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

Top-Six Center a Need?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-13-2013, 07:58 AM
  #1
Cullksinikers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: 'Merica
Country: United States
Posts: 15,173
vCash: 500
Top-Six Center a Need?

I think we should look for a new center for the second line. I like Bolland. The dude is a great player. However, I think he's one of the best third-line centers in the league and has the skill to play on the second line in a pinch but not full-time. He's a full-time top-six center right now and just looks alright. His natural role is to be on that third line and getting thrown out against some of the top lines. Get a guy like Ribiero when Washington inevitably sells and kill two birds with one stone by making Bolland better and getting a true top-six center with Sharp and Kane or whoever Q wants to throw him between.

What do you guys think?

Cullksinikers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 08:23 AM
  #2
ChiGuySez
Streak ends 108
 
ChiGuySez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 8,249
vCash: 500
Put Sharp back at center. Bolland to the third line. Hawks have an abundance of wings.

ChiGuySez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 08:26 AM
  #3
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,469
vCash: 50
It's a definite need and Ribeiro is the guy to get. Plus, let's say, and I know this is such a crazy idea, but let's say Bolland gets hurt, after the deadline. You just pitch this great season in the garbage because you didn't trade for a 2nd line center? Really?? No, cannot happen, will not happen, if Bolly went down with Ribs on the team, we can put Kruger or Shaw in at 3C and keep going. It's what must happen.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 08:34 AM
  #4
BronYrAur
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,275
vCash: 500
I'd have no problem going after Ribeiro but a ton of teams will be after him if Washington is selling. It will take A LOT to get him.

BronYrAur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 08:48 AM
  #5
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,469
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BronYrAur View Post
I'd have no problem going after Ribeiro but a ton of teams will be after him if Washington is selling. It will take A LOT to get him.
A 1st is a great offer. If other teams match that, add a prospect like Pirri or Jayes. I can't imagine them turning down 1st + Jayes and if another team clearly tops that (like Danault, Saad, TT, McNeill type + 1st), well, I can live with losing out on him.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 09:05 AM
  #6
ovenbaked
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 377
vCash: 500
I'll say this team seemed to struggle without bolland in for one game. I don't want to see what we'll play like over 4-5 games

ovenbaked is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 12:20 PM
  #7
puterwiz53
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 246
vCash: 500
It looks like O'Reilly is now available as contract talks between him and the Avalanche have ended. O'Reilly would be a great pickup but at what cost. The Hawks should at least look into this to see what the Avalanche are willing to take back in a trade. I would trade Sharpie, move Bolland back to 3rd line center and move Stalberg up to 2nd line wing and move Shaw back to wing on the 3rd line. The Hawks have plenty of prospects of which they could throw a couple into the trade. This would make the top two lines really awesome - Saad/Toews/Hossa and Stalberg/O'Reilly/Kane.

puterwiz53 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 12:26 PM
  #8
Central PA Hawk Fan
Registered User
 
Central PA Hawk Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: York, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,260
vCash: 500
I'm not sure we could afford O'Reilly. If you want to improve that 2nd line center its going to have to be a solid vet looking for a chance at a ring (Ribero) or one of our young centers down on the farm (McNeill, Hayes, Pirri, etc...) Trying to fit a budding superstar type looking for big money isn't the way to go here.

Central PA Hawk Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 12:36 PM
  #9
Cullksinikers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: 'Merica
Country: United States
Posts: 15,173
vCash: 500
No way in hell should we give up assets for ROR and then pay him over $5 million.

Cullksinikers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 12:42 PM
  #10
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 3,139
vCash: 500
O'Reilly spent almost all his time on the ice in meaningless games and playing with Landeskog last year. I'm skeptical of what he would really bring to a good team the next year or two. I say let him go.

hockeydoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 12:43 PM
  #11
TorMenT
Go Blackhawks!
 
TorMenT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Rockford, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 5,432
vCash: 500
We don't really have a top-6 C NEED, more of a strong want. This team is good enough to beat anyone when healthy. As constructed, I think the hawks are a favorite against anyone in the West.

That being said, a 2C would be awesome and I'm all for it, but it's not necessarily a need.

TorMenT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 12:48 PM
  #12
Sarava
Moderator
 
Sarava's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Naperville, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 13,227
vCash: 500
I guess I'll break the trend here and say that I would make a run at ROR if I'm the Hawks.

Sarava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 12:55 PM
  #13
Sevanston
Registered User
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 13,909
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarava View Post
I guess I'll break the trend here and say that I would make a run at ROR if I'm the Hawks.
I would too.

Not as seriously as more desperate teams might pursue him, but I'd go pretty far into the bidding war for him.

He's probably the only available player I would put Danault on the table for. That probably doesn't mean much to Colorado, but I think really highly of Danault. Thing is, Danault at his best will probably be exactly what ROR already is.

Sevanston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 12:57 PM
  #14
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,469
vCash: 50
I'd love to get ROR, just don't think we could afford him with the cap. We'd have to trade Oduya, Hammer or Crawford. I could definitely lose Oduya, but I don't know how difficult he is too move.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 12:58 PM
  #15
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,469
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevanston View Post
I would too.

Not as seriously as more desperate teams might pursue him, but I'd go pretty far into the bidding war for him.

