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

Bowman plans to "improve from within"

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-29-2012, 10:36 AM
  #76
Atomic Punk
Mean Streets
 
Atomic Punk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Panama
Country: United States
Posts: 8,794
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by HawksFan74 View Post
Not very realistic. Hawks tix will be a hot item for the foreseeable future. Everybody needs to stop acting like this team doesn't spend money. It does.
It does spend money. Just sometimes not well. And the sometimes is becoming more and more common.

Atomic Punk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 10:51 AM
  #77
Illinihockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 14,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyJet View Post
/\
In the short term, a half empy UC wonít do anything for the team. But Hawks management needs to know that the product on the ice is more important than all the marketing glitz weíve witnessed since winning the SC. Itís easy to get the impression that their strategy is ďthe goal was reached now letís milk it for all its worthĒ. Thatís fine as long as going forward we ice the best team possible and that simply isnít happening at the moment. Yes, Stanís hands were certainly tied due to the cap problems and high bonus payments, and he did a decent job in making some difficult decisions, but that was then, and this is now. I donít want to see a replay of the sad sack era we endured under the Wirtz Sr.
How is it easy to get the impression they are "milking it for all its worth" when they buried $8 million dollars in the minor leagues last year to try to be competitive? How can you say that when they've made big dollar, long term commitments to players every single season for the past 4 years?

Illinihockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 10:52 AM
  #78
HawksFan74
Tread Lightly
 
HawksFan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,248
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by swanny View Post
It does spend money. Just sometimes not well. And the sometimes is becoming more and more common.
Yeah... well, it remains to be seen. FA has not started yet. Bad decisions fall on Bowman.

HawksFan74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 10:58 AM
  #79
DontTazMeBro
LoveYouRyanNash
 
DontTazMeBro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Chicago, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 1,968
vCash: 500
This is the make or break season for Stan IMO.

__________________
Stanley Cup Champions
1934 1938 1961 2010 2013
R.I.P Ryan Nash.
Old username: LoveYouRyanNash
GO HAWKS!
DontTazMeBro is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 11:02 AM
  #80
Martini*
Gods Team
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,786
vCash: 500
LOL at this thread.

Blowman is building thru the draft. The Hawks suppossedly have one of the best systems in the league. This is what many here want, Krugers and euro's on the ice whom were top five picks in the draft who luckily dropped like anvils to the Hawks pick.

Blowman gets a pass if that is what he is doing. Nothing will change that, and calling for his head will fall on deaf ears, like McDunce cares about any fans opinions over what is in their wallets and purses.

Live with it. Deal with it. This team for now is content with making the playoffs and will not be a Cup contender until they get rid of dead weight like the Krugers, etc. Players Blowman has a crush on whom just arent that good to begin with but Blowman wont admit he made a mistake. This team needs vets who know how to win instead of relying on kids who may or may not work out.

Martini* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 11:22 AM
  #81
rick hawk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 539
vCash: 500
I wouldn't downplay the importance of the draft. IMO its the single most important element in having a successful team. Trades and free agency reinforce that but the draft is the foundation.

rick hawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 11:33 AM
  #82
Judrix
Kruger is our 2C
 
Judrix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 2,340
vCash: 500
what the hell are some of you talking about? Kruger played ONE season in the NHL on new sized ice. He was GREAT defensively and always will be. I don't know what the **** some of you expect from a rookie.

The kid has a place on this team and will be a great player. Just because he was thrown into a role he wasn't ready for has clouded all your judgments of him as a player. Most teams fans would see a 22 year old kid that carried himself that well throughout his first season and be hyping the kid up like crazy.

Ryan O'Reilly put him very similar numbers in his 2ND season as Kruger did in his 1ST.

Judrix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 11:37 AM
  #83
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Kruger is not great defensively. A great defensive player has great position, backchecks well, helps clear the crease (for centers), wins faceoffs (for centers), and makes the players around him better. Kruger is above average positionally, that's it.

His offensive numbers were a mirage since his assits were basically a result of other players making good plays, not him. He scored goals by going to the net, a player with his size and strength I just don't see that being a viable long term game plan for him. He already had a concussion playing that way this year.

