Is it Hjalmarsson or Niemi?
The Blackhawks could be on the verge of losing another key player off their Stanley Cup team, but it might not be defenseman Niklas Hjalmarsson.
Hawks general manager Stan Bowman has seven days to match the four-year, $14 million offer sheet Hjalmarsson got from the San Jose Sharks on Friday - a stunning development for a team that thought it had its salary cap issues under control.
The Hawks are in a tough spot, one that might force them to choose between keeping Hjalmarsson, goalie Antti Niemi or even center Patrick Sharp.
The question Bowman and his staff might be pondering is this: Is it more important to keep a 23-year-old defenseman with a huge upside; Niemi, whose money demands might be out of line; or Sharp, whose contract with its $3.9 million cap hit is up in two more years?
The Hawks' best option might be to keep Sharp, match the offer sheet for Hjalmarsson and let Niemi go to his arbitration hearing and see what the award is.
If it's more than $4 million a year, the Hawks could walk away from it, let Niemi become an unrestricted free agent and go after either Marty Turco or Jose Theodore - provided they still are available as free agents.
There are no easy answers here. Sharks GM Doug Wilson made a shrewd move here, kicking the Hawks while they're down and forcing them to make some serious salary cap decisions that could remove them from the list of Stanley Cup contenders.
Wilson is showing more competitiveness than many of his players did in the Western Conference finals.
The Hawks' defense wouldn't be the same without Hjalmarsson.
They might be able to contend with someone other than Niemi in goal.
to mrrast who posted on Sun, 07/11/2010 - 17:32
First of all, if someone threw you 14 million, you wouldn't be spewing the crap you posted about what Hjalmarsson should have done.
As we all know... hockey is played well beyond the rinks and deep into the boardrooms. With all due respect bud, you aren't sittin in Doug Wilson's seat, with good reason. Nor are you in the box upstairs sharing a cold one with Rocky.
To the rest of you...My question is why our top dollar players and their contracts weren't restructured to accomodate some of the pieces we lost? I thought the team was "tight".
I probably should of read the story but I do believe that the big 3 that just decided to go and or stay with the Miami Heat... each gave up 15 mil to allow the team to acquire more players.
I would think that our big 3 could of done the same. But then again, I'm not upstairs sharing a cold one with Rocky either.
Well...no doubt I was a little harsh, but it was in fact his choice to sign that offer sheet. I'm not angry at the kid for doing it. Actually whats funny is your next set of statements. Here's the answer to your question:
The 3 guys you mentioned are signing new contracts, so they can sign for whatever they want, which is an NBA Championship, of course, so they can be flexible with their contracts. $15 million over 6 years is a small price to pay, and they are all, undoubtedly, going to make it back in the endorsements they are all going to get, together, so they probably don't care about the 3.5/year. The "big 3" on the 'Hawks already have contracts for the following seasons. Once a deal is done in the NHL, it's done. It can't be "restructured" to accommodate for incompetency, or whatever, in the front office. In our case, it's more a deal they struck 3-4 years ago in their entry level contracts, which also can't be deferred or withheld because of whatever reason. But, had they not locked down Kane, Toews, or Keith before the season, how badly do you think another team would have been salivating to snag them, now?
Getting back to your statements, so, you'd want our "big 3" worthy and deserving players of the contracts they received to "restructure" their contracts (again, we know they can't due to the CBA). But Hjalmarsson, who CAN structure his new contract to be more accommodating, much like Miami 1-3-6 did, and be the town hero, which is basically my point, as it's within the boundaries of the CBA, yet you're calling me out for what reason? Calling him greedy?
J. Hayes = willing to drop the gloves, as he and Flick went for a little dance this afternoon. Hayes seemed to dominate the fight; Flick did get in a nice punch or two on him. K. Hayes scored the lonesome goal on a cannon of a shot from the blue line. Both were solid players.
Kruger = Might of had two goals in today's game. It looked like he redirected a Leddy shot. Another was a Kruger, Broadhurst, Kruger pass and tap in. Solid all around player on both ends of the ice. Seems to always be in position to make a play on either end. He made up for the Leddy and Lalonde giveaways in front by clearing it. Probably had the simplest game all weekend, takes care of the puck, and finds his way to the front of the net.
Beach = If he were a musical instrument, I'd say he was B Flat all of the camp. He played steady, average games. He always seems to be the most comfortable guy on the ice, whereas, most others were out to "prove" themselves. He seemed to want to slow down the pace a bit to help these guys out, but no one was having that.
