HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Chicago Blackhawks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Blackhawks re-sign Ryan Stanton to a one-year contract

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-16-2013, 03:39 PM
  #1
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,402
vCash: 500
Blackhawks re-sign Ryan Stanton to a one-year contract

Quote:
@NHLBlackhawks
The #Blackhawks have agreed to terms with defensemen Ryan Stanton on a one-year deal.
http://blackhawks.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=678120

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 03:40 PM
  #2
Cullksinikers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: 'Merica
Country: United States
Posts: 14,995
vCash: 500
I'm hoping for a two-way deal around $700K or less.

If it's a one-way deal, Brookbank may be on the block.

Cullksinikers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 03:42 PM
  #3
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,402
vCash: 500
Brookbank was probably on the block regardless. He deserves to play, which he'll rarely do in Chicago, and Stanton's ready to be a #7 Dman in the NHL.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 03:58 PM
  #4
Sevanston
Registered User
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 13,215
vCash: 500
He's looked like a solid NHL bottom pairing option for a while now.

Hopefully this season he'll get to prove it.

Sevanston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 03:59 PM
  #5
Cullksinikers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: 'Merica
Country: United States
Posts: 14,995
vCash: 500
The Hawks don't need to make any more moves.

However, with Carcillo gone, if the Stanton contract proves to be a one-way deal, something's up in Chicago. We don't need any more additions, but if Stanley thinks his plan makes the Hawks better, go for it.

Cullksinikers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 04:03 PM
  #6
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,402
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cullksinikers View Post
The Hawks don't need to make any more moves.

However, with Carcillo gone, if the Stanton contract proves to be a one-way deal, something's up in Chicago. We don't need any more additions, but if Stanley thinks his plan makes the Hawks better, go for it.
Chicago fans are too eager to think, "something's up". I've been saying all off-season that people shouldn't be surprised to see Chicago trade Carcillo/Brookbank, like I said that people shouldn't be surprised to see Chicago trade Frolik after they moved Bolland.

Carcillo has been/will be replaced by Ben Smith. So there's no need to have him on the roster. Brookbank's getting paid 1.25M to be a #7 Dman.. why would Chicago pay that when they could sign Stanton (as they have) to around 600K, and get a player about as good?

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 04:09 PM
  #7
Cullksinikers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: 'Merica
Country: United States
Posts: 14,995
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeySensible View Post
Chicago fans are too eager to think, "something's up". I've been saying all off-season that people shouldn't be surprised to see Chicago trade Carcillo/Brookbank, like I said that people shouldn't be surprised to see Chicago trade Frolik after they moved Bolland.

Carcillo has been/will be replaced by Ben Smith. So there's no need to have him on the roster. Brookbank's getting paid 1.25M to be a #7 Dman.. why would Chicago pay that when they could sign Stanton (as they have) to around 600K, and get a player about as good?
Uh, I have, as well.

I'm not antsy or anything. The fact remains that if the Stanton's contract is a one-way deal, there is a higher chance than if it is a two-way deal that a deal (99 percent chance it would be Brookbank) would transpire.

The Hawks were fine.

Bickell-Toews-Kane
Sharp-Pirri-Hossa
Saad-Shaw-Morin
Kruger-Handzus-Smith
Bollig, Carcillo

Keith-Seabrook
Hjalmarsson-Oduya
Rozsival-Leddy
Brookbank

Crawford
Khabibulin

That team would have been under the cap by over $600K. I don't think they need to make a move. I would prefer them to only make a move based on if they are dissatisfied with parts of the team once the season begins. Maybe they prefer Hayes to Carcillo. Hayes might be our 13th or 14th forward (one extra defenseman on the team). That'd be a smart move, IMO.

Cullksinikers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 04:14 PM
  #8
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,402
vCash: 500
There's no chance Hayes comes up as the 13th forward. That serves no point in his development. He's not a young prospect anymore, but there's no point having him sit in the pressbox when he could be playing a large role in Rockford.

They moved Carcillo because he's been replaced by Smith, and Bollig's going to be the 13th forward. They'll move Brookbank because he can be replaced by Stanton, at a fraction of the cost, and the drop-off in play is minimal.

It's just an effective use of the cap space Chicago has. It doesn't mean they'll add anyone, it simply means they're using what they'll have efficiently.. and it doesn't mean they're thinking about adding anyone at the dead-line either. It's a move (or soon to be moves) that's all about getting the most out of the dollars you spend on your roster.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 04:18 PM
  #9
Cullksinikers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: 'Merica
Country: United States
Posts: 14,995
vCash: 500
How is Smith replacing Carcillo? If Smith comes up and sticks, he'll likely be on the fourth line. The only Carcillo replacement is a new extra forward.

