- Joined:
- Apr 24, 2010
- Posts:
- 29,061
- Liked Posts:
- 7,246
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 6,122
- Liked Posts:
- 1,642
- Location:
- Misery
I don't like Rogers. But I don't mind this theory. They shouldn't think that they'll win the cup this year with those young guys though.
- Joined:
- Jun 5, 2012
- Posts:
- 2,236
- Liked Posts:
- 668
- Location:
- UofM-Twin Cities Campus
So many question marks on this team that need to be filled by those young guys, hope Bowman's gamble pays off in a couple of years
HawkWriter
New member
- Joined:
- Aug 18, 2011
- Posts:
- 3,491
- Liked Posts:
- 1,341
What young guys are going to fill holes though? I really don't see that many new prospects making the team, honestly just one at most in my eyes. No where on defense as Olsen still needs minutes in the AHL to develop and there are 7 veteran guys coming back on defense (as long as Montador is healthy). Carter Hutton would have to make one hell of an impression to get a spot on this roster. At forward is the only spot where I see a prospect making the team...and that is 1 prospect at most which I think is going to be between Saad, Pirri, Morin, and Hayes. There just aren't holes for prospects to fill on this team, which is why I don't really get the article from Jesse here.
- Joined:
- Jun 5, 2012
- Posts:
- 2,236
- Liked Posts:
- 668
- Location:
- UofM-Twin Cities Campus
I know I don't agree with him, I'm just commenting on his thoughts on the team
DMelt36
Bolland > You
- Joined:
- May 27, 2010
- Posts:
- 13,969
- Liked Posts:
- 8,434
Olsen could very easily be the 5th or 6th defenseman on the team this year.
There's a hole in the top 6, and I'd say the majority of spots on the 3rd and 4th lines are very much up in the air. There are plenty of places for some of those young guys to jump up to the big squad.
Not as many on defense, no. But you're going to see a lot of those prospects on the ice this year, I think.
HawkWriter
New member
- Joined:
- Aug 18, 2011
- Posts:
- 3,491
- Liked Posts:
- 1,341
I don't know where you see any of those openings.
Olsen is definitely not #5/6 at the current moment in time. He is at BEST #8 on the depth chart. He played solid last year but then started to get exploited for his slow foot work.
I also don't see the spots in the bottom 6 that are going to be filled by prospects...I have the 3rd/4th lines being comprised of Shaw/Bolland/Bickell and then Carcillo/Mayers/Kruger - add in Bollig and Frolik to one of those as well. I just don't see where any prospect is going to come in and play in the bottom 6 on this team.
Hell, there might not be a prospect in the top 6 if the Blackhawks role out Carcillo again...
Stalberg/Toews/Sharp
Carcillo/Kane/Hossa
Bickell/Bolland/Shaw
Frolik/Kruger/Mayers
Bollig
Where does a prospect fit in? I just don't see any spot in that line up where a prospect would fit in nicely in the bottom 6. Also, what prospect would it be?
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 6,122
- Liked Posts:
- 1,642
- Location:
- Misery
Thanks to hawkgod for the help with seeing how prospects fit in for the roster.
I think Rogers' point was that the Hawks didn't sign vets because they believe that the prospects on the Hawks are good enough to wait for for the future when they can screw Bickell because he isn't good. And I agree with that. Signing vets wasn't helping the Blackhawks at all.
I think Rogers' point was that the Hawks didn't sign vets because they believe that the prospects on the Hawks are good enough to wait for for the future when they can screw Bickell because he isn't good. And I agree with that. Signing vets wasn't helping the Blackhawks at all.
HawkWriter
New member
- Joined:
- Aug 18, 2011
- Posts:
- 3,491
- Liked Posts:
- 1,341
My bad for talking knowledgeable hockey and for giving my opinion. Apparently that is frowned upon around here.
All the whining around here is pretty classic, especially from the people who bitch at others to get back to talking hockey.
Last edited:
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 6,122
- Liked Posts:
- 1,642
- Location:
- Misery
I'm fine with talking hockey, but the way you put down others for their opinions makes you a bit of a hypocrite. You like to have this high and mighty attitude like you know more than everyone else here.