Not saying he's got no future but he doesn't belong in the NHL, especially not as a center, especially not on a supposed contender.

MagicSlap* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 11:44 AM
  #84
xX Hot Fuss
Registered User
 
xX Hot Fuss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 10,585
vCash: 500
I'm sure a half empty UC will get us really far when we have to re-sign half our team, Toews and Kane included


Last edited by xX Hot Fuss: 06-29-2012 at 11:49 AM.
xX Hot Fuss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 11:46 AM
  #85
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicSlap View Post
Kruger is not great defensively. A great defensive player has great position, backchecks well, helps clear the crease (for centers), wins faceoffs (for centers), and makes the players around him better. Kruger is above average positionally, that's it.

His offensive numbers were a mirage since his assits were basically a result of other players making good plays, not him. He scored goals by going to the net, a player with his size and strength I just don't see that being a viable long term game plan for him. He already had a concussion playing that way this year.

Not saying he's got no future but he doesn't belong in the NHL, especially not as a center, especially not on a supposed contender.
It's funny, I never see Bolland clearing the crease or winning the majority of his faceoffs.. I'd say he's pretty damn good defensively.

And Kruger does backcheck well.. he's almost always the first guy back on the backcheck and routinely fills in at the point for pinching Dmen:



His offenisve numbers weren't a mirage.. for every "cheesy" assist you point too I can just as easily point to a nice set-up that wasn't finished.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 11:49 AM
  #86
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
That was a nice play but they were too few and far between. I'm more so talking about his play along the boards in the d zone, which sucked. He hustles, we know, but that's about it. Heart and energy can only do so much when the talent and skill isn't there.

Bolland is great positionaly (not just above average like Kruger), gets under the other teams's skin, can hit, plays along the baords and plays with the same heart Kruger does but he has the skill to match.

He had a few nice set ups this year that went unfinished. Get over it, for a "playmaker" he showed barely anything at all. Cling to the couple of nice plays he had this year, cause he did do some nice things, but the much greater amount of bad greatly outweighs it.

MagicSlap* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 11:55 AM
  #87
BobbyJet
Registered User
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Illinihockey View Post
How is it easy to get the impression they are "milking it for all its worth" when they buried $8 million dollars in the minor leagues last year to try to be competitive? How can you say that when they've made big dollar, long term commitments to players every single season for the past 4 years?
After dumping the salaries of Campbell, Brouwer and Campboli, by the product I see on the ice. It's worse, much worse. Then another bad signing, and wasting some of that cash with a contract to Oduya, who couldn't hold Campbell's jock strap. The team as it stands now is worse than the watered down team we had the Autumn after winning the SC, yet the hype continues and supposely Stan still thinks we are a contender. That's how.


Last edited by BobbyJet: 06-29-2012 at 12:01 PM.
BobbyJet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 11:55 AM
  #88
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,824
vCash: 500
So by "helps clear the crease, backchecks well" you were talking about boardplay? Gotchya.

You talk about boardplay and then bring up talent and skill? What does talent and skill have to do with boardplay? There's nothing wrong with Kruger's skill level or talent.. he needs to get bigger, which he will.

Kruger was in his ****ing rookie season.. who are you guys comparing him to that shows he sucks? The Bolland of 2010/11/12 wasn't the Bolland we saw in 2007/08.. and, I wager, the Kruger we see in 2014/15/16 won't be the same Kruger we saw in 2011/12. He's going to improve, he's going to get stronger and he had a solid rookie season this year. He got better as the season went along and there's no reason to believe he won't continue getting better. He may never be a star in the NHL but he's going to be a good NHLer.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 11:58 AM
  #89
massivegoonery
Registered User
 
massivegoonery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 11,326
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicSlap View Post
Um he put up almost 40 points this year with awful linemates playing against the toughest players in the NHL while starting 70% of the time in the dzone.

He had like three shifts in the top 6 before being demoted. He was demoted not because he didn't fit there but because we had nobody who was good enough to play 3C.