Lalonde = Played catch up today against the Hayes' grouping. I don't know what it is, but he plays reactive instead of proactive on the ice. Everything seems to be 1/2 second ahead of him. He certainly isn't playing like he wants a spot on the roster next year.
Leddy = Dumped 2 pucks back into the middle of the ice in his own end. I thought they were going to lead to goals, but Kruger got back in time for one, and the other was cycled back out to the point. I am really surprised the score was 6-1 at the end with these two out on the ice. I hope he steps up his game and improves in a lot of areas, defensively.
Broadhurst = This kid might be the surprise of the weekend. He came out of no where and seemed to be in on every play. After being fed a nice pass from Kruger, he dished it right back to him for a nice goal. He has a 6th sense for the puck. Had a nice shot and goal at the end of today's game. Correct me if I'm wrong, I thought he had 2 goals and an assist in today's game.
BLACKHAWKS SAY THEY'LL MATCH SHARKS' OFFER FOR HJALMARSSON
We saw Morin cross check someone near the player's benches after the play had gone down ice. Overall I say this kid does have that compete level. He did stick his nose in by poking for the puck in boards mucking for the puck so he doesn't appear to be a so called soft player. He may just be that player with the Hull type shot who can do nothing all game, then wins the game in the final :30 seconds. He is a skill guy and next to Paradis he may be the closest to making the team. I was especially pleased with the overall game from Birch. I think if you look at hi scouting report, he doesn't have an issue with being physical. He just makes a check and it is from a big frame guy when he dishes out a check. But he makes the check willingly when the situation presents itself. He showed this early in the scrimmage. He is not an offensive guy but (again) if the situation presents itself he looked comfortable carrying the puck and dumping it in. I don't think he is going to dazzle anyone making a great offensive play. I'd love to see him compete for a spot in pre-season -- that's his next challenge. But I believe he is headed back for soph year.
I hope the 'Hawks let him walk...
Rationale:
Hjalmarsson is a quality player who MIGHT turn into a great player in the next 4 years, BUT he is not worth a 4 year/$14 million dollar contract, now. You have to earn that kind of money. The person who posted about Hjalmy's likeness to Keith is right, but there is a major difference between the two and where they are at in their careers, respectively. Not a single person on this blog would have signed Keith to 4yrs for $14 million when he was due for a new contract in '06/07 and posited Hjalmy-like numbers the year before (9g,12a). It's easy to look back and say you would have, but we know that's a lie.
Comparing the two, I agree there are slight similarities, but how many times has that happened and the guy took a turn for the worse? Have times changed, contractually? Yes, but you still have to earn your pay around here. Keith developed and progressed season to season after he re-signed in '07 ($1.4 million/yr), and when it came time to re-sign, again, he got rewarded, handsomely, for that progression. The guy is humble and should be nothing less than an inspiration to Hjalmarsson. Keith deserves every penny of the $8 million he's going to make next year. The only thing the 'Hawks should give Hjalmarsson is a hand packing his bags. Since San Jose is willing to pay a #4 defenseman like he's a #2 after 1 full season, let him go. Paying him that kind of money, or any player for that fact, at this point in his career is an insult to the guys who are/were here and actually deserve it.
It's unfortunate for Hjalmy and the 'Hawks that his contract was up this year and not, say, 2 years from now when he might develop into a $3.5 million dollar defenseman. I don't dislike they guy; I enjoyed watching him play. The guy is simply wanting too much, too soon. And I don't think it's a gamble the 'Hawks can risk seeing that they have deserving players that need raises this summer before their contracts expire at the end of next season, i.e. Seabrook/Brouwer. I wish the 'Hawks re-signed Hjalmarsson and Ladd, specifically, during the off-season last year or around the trade deadline. They would have at least signed them to more appropriate contracts. Lesson learned for Seabrook, Brouwer, and even Sharp.
For those of you that find comfort in Hjalmarsson like you did your blanky when you were little, I suggest subscribing to NHL GameCenter Live to get your Hjalmy fill each week. San Jose needs far more than Hjalmarsson's #4 ability and speed to capture the illusive Cup. The guy is making a grave mistake taking that offer, but hey, when you're greedy, I guess even a contract to Florida would make sense. The kid should have taken a big piece of the Keith humble pie and sucked it up for a 2 yr, $4 million dollar deal (with some nice bonus incentives) to prove himself. Oh, well, though. There will be plenty of guys on the market next year, and if we have that "lull" of a year, better we don't waste a year and $3.5 on his salary.
