HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Andy McDonald to Chicago?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-31-2011, 01:54 PM
  #51
Happyhary9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesfan94 View Post
I actually wonder about this whole talent thing. Let's go line by line

Forwards

McDonald - Backes - D'Agostini.
vs.
Smith - Toews - Kane

McDonald >> Smith
Backes < Toews
D'Agostini << Kane

Oshie - Berglund - Stewart
vs.
Brunette - Sharp - Hossa

Oshie > Brunette
Berglund < Sharp
Stewart < Hossa (this one is a lot closer than people think, IMO)

Steen - Arnott - Langenbrunner
vs.
Bickell - Bolland - Frolik

Steen > Bickell
Arnott < Bolland
Langenbrunner = Frolik

Sobotka - Nichol - Crombeen
vs.
Olesz - Mayers - Carcillo

Sobotka > Olesz
Nichol > Mayers
Crombeen = Carcillo

Adds up to STL = Chicago

On defense

Colaiacovo - Pietrangelo
vs.
Seabrook - Keith

Colaiacovo << Seabrook
Pietrangelo < Keith

Jackman - Polak
vs.
Leddy - Hjalmarsson

Jackman = Leddy (at the present, IMO)
Polak = Hjalmarsson

Nikitin - Shattenkirk
vs.
Montador - Lepisto

Nikitin > Montador (IMO)
Shattenkirk > Lepisto.

Adds up to Chicago > STL

Goalies
Halak
Elliott/Bishop
vs.
Crawford
Salak

Halak > Crawford
Bishop/Elliott = Salak

Adds up to STL > Chicago

In total, this all adds up to being equal. I'm sure there's a lot people disagree with, and I understand that Chicago's top end talent is better than St. Louis', and I would never try to argue that, but I think through the entire roster, St. Louis compares pretty equally. I'm interested in what people have to say about this. And I realize that these measurements are imprecise and this is an inexact evaluation, but I'm curious as to how other people rate these players. And I don't want Kane >>>>>>>>>>>> Crombeen or anything along those lines. I think that this is pretty fair combinations. I don't know. Just curious
I hate these little >/< because all position/line have much greater weight assigned to them. A 1C>1C has a lot more value then a 4C<4C. The top two lines play about 2 thirds the game and you top pairing D play 26 mins a night. Were the Hawks have the clear edge. Not only that right now the Hawks have the top 3 overall offensive players probably 4 if Hossa stays healthy. Plus the top two overall D-men. They very little difference in bottom line depth is not making up that difference at all.

Happyhary9 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 02:03 PM
  #52
bluesfan94
#BackesforSelke
 
bluesfan94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 6,038
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happyhary9 View Post
I hate these little >/< because all position/line have much greater weight assigned to them. A 1C>1C has a lot more value then a 4C<4C. The top two lines play about 2 thirds the game and you top pairing D play 26 mins a night. Were the Hawks have the clear edge. Not only that right now the Hawks have the top 3 overall offensive players probably 4 if Hossa stays healthy. Plus the top two overall D-men. They very little difference in bottom line depth is not making up that difference at all.
Depends upon how your team plays. We'll probably roll three lines about evenly, and then have a fourth. Like I said, you probably have the top end talent. But I'll take 9 20 goal scorers (I think everyone on the first 3 lines can), possibly 10 depending on Perron, over having 4. And I'm still wishy washy on Stewart v. Hossa. I think the Blues definitely have better defensive depth, and I think that Pietrangelo will challenge Keith relatively soon. I don't know. Like I said, the whole >/< thing isn't perfect. But when you're talking about talent throughout a roster, it makes more sense than comparing first lines only.

bluesfan94 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 02:10 PM
  #53
SteenMachine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Fenton, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 4,138
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesfan94 View Post
Depends upon how your team plays. We'll probably roll three lines about evenly, and then have a fourth. Like I said, you probably have the top end talent. But I'll take 9 20 goal scorers (I think everyone on the first 3 lines can), possibly 10 depending on Perron, over having 4. And I'm still wishy washy on Stewart v. Hossa. I think the Blues definitely have better defensive depth, and I think that Pietrangelo will challenge Keith relatively soon. I don't know. Like I said, the whole >/< thing isn't perfect. But when you're talking about talent throughout a roster, it makes more sense than comparing first lines only.
Well luckily all 4 of their top forwards and their top pairing are immune to injury, fatigue, scoring droughts; hell they won't even make line changes this year because their team is so superior and won't be a huge hole in the roster if they had to miss a month or more of the season. Nothing could possibly go wrong, so it's easy to predict how good they'd look in a perfect world and not be completely full of ****.

