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

John Weideman on NHL Network Tonight...and oh yeah Craig Button's take

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-19-2012, 01:45 AM
  #1
AmericanDream
Puck You
 
AmericanDream's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: I Return to Serenity
Country: United States
Posts: 9,590
vCash: 500
John Weideman on NHL Network Tonight...and oh yeah Craig Button's take

pretty cool NHL Tonight show as they really spent a lot of time discussing the Hawks. Craig Button and some other dude who I never seen before really seem to think the Hawks are going after Malcom Subban.....at #18. I cringed when I heard this, but it could be likely I guess...

then John Weideman comes on for a real nice interview and points out a few things...

John said these things sumed up:

"Hawks are likely to make a splash if a real deal is on the table"

the guys were talking about the Hawks moving Kane and Weideman pretty much said Kane is likely in play at the draft, but the return would be significant...

Weideman pretty much differed from the panel and felt " the Hawks are likely going to go with a defenseman in this draft...when you have a draft this solid and deep with dmen, you really need to get the best one available at #18".

Weideman also pointed out " Crawford had an up and down year, but he feels he will come back strong and run with the #1 spot"...many on here are on both sides of the fence, but I agree with John

Weideman then said a few Hawks from Rockford will play big roles for the Hawks next year : "Dylan Olsen and Ben Smith are my top 2 players to come in right away and help this team out, both landing pretty big roles on the Hawks"...I can see both doing that depending on free agency, but Smith seems to be the forgotten guy that all announcers said has recovered from injuries and will be a player in the NHL.

Weideman and crew also talked about Brandon Saad...

and take this for what its worth, but Craig Button pretty much said "you dont trade Patrick Kane if you dont have Brandon Saad"... "kane can be moved because a kid like Saad, who has size, has amazing hands, and can score can step in right away and help replace that loss of Kane for the Hawks".......I usually cringe when Button talks, but how glowingly all of them talked about Saad including Weideman, you would think he is a 30 goal scorer in the NHL...

Bottom line is this: the panel believes the Hawks are a contender, and depending on free agency a serious contender. they feel Patrick Kane is the more likely star to get moved, but at a ransom price...they also feel the Hawks will take a goalie at #18 but only if his name is Subban....they also think Brandon Saad is very groovy, and will be a primetime player for us...good stuff to hear as there was honest criticism from all on the show especially with not keeping Niemi over Hjalmarsson and a number of ill older player signings from Bowman that havent panned out...

lastly, Weideman also said "I doubt the Hawks are going to make any big splash in free agency, when talking with Stan and seeing the direction they have gone, this team will build from the draft on up, and I dont see that changing right now....this team has young guys ready for roles and they need to be given spots to see what they can do".

Not a single one on that panel felt the Hawks will be major players for any top free agents...just throwing this out there as it was a pretty solid watch despite some of the people talking.

AmericanDream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 02:53 AM
  #2
Hawks82
Registered User
 
Hawks82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 893
vCash: 500
I've been watching that myself. I just listened to the segment with Wideman and I didn't hear him mention that Kane was on the block. He said a deal could be made at the draft, but he didn't say for Kane.

Loubardias said that there were wispers that Kane could be on the block. He mentioned that he'd be very careful in dealing him because "Patrick Kane's don't grow on trees".

Button surmised that it could be possible for the right return and that Brandon Saad could make Kane tradeable. That's a pretty big reach though.

It was nice to hear the glowing praise for Saad. I don't think he makes Kane expendable, and Button's a fool if he believes so, but if Saad develops into a productive 20-25G top 6 LW, I'll be happy.

If Subban is there at 18, I wouldn't be too dissapointed if the Hawks pick him. Good lateral movement, athletic, good glove. It seems like his strengths are Crawford's weaknesses.

Hawks82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 04:55 AM
  #3
Sarava
Moderator
 
Sarava's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Naperville, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 9,144
vCash: 500
The great thing is that the NHL Network replays everything 16,000 times, so I was able to go watch it after seeing this thread.

