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

Lets talk about Dave Bolland

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-29-2013, 05:00 AM
  #526
WarriorofTime
HFBoards Sponsor
 
WarriorofTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 15,127
vCash: 500



Just because I know some of you have forgotten. It's a shame he's not healthy (or ever seems to be) but he's definitely a guy I want going to battle for the Playoffs.

WarriorofTime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 06:16 AM
  #527
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 27,668
vCash: 50
he is not healthy, he has a contract that makes him expandable. He hasn't worked out on the 2nd line so far.
Hawks could get a good return for him to keep the roster young and good going forward.

Not saying he will get traded, but Bowman will think hard and long about it and consider it

Bubba88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 09:31 AM
  #528
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 3,059
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba88 View Post
Hawks could get a good return for him to keep the roster young and good going forward.

Not saying he will get traded, but Bowman will think hard and long about it and consider it
I agree that Bowman will consider trading him, I think he's considered it every year.

Since his injury history makes him a risky pickup, I'm not sure there will be options on a good return unless it's a roster player with similar injury risk coming back. Almost all the other firsts involved in trades for players saw that player retained by the club or they were still under cost control (RFA status). Kaberle is the only recent exception. Gaustad was the only other player with significant injury risk that was traded for a first.

Anyway, my point is that I don't think Chicago will get a solid return ( such as ahigh prospect or a first) in a trade for Bolland unless there is significant risk coming back. That's why I'm saying it might be best to keep him at this point.

hockeydoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 11:55 AM
  #529
WarriorofTime
HFBoards Sponsor
 
WarriorofTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 15,127
vCash: 500
What do you want to do with the 3.375 you'd save from Bolland? Consider that Center is our biggest weakness, I don't see how getting rid of him would make us better. Eat the contract, put him back in the third line where we know he's super-effective next year. Re-evaluate next year when his contract is set to expire. I'm not ready to gift Kruger a 2nd line role or a roster spot to guys like Pirri or LeBlanc till they prove it.

WarriorofTime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 12:12 PM
  #530
MTP
I Love Shinpads
 
MTP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Joliet, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,926
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to MTP
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarriorofTime View Post
What do you want to do with the 3.375 you'd save from Bolland? Consider that Center is our biggest weakness, I don't see how getting rid of him would make us better. Eat the contract, put him back in the third line where we know he's super-effective next year. Re-evaluate next year when his contract is set to expire. I'm not ready to gift Kruger a 2nd line role or a roster spot to guys like Pirri or LeBlanc till they prove it.
Agreed. And if Bolland actually proves to be expendable then you move him at the deadline and get a better return. There always seems to be a market for centers.

MTP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 12:57 PM
  #531
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 27,668
vCash: 50
what to do with Bollands salary? Keep your own Free Agents that you would lose otherwise.

I'd rather have Stalberg + 1st than Bolland as UFA to be

Bubba88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 01:06 PM
  #532
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,921
vCash: 500
I would rather just not sign Kruger, and keep both of Stalberg and Bolland.

FORWARDS
Brandon Saad ($0.894m) / Jonathan Toews ($6.300m) / Patrick Kane ($6.300m)
Patrick Sharp ($5.900m) / Drew Leblanc ($1.487m) / Marian Hossa ($5.275m)
Jeremy Morin ($0.887m) / Dave Bolland ($3.375m) / Viktor Stalberg ($3.000m)
Daniel Carcillo ($0.825m) / Andrew Shaw ($0.578m) / Ben Smith ($0.563m)
Brandon Bollig ($0.575m) /
DEFENSEMEN
Niklas Hjalmarsson ($3.500m) / Duncan Keith ($5.538m)
Brent Seabrook ($5.800m) / Nick Leddy ($2.500m)
Johnny Oduya ($3.383m) / Sheldon Brookbank ($1.250m)
Michal Rozsival ($2.000m) /
GOALTENDERS
Corey Crawford ($2.667m)
Nikolai Khabibulin ($1.250m)
OTHER
Buyout: Rostislav Olesz ($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: $63,869,226; BONUSES: $167,500
CAP SPACE (23-man roster): $621,607

Hawkaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 01:53 PM
  #533
rick hawk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,067
vCash: 500
I can't believe how quickly a guy can go from being one of the most popular and repected players on a team to a guy that most can't stand and want to dump. All it takes is a thirty plus games in an injury plagued season.

rick hawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 02:01 PM
  #534
madgoat33
Registered User
 
madgoat33's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,944
vCash: 500
every season is injury plagued for bolland. the issue this season is that many people believed he was a 2c playing 3c as aluxury, so when he can't perform at 2c people are disappointed. relative to his role, he was very likely the worst hawk forward this year.

madgoat33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 02:44 PM
  #535
rick hawk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,067
vCash: 500
He's missed 13 games this year-6 last year. Sharp has missed 20 this year and 8 last year. He only has 6 goals this year. Lets get rid of him too. Hossa has missed significant time every year but last year. What a bum. Yes Bolland has had a bad year. Hjalmarsson had one last year. The second line thing hasn't worked out too well but how many games were Ssharp, Kane and Bolland actually together and healthy. Just sayin...

rick hawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 02:50 PM
  #536
Pepe Silvia
Registered User
 
Pepe Silvia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 8,936
vCash: 1344
Quote:
Originally Posted by rick hawk View Post
I can't believe how quickly a guy can go from being one of the most popular and repected players on a team to a guy that most can't stand and want to dump. All it takes is a thirty plus games in an injury plagued season.
But but but, what has he done for me lately?