Fire at will...
"The kid should have taken a big piece of the Keith humble pie and sucked it up for a 2 yr, $4 million dollar deal (with some nice bonus incentives) to prove himself"
MrRast, How do you know he wouldn't have taken that deal?
It is fine to suggest the Hawks should let him walk at that price (3.5 m)....but to suggest #4 is being greedy is over the top...unless of course you have some kind of information on the QO the Hawks gave.
He is certainly worth more than 725 per year.....
Its the right move. Hammer was the most underrated member of the Hawks last season and there is widespread consensus that his upside is very strong. Defense is what translates into deep playoff runs year after year. Defense is what enabled Detroit to have their glorious multi-year playoff run too. Believe me Stan and his father understand that.
So it looks like Hjalmarsson stays. Neimi? I guess it is a 50-50 bet he winds up as the San Jose goaltender.
What multi-year playoff run would you be referring to?
I am going to guess he is talking about the post cap run of 07Conference Finals, 08 SC Champs, and 09 SC Finals....
The pre-cap run was 95 SC Finals, 96 Conference Finals, 97 SC champs, 98 SC Champs...but that obviously has no relevance to how much you should pay a #4 D in the Salary Cap World.
He is also a distinct strength of the Hawks whose fair market value has been set. Hawks need to bring him back and match the San Jose offer -- it is as simple as that.
I don't begrudge these players trying to maximize their value. The system is there for them to take advantage of it. The career span of your typical NHL player is not very long, therefore you need to take care of number one when it comes to getting paid. It is the free enterprise system, a concept that apparently some of you don't get or don't want to get.
The biggest thing to think about is this: Hjalmarsson *didn't have to sign the offer sheet* - at least, not yet. He CHOSE to do so. He could've waited. With the D-man market as this as it is this season, and the potential he's got, there is no doubt that if it was solely about the money, he could've matched that offer from somebody later in the summer, even if Chicago didn't have that much money left to offer him after re-signing Niemi. We know Chicago gave him at least one offer, a qualifying offer; but how much/length is nothing but speculation.
San Jose is already heavily committed to D-men. If they take Hjammer on - and they will have to, if Chicago passes - then they have to dump somebody else, because they still need forwards. In other words, SJ made a high-risk move which is probably more aimed at trying to force Chicago's hand to dump Niemi, who is somebody that SJ is salivating to have. Just look at who SJ currently has signed for goal: one guy to a 2-yr, another with 1 yr left, neither of whom scream out as solid #1s. And, in the process, they'd lose 1st and 3rd-round draft picks to Chicago. A short-term win for SJ, with future potential, but also some future losses.
Additionally, if Chicago committed $3.5M/4 yrs to him, it might make it tougher to re-sign Seabrook next year, even with the Toews/Kane bonus hit coming off the books. So, sign the younger guy with potential, or keep the guy who's proven he's a defensive powerhouse?
By Hjalmarsson signing the sheet, it gave power to San Jose (and to Hjammer), yes, but it also forces Chicago's hand. Chicago loses all negotiating room with Hjalmarsson, and is dictated to the terms of the contract.
Stan Bowman doesn't strike me as the kind of guy who's going to be forced by somebody outside on the organization on how he's going to run the team.
And if people keep saying they don't want Huet, why would they want Marty Turco over Niemi? Turco has not been spectacular last year. Decent enough, yes, but in the 2009-10 season, he only played 53 games, and went 22-20-11, with a 2.72 GAA and .913 SV% and 4 shutouts. By comparison, Niemi did 39 games for 26-7-4 including 7 shutouts in regular reason with 2.25 GAA and .912 SV%; and 16-6 in the playoffs with 2 shutouts, 2.63 GAA and .910 SV%. (Huet was 26-14-4 with 4 shutouts, 2.5 GAA and .895 SV%.)
Turco MIGHT want to sign a short-term contract for say, $2-$2.5M to keep playing, which would be a significant drop from his past few years' salary. But if he was good enough, why wouldn't the team who has had him for 9 years want to keep him? (The Stars have some breathing room in their cap space, but again, he likely would've had to take a pay cut.)
Jose Theodore's stats are more attractive than Turco's, but again, another goalie on the late end of their career, another player with a sizable recent salary ($4.5M/yr last two), that MIGHT want to extend his career by a year or two with a short-term, but much lower salary, contract.