Cullksinikers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 04:27 PM
  #10
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,402
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cullksinikers View Post
How is Smith replacing Carcillo? If Smith comes up and sticks, he'll likely be on the fourth line. The only Carcillo replacement is a new extra forward.
Carcillo should have been playing over Bollig. He wasn't. Smith's taking what should have been his spot on the 4th line, and Bollig remains the 13th forward.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 04:33 PM
  #11
Cullksinikers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: 'Merica
Country: United States
Posts: 14,995
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeySensible View Post
Carcillo should have been playing over Bollig. He wasn't. Smith's taking what should have been his spot on the 4th line, and Bollig remains the 13th forward.
Exactly. That's been my thinking all along. Now that you said it that way, we're in agreement.

Cullksinikers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 04:35 PM
  #12
IU Hawks fan
They call me IU
 
IU Hawks fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: No longer IU
Country: United States
Posts: 21,395
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeySensible View Post
Carcillo should have been playing over Bollig. He wasn't. Smith's taking what should have been his spot on the 4th line, and Bollig remains the 13th forward.
2 years ago, sure. Bollig is a better option today, though.

IU Hawks fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 04:38 PM
  #13
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,402
vCash: 500
I'm certainly not one of the anti-Bollig folks. I think he does do some things well enough to be an everyday NHLer (albeit a 4th liner), but Carcillo was/is a better option than him. He's a better agitator, is more effective offensively, and brings as much (and probably more) energy. His biggest concern has been his health, which is why he didn't play as much as he should have. That's understandable.

Bollig's strong along the boards, cycles well, gets in on the forecheck and throws his considerable weight around and he really does have a great shot.. he's just doesn't have much of any hockey sense to speak of.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 04:49 PM
  #14
IU Hawks fan
They call me IU
 
IU Hawks fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: No longer IU
Country: United States
Posts: 21,395
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeySensible View Post
I'm certainly not one of the anti-Bollig folks. I think he does do some things well enough to be an everyday NHLer (albeit a 4th liner), but Carcillo was/is a better option than him. He's a better agitator, is more effective offensively, and brings as much (and probably more) energy. His biggest concern has been his health, which is why he didn't play as much as he should have. That's understandable.

Bollig's strong along the boards, cycles well, gets in on the forecheck and throws his considerable weight around and he really does have a great shot.. he's just doesn't have much of any hockey sense to speak of.
You're straight up talking about the pre-Hawks Carcillo. Outside of a few flashes, he pretty much never showed any of those traits in his time here.

IU Hawks fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 04:55 PM
  #15
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,402
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IU Hawks fan View Post
You're straight up talking about the pre-Hawks Carcillo. Outside of a few flashes, he pretty much never showed any of those traits in his time here.
I'm talking about the pre-knee injury Carcillo.

Carbomb showed a lot of what I described in his time in Chicago, specifically 2011-12. The defining moment of his time in Chicago was a game against St.Louis where Chicago was getting badly outplayed and outhit, Q put Carcillo on Toews/Kane's line, stuck up for them in a few scrums, and Chicago dominated the rest of the way through and won the game. That game perfectly embodied what Carcillo can be when he's healthy and reeled in. That's what he was in 2011-12. In 2012-13, he wasn't healthy, but he was reeled in, which made him look less intense/energetic on the ice.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 05:26 PM
  #16
RomersWorld*
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,162
vCash: 500
Rather see Beach over Bollig.

RomersWorld* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 05:29 PM
  #17
DisgruntledHawkFan
Moderator
 
DisgruntledHawkFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 27,075
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to DisgruntledHawkFan
Bollig isn't a great fighter, but Beach has an atitude and skating problem. He's also a light heavy at best who picks his spots against smaller players.

No thanks.

DisgruntledHawkFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 05:31 PM
  #18
RomersWorld*
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,162
vCash: 500
Bollig: 1.5 PEN TAKEN/60, 0.9 PEN DRAWN/60
Carcillo: 0.6 PEN TAKEN/60, 1.2 PEN DRAWN/60

RomersWorld* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 05:34 PM
  #19
BobbyJet
HFB Partner
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,385
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeySensible View Post
I'm talking about the pre-knee injury Carcillo.