SteenMachine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 02:16 PM
  #54
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,827
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesfan94 View Post
Depends upon how your team plays. We'll probably roll three lines about evenly, and then have a fourth. Like I said, you probably have the top end talent. But I'll take 9 20 goal scorers (I think everyone on the first 3 lines can), possibly 10 depending on Perron, over having 4. And I'm still wishy washy on Stewart v. Hossa. I think the Blues definitely have better defensive depth, and I think that Pietrangelo will challenge Keith relatively soon. I don't know. Like I said, the whole >/< thing isn't perfect. But when you're talking about talent throughout a roster, it makes more sense than comparing first lines only.
St. Louis had 6 guys that scored 20+ goals, Chicago had 4, but had 8 guys over 15 compared to the Blues 6. And that was in a year when Chicago had very little depth and played poorly for most of the season.

Chicago has just as much depth, if not more than St. Louis...so that point isn't valid.

Hossa is far better all around than Stewart is, and Pietrangelo has a long way to go before he even comes close to Keith.

St. Louis has nothing close to the talent of Hossa, Toews, Kane, Sharp, Keith and Seabrook. Halak isn't that much better if at all, than Crawford.

Hawkaholic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 02:27 PM
  #55
Happyhary9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesfan94 View Post
Depends upon how your team plays. We'll probably roll three lines about evenly, and then have a fourth. Like I said, you probably have the top end talent. But I'll take 9 20 goal scorers (I think everyone on the first 3 lines can), possibly 10 depending on Perron, over having 4. And I'm still wishy washy on Stewart v. Hossa. I think the Blues definitely have better defensive depth, and I think that Pietrangelo will challenge Keith relatively soon. I don't know. Like I said, the whole >/< thing isn't perfect. But when you're talking about talent throughout a roster, it makes more sense than comparing first lines only.
And The Hawks can easily have more then four if healthy just like you are assuming:
Toews- Lock
Kane- Lock
Hossa- Lock
Sharp- Lock
Frolik- done it twice in Fla could easy do it a full year in Chi
Bolland- If healthy he does it for sure
Bickell- 17 as a rookie
Brunette- done it 2/3 years in Minny I would say he has a good shot in chi's top 6

I love how you assume for the guys on the blues but not for the Hawks. Hawks have 8 guys that could score 20, with four of them having had 30+ seasons under their belts. 6 have been 20 goal scorers already. Only two have not that Bolland mainly due to injuries and Bickell 17 as a rookie. Like I said what very little depth the Blues have on the Hawks does not out-way the difference in top-end talent.

Happyhary9 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 02:30 PM
  #56
Happyhary9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteenMachine View Post
Well luckily all 4 of their top forwards and their top pairing are immune to injury, fatigue, scoring droughts; hell they won't even make line changes this year because their team is so superior and won't be a huge hole in the roster if they had to miss a month or more of the season. Nothing could possibly go wrong, so it's easy to predict how good they'd look in a perfect world and not be completely full of ****.
To bad you just assume the Hawks don't have depth. But their depth is almost equal to the Blues but still have a big advantage in top end skill. Both these teams healthy Hawks walk away with at least a 10 point lead in the standings.

Happyhary9 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 02:56 PM
  #57
sketch22
Registered User
 
sketch22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,241
vCash: 2893
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesfan94 View Post
Depends upon how your team plays. We'll probably roll three lines about evenly, and then have a fourth. Like I said, you probably have the top end talent. But I'll take 9 20 goal scorers (I think everyone on the first 3 lines can), possibly 10 depending on Perron, over having 4. And I'm still wishy washy on Stewart v. Hossa. I think the Blues definitely have better defensive depth, and I think that Pietrangelo will challenge Keith relatively soon. I don't know. Like I said, the whole >/< thing isn't perfect. But when you're talking about talent throughout a roster, it makes more sense than comparing first lines only.
Pietrangelo has a long way to go before he is a serious contender for the Norris (ie Keiths level of play). It also surprises me that you consider the blue to have better depth on D. Keith and Seabrook are head and shoulders above anyone on the Blues. Then you don't even mention the fact that we have SOD as our 7th dman. Nikitin is not better than Montador as well. Monty put up 26 points last year and was a +16. What did Nikitin do?

If you want to compare the teams and how they will play, then think of it like a real game:
Backes line vs Bollands line = Hawks
Toews line vs Berglunds line = Hawks
Sharps line vs Arnotts line = Hawks
Mayers line vs Nichols line = A lot of blood, probably not much actual hockey played by these guys given how games generally go between us.