The rest of the goalies still "on the market" are mostly made up of players who have never served as a #1 goalie, so at best, the idea of signing Turco or Theodore would be a 1-2 year solution, and what then? Hope that somebody in the farm system has developed well enough to step up? Find another free agent?
The Blackhawks do not have a good history with goalies over the past several years, so it can be understandable they're feeling gun-shy. But while Hjalmarsson certainly made great defense, the Hawks would not have won the Cup without Niemi. He flat-out stole games for them early in the series, and kept the team in the game long enough for them to get their feet under them and take their confidence from him to win in others.
I understand your sentiments, but lets remember a few things:
1. I don't see any reason why/how the Hawks pony up and pay another defenseman 5+ million a year when Seabrook comes knocking next summer. I personally, don't see how Seabrook can be valued at that price based on what he brings. Yes, he's a physical defenseman AT TIMES, but what offesive numbers does he bring? I think he becomes a HUGE trading chip next season, along as their is replacement in the system......Like Buff, Seabrook seems to be the most consistent physically in the playoffs, but during the regular season he's not consistent enough for how big he is, and the fact he's paired up with Keith. Plus, he also got his @ss benched in Vancouver for a reason, while a rookie logged valuable ice time in elimination games for team Canada.
I like Seabrook, but I don't think he's as consistent as should be. Now, we may see a different guy, since his contract is coming up, and he figures somebody will throw HUGE money at him if he can post a great year. We shall see......
2. Hammer wasn't expected to score, and if you watch the games closely the guy sat back a lot of times when Campbell was rushing in along the left side half boards to make sure the Hawks had somebody back. That's why this guy's stats are "down". Plus, he accepted his role and become a HUGE shot blocker, and having already lost Sopel, who is going to fill that role? Not to mention this was his 1st full year in the NHL. Very few defenseman explode offensively as they concentrate on fine tuning the defensive side of things....Look at Keith. HE never was considered "an offensive" defenseman...All we heard about was Cam Barker and his cannon of a shot.
3. Your defensive depth is EXTREMELY weak, and going back to point #1, Hammer could be Seabrook's replacement next year. Who steps in with Campbell? What guy on this roster do you feel comfortable with, when #51 takes off and pushes the play? IF you limit Campbell from doing that, you aren't getting your full return for what Campbell can do. Plus, you still have to find 3 more defensemen to fill in the rest of your roster. I don't know of any "veteran" UFA right now, that could come in and do that job, and take less amount of money right now.
4. The guy is coveted. Obviously by the offer sheet by San Jose, but he is also glorified by the national media. While Foley and Eddie O built Keith into an immortal around here, the national media was all about the Hammer, and he's only going to get better considering last year was his FIRST FULL year in the league.
Campbell is almost untradeable now, and I really don't see that changing if the reports are accurate about the cap going DOWN with the new CBA looming. Campbell is also extremely valuable, not worth his contract (but that's not his fault), but lets not forget that this team probably loses to Nashville in the 1st round, but took off right when #51 returned to the ice. They were 1-2 with Campbell......15-5 with him.
The Hawks success is based on puck control, and defensive who can move the puck. Keeping this core of 4 guys together as long as possible, will enable them to limit shots against and allow them to let Niemi walk, and put in a veteran who may have something left to prove (Turco/Theodore).
1. I never said the 'Hawks should pony up and pay anyone $5+ million. Seabrook was only mentioned as someone who IS deserving of a raise. How much isn't up to me. My point there is the 'Hawks should sign him before he has the opportunity to seek the "huge" money potential.
2. You basically said it your self in #4, Campbell and Seabrook are interchangeable #2 defenseman. Hjalmarsson was allowed to take the chances on defense because Campbell (and the likes of Sharp/Bolland/Hossa/Ladd) had the speed and talent to get back when he rushes the puck forward. Watch what happens to Hjalmy on San Jose, the guy will get eaten alive cause they are tooooooooo slooooooow, and nobody will be there to recover for Halmy laying down on a puck like there was in Chicago.
3. Next year there will be a number of quality defenseman hitting the market, including many within the 'Hawks organization. Mitch Versteeg is one name that comes to mind as being capable of filling that role in a year, or maybe now if given the opportunity. But their will quite a few UFAs next season that will be on the verge of a breakout season and won't command 3.5 million. I mean this is nothing short of a cheap shot by SJ; Kurtis Foster (probably the most underrated defenseman in the league) is getting 3.6 million over 2 years, and Colaiacovo is getting $4.35 over 2 years; BOTH guys are better than Hjalmarsson RIGHT NOW and are only getting better, so let San Jose choke on their decision over the next four season as they wait for him to develop only not to be able to re-sign him to the MONSTER of a contract he's going to expect in 4 years.
