championship brings. And even if the momentum does shift it will go right back to where it was in a year or two when we are likely back at the top of the conference.

[brinoch]

that 4-minute penalty was such [expletive] [expletive].

 

Yep. It was crap. Especially considering that the Stalberg penalty should have been a five minute major for leaving the ice.

[jersey cubs fan]

The Hawks have the 9th seed now tied with 2 others (7th and 8th seeds) points wise. Those teams have played fewer games. Missing the playoffs would destroy so much momentum this organization had.

 

It's hard to kill the momentum a championship brings. And even if the momentum does shift it will go right back to where it was in a year or two when we are likely back at the top of the conference.

 

Missing the playoffs would hurt, but not come anywhere close to killing the momentum from the championship. It remains the only "all Chicago" team with a championship this century. They will live on that for a couple years, and unless they revert to missing the playoffs every year, they will not go back to the Dollar Bill days.

 

This is why I would rather see them concentrate on 2011/12 and beyond than this year.

[Soul]

It should have been fairly obvious there would be boos bringing Chelios back to be honored.

 

That was kind of embarrassing.

 

I didn't realize he actually played 7 years in Montreal before he even came to Chicago. Yes, he had a lot of good years here, but I think elevating him to the same kind of level as the Espositos and the Hulls is a bit much, considering the majority of his career, and the most successful parts of his career, were spent elsewhere.

[UMFan83]

It should have been fairly obvious there would be boos bringing Chelios back to be honored.

 

That was kind of embarrassing.

 

I didn't realize he actually played 7 years in Montreal before he even came to Chicago. Yes, he had a lot of good years here, but I think elevating him to the same kind of level as the Espositos and the Hulls is a bit much, considering the majority of his career, and the most successful parts of his career, were spent elsewhere.

 

You arent surprised he was booed? I am. I know he was a Red Wing for several years, but from what I've read, he never really wanted to get traded there, and despite the way he left town, he's always had nice things to say about the Hawks org. Besides when he was in Detroit the Hawks were barely in the NHL, so its not like there were several physical playoff series to built some legitimate hate towards him. I'll always love Chelios despite the Wings affiliation.

 

Also, way to show up tonight Hawks!

 

I mean it!

[NewUserName]

It should have been fairly obvious there would be boos bringing Chelios back to be honored.

 

That was kind of embarrassing.

 

I didn't realize he actually played 7 years in Montreal before he even came to Chicago. Yes, he had a lot of good years here, but I think elevating him to the same kind of level as the Espositos and the Hulls is a bit much, considering the majority of his career, and the most successful parts of his career, were spent elsewhere.

 

not quite the same, but I think it is similar to how the Cubs treat Greg Maddux.

[Magnetic Curses]

i hate detroit, their defensive stick-work is annoying.

[Magnetic Curses]

It should have been fairly obvious there would be boos bringing Chelios back to be honored.

 

That was kind of embarrassing.

 

I didn't realize he actually played 7 years in Montreal before he even came to Chicago. Yes, he had a lot of good years here, but I think elevating him to the same kind of level as the Espositos and the Hulls is a bit much, considering the majority of his career, and the most successful parts of his career, were spent elsewhere.

 

i disagree, he's most identified with the blackhawks. he actually played longer in detoit i think and had more success in both montreal and detroit. but he's a chicago boy.

 

this isn't like the idiot avalanche retiring ray bourque's number.

[jersey cubs fan]

It should have been fairly obvious there would be boos bringing Chelios back to be honored.

 

That was kind of embarrassing.

 

I didn't realize he actually played 7 years in Montreal before he even came to Chicago. Yes, he had a lot of good years here, but I think elevating him to the same kind of level as the Espositos and the Hulls is a bit much, considering the majority of his career, and the most successful parts of his career, were spent elsewhere.

 

i disagree, he's most identified with the blackhawks. he actually played longer in detoit i think and had more success in both montreal and detroit. but he's a chicago boy.

 

this isn't like the idiot avalanche retiring ray bourque's number.

 

To me, the Chicago Blackhawks are Roenick, Chelios and Amonte. Those older guys mean nothing to me, but I appreciate their place in history. Chelios was a Blackhawk who ended up with Detroit because Wirtz and Pulford sucked balls. I hold nothing against him and do not understand anybody who does.

[kujay]

It should have been fairly obvious there would be boos bringing Chelios back to be honored.

 

That was kind of embarrassing.

 

I didn't realize he actually played 7 years in Montreal before he even came to Chicago. Yes, he had a lot of good years here, but I think elevating him to the same kind of level as the Espositos and the Hulls is a bit much, considering the majority of his career, and the most successful parts of his career, were spent elsewhere.

 

not quite the same, but I think it is similar to how the Cubs treat Greg Maddux.

 

I don't recall the circumstances of Chelios leaving, but how would we feel about Maddux if he went to the Cardinals and won a handful of championships instead of ATL?

 

The booing wasn't because Chelios left, but because of where he went and what he accomplished there. I thought it was funny. I wouldn't have booed, but I'm sympathetic to those who did.

[kujay]

It should have been fairly obvious there would be boos bringing Chelios back to be honored.

 

That was kind of embarrassing.

 

I didn't realize he actually played 7 years in Montreal before he even came to Chicago. Yes, he had a lot of good years here, but I think elevating him to the same kind of level as the Espositos and the Hulls is a bit much, considering the majority of his career, and the most successful parts of his career, were spent elsewhere.

 

i disagree, he's most identified with the blackhawks. he actually played longer in detoit i think and had more success in both montreal and detroit. but he's a chicago boy.

 

this isn't like the idiot avalanche retiring ray bourque's number.

 

And no, it's not like what Colorado did. That's an embarassment.

[brinoch]

It should have been fairly obvious there would be boos bringing Chelios back to be honored.

 

That was kind of embarrassing.

 

I didn't realize he actually played 7 years in Montreal before he even came to Chicago. Yes, he had a lot of good years here, but I think elevating him to the same kind of level as the Espositos and the Hulls is a bit much, considering the majority of his career, and the most successful parts of his career, were spent elsewhere.

 

i disagree, he's most identified with the blackhawks. he actually played longer in detoit i think and had more success in both montreal and detroit. but he's a chicago boy.

 

this isn't like the idiot avalanche retiring ray bourque's number.

 

To me, the Chicago Blackhawks are Roenick, Chelios and Amonte. Those older guys mean nothing to me, but I appreciate their place in history. Chelios was a Blackhawk who ended up with Detroit because Wirtz and Pulford sucked balls. I hold nothing against him and do not understand anybody who does.

 

Same here. Though, I was also paying attention when it was Savard, Wilson and Larmer. But, whatever, the principle is the same.

[brinoch]

Hawks with another key win tonight against the Kings. That was a very, very important win. (As was Detroit.)

 

I noticed that Q moved Skille to the 4th line after a bad turnover, but seriously Q... Skille works hard and makes few mistakes and is, you know, head and shoulders better than Hendry. Who is, you know, a defenseman playing on the 4th line and can't seem to displace Boynton or Cullimore in Q's mind. Which reminds me, another Boynton bad play led to an opposition goal. Why is this guy here, again? He's seriously terrible. I hope that when Stalberg, Kane and Hossa return, Hendry moves to the blue line where he belongs and Boynton goes away.

 

Another couple of players that I have been impressed with? Toews, of course. Anyone who knows me knows that I think Toews is the best player on the Hawks, bar none. But, aside from Captain Serious, I think Jake Dowell has been *very* impressive. I would love to see the Hawks trade Bolland in the off season and keep Dowell as the 3rd line center (though they might be selling low on Bolland at that point).