That's my only problem.
HawkWriter
New member
- Joined:
- Aug 18, 2011
- Posts:
- 3,491
- Liked Posts:
- 1,341
How did I put down Dmelt in that post? I disagreed with him saying we will see lots of youth. I then went ahead and laid out why I disagree with him and how I don't see any holes that the prospects will fit in. I fully expect Dmelt to come back and say where he sees the holes and what prospects will fit in. That is what happens in a forum like this, right?
Did I call him an idiot, a meatball, did I add "zs", or say anything against him personally? I disagreed with his post and went through why I disagree with it. Pretty big difference and pretty damn simple unless a certain someone wants to start shit and derail some hockey conversation.
Last edited:
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 6,122
- Liked Posts:
- 1,642
- Location:
- Misery
Just my opinion. Sorry bud.
HawkWriter
New member
- Joined:
- Aug 18, 2011
- Posts:
- 3,491
- Liked Posts:
- 1,341
Instead maybe you should have given your opinion on the disagreement Dmelt and I seem to have on the prospects/holes and everyone could have continued talking hockey. Just my thought. Sorry chief.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 6,122
- Liked Posts:
- 1,642
- Location:
- Misery
I did. I said that I thought Rogers' point wasn't that prospects would be up on the team this year. His point was that the hawks didn't sign vets because they believe that in the next couple years the prospects will fill the holes.
Denault or McNeill at 2C, Saad in the top 6, Shaw and Smith and/or Beach in the bottom 6, Olsen as a D-man, and Hutton as goaltender.
The hawks felt no need to sign vets because it wasn't going to help and was only going to take up cap space.
- Joined:
- Nov 12, 2010
- Posts:
- 25,055
- Liked Posts:
- 11,499
My favorite teams
Sometimes writers just write to meet their quotas.
I don't think letting a lot of younger players step up would be the answer to finding another cup.
Seems like teams that have a mix of veterans and younger players do the best.
I don't think letting a lot of younger players step up would be the answer to finding another cup.
Seems like teams that have a mix of veterans and younger players do the best.
- Joined:
- Apr 26, 2010
- Posts:
- 15,922
- Liked Posts:
- 2,701
- Location:
- Chicago, IL
My favorite teams
Beach will never make this team IMO.
Hutton im not sold on.
While it is always good to have some youth intertwined in the lineup, they need to be offset with some vets. You could argue the hawks have those vets, but I would say they need more.
I see 3 big holes:
Top 6 (2 center)
Top 6 (Wing)
And bottom 2 defenseman
Sent via Tapatalk on Droid RAZR MAXX
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 6,122
- Liked Posts:
- 1,642
- Location:
- Misery
Yeah, but I think the point is that signing a vet this offseason wasn't the answer. I think the Hawks are going to wait for McNeill or Denault to play 2C and Saad to be in the top 6. And then they'll fill the other holes with some vets after that.
The UFA pool wasn't good this year. Waiting for some players to be ready before signing other guys is smart because it gives you a good window of opportunity with the young guys playing well and the UFA you sign before you have to give the young guys a new contract and the cap becomes an issue.
- Joined:
- Apr 24, 2010
- Posts:
- 29,061
- Liked Posts:
- 7,246
its quite obvious why this article was written. tcf pretty much summed it up.
Sent from my USCfans guide to being an uneducated baseball fan using Tapatalk
Sent from my USCfans guide to being an uneducated baseball fan using Tapatalk
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 6,122
- Liked Posts:
- 1,642
- Location:
- Misery
And what fisch said is true. Rogers probably wrote it because he had to write something and this was just him finding something to write about.
- Joined:
- Apr 24, 2010
- Posts:
- 29,061
- Liked Posts:
- 7,246
im not even involved in this debate and yet you cant seem to resist bringing me into it. i thought you were here to talk hockey as you always state but yet you do the same thing. so what started this? tcf calling you hawkgod sarcastically? mind you while giving a hockey response. you need to get thicker skin.
Sent from my USCfans guide to being an uneducated baseball fan using Tapatalk