4. I don't care who the guy is, you don't throw that kinda money because we THINK he might be a stud defenseman. You have to earn it, not ride on the coat tails of a Championship. Look around the league, Steve; I pointed out two STUDS who went about their negotiations the right way. Kudos to Hlamy for being about to do the latter; enjoy San Jose, I won't hold it against you for doing what you have to do. What do you think has gotten us into this mess in the first place? Sure, pay Hjalmy so in 2 years we can discuss the ways we can unload his contract, too, and how we should have traded him in when we had the chance. I'd respect Bowman decision if he decides to let him go.
Wiz and jmc have said it pretty clearly, there are 100 great players at camp, right now. Birch, Leddy, Connolly, Lalonde, Olsen, Johns, Lavin, Stanton, Versteeg, and Youds are all defensman who will be coming in over the next 3 years. 3 of those names could easily fill roster spots next season. And I'd much rather gamble with rotating young talent and let them get in a solid year rather than gamble with 1 guy for 4 years; especially if that 1 unproven guy prevents us from signing proven players in the very near future.
Seabrook got his ass benched in Vancouver because he couldn't keep up with the pace. He is not a world class powerskater. And before the resident expert goes off on me, I taught powerskating for years, among other things having to do with this game. I like everything else about Seabrook. And give him this- he knows his limitations. I have seen him numerous times falling down on his own, without being touched, but still make a play going down. That's talent. That is not world class skating. So he benefits greatly being paired with Keith. And those two are a a very good pairing. But as seen in Vancouver, Keith, with his quickness, can play with just about anybody. So in the sell high frame of mind, I would consider trading Seabrook as he might be worth a ton right now. But if they do, they better have a plan for a physical defenceman that can play right away. I would hope Scott could be that guy, but I have to believe he needs work. I am not sure if any of the players would hold a grudge with Hammer signing the offer and cashing in. If he had already made a lot of money in the game, then maybe so. But how could they blame him for making sure of his financial future now?
All you guys jumping Bowman, he is in a tough spot. Kind of like getting his dick unstuck from his zipper. I don't envy him a bit. I think he should be given another year or so at least to be fairly judged.
Turco-pass. Theodore- pass. If they are going to have to play kids more than they would like to because of the cap, then why not get a handle on the young goalies. Camp & practice don't demonstrate which one has the intangibles to be a champion. None of us knew how Niemi would do, but there were a lot of us begging for him to get his shot. You never know for sure what you have until you see what you are up against.
that line about bowman is up there for some of the funniest crap I have read on this site. I laughed out loud.......Classic comparison.
I'm not against trading Seabrook, depending upon what they could get back. Out of all their players right now, he could fetch the most by far, but I highly doubt that they're even considering it. Instead, I'm sure they're looking at what they could get for Sharp since he's probably not part of the "core" once his current deal expires.
Ya Rain, more than likely, you are right about the Sharp/Seabrook thing above. But the hawks are in an extraordinary situation. If they are to escape with a chance to contend seriously going forward, it is going to take some contrary to ordinary thinking. That's why I said to give Bowman some time and let him see what he has in prospects. Let's see what he can cook up. At some point, he might think that if we are going to lose so many good players in one summer, let's part with a star and restock all at once. I would certainly do the legwork on something like that and see what I get. And I think Seabrook is the most expendable star they have. Probably a good thing I am not the GM.
Any why is it that the most impressive player at camp is usually the smallest. I was only there for the first drills and the first period on friday. But that Olimb guy to me was the most polished. I read a comment that he was making high risk passes and he was. But maybe trying to make a bigger impression for the coaches. I think Wiz used the term "waterbug" to describe him, and I agree.
I can tell who the most valuable person in camp is. The coach running the drills. I think his name is Vincent. Best drills I have ever seen. Incorporates skating, stickhandling, and heads up movement. I coached from learn to skate up to AAA, and this guy is my idol. He is an east coast guy like Torchetti. I hope there is no connection, as I would hate to see him follow the caravan down to Atlanta.
...then the day after they won the Cup, he should have signed Hjarlmarsson.
Be proactive. He must have sh** his pants when Nick signed that offer sheet.