Weideman did not say anything about trading Kane. The trade Kane dissuasion was in the segment before Weideman joined them. Also Weideman's comment "Hawks are likely to make a splash if a real deal is on the table" was more or less him saying sure, when pressed on that by the panel. He didn't bring it up.

It was an interesting peace, and as you guys mentioned - there was lots of praise thrown Brandon Saad's way by all of them.

Sarava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 06:18 AM
  #4
EmeticDonut
Registered User
 
EmeticDonut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,643
vCash: 500
I don't really get this Saad hype. People are seemingly penciling him as a sure fire roster player on opening night, in the top six no less. Is it just that he is a first round talent from the second round that is skewing the expectations? He had an excellent year in the OHL, but as an overager. His very brief stint in the NHL is really not enough to say one way or another either.

I am not saying this kid won't amount to anything, but I also have a hard time believing he will be a bonafide star. He might manage 60 points on a good year in his prime but will hover around 40-50pts if he makes it that far. Is that what everyone are expecting out of the kid and I am just reading the hype wrong? If that's the case then nevermind.

EmeticDonut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 06:39 AM
  #5
w00d
In Saad We Trust
 
w00d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: United Center
Country: United States
Posts: 1,232
vCash: 500
Brandon Saad? Never heard of him.

w00d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 06:48 AM
  #6
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 24,452
vCash: 500
You don't trade Kane because you have Saad. You trade Kane when you get better players coming back that fills his hole and others on the roster

Bubba88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 08:40 AM
  #7
tomcat24
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 75
vCash: 500
At the very last segment of the show Buttoon said it wouldn't surpise him at all if Kane was traded around the draft like Carter and Richards were last year. That is the kind of return I would like for Kane. What philly got.

tomcat24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 09:17 AM
  #8
xX Hot Fuss
Registered User
 
xX Hot Fuss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 10,963
vCash: 500
Replacing Kane with Saad should get Bowman fired.

Luckily I don't think he's that stupid/insane

xX Hot Fuss is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 09:22 AM
  #9
Illinihockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 15,223
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EmeticDonut View Post
I don't really get this Saad hype. People are seemingly penciling him as a sure fire roster player on opening night, in the top six no less. Is it just that he is a first round talent from the second round that is skewing the expectations? He had an excellent year in the OHL, but as an overager. His very brief stint in the NHL is really not enough to say one way or another either.

I am not saying this kid won't amount to anything, but I also have a hard time believing he will be a bonafide star. He might manage 60 points on a good year in his prime but will hover around 40-50pts if he makes it that far. Is that what everyone are expecting out of the kid and I am just reading the hype wrong? If that's the case then nevermind.
Agreed. People are way too excited about him right now.

Illinihockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 09:24 AM
  #10
unbridledid
Registered User
 
unbridledid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 443
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Illinihockey View Post
Agreed. People are way too excited about him right now.
A year in Rockford would do Saad a world of good...

unbridledid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 11:40 AM
  #11
HawksFan74
Tread Lightly
 
HawksFan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,584
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba88 View Post
You don't trade Kane because you have Saad. You trade Kane when you get better players coming back that fills his hole and others on the roster
Agreed. Better be a good return for Kane if he's traded.

HawksFan74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 12:07 PM
  #12
Illinihockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 15,223
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by unbridledid View Post
A year in Rockford would do Saad a world of good...
Right. Now if he goes into Rockford and shreds the AHL....then ya, I'll get excited.

Illinihockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 12:50 PM
  #13
hawksfan50
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 3,013
vCash: 500
Well --last night TSN had Bob Mckenzie reveal his final rankings for the draft...