Carbomb showed a lot of what I described in his time in Chicago, specifically 2011-12. The defining moment of his time in Chicago was a game against St.Louis where Chicago was getting badly outplayed and outhit, Q put Carcillo on Toews/Kane's line, stuck up for them in a few scrums, and Chicago dominated the rest of the way through and won the game. That game perfectly embodied what Carcillo can be when he's healthy and reeled in. That's what he was in 2011-12. In 2012-13, he wasn't healthy, but he was reeled in, which made him look less intense/energetic on the ice.
Agreed. Carcillo never really got going here, largely due to injury.

Hoping this trade turns around his luck, and he gets a few years in before packing it in.

BobbyJet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 06:34 PM
  #20
topnotch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,039
vCash: 500
Stanton is still waiver eligible according to capgeek. No reason to trade Brookbank for Stanton unless Bowman is going to sign another vet forward.

The Hawks have plenty of cap space for mid-season acquisitions.

topnotch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 06:46 PM
  #21
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,402
vCash: 500
Pirri's still waiver exempt as well.. I guess the Hawks should go out and try to sign a vet to be the 2nd line centre and just have Pirri waiting in the wings. The Hawks need to see what they have in some of these young players. They don't have to do anything else, but another year in the AHL for Stanton doesn't do anything for him. He's a low-upside guy, who's pretty close to his upside at this point. He'll gain more playing a few NHL games and practising in the NHL than he will in the AHL.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 06:53 PM
  #22
topnotch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,039
vCash: 500
Stanton over Brookbank is a risk they don't need to take. They don't need the cap space. Roszival will be out some games and might get injured forcing the #7 dman into the lineup. I feel better with the proven NHL player.

If Pirri can't cut it on the team I expect he will be sent down as well.

Just because the Hawks have prospects doesn't mean they deserve NHL time.

Earn your spot or play in Rockford.

topnotch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 07:00 PM
  #23
SLarmer28*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,649
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RomersWorld View Post
Rather see Beach over Bollig.
Beach sucks.

SLarmer28* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 07:01 PM
  #24
tdfxman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeySensible View Post
There's no chance Hayes comes up as the 13th forward. That serves no point in his development. He's not a young prospect anymore, but there's no point having him sit in the pressbox when he could be playing a large role in Rockford.

They moved Carcillo because he's been replaced by Smith, and Bollig's going to be the 13th forward. They'll move Brookbank because he can be replaced by Stanton, at a fraction of the cost, and the drop-off in play is minimal.

It's just an effective use of the cap space Chicago has. It doesn't mean they'll add anyone, it simply means they're using what they'll have efficiently.. and it doesn't mean they're thinking about adding anyone at the dead-line either. It's a move (or soon to be moves) that's all about getting the most out of the dollars you spend on your roster.
This. +1

I remember seeing a report on Bowman saying "we managed the hell" of of the salary cap. that was the year after the Cup.

we will have the rockford shuttle going. I know I was happy with Bollig and Carcillo but that was always redundant, which I posted. This makes sense. Travel and carry 7 D and 13F. So we only have 2 extra guys. We can always call someone up to play ahead of Bollig. The cap is calculated on a daily basis with who is on your roster each day etc.

So we will be carrying 22 for the season. I love it, Bollig is suited and used to being the scratch forward.

Great news on moving Carcillo. I agree with posters, the inj hurt his speed. He started the Cup year on our #1 line in LA, now he can't even play for us and is a redundant spare part. GL carbomb.

tdfxman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 07:17 PM
  #25
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,402
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by topnotch View Post
Stanton over Brookbank is a risk they don't need to take. They don't need the cap space. Roszival will be out some games and might get injured forcing the #7 dman into the lineup. I feel better with the proven NHL player.

If Pirri can't cut it on the team I expect he will be sent down as well.

Just because the Hawks have prospects doesn't mean they deserve NHL time.

Earn your spot or play in Rockford.
I'm one of the seemingly few posters that actually likes Brookbank. As far as #6 Dmen go, I think he's solid. In saying that, I don't think the drop-off from Broobank to Stanton is big at all and while having a proven NHL Dman as your #7 is great, at 1.25M, it's dollars that really don't need to be spent. As I've said as well, Brookbank deserves to play. He's good enough to be in the lineup more than he is/will be in Chicago. Ryan Stanton has earned a chances to showcase himself in the NHL, and Brookbank deserves to play with more regularity. Moving him saves Chicago a decent chunk of change, and helps two players further their careers. I don't see a downside.

I won't be uspet if Brookbank's still around come October, I just expect Chicago will move him.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:04 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.