Question: Why wouldn't Nick H let the 'Hawks know about the big offer sheet before signing it? And give them a chance to make an offer before they were forced to??
It's a tad more complicated than that. Something called cap room.
These 3 late additions to their teams played incredible in the playoffs - pk suppan for montreal, carlsson for Washington, and carlsson for Ottawa. Do the Hawks have this type of caliber d-man waiting to pounce on an opportunity? there wasn't one last year.
How good were the d-men in Wash and Ott if the are gone in round 1?
Confused. Especially when Ott signed Sutton and not Carlsson.....
Miscellaneous observations on day two of prospects' camp:
Lalonde looked much better today than yesterday. Confident with the puck, aggressive. Very nice skater with a bit of nasty to his game. I see no reason why he couldn't fill a 5th or 6th slot on our d-corps.
I found Mitch Versteeg an intriguing talent. Significantly larger than his older brother. Loves taking the body. Skates well and seems to have a feel for positioning. He's a definite keeper for the organization.
Rensfeldt lined up at center during the first of the second set scrimmage sessions and did not look out of place. He won faceoffs and looked very big out there. Reminded me of P Marleau. Likes to hit and has soft hands.
Its time for some of our bloggers to get off of Beach's case. He is a big boy with a considerable skill set. He made a lovely little pass on Connolly's one-time goal during the first scrimmages that was NHL caliber. It was easily the nicest bang-bang play of the morning. We need what he brings.
That little guy Broadhurst played his way onto someone's roster, Rockford, etc... with his hustling effort all morning. Speedy, gritty, and skillful. Reminded me a little of Linesman, Draper.
D Olsen will play with the big club before too long. He is long, tough, and skilled. Has a confident air about himself.
You've got to like the trade for Jimmy Hayes. He is a big big man with nice hands. Likes to hit. Demonstrated really nice touch on a p-shot goal. Thought he and Kevin had good chem together. Not ready to call them the new Sedins. But they do have some game and grit.
Morin was really busting his tail. He's another guy who could sneek his way onto the opening night roster. He's got the size and the speed, and he's not afraid to paste his check into the 3rd row, as Eddie O likes to say.
All in all, a very impressive group of young players. More later.
Every one of the 100 players on the hawk list are keepers.
They traded to acquire the pick to draft him as they thought he ws the last of that strong draft class of defesneman in North America to have enough upside to a be an NHLer. (btw, that 2008 drfat may go down as the best draft of deemen ever.)
I thought he showed his wasn't good enough defensively to step up against these guys, I don't know how he can play 9 minutes a game in the NHL without some pro time in Rockford.
Yeah, he bigger, shoots the tail of the puck, moves very well, but if he can't play in his own end, he have to pay dues and learn the defensive position at the higher skill and speed with which the opponents will be playing.
We need a Hjammer type, not the deer in the headlights repeat of Barker.
You could see him as a 5th or 6th and I don't right now because he didn't step up defesnively against these guys. He obviously has more skills than Joradn Henry, but I'll step up and say Hendry who I have no love for, is gonna do a better job against NHL forwards than this kid could right now....
Too bad the "air" you see with Olsen doesn't apply to the classroom...he got a note of warning for low grades. He btw, is more what you want as a Hjammer replacement though not ready.
As far as Beach: in rpo sports you are subjected to all the public by your play.
I realize they had Beach paired with lesser-lights and he didn't have his big brother who he played with his entire life on the other wing, but there is perspective.
As a pro, you have to to make your teammates better and also take charge of your side.
Beach wasn't playing with pros the last couple. He made no one look good, especially himself.
Granted maybe he thinks he shouldn't go from the double decker bus and the main stage of the parade to a "prospect's camp." that he has proved through the 50 goal season, the improved feet & balance , and where he was drafted that this camp was ... preliminary, and something he was asked to do. And in attending he was under no pressure and there was no need for dominant show of his talent.
You can go back and look through your yearbook and site where each guy was drafted and "like" them according to their pick. But I prefered Tyler Myers, who actually plays in the NHL, and when I see laize faire play where I want to see him bullying those defenseman, making them close down the gaps on him, and him owning the boards, well, call me "blogger still on Beach's case."
As far as your comparison of Rensfedt to Marleau: I would put away that one. He would have to show that he carried the puck really well and had some dangle. He didn't show that. He was superb positionally, good in three zones, gets to the areas, etc. Marleu carries the thing whereas Ludwig quickly dispersed it as opposed to trying to skate through the defensive players. I would he tickled if he did turn out to carry as well as a number one overall pick.