You can be high on your team as much as you want, but I will happily bet you that at the end of the year the Hawks have more points in the standings and are top 5 in goals scored.

sketch22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 03:09 PM
  #58
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 19,730
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
St. Louis has nothing close to the talent of Hossa, Toews, Kane, Sharp, Keith and Seabrook. Halak isn't that much better if at all, than Crawford.
Really? I think, Backes, Stewart, and Pietrangelo have something to say to you. A healthy McDonald also has something to say.

Honestly these Blues-Hawk arguments are just as bad as the ones with Wing fans.

bleedblue1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 03:19 PM
  #59
trublu16
Registered User
 
trublu16's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 762
vCash: 500
Shocking that a thread between the Blues and Hawks turned into a pissing match between fans of both teams. Lets just put it this way, Hawks want a 60-70 pt player for nothing. And the Blues will want an arm and a leg for that player. Hence they will never agree on a trade of this magnitude. Too big of a deal, minor deals would work but not this one.

As for as where the teams will end up in the standing, when did any of you become a fortune teller. Anything can happen in a course of 82 game season.

trublu16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 03:24 PM
  #60
sketch22
Registered User
 
sketch22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,241
vCash: 2893
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedblue1223 View Post
Really? I think, Backes, Stewart, and Pietrangelo have something to say to you. A healthy McDonald also has something to say.
Is it, "Thank you, sir! May I have another?" Because that would make sense.

sketch22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 03:26 PM
  #61
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 19,730
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by sketch22 View Post
Is it, "Thank you, sir! May I have another?" Because that would make sense.
Yeah cuz that makes complete sense...

bleedblue1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 03:27 PM
  #62
Happyhary9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedblue1223 View Post
Really? I think, Backes, Stewart, and Pietrangelo have something to say to you. A healthy McDonald also has something to say.

Honestly these Blues-Hawk arguments are just as bad as the ones with Wing fans.
Well I would bet 99% off all other teams fans would say the Hawks are better on paper. And for the best way to look at it the Hawks have proven to be better on the ice. Why don't the Blue make a real run at the Hawks or Wings before we start saying they are just as good.

Its one thing to say I think the Blues can make a run at the Central. Its way different just saying we are a top 4-5 team in the West and just as good as the Hawks, cause as of right now there is no facts to support that and many to support the Hawks being the better team.

Happyhary9 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 03:30 PM
  #63
Happyhary9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by trublu16 View Post
Shocking that a thread between the Blues and Hawks turned into a pissing match between fans of both teams. Lets just put it this way, Hawks want a 60-70 pt player for nothing. And the Blues will want an arm and a leg for that player. Hence they will never agree on a trade of this magnitude. Too big of a deal, minor deals would work but not this one.

As for as where the teams will end up in the standing, when did any of you become a fortune teller. Anything can happen in a course of 82 game season.
Well probably because the OP trade was so bad it really did not need a discussion on it.

Happyhary9 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 03:35 PM
  #64
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 19,730
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happyhary9 View Post
Well I would bet 99% off all other teams fans would say the Hawks are better on paper. And for the best way to look at it the Hawks have proven to be better on the ice. Why don't the Blue make a real run at the Hawks or Wings before we start saying they are just as good.

Its one thing to say I think the Blues can make a run at the Central. Its way different just saying we are a top 4-5 team in the West and just as good as the Hawks, cause as of right now there is no facts to support that and many to support the Hawks being the better team.
So you say it is better for me to say we can win the Central, instead of saying that we can be a top 4-5 team in the West. If we win the Central we would be a top 3 team in the West. And if it makes you feel better, we can be 5th in the West and you can be 4th.

There are NO facts to support any team on who is better right now. Every team has changed from last season, so we won't know anything until the season starts. Last season virtually means nothing. It is just my opinion on how the Blues will do this season and their potential. I can't believe how sensitive you are being on this subject.