These canvass the opinions of actual NHL teams' scouts not the opinions of the independent scouting orgs---so it should be closer to a real "coonensus" of how the actual NHl teams rank the players-but Mckenzie only samples 10 teams' scouts -so it is not a complete picture as to how all nhl teams view the rankings ..still IF this Hawks will take Subban if he still is on the board at #18 indication (from the panel in the Weideman interview is correct0then the Mckenzie overall consensus view is that Subban was only a #25 ranking(Vasilevski was #24) --so these NHl scouts did not place the goalies as worthy of top 20 status ---BUT MCKENZIE said the goalies could go earlier if a team wanted to draft a goalie....FYI--Kyle woodlief does not think Subban rates top 20 either and has him going 29 to NJ in his mock draft---he has the Hawks takng Vasilevski at #18 --BUT I think the Hawks willnot risk on a Russian --even if he is the best goalie in the draft--rather IF they want a goalie ,then I think the panel in the Weideman interview is correct-it would be SUBBAN..

ON the other hand --if Wiedeman is tipping us off that the Hawks must take a d-man because this draft is deep in d-men and so we must take the best one still available--this is LUNACY ....I can see taking position need at goalie because the conensus seems to be that only 2 are worthy first rounders so we must get one of them and since we won;t riska Russkie that leaves Subban ....BUT to say we must take a d-man because the draft is so deep in d-men is nUTS ....IF in position players (forwards and d-men) you have a top 20 pick--usually you stick to your BPA ranking ....so taking a d-man just becase of perceived depth of d-men whilst bypassing forwards who may rank higher on your list is crazy ...

Looking at the McKenzie conensus survey--- (albeit only 10 NHL teams' scouts)---we see he has TOM WILSON the big bruising RW ranked 18th and TOMAS HERTAL the 6'2.25 198 lb centre with 1 yr. pro experience already against men in the Czech Extraliga) as 19th..

Now the Hawks might be settled on the need to get SUBBAN at #18 and I can understand that,and I agree -he would be the goalie I'd take...WILSON if on the board I also could understand -who would not love adding a LUCIC type to the team ? BUT in all honesty I would take HERTL at the top of my list for #18 because
in my opinion he is the long sought 2nd line centre we need -i think he is far better than any of our vaunted pipeline centres --PIRRI.MCNEILL,DANAULT,KEVIN HAYES--all of whom have flaws that I think make them not the ideal solution at 2nd line C we are seeking. HERTL on the other hand i think has what it takes for the role.
MY instinctual hunch says --do not bypass this opprtunity despite our "perceived" pipeline depth at centre.. Craig Button gives a glowing synopsis of Hertl --yet in his own rankings somehow he cannot put him any higher than #22 ...YET McKenzie's conensus view is that HERTL should be right there in consideration (#19) and that it is only a matter of whih "hole" on the team you weant solved:

. if a goalie of the future is a priority: take Subban

.if a perceoved "soft" team needs a LUCIC/NEIL type desperately take Wilson

.if you are not sure your vaunted pipeline centre draftees are the real deal for 2nd line centre long term solution : take HERTL because he sure looks like he is...
PLUS -he may be NHL ready right NOW--such is his hockey sense and maturity of his game ..I don't think anyone in this draft thinks the game as well as he does..

Amazingly I have posted on these 3 possible "targets" for Chicago for a long time now--UNFORTUNATELY we can only chose one (UNLESS STAN gets another first roundeer in a trade in which case we have a shot at 2 of them) ...

BUT THEN WEIDEMAN says a silly thing that because this draft is so deep in d-men we must take the next remaing highest ranked d-man on the board..

OF course you know that this is probably what idiot Stan will do --and so instead of
for sure filling at least one of 3 big holes this teams needs for its long term success in future --he will gamble on the scraps of d-men remaining on the board ..In the 17 coming off the board should teams draft eactly as McKenzie has them per his conensus survey there are 7 forwards and 10 D off the board --this assumes no goaie goes in the top 17 (but in reality some team might grab a goalie before we pick
so in that case there could be 7F/9D or 6F/10 D off before we pick...
THIS means if we take a d-man the probability is we must take only the 10th or 11th best d-man vs. taking perhaps the 2nd ranked goalie,the 7th or 8th or 9th ranked FORWARD ...