Pepe Silvia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 02:59 PM
  #537
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 3,059
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba88 View Post
what to do with Bollands salary? Keep your own Free Agents that you would lose otherwise.

I'd rather have Stalberg + 1st than Bolland as UFA to be
I don't see Bolland landing a first. He's too expensive to keep and too much of a risk to justify giving up a first for almost all gms (given history, budget, and trends). He's not going to get Bowman a first or high-end prospect in my opinion. That window closed.

That 3+ will be going right back into the center position one way or another. They aren't going to line up 3 or 4 undersized and relatively inexperienced players up the middle.

hockeydoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 03:05 PM
  #538
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeydoug View Post
That 3+ will be going right back into the center position one way or another. They aren't going to line up 3 or 4 undersized and relatively inexperienced players up the middle.
Then we may as well keep him. You won't sign a better guy for 3mil, and no one in our system can replace him yet.

Hawkaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 03:08 PM
  #539
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 3,059
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rick hawk View Post
He's missed 13 games this year-6 last year. Sharp has missed 20 this year and 8 last year. He only has 6 goals this year. Lets get rid of him too. Hossa has missed significant time every year but last year. What a bum. Yes Bolland has had a bad year. Hjalmarsson had one last year. The second line thing hasn't worked out too well but how many games were Ssharp, Kane and Bolland actually together and healthy. Just sayin...
Sharp has helped the team get in the postseason the last 2 years and his offensive value is much harder to replace. Sharp has one down year. Bolland on the roster hasn't helped through the regular season for 3 years in a row now and he hasn't had a healthy pro season. Big difference. Defensive players are much easier to replace.

hockeydoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 03:11 PM
  #540
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 3,059
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
Then we may as well keep him. You won't sign a better guy for 3mil, and no one in our system can replace him yet.
That's what I'm saying.

I've wanted him gone for years, but the time to trade him for value is gone. Better to keep him and get what you can out of him at this point. His injury history and offensive ceiling to too defined to get a great offer anymore. No reason to move him in a gamble now.

hockeydoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 03:15 PM
  #541
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeydoug View Post
That's what I'm saying.

I've wanted him gone for years, but the time to trade him for value is gone. Better to keep him and get what you can out of him at this point. His injury history and offensive ceiling to too defined to get a great offer anymore. No reason to move him in a gamble now.
I think he could get a 1st...look at what Gaustad, Quincey, and others have got. GM's look at his play in the post-season and his role over the past few years (shutting down the top lines of opponents) and they will most definitely pay a good price to get him.

Not every GM is an HF poster.

Hawkaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 03:23 PM
  #542
Sevanston
Registered User
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 13,909
vCash: 500
If Troy Brouwer can get a late 1st at the draft, Bolland can with ease.

Sevanston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 03:25 PM
  #543
Sarava
Moderator
 
Sarava's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Naperville, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 12,760
vCash: 500
I would bet Dale Tallon would trade for Bolland in a heartbeat. Obviously we wouldn't get his 1st round pick. Maybe their 2nd, which will be the first pick in the 2nd round. Don't really want to think of this stuff yet though...let's see how the playoffs play out for the Hawks and Bolland.

Sarava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 05:49 PM
  #544
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 27,668
vCash: 50
yeah, getting the FLA 2nd (31st overall) would be fine be me if we can guarantee that Stalberg stays.

I'd rather have Stalberg and that pick with giving our young guys a chance. Team was fine with him playing like ****, why should it be worse with young guys trying to win a spot?

Bubba88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 05:59 PM
  #545
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 3,059
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
I think he could get a 1st...look at what Gaustad, Quincey, and others have got. GM's look at his play in the post-season and his role over the past few years (shutting down the top lines of opponents) and they will most definitely pay a good price to get him.
But he didn't shut down lines last year(pk didn't go too hot), he missed 3 games the year before and he hasn't helped his team during the regular season for 3 straight. On top of that, he isn't price controlled (like Quincey was). Quincey and Gaustad were deadline deals, it's possible Bolland is moved in the deadline month(if healthy) for such a price. I was talking more about the offseason. If he could fetch a first or high-end prospect this summer, I'll happily eat my crow.