Bolland was always supposed to be the 2C of the future but the pipeline never panned out to give him a chance to be it. He'd be just fine there.
Bolland was absolutely ****ing horrible for the vast majority of this year. He got all the hard minutes and absolutely failed with them and he's probably the individual most at fault for the Blackhawks' miserable team defense this year.

The cognitive dissonance displayed when you praise Bolland's disappearing act and hammer a successful and dependable rookie season from Marcus Kruger is astounding.

massivegoonery is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 11:58 AM
  #90
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
You seem to be taking a lot of what I say out of context, cherry picking some things while ignoring the whole thought.

Backchecking and playing the boards doesn't take skill but it takes size and strength, something Kruger doesn't have. Sure he can develop it but let him develop in the AHL.

Offensive game comes from skills such as speed, acceleration, having a good shot, etc. Kruger is at best and average skater with average acceleration. He has an awful shot. His supposed best asset, his play making ability, was basically non-existent this year.

I'm not saying Kruger will never be a good NHLer, just that he's not a good one right now and I'd rather him be in Rockford

MagicSlap* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 12:01 PM
  #91
Illinihockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 14,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyJet View Post
After dumping the salaries of Campbell, Brouwer and Campboli, by the product I see on the ice. It's worse, much worse. Then another bad signing, and wasting some of that cash with a contract to Oduya, who couldn't hold Campbell's jock strap. The team as it stands now is worse than the watered down team we had the Autumn after winning the SC with, yet the hype continues and supposely Stan still thinks we are a contender. That's how.
How did they dump the salaries of Brouwer and Campoli? They stole a first round pick for Brouwer and then used that money to sign another player. Campoli was a 3rd pairing defenseman who they replaced with Steve Montador for more money. You can criticize their free agent moves but they are spending money....a ton of money, thats not milking it. Milking it would be if they had a $50 mil payroll last season.

Also how can you say last years team was worse than the team the year after the Cup? They had 4 more points last year. You can say they were comperable, but they certainly weren't worse.

Illinihockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 12:02 PM
  #92
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by massivegoonery View Post
Bolland was absolutely ****ing horrible for the vast majority of this year. He got all the hard minutes and absolutely failed with them and he's probably the individual most at fault for the Blackhawks' miserable team defense this year.

The cognitive dissonance displayed when you praise Bolland's disappearing act and hammer a successful and dependable rookie season from Marcus Kruger is astounding.
Bolland had a subpar year for what we expect out of him, which is to be essentially the best 3C in the game. It is understandable though considering the minutes he had to play and the players he had to play with. He was absolutely not the individual most at fault on the Hawks though, that is an absurd thing to say. He was inconsistent, that would be my complaint. At times he was the Bolland we know and love and at times he seem disinterested.

Kruger was given way more of a chance to succeed and he failed, it's that simple. Send him to Rockford until he's ready.

MagicSlap* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 12:04 PM
  #93
HawksFan74
Tread Lightly
 
HawksFan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,248
vCash: 500
Kruger couldn't hold Bolland's jock strap, there is no comparison. Kruger's slot and minutes are the biggest area for improvement on the Hawks.

Kruger is not a quality NHL 2nd line center. Pretty much any prospect in the system would have replicated Kruger's numbers with,

- The line mates Kruger played with
- Minutes & PP time he received

HawksFan74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 12:06 PM
  #94
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Kruger is not an NHL caliber center, no matter what line.

MagicSlap* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 12:07 PM
  #95
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicSlap View Post
You seem to be taking a lot of what I say out of context, cherry picking some things while ignoring the whole thought.

Backchecking and playing the boards doesn't take skill but it takes size and strength, something Kruger doesn't have. Sure he can develop it but let him develop in the AHL.

Offensive game comes from skills such as speed, acceleration, having a good shot, etc. Kruger is at best and average skater with average acceleration. He has an awful shot. His supposed best asset, his play making ability, was basically non-existent this year.