THE 11th ranked d-man on MCKENZIE's conensus ranking is MATHEW FINN who ranks #21 overall in his final rankings...next at #22 is the 12th ranked d-man Brady Skjei...IF a goalie went in the top17 ,then it means the #17 ranked DEREK POULIOT is also available (I doubt STAN takes another smallish offenseman)but the fact is that POULIOT probably thinks the game on D better than most D-men in this draft,just like HERTL is the cerebral (hockey sense) paragon among the forwards of this draft) ..


SO folks there it is in a nutshell: 1 goalie, 2 forwards,3 D as potetial STANBOW most realistic targets for the #18:


.SUBBAN (G)
.WILSON (RW/physical,big,hiiter/fighter but can skate and is defensively responsible )
6'4 200..
.HERTL (C) a real deal 2nd line centre solution --terrific hockey sense 6'2.25 198
Could be NHL ready right now...
. POULIOT--- smallish offensive d-man but terrific hockey sense and can be PP point..
. MATT FINN ---6'0 192--not classic BIG D --but a very effective 2-way D-man
good in transition,good skater,gets puck out of danger ---but now wow factor like a Doughty...( see good but not special)...

.BRADY SKJEI ---6'3 203 --on the other hand here is the bIG and difficult to play against --limited offense but skates well,very agile.hard to get around him -very effective defensively ...but not a real punisher ..(again "solid" but now wow factor -but at least he brings size too-something Finn and Pouliot don't have)..


So while Stan can't control the board (baring trades to get a higher or another first rounder in the range where he gets at least 2 of these "targets" -he must decide which of these realistic targets should be his pick at #18..

IF it is me-I go with Hertl because it is so hard trying to get that real deal 2nd line centtre.. I think HERTL can be that guy -but it is my opinion-I have no knowledge of how Stan and our scouts feel about it EXCEPT that they probably still overvalue our pipeline centres to the point they think one of the willbe the real deal in the 2nd line C spot OR that Patrick Kane (LOL) is the ideal solution to that hole (unless they trade him)...The one guy on this list making the least sense is Pouliot--though while i like his offense -i cringe at another smallish d-man who will get pushed around in the pros.

I could understand us taking Subban or Wilson ...but we may not get another crack (barring trade) to draft a 2nd line centre who has both size and the hockey sense to be the ideal 2nd line centre for us... K. Hayes has the size,defense but not the hockey sense /creativity and hands for the overall job; Pirri has the creativity and hands but lacks the size and balance not to get pushed around; MCNEILL lacks the hockey sense,playmaking and creativity and has never yet demonstrated he can be a plus player, DANAULT again lacks the size and his goal scoring is suspect --so he maybe only a role player/pk'er typ on the bottom 2 lines...Hayes and Mcneill might only have 3c upsides for the pros ...Pirri might never have the strength to last in the NHl and so could just be one of those smaller careeer aHl'er guys who racks up points at that level.. BUT if our top brass think any one of these can "make a difference" centering the 2nd line to all that is required there in terms of points,good +/-, face-offs,puck possession--then STAN will see no "need" to draft another centre at #18. I am skeptical any of our pipeline centres willbe that solution--and not anytime soon if that...as I said --HERTL may be NHL ready NOW ...

On the other hand we know it takes most D-men several years after the draft to be ready at the NHL level ---so if we do take a D-man--don't think he willbe ready for 2 years at least...