bleedblue1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 03:39 PM
  #65
Chris Hansen
Team Tyrion
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,131
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesfan94 View Post
Depends upon how your team plays. We'll probably roll three lines about evenly, and then have a fourth. Like I said, you probably have the top end talent. But I'll take 9 20 goal scorers (I think everyone on the first 3 lines can), possibly 10 depending on Perron, over having 4. And I'm still wishy washy on Stewart v. Hossa. I think the Blues definitely have better defensive depth, and I think that Pietrangelo will challenge Keith relatively soon. I don't know. Like I said, the whole >/< thing isn't perfect. But when you're talking about talent throughout a roster, it makes more sense than comparing first lines only.
Allocation of icetime, which you fail to take into account, makes your "9 guys scoring 20 goals" point utterly ridiculous. Yes, they all get even time out there... okay. With 17 minutes a game for all forwards on your first three lines, you will be lucky to have four. This is true for any team in the NHL.
Now, give 20 minutes a night to your top two lines as is fairly common for every other team in the NHL (maybe a bit of an overestimate, but not by much), and you'll be likely to get 5 or 6 guys putting up 20 for the year, assuming no injuries. Of course... there are a good deal of teams that could do that.
Fact is, the best offensive team in the league last year had only 3 20+ goal scorers. To expect 1 or 2 more than that, let alone 6 is absurd.

Many teams in this league have top 9's with guys who are "capable" of putting up 20. And yet they never do.


On another note, being "wishy washy" between Stewart and Hossa is insanity. Please don't tell me you have to think hard about that one. Please. And Stewart's pretty good in his own right. But damn...

Pietrangelo may "challenge" Keith fairly soon, but even Keith at his worst (last season) is better than Pietrangelo at his best, as of right now. And we're worrying about precisely that in this thread... the here and now.

Seabrook is also better than any defenseman on the Blues. You could put up an argument for Pietrangelo, but I doubt you'd win it.

Having the two best defensemen on both teams combined certainly plays in Chicago's favor. The second pairings of each team look to be about equal, and the third pairing goes to St. Louis in a close one. Considering the heavy amount of time every team's first and second pairings play... Chicago takes that one.

Chicago's first two forward lines are better and personally, I take their third line of Bickell-Bolland-Frolik over St. Louis' third as well, considering the former has proven to have great chemistry while the Blues' best hope is for their counterpart to just equal Chicago's.

In net, Halak is awesome. I don't think he's much better than Crawford, but he still has a clear edge.

At the end of the season, I think Chicago will have 8-10 points on the Blues. Both are good teams and should make the playoffs in the West.

Chris Hansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 03:57 PM
  #66
Happyhary9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedblue1223 View Post
So you say it is better for me to say we can win the Central, instead of saying that we can be a top 4-5 team in the West. If we win the Central we would be a top 3 team in the West. And if it makes you feel better, we can be 5th in the West and you can be 4th.

There are NO facts to support any team on who is better right now. Every team has changed from last season, so we won't know anything until the season starts. Last season virtually means nothing. It is just my opinion on how the Blues will do this season and their potential. I can't believe how sensitive you are being on this subject.
No you said would have been a top 4-5 team if not for injuries (which a lot of teams dealt with and other issues). The Blues have had the main core of guys for a few years and have not proved that, yes so are young so have changed. But over the past three seasons the Wings, Hawks, Sharks, and Nucks have proven to be the top 4 teams. Two have made in 3/3 the others 2/3 in to top four standings, then when you look at other numbers like GF, GA, GDiff, it really starts to paint a picture that these four teams have been the most talented teams. And like I said I would bet a lot of money you could not get very many non hawks/blues fans to feel the the Blues are more talented then the Hawks. Maybe the Blues could become a top 4 team next year but as of right now they have done nothing to warrant being called a top 4/5 team in the west.

Happyhary9 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 04:06 PM
  #67
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,455
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happyhary9 View Post
I hate these little >/< because all position/line have much greater weight assigned to them. A 1C>1C has a lot more value then a 4C<4C. The top two lines play about 2 thirds the game and you top pairing D play 26 mins a night. Were the Hawks have the clear edge. Not only that right now the Hawks have the top 3 overall offensive players probably 4 if Hossa stays healthy. Plus the top two overall D-men. They very little difference in bottom line depth is not making up that difference at all.
While I agree I don't like the "greater than, less than" indicators, I think the general theory that the Blues have a similar amount of talent on the roster is VERY valid. A bunch of that talent is still young, and I'm not sure how fast guys like Berglund & Pietro develop (similarly - there's a bunch of Hawks that are young and could still have untapped upside that we haven't seen yet). Then factor in injuries (and how a guy like Perron wasn't even in the one comparison I saw), and depending how who gets hurt could easily determine who finishes with the better record.

Definetely agree that the Blues have the talent in the organization to be a very good team if the team can stay healthy and gel.