I'm not saying Kruger will never be a good NHLer, just that he's not a good one right now and I'd rather him be in Rockford
I'm cherry picking? This was you're entire "thought":

Quote:
"Kruger is not great defensively. A great defensive player has great position, backchecks well, helps clear the crease (for centers), wins faceoffs (for centers), and makes the players around him better. Kruger is above average positionally, that's it."
Not once in the entire post did you bring up "boardplay".. but then, after my response, you said "I'm more referring to boardplay in the D zone"..

Offensive game comes from intelligence, anticipation, being able to read and make plays: Hockey sense. There are physical tools that players certianly benefit from; Having a nice shot, being strong around the net, having good speed... but if you don't have smarts you'll never be as good an offensive player as someone who has good hockey sense. See: Skille, Jack.

And backchecking very clearly doesn't take size.. either that, or Kruger is the exception and not the rule, as he backchecked well all season.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 12:09 PM
  #96
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
I consider board play in the d zone to be part of the backcheck responsibilities.

Yes hockey sense is important, critically important, but it's not like Kruger oozes it or anything. He seems like a smart positional player but he's definitely doesn't possess a ton of offensive creativity.

MagicSlap* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 12:17 PM
  #97
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicSlap View Post
I consider board play in the d zone to be part of the backcheck responsibilities.

Yes hockey sense is important, critically important, but it's not like Kruger oozes it or anything. He seems like a smart positional player but he's definitely doesn't possess a ton of offensive creativity.
In what way does boardplay have anything to do with backchecking? The point of a backcheck is to apply pressure to the opposing player with the puck, who's attempting to bring the puck into the offensive zone. Boardplay has nothing to do with it. Forechecking? Sure.. but not backchecking.

According to this board, Kruger does nothing well. I can't imagine what people were saying about a 6'0", 175lbs David Bolland when he was up with Chicago in 2007-08.

Kruger hasn't had enough time to show what he can be in the NHL. He's coming off a solid rookie season, a season in which he improved throughout the year in a number of areas. I'm not saying he's a 2nd line centre, but he is an NHL player at this point and he'll only get better; He has room to improve and to grow and he's shown nothing to suggest that's not the case.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 12:21 PM
  #98
massivegoonery
Registered User
 
massivegoonery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 11,326
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicSlap View Post
He was absolutely not the individual most at fault on the Hawks though, that is an absurd thing to say. He was inconsistent, that would be my complaint. At times he was the Bolland we know and love and at times he seem disinterested.
When your "shutdown center" is disinterested in, you know, shutting anything down, what do you think that would do the overall defensive focus of a team? If it is a personnel problem - I'm not sure it is - he's high up on the blame list.

Anyways, from where I'm sitting Kruger and Bolland are basically the same player. Your hatred for him really makes no sense at all, so I suspect you are just incredibly inflexible or some kind of bigot.

massivegoonery is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 12:52 PM
  #99
hawksfan50
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,829
vCash: 500
Well IF the hawks have one of the best pipeline stable of prospects in the NHL --what good is it unless ech year a couple of rookies get infused and IMPROVE THE TEAM....other teams seem to infuse rookies fromtheir pipelines that impact --we cannot have ZERO impacts of improvement from the pipeline either by not infusing or by not getting much impact when they do get infused and then still without laughing our heads off claim our vaunted pipeline is that "great" or "one of the best" in the league...so 2 things are required from a claim of "one of the best" pipelines to be believed and taken seriously:

1. THERE MUST BE YEARLY INFUSIONS of at least one or two from the pipeline onto the big club...

2. These infusions must BETTER THE TEAM --not be merely cheaper replacements to stand still in the same place --not be scaring the coach such that he doesn't trust the "kids" to better the tem but in fact is scared they will hurt the team ..


THUS we must get infusions that are not only "ready" but ready to make a difference to the better in our success..


IF the top brass keeps "ready" prospects on the farm too long (no places for them on the big club) --that is very wasteful to the whole raison d'tre of tryiong to get a top-notch pipeline batch of ssets..

It also hurts a team's reputation if it is known you really have little chance of ever getting called up and given significant roles despite whatever you do on the farm or in the pipeline..if that is the case the ipeline kids WILL GET DISCOURAGED...so there must be some infusion succeses to show the other kids in the pipeline that the dream is possible ...