To me--HERTL does look "special" (elite hockey sense/mature game already); McNeill looks like he needs lots of pro development yet--in his Rockford trials he hardly got off any shots --not very encouraged by that typical big jump from Jr. to the pro reality --but HERTL has played against the top pros in the CZECH Rep. and shone already at 18 ...I don't think he needs much developing -his hocey sense is good already ... K. Hayes disappointed me in how non-dominating/ quite average he looked at B.C. (i saw several games lst season) -whether he was content to play a mere supportive role and not assert himself as a potential "star" -I do not know-but to me this lack of wanting to be the "go to guy" is a character flaw-I expected more from an NHL first rounder playing on a college team... Danault disappointed with how few goals and points he could muster in the year after his draft in the Q league ---I said at the time of his draft he was more only of 2nd rounder quality and could not see why they picked a likely bottom 2 line role player so high (1st rounder) --so I don't see him as any 2nd line NHL'er--sorry... PIRRI i think does have scoring ablity but if he gets pushed around defensively-he would be a one-way libility we an't carry... Either he makes it as a 2nd line centre or busts as an NHL'er...At least McNeill,K. Hayes,Danault all can find roles as bottom 2 line players if they never hit the ceilings offensively that our scouts thought they might have as pros...
So -if we really are back at square one in the long-time search for a real deal 2nd line centre behind Toews --then how can we pass on the chance to FIX that hole once and for all ...This is why I would take HERTL because D-men or Lucic types maybe we can get in other drafts but drafting high enough and in years where there is a real deal solution for the 2C spot are rare opportunities.. So while we also need an elite goalie prospect and a big tough hitter/fighter guy wjo can play regular shifts
WE NEED a 2nd line centre long-term structural solution MORE --because it is so difficult to draft .We should not bypass HERTL ...but alas,I fear STAN will because he unlike me, he probably still believes one of his 4 prized pipeline centres will "develop" into that long sought ideal 2nd line centre...

IF I am correct in guaging Stan's optimistic view of his 4 pipeline centres for eventually filing the 2C hole problem --then I at least HOPE he tries solving either the elite goalie (of the future) NEED,or the LUCIC-type BIG winger NEED..my FEAR though is that he "settles" for more 2nd pairing upside (after Development --ie. 2-3years away) d-man depth for the system..

The problem with this is thaat IF we stay healthier,get a bit more luck, get a better year from our goalies and Stan's moves for immediate help vua trades or UFa's all work out--THEN instead of 18 we draft late 20's to 30th next year (with only 1 pick in the top 3 rounds --round one)... THAT draft is considered deeper than this but STILL it is unlikely drafting late 20's we get as good a centre prospect as HERTL ,
a Lucic type,or an elite goalie prospect...but MAYBE a FINN or a SkJEI 2nd pair ceiling D-man willbe available ..

In summary: TO me the opportunity cost in bypassing a 2C,or a Lucic -like special role player, or an elite goalie of the future is too much to ignore in favour of a mere
#3 or #4 D-man who we can get already developed via trades rather tan hoping our draftee fills that role in 2-3 years of more development...The latter are more easily draftable or available via trades -the other needs are usually harder to fill.
It would be different if we had a shot at a #1 or #2 d-man-but we donot draft high enough for that and while with LUCK a later pick in round one or round two could yet provide a top pairing d-man ---those lucky instances are rare--in general past #15 you do not get many elite top pairing D-men...BUT the odds of getting a #3-4
guy are probably as good with 2nd and 3rd rounder d-man picks.THEREFORE I strongly disagree with WEIDEMAN that we must take a d-man because this is a strong d-man draft in first round depth for the position..His error is assuming depth of d-men means that even the 10-11 d-men who could get picked before #18 are any of them of PIETRANGELO /DOUGHTY/ DOUGIE HAMILTON quality --maybe for all thei hype none reaaly are that "elite" --meaning there are lots of "good" d-men at the top half of this draft but perhaps no "great" ones .IN that case if the base quality is "less" than elite -it means lots of mistakes in drafting and less "certain" top parir celilings for a lot of them... THAT lowers the "quality" of those d-men remaining past mid-first... It implies either an equal ceiling chance for a 2nd pairing as guys taken ahead of hem OR it means if the #3-4 ceilings are already plucked off--the guys remaining past mid-first in this plethora of d-men are more likely only #4-5ceilings-- and that more risk of then never even "making it" or if they do--not with any significant impact bit only average impact..