I have seen to two paid professional draft prognosticators and one called the comaprison of his style to TRENT HUNTER, and another saw the upside to be a Franzen type, and that was based on his size and considerabl wall work, and footwork.
Just kinda disappointing when the two players billed most to challenge for roster spots were not on their games saturday.
I agree about Kris versteeg's brother, but the Hayes boys looked like they weren't their to bruise anyone, and didn't go looking for contact...
Dear Wiz:
Were you the guy wearing the vintage Hawks jacket chatting up those two lovely young ladies on the right side of the seating area? Thought that might have been the illustrious Wiz.
Anyhow, I understand your point about Beach. However, he has raised the level of his game over the past two years and he may be ready to show that he's an NHLer. Don't you think he wanted to show Hawks brass that he was more than just a brawler? His board work was OK yesterday. No, he wasn't Clark Gillies. But he wasn't Alain Daigle either. Its tough coming to a camp such as this, being assigned linemates, and being expected to develop rapport on the fly--not to mention having most eyes focused on you as a former #1. I think he performed ably enough. Only time will tell whether he becomes a legitimate top 6 forward.
As to Rensfeldt, I likened him to Marleau. I didn't intend to suggest that he was in fact a young Marleau, with all the skills at present of that elite forward. Rensfeldt is long like Marleau, seems to have nice hands, performed well on faceoffs, has some giddy-up in his stride, and appeared not at all fazed by the physicality of things. C'mon, Wiz, he's only 18. I merely suggested that he has the look of that sort of forward. Once again, time will only tell.
Sure the Hayes boys are a bit skinny and don't appear eager to drop the gloves with everyone who looks cross-eyed at them. But perhaps that's a sign of maturity and a commitment to the finer points of the game. The NHL is a speed/skill league. Not too many Dave Schultzes and Tiger Williams these days. What I like about the boys is that they can play, and they are big. Both will fill out and might turn out to be legitimate power forwards. You can't teach crease clogging size.
I admire your support of Hammer. But I don't want you to break down if the Hawks choose not to match. Life will go on, and one of these kids perhaps might step in and surprise us all. Yeah, I like Hammer very much. But the financial dimensions of the game prevent good teams from retaining all of their good players. Its not necessarily a failure on Stan Bowman's part or Tallon's for that matter. Players want to be paid top dollar, especially those on Cup winning teams, and there simply isn't enough green to go around. Did we overpay for Soupy? Sure we did. But I guarantee you, if we hadn't signed him, fans would have been deriding the organization for not going out and grabbing the big-time puck carrying d-man. We went out and got him, and the rest is history. He may not have single-handedly won us the Cup, but he was part of the mix. If we could get a team to take on his contract, then, yes, we could do a few more things I suppose. But I am very happy that Soupy is still a part of our blue line corps, and I do think he is going to have a banner year coming up.
Lastly, Wiz, yes, I know that the 100 players or so participating in the prospects camp are "keepers," in terms of them having their rights owned by the Hawks organization. I'm a little long in the tooth, Wiz, meaning I've been a fan a long long while. Who knows I may be a bit longer in the tooth than even you? If not, I'm in the ball park I'll bet. What I meant by my comment was that not all of these kids will remain in our organization. Some will be cut, some traded. Some may remain with us but never catch even a sniff of the big show. That's what I was getting at, your highness.
In spite of it all, I still love ya, Wiz. Should be an interesting week for Hawks' fans. Best always, my friend.
I live in Europe,a friend of mine is from Sweden,he claimed Kruger will be great in a few years,donno if that is just his Swedish homerism talking or if the kid could become the real deal......And I know Stalberg is a pro,but how good is he?Can he be a good Versteeg replacement?Does the guy forecheck backcheck?anything....cmon Bowman where the hell is the quote for the newspapers that you are goin to match the Hammer offer sheet......worried....gulp!
Kruger looked good in the scrimmage. I also was impressed with Mathis Olimb. He has speed and played well yesterday. I think we could see them both of them somewhere down the road.