So the question we all have is that : Because Rockford has not been that successful winning in the AHL --we all think few of the kids there are NHL ready despite 2or 3 years now for some of them..much more not getting their NHL chance and they willget discouraged realizing they really were never that godd because top brass in Chicago never gave them a real shot on the big club...For kids further down the pipeline in Jr. or with only 1-2 years of NCAA experience and so "not ready" to get NHL shots yet ---if they see guys going to rockford and stillnot getting infusion chances after 2-3 years there--they too willwonder about any future of making the Blackhawks--like it is some kind of sham process...


YET-you do have to EARN your NHL job...so you should be NHL ready and prove you can impact the club positively...


THAT is the question about the QUALITY of the HAWKs pipeline---overblown hype and over-valuation of the quality of our prospects-- OR would easlily make other less crowded NHL teams? The problem is-I do not think you can make the latter statement..therefore we propbably are overestimating the potential of our pipeline for infusion impact..

KYLE BEACH --relatively high pick #12 overall in his draft year --easily make less crowded NHL rosters and impact ? Don't think you can say that ? Not "ready" --well he sHOULD be by now ... more suspect than part of "one of the best" pipelines..

PIRRI --2 yrs in AHL now..SHOULD be ready --- but again cannot say he's easily infuse and possibly impact on a less crowded NHL roster...

LEDDY--already infused -but impact more negative than positive (-12) with the Hawlks.. the HOPE he takes GLF (Great leap Forward) this year--BUT would he even be on on other NHL teams' roster? WAS he even "ready"?


MORIN--high hopes for hom but now 2 years in AHL (abeit concussed last year) but if he is that good shouldn;t he het his shot at infusion and improving us..?


ANYONE from the Rockford D/ REady? SIGNIFICANT IMPACT? Doubyful..

McNEILL /DANAULT --- had brief AHL trials at end of last season... MCNEILL had trouble even getting off shots? DANAULT hardly impactful in the AHL in his brief trial ..DON"T think they are "ready" and impact debateable..



YES the Hawks got lucky on one infusion ---ANDREW SHAW with some impact --and others JIMMY HAYES -- marginal impact but hope he will get better and impct more with that size...

BUT OVERALL --you have to wonder why such little amount of infusion and impact given the vast quamtity of our alleged depth in the pipeline?

Where was our Adam Henrique? Our Duchenes and O'reilly's,and you can find many other examples of "kids" coming into the league and improving their teams ...Seems we last fid it with Toews and Kane but if has been sparse ever since...
SO how good and deep is our vaunted pipeline?


WE cannot have it both ways...saying "look how good our pipeline is --everyone says it is one of the NHL's deepest pools of young talent" --YET we see so few results from it that make our team and mke it better AND then make the FAIL of the pipeline a self-fullfing prophecy of FAIL because Q and the top bras figure too many yutes spoil the chances of maintaing our CUP CONTENDER status--such that we need INSTEAD more "vets" ( the argument had a huge FAIL with Andrew Brunette last year) and we can't trust the not quite or never willbe ready"yutes" so why risk infusing them---OR we do infuse them and they STILL FAIL to impact positively---all of this YUTE FAIL seems to indicate WE ARE NOT DEVELOPING OUR VAUNTED "DEPTH" OF PIPELINE VERY WELL-for If we were,they would be "READIER",the coaches would trusty to play them,and mercy --they might actually IMPROVE THE TEAM! But it never seems to happen much...

Conclusion: OUR pipeline seems more a collection of suspects rather than a collection we can count on to IMPROVE FROM WITHIN..

hawksfan50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2012, 01:50 PM
  #100
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 24,130
vCash: 500
Bowman is right. Don't force anything, don't overpay and spend your money on proven players and D depth. Build within the organisation.

Hawks just need time and will get it. They are competitive as is.
Craw with a bounce back season, Leddy & KrŁger with more experience and confidence and our team is a cup favorite.

Bowman wants to upgrade some positions, sometimes there just isn't a chance to do it

Bubba88 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 11:57 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.