So I ask --CAN we get a "difference-maker" as opposed to a mere useful part at #18?


SUBBAN -COULD be a diffrence-maker if he pand out as a top-ten NHL goalie in future..


HERTL --looks like he can make a difference filling 2nd line C hole perhaps immediately -but if not probably just 1 yeear away--his game already is pro mature level..


WILSON-- if he brings the LUCIC presence to the lineup that makes the Hawks a lot TOUGHER and prevents abuse on our skilled stars--that role type CAN be a huge difference-maker...our stars will play more cnfidently knowing opponents won't be targeting them for hits as much because our big hitter will take it back out on their stars..

Would any of the 3 highest ranked d--men who might be remaining make such a difference 2-3 years from now if they make it to our 2nd paring? WEll i don't think so --not any more tht whatever 2nd pairing we have at that time..

In conclusion--Weideman is nuts if he believes we must take a d-man because the hype says this draft is deep in d-mem.. Forgive the pun,but his analysis must go DEEPER than that. (as mine does).

hawksfan50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 02:07 PM
  #14
giza
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 186
vCash: 500
The Hawks Draft

First, Kelley is not going to reveal anything. It's his job not to. He may actually be a little bit purposely misleading. 2nd, Button really doesn't know much so disregard what what he says altogether. I would put more stock in McKenzie.

The key to it all is how the draft can make the biggest impact for your team. I honestly believe there are 7 Dmen that the Hawks would be elated with if any one of them are available with the 18th (Murray, Reilley, Ceci, Reinhart, Dumba & Trouba and Koekkoek). There are some others, and they are decent, but more vanilla and are more of a nice to have, but not impactful.

If none of these 7 are around at 18 it gets REAL interesting. I could see them going with a power forward (Wilson, Gaunce, Girgenson), but I believe the more likelyhood is that they go goalie because that is where the biggest hole in the organization is in terms of quality talent. However, I don't think the Hawks will utilize the 18th pick on any goalie in this draft. The Russian kid has the Russian factor and we all know Russian's haven't worked out here. Subban is very athletic, but pretty raw. Dansk has the size and technique you're looking for, but isn't rated quite as high. So, if they don't get one of the coveted D men listed above, I think they move back and recoup some of what they laid out at the last trade deadline for Oduya. I honestly think they want Dansk most and if they can get him in the early to mid-20's, they'll be happy. It will impact the team and it will bring in more assets by doing so. They can still get a decent D man in the 2nd round as well. Some like Pelech or the hitting machine from the US National Developmental team might still be around. This is the scenario I used to make my annual mock draft.

giza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 04:20 PM
  #15
HawksTillDeath
Registered User
 
HawksTillDeath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 1,643
vCash: 500
lock this thread - the kane issues wasn't even spoken to that extent

HawksTillDeath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 04:25 PM
  #16
Sarava
Moderator
 
Sarava's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Naperville, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 9,144
vCash: 500
Kane being traded came up in 2 different segments. There's no need to lock this thread.

Sarava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 04:32 PM
  #17
AmericanDream
Puck You
 
AmericanDream's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: I Return to Serenity
Country: United States
Posts: 9,590
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HawksTillDeath View Post
lock this thread - the kane issues wasn't even spoken to that extent
ummm, they certainly did talk about Kane being moved and what kind of price it would take to get him...

.......if you dont like the thread, dont post in it, no use in trying to play moderator on here...

AmericanDream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 04:36 PM
  #18
AmericanDream
Puck You
 
AmericanDream's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: I Return to Serenity
Country: United States
Posts: 9,590
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarava View Post
The great thing is that the NHL Network replays everything 16,000 times, so I was able to go watch it after seeing this thread.

Weideman did not say anything about trading Kane. The trade Kane dissuasion was in the segment before Weideman joined them. Also Weideman's comment "Hawks are likely to make a splash if a real deal is on the table" was more or less him saying sure, when pressed on that by the panel. He didn't bring it up.