He's probably the only available player I would put Danault on the table for. That probably doesn't mean much to Colorado, but I think really highly of Danault. Thing is, Danault at his best will probably be exactly what ROR already is.
Yeah, I've always thought if we did get involved in ROR talks, Danault would be a sticking point.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 01:00 PM
  #16
puterwiz53
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 246
vCash: 500
The Hawks should definitely go after ROR. They could afford him in the right deal. Sharpie is expendable but I believe he has a no trade clause. Bolland could be expendable. The Hawks have plenty of prospects in which they could throw 2 or 3 into the trade. At least inquire and see what the Avalanche are willing to take back in return and of course first see if they can sign ROR to a friendly 3 or 4 year deal.

puterwiz53 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 01:02 PM
  #17
Sevanston
Registered User
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 13,909
vCash: 500
Even if we gave ROR $5M (too much for what he's shown, but whatever), all it would take is buying out Olesz/Montador for us to re-sign Leddy, Kruger, maybe Stalberg and we would still be under the cap for next year.

Sevanston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 01:23 PM
  #18
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,590
vCash: 500
If you're going after ROR, you have to trade Bolland. You don't have a choice. By trading for ROR, you're making a commitment past this season and Chicago can't afford that 5M caphit with Bolland on the roster going forward. If you have enough faith in ROR being everything Bolland was, with more offense and you're pretty confident Shaw/Kruger/Danault/McNell can handle your third line spot full-time now or next year, than it might be worth it.

IMO though, you need Bolland if you're trying to win the Cup this year.

Tough call.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 01:36 PM
  #19
Illinihockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 19,545
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevanston View Post
Even if we gave ROR $5M (too much for what he's shown, but whatever), all it would take is buying out Olesz/Montador for us to re-sign Leddy, Kruger, maybe Stalberg and we would still be under the cap for next year.
O'Reily at $5 mil, Kruger at $1.75 mil, and Leddy at $2.25 mil and you have $1.8 mil in cap space with 19 players signed. That doesn't work.

Illinihockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 01:36 PM
  #20
Illinihockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 19,545
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HossTheBoss View Post
If you're going after ROR, you have to trade Bolland. You don't have a choice. By trading for ROR, you're making a commitment past this season and Chicago can't afford that 5M caphit with Bolland on the roster going forward. If you have enough faith in ROR being everything Bolland was, with more offense and you're pretty confident Shaw/Kruger/Danault/McNell can handle your third line spot full-time now or next year, than it might be worth it.

IMO though, you need Bolland if you're trying to win the Cup this year.

Tough call.
Agreed, its Bolland or O'Riley....not both.

Illinihockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 01:37 PM
  #21
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,590
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevanston View Post
Even if we gave ROR $5M (too much for what he's shown, but whatever), all it would take is buying out Olesz/Montador for us to re-sign Leddy, Kruger, maybe Stalberg and we would still be under the cap for next year.
You'd have to move/buyout/get rid of Olesz, Frolik and Montador and even then it'd be an extremely tight fit.

FORWARDS
Brandon Saad ($0.894m) / Jonathan Toews ($6.300m) / Patrick Kane ($6.300m)
Patrick Sharp ($5.900m) / Ryan O'Reilly ($5.000m) / Marian Hossa ($5.275m)
Viktor Stalberg ($2.875m) / Dave Bolland ($3.375m) / Andrew Shaw ($0.565m)
Daniel Carcillo ($0.825m) / Marcus Kruger ($1.500m) / ??? ($0.600m)
Brandon Bollig ($0.575m) /

DEFENSEMEN
Duncan Keith ($5.538m) / Brent Seabrook ($5.800m)
Niklas Hjalmarsson ($3.500m) / Johnny Oduya ($3.383m)
Nick Leddy ($2.500m) / Sheldon Brookbank ($1.250m)
Ryan Stanton ($0.600m) /

GOALTENDERS
Corey Crawford ($2.667m)
Back-up ($0.800m)

OTHER

Buyout: Rostislav Olesz ($0.000m)
Trade: Michael Frolik ($0.000m)
Buyout: Steve Montador ($0.000m)

------

CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter)
(these totals are compiled with the bonus cushion)
SALARY CAP: $64,300,000; CAP PAYROLL: $65,940,628; BONUSES: $82,500
CAP SPACE (22-man roster): -$1,558,128


You can say don't resign Stalberg, but you'd still need to replace that depth. Either way, it's an extremely tight fit.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 01:38 PM
  #22
Sarava
Moderator
 
Sarava's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Naperville, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 13,227
vCash: 500
Yeah it's an extremely tight fit - then you're screwed a year later when the cap goes down some more. I agree with you, - if you make this move, then Bolland has to be part of the deal.

Sarava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 01:44 PM
  #23
Sir Psycho T
More Cowbell!
 
Sir Psycho T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Redwood City, CA
Posts: 3,697
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarava View Post
Yeah it's an extremely tight fit - then you're screwed a year later when the cap goes down some more. I agree with you, - if you make this move, then Bolland has to be part of the deal.
It doesn't, part of the CBA was that the cap won't ever go below next years 64.3.

Sir Psycho T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 01:46 PM
  #24
Sarava
Moderator
 
Sarava's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Naperville, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 13,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post
It doesn't, part of the CBA was that the cap won't ever go below next years 64.3.
I thought it was a 2 year process and was going to around 60 mil the year after? Where did I get that from if I'm wrong? lol

Sarava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 01:51 PM
  #25
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 27,972
vCash: 50
I'd do nothing as of now and see how it works out with Shaw and Krüger. If we can make a cheap deal around the deadline, pull the trigger.

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 11:15 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2017 All Rights Reserved.