Beukeboom Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 04:17 PM
  #68
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 19,730
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happyhary9 View Post
No you said would have been a top 4-5 team if not for injuries (which a lot of teams dealt with and other issues). The Blues have had the main core of guys for a few years and have not proved that, yes so are young so have changed. But over the past three seasons the Wings, Hawks, Sharks, and Nucks have proven to be the top 4 teams. Two have made in 3/3 the others 2/3 in to top four standings, then when you look at other numbers like GF, GA, GDiff, it really starts to paint a picture that these four teams have been the most talented teams. And like I said I would bet a lot of money you could not get very many non hawks/blues fans to feel the the Blues are more talented then the Hawks. Maybe the Blues could become a top 4 team next year but as of right now they have done nothing to warrant being called a top 4/5 team in the west.
When we were healthy at the beginning and end of the season, we were just as good as any team in the league, so when healthy we can be a top 4-5 team in the West. You don't have to tell me about injuries. Prior years mean nothing because our core is all younger players who were developing during those years.

bleedblue1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 04:19 PM
  #69
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 19,730
vCash: 50
Alright Happyhary, I'm going to end this pissing match because I actually have things to do.

bleedblue1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 04:23 PM
  #70
Happyhary9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beukeboom Fan View Post
While I agree I don't like the "greater than, less than" indicators, I think the general theory that the Blues have a similar amount of talent on the roster is VERY valid. A bunch of that talent is still young, and I'm not sure how fast guys like Berglund & Pietro develop (similarly - there's a bunch of Hawks that are young and could still have untapped upside that we haven't seen yet). Then factor in injuries (and how a guy like Perron wasn't even in the one comparison I saw), and depending how who gets hurt could easily determine who finishes with the better record.

Definetely agree that the Blues have the talent in the organization to be a very good team if the team can stay healthy and gel.
Oh I agree with what you are saying just don't feel they are proven enough to say they are there with the Wings, Hawks, Nucks, and Sharks. And until one of there guys break out big they lack the top end guys of those teams. I love TJ's game and think he could be a gamer if he can just stay healthy. I would say Bergy has the highest offensive ceiling and if he could bust out would be huge. Plus in a few years Petro could be a top 5 D-man. Just to many questions right now to put them with those 4 teams until they start to prove it. Tarasnko (spelling?) could be a huge factor in a few years as well. I watch a lot of Blues games was in carbondale il got FSWM now live 12 mile from down town St louis and even go to many live games.

Happyhary9 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 04:26 PM
  #71
Happyhary9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedblue1223 View Post
Alright Happyhary, I'm going to end this pissing match because I actually have things to do.
That's cool never thought it was a pissing match as I was never upset or offended. More just a discussion between people with two different opinions. I guess we will see whose opinion was right during the season.

Happyhary9 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 04:31 PM
  #72
sketch22
Registered User
 
sketch22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,241
vCash: 2893
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beukeboom Fan View Post
While I agree I don't like the "greater than, less than" indicators, I think the general theory that the Blues have a similar amount of talent on the roster is VERY valid. A bunch of that talent is still young, and I'm not sure how fast guys like Berglund & Pietro develop (similarly - there's a bunch of Hawks that are young and could still have untapped upside that we haven't seen yet). Then factor in injuries (and how a guy like Perron wasn't even in the one comparison I saw), and depending how who gets hurt could easily determine who finishes with the better record.

Definetely agree that the Blues have the talent in the organization to be a very good team if the team can stay healthy and gel.
You mean like how Kane and Toews, who are much better than anyone on the Blues, are still only 22 & 23 respectively? Or how the core of this Hawks team has been better than the Blues for the last few years and now your have suddenly bridged the gap with no real rhyme or reason as to how.

Or how the Hawks have the 2 best dman out of both teams on our top line. Along with a guy who played 20 mins a night, was +16, with 26 points last year in Montador possibly playing on the 3rd pairing. Or how by and large all the members of our defense this year outperformed their counterparts on the Blues last year, but somehow the Blues have more depth on defense.

How about how our rookie goal performed better than your goalie last year. The Hawks are contending for the cup next year, the Blues are contending for a playoff spot. Please tell me you see the difference.

sketch22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 04:36 PM
  #73
Happyhary9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sketch22 View Post
You mean like how Kane and Toews, who are much better than anyone on the Blues, are still only 22 & 23 respectively? Or how the core of this Hawks team has been better than the Blues for the last few years and now your have suddenly bridged the gap with no real rhyme or reason as to how.

Or how the Hawks have the 2 best dman out of both teams on our top line. Along with a guy who played 20 mins a night, was +16, with 26 points last year in Montador possibly playing on the 3rd pairing. Or how by and large all the members of our defense this year outperformed their counterparts on the Blues last year, but somehow the Blues have more depth on defense.