Gaustad was a desperation move by Poile because of franchise circumstances (revenue, contract situations, window, etc.) and Quincey was in part a more controlled move because he was an upcoming RFA and Stuart was on the way out the door. High minute dmen on the market are extremely expensive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevanston View Post
If Troy Brouwer can get a late 1st at the draft, Bolland can with ease.
Varlamov, Brouwer, Byfuglien, etc. were all price controlled. That raises their value significantly. Many of those players on an EL or intitial extension involved in a trade for a first also had years before arbitration eligibility and could be signed to bridge contracts. Very rare for an upcoming UFA to get a first back in trade during the summer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
Not every GM is an HF poster.
I agree, I heard Holmgren had two accounts banned and is no longer a poster here. Rumor has it a mod banned Tambellini too for picking an e-fight after his Hemsky contract.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarava View Post
I would bet Dale Tallon would trade for Bolland in a heartbeat. Obviously we wouldn't get his 1st round pick. Maybe their 2nd, which will be the first pick in the 2nd round
I could see a high 2nd, if they were going to trade him.
Quote:
Don't really want to think of this stuff yet though...let's see how the playoffs play out for the Hawks and Bolland.
If the opponent was somebody other than minnesota, I probably wouldn't even think about the offseason. Anyway I look at it, I can't see Minnesota winning the series without a wacky set of unforeseeable circumstances changing things. Since it's a Monday without a game tonight, I thought it was a good day to play imaginary gm.

hockeydoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 06:42 PM
  #546
Sir Psycho T
More Cowbell!
 
Sir Psycho T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Redwood City, CA
Posts: 3,697
vCash: 500
This thread

A guy who has been one of our best and most important players for 5 years now and lets get rid of him because he had a bad 30 game stretch.

Sir Psycho T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 07:37 PM
  #547
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,921
vCash: 500
Bolland most definitely did shut down the opposition last year. First off, his linemates were terrible, he had 37pts, and was still an even player. For example, say Bolland was on the ice for 30GF, that means the top players, all year, only scored 30G against Bolland. Thats less than a half goal a game. Thats pretty good considering his linemates. This year is an off year, and everyone turns.

Gaustad was a despiration move, but no GM would be in a desperate situation for a shut down C at any time in the near future?

Quincey is garbage, and was garbage before the trade. Bolland has at least proven to be a top shut down C.

Hawkaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 08:09 PM
  #548
Nothingman*
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 12,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post
This thread

A guy who has been one of our best and most important players for 5 years now and lets get rid of him because he had a bad 30 game stretch.
Um. You sleep with a Bollie doll or something?! That statement is so inaccurate it is ridiculous.

Nothingman* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 10:10 PM
  #549
massivegoonery
Registered User
 
massivegoonery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 11,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post
This thread

A guy who has been one of our best and most important players for 5 years now and lets get rid of him because he had a bad 30 game stretch.
We trade important players all the time. Bolland is the laziest player on the team, of all the important players we've traded, I will miss him the least.

massivegoonery is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 10:42 PM
  #550
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 3,059
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
Bolland most definitely did shut down the opposition last year.
Name the 3rd line centers on decent teams that didn't succeed shutting down PHX's weak offense, their centers, or the 29th ranked PP. He was on the ice for 1pp for and 3 against. The Hawks needed goals, defense from the top 3 lines was not a concern for most teams all year against PHX. He made some nice plays and some bad plays and he tried hard.
Quote:
First off, his linemates were terrible, he had 37pts, and was still an even player. For example, say Bolland was on the ice for 30GF, that means the top players, all year, only scored 30G against Bolland. Thats less than a half goal a game. Thats pretty good considering his linemates. This year is an off year, and everyone turns.
He has 4 years of streaks longer than 30 games where he was injured and/or playing terrible in the regular season. There's a big sample size now. He has some hot streaks sprinkled in but he hasn't pulled his weight putting pts in column for 3 years for one reason or another. He's injured or playing hurt with regularity, that can't be glossed over anymore and has to be considered when evaluating what he's worth to the team.
Quote:
Gaustad was a despiration move, but no GM would be in a desperate situation for a shut down C at any time in the near future?
I said that it's a possibility. For the summer, I would be pretty surprised. If he has a postseason like 2010 or is playing well enough to command a 1st at the deadline timeframe next year, I doubt Chicago would be in a position where they would consider selling players.
Quote:
Quincey is garbage, and was garbage before the trade. Bolland has at least proven to be a top shut down C.
Absolutely, the big difference in the comparison was that Quincey was in a top 4 dman role and was cost controlled because of his FA status.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post
A guy who has been one of our best and most important players for 5 years now and lets get rid of him because he had a bad 30 game stretch.
He's had 3, arguably 4 bad regular seasons. The injuries aren't his fault, but they're still there. For his role and his "importance" and cap hit (when it was extremely tight) he hasn't carried his weight during the regular season They have made him one of the most important players in 2011 and 2012 but he hasn't been one of the best, in part, because he's inconsistent, not there, or only partially there throughout the regular seasons.

hockeydoug 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 08:35 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.