It was an interesting peace, and as you guys mentioned - there was lots of praise thrown Brandon Saad's way by all of them.
Weideman was asked if the Hawks were going to make any big moves, and he said he wasnt sure but could see it happening if something legit was on the table, they all said Kane is the likely guy to get moved...I just watched it for the second time... no mention of Sharp, Hossa, etc.. just Kane being mentioned as a trade target and that it would cost a heck of a lot to get him from the Hawks..

it doesnt matter who said what, all I wanted to talk about was that this is something that is being talked about (Kane getting traded) and that they had a nice discussion on the NHL Network involving this....just food for thought

AmericanDream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 04:58 PM
  #19
massivegoonery
Registered User
 
massivegoonery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 11,389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EmeticDonut View Post
I don't really get this Saad hype. People are seemingly penciling him as a sure fire roster player on opening night, in the top six no less. Is it just that he is a first round talent from the second round that is skewing the expectations? He had an excellent year in the OHL, but as an overager. His very brief stint in the NHL is really not enough to say one way or another either.

I am not saying this kid won't amount to anything, but I also have a hard time believing he will be a bonafide star. He might manage 60 points on a good year in his prime but will hover around 40-50pts if he makes it that far. Is that what everyone are expecting out of the kid and I am just reading the hype wrong? If that's the case then nevermind.
Translation: I haven't seen him at all, I don't know what the word "overager" means and it's always a high-percentage play to say a prospect won't be a star.

massivegoonery is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 08:09 PM
  #20
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,965
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EmeticDonut View Post
I don't really get this Saad hype. People are seemingly penciling him as a sure fire roster player on opening night, in the top six no less. Is it just that he is a first round talent from the second round that is skewing the expectations? He had an excellent year in the OHL, but as an overager. His very brief stint in the NHL is really not enough to say one way or another either.

I am not saying this kid won't amount to anything, but I also have a hard time believing he will be a bonafide star. He might manage 60 points on a good year in his prime but will hover around 40-50pts if he makes it that far. Is that what everyone are expecting out of the kid and I am just reading the hype wrong? If that's the case then nevermind.
Brandon Saad was the most dominant player in the OHL this season. Better than Yakupov, Strome, Scheifele and other highly-touted propsects.

Brandon Saad was NOT an overager. This past season was Saad's 18/19-year-old season.

As far as production expectations; once he establishes himself as an NHL player and establishes himself within our top-6 - which I think he will sooner rather than later - then I'd expect him to put up 55-65 points with regularity.

HockeySensible is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 08:21 PM
  #21
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,303
vCash: 500
Is that hf50's longest post ever?

Chris Hansen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 08:22 PM
  #22
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,965
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Is that hf50's longest post ever?
I'm gonna guess it's not.

HockeySensible is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 08:27 PM
  #23
brtriad
Registered User
 
brtriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The Loop
Country: United States
Posts: 13,004
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to brtriad
Tom Wilson is surely an intriguing prospect. Seems a lot like Mark McNeill with a self professed mean streak.

brtriad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 08:37 PM
  #24
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,965
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by brtriad View Post
Tom Wilson is surely an intriguing prospect. Seems a lot like Mark McNeill with a self professed mean streak.
Mark McNeill is far, far more talented.

HockeySensible is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 10:35 PM
  #25
AmericanDream
Puck You
 
AmericanDream's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: I Return to Serenity
Country: United States
Posts: 9,590
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HossTheBoss View Post
Mark McNeill is far, far more talented.
agreed.

Wilson makes no sense at all for us at #18...

what does make sense is

a. Center

b. Defenseman (preferably a power play point man with a blast and some size)

c. Goalie

those 3 options make sense, adding a winger that has below average offensive skills is pointless when we already have Beach and Hayes in our system as well as Bickell...

AmericanDream 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 11:22 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.