How about how our rookie goal performed better than your goalie last year. The Hawks are contending for the cup next year, the Blues are contending for a playoff spot. Please tell me you see the difference.
Just to let you know the guy you are quoting and calling the Blues your team is a Blackhawks fan.

Happyhary9 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 04:57 PM
  #74
Elvs
Registered User
 
Elvs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Pitea
Country: Sweden
Posts: 6,643
vCash: 500
McDonald is the most underrated player on the entire boards, people on here aren't gonna give him much value.

His only flaws are lack of size and that he's a bit injury prone.

He's got amazing speed and skating ability. He has good vision and is a great passer. His wrist shot is underrated as he's gonna give you about 25 goals year in and year out. He's great in the face off circle and can play both centre and wing effectively. For a little guy he doesn't shy away from contact and works hard. He's good in the shootout.

Add his cup experience to that and he should fetch more than a late 1st at the deadline consider that he has another year left. Especially if he stays healthy this season and puts up the 65-70 points that he should provide.

Last 3 seasons: 183 games, 151 points. Yet he's not even going to make the HFboards top 90 Forwards in the poll section.


Last edited by Elvs: 08-31-2011 at 05:23 PM.
Elvs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2011, 07:22 PM
  #75
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,455
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sketch22 View Post
You mean like how Kane and Toews, who are much better than anyone on the Blues, are still only 22 & 23 respectively? Or how the core of this Hawks team has been better than the Blues for the last few years and now your have suddenly bridged the gap with no real rhyme or reason as to how.

Or how the Hawks have the 2 best dman out of both teams on our top line. Along with a guy who played 20 mins a night, was +16, with 26 points last year in Montador possibly playing on the 3rd pairing. Or how by and large all the members of our defense this year outperformed their counterparts on the Blues last year, but somehow the Blues have more depth on defense.

How about how our rookie goal performed better than your goalie last year. The Hawks are contending for the cup next year, the Blues are contending for a playoff spot. Please tell me you see the difference.
Like it's been said - I'm a Hawks fan, I and expect that the Hawks will bounce back from the Cup hangover to have a very good year. I specifically stated in my thread that the young Hawks players potentially still have additional upside we haven't seen yet. I'm just trying to have a relatively unbiased view of both teams when making a point.

Before you talk about "contending for the Cup", let's see how the Hawks gel. There's a significant amount of turnover on the roster (again), and we're relying on getting bounce back years from Keith & Seabrook. Because they've done it in the past - that's a lower risk IMO than counting on guys like Petro, Berglund or Oshie making the leap to elite status. But to assume that all the Hawks players bounce back (aka - what would be required for them to be a Cup contender IMO), and then don't give the Blues the same benefit of the doubt is why the board devolves into pissing contest.

I think that it's reasonable to ask questions about the Hawks blueline. Does Hjalmarsson develop? Is Leddy the real deal? How does Montador do in a different situation? What are they going to get out of Lepisto in a #6 type role? Will Q have enough confidence in the 2nd & 3rd pair to not burn out Keith & Seabrook? I like the Hawks blueline, but it's not like they're so good that Hawks fans should expect people to NOT have questions after they traded Campbell, who was the Hawks best d-man for much of last year.

Like I said - if both teams stay healthy, and both teams see a reasonable amount of progress from the young guys - I'd say the Hawks have the edge. I don't think there is some obscenely huge gap like others seem to assume in this thread though.

When you talk about the young core - not all players develop at the same rate. A guy like Kane was a legit 1st line contributor as an 18 YO kid. A guy like Berglund has had a more "normal" development curve. Add in more injuries (or less NHL experience) for the Blues core guys and I think it's reasonable for Blues fans to expect the Blues core to start "closing the gap". Stewart is a stud, and played all of like 30 games for the Blues. IMO, guys like Berglund & Oshie (and Perron if he can come back healthy) all have more upside over what they've shown in the past than the Hawks core. I think that guys like Toews & Kane (& Bolland) both will produce more than last year - but I don't think you'll see them be SIGNIFICANTLY better like the Blues guys I mentioned. (NOTE - I'm not saying the Blues players are better - just that because they weren't as far along the development curve, and they've got the potential to improve more that the Hawks guys I mentioned. JT & PK could both score 10 more points that last year - but I could see PB & TJO score 20+ more points than last years pace.)

Beukeboom Fan 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 10:03 AM.

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.