I don't know where people are coming with the Olimb comments. Yes, he'll be a great player, for the Rockford team, but he's 24 and Krugers 20, and Kruger is already on par with Olimb's level of play, if not slightly better. On both day's I thought Kruger played much better. Olimb has serious passing issues from what I saw. He tries to thread the needle way to often, which lead to a lot of turnovers. Kruger makes smart decisions and protects the puck much better than Olimb. Olimb did have a sweet move on Lalonde, but he is trying to showboat too much. Kruger plays a simple, hard-nosed hockey game who made some of the cleanest, crisp passes I've seen in two days. Kruger could easily be the guy that goes between Rockford and the 'Hawks all next year, which I think could boost his play tremendously.
there si no debate Kruger tries to make the roster next year, and Olimb has a one yera contract.
The water bug was fearlees and fast. Kruger is an offenisve generator, good in all the areas kane is.(pleae I am not rtying to make a comparison as EQUAL jsy comparable)
Kruger was fearless attacking the box and working the area behind the goal line and and the wall.
Olimbug was just smaller and simply quicker than most, and very skilled.
Scorer? We will see?
Kruger scorer? We will see.
But with Kruger it is pretty certain he will get the puck to guys and make scoring chances for himselves or others...
I was impressed with him as well. Size will be an issue with him but he does have speed and is aggressive. It wouldn't hurt to take a look at him.
I know this will be thought of as crazy.
But you have Kane, Toews, Campbell, Hossa, Keith tied up for several years. What if you let Hjalmarsson go to San Jose for a 1st and a 3rd, trade rights to Niemmi for picks and prospects, send Huet to Rockford. Sign Modano and Turco for 1 or 2 years and maybe one or two other decent depth free agents for short term contracts. Extend Seabs for 5 years. Play your young kids like Lalonde, Beach, Skille, Bickell, Dowell, Morin, Crawford and others. I think you still have a playoff team each year. You develop your younger kids faster and in three years you have a heck of a team. You can also manage your cap better going forward. Toews and Kane would still be under 25. Keith and Seabs would be under 30. Campbell and Hossa would not be that old. And you are the deepest team in the league with the big fast talented prospects and picks you picked up in the salary cap trades this year and letting Hjalmarsson and Niemmi go.
For the next two years you make the playoffs but you probably do not contend for the Cup. But in years 3, 4, and 5 you are going to have a heck of a team.
Is Hjalmarrson worth 3.5 mil a year this year? No....not until he shows some offense is he worth this much. So the Sharks obviously feel that he will grow into a 3.5 mil player at some point over the next four years and become worth what they've offered. But it is a gamble on potential and as Da Coach used to say, "potential will get you fired if you aren't careful". Then again, if Hjalmarrson tanks Wilson's gamble will be some other GM's problem so he probably figures it is worth it.
The question for the Hawks is do they have another Hjlamarrson lurking in the backwoods somewhere that we haven't seen yet? If they do then he goes. If they don't they sign him and then move on to figuring out how to sign Niemi. But Niemi may get an offer sheet soon too so Junior better have some backup plans in place.
dump Huet... minors .... europe... whatever.... dont need to spend millions to keep the bench warm. sign a backup for a fraction. Plenty of money then to keep your studs.
think about it... all the "know it alls" claimed throughout the year that the achilles heel for the Hawks was goaltending. Well, it became pretty evident that the defense MADE the goaltending SEEM awesome.
Nice to see Niemi make some nice saves, but lets not start comparing him to Patrick Roy.
Keep the defense strong, goalie (s) SEEM top shelf.
Beach is dead - with a hit of 1.2 mil a year - - - - he will see limited time in the big leagues. I hope Bickel realizes this and doesn't ask for too much - because he can also price himself out of a spot.
oh, that's right...he was the rookie of the year...
Hawks could have had Karlsson, Boychuck or Myers. Myers is going to be something special
the Hawks need to decide who they would rather keep...Hjamarlsson or...not Niemi...but Seabrook.
I want Nik to remain a Hawk. Most D-men don't mature until their mid 20's and he's well ahead o the curve at just 23.
However, under the current CBA, it's impossible to tie up 1/3 of your cap space on four defenders...if the Hawks match the offer sheet, it will have them paying out almost $16.2 million for just Soupy, Dunc and Hjammar. I highly doubt the cap will exceed $60 million the year before the current CBA runs out. It's easy math, even people here can do it.
Seabrook will get AT LEAST a $4.5 offer sheet next year if he is allowed to reach RFA status on July 1, 2011.
So if the cap STAYS around $60 million and they have to pay Seabrook between $4-$5 million a year...that's OVER 1/3 of the cap on 4 defensive players. Add to that a little over $25 million for the core of Toews, Kane, Sharp, Hossa and Bolland...that's anywhere from $13-$15 million to spend on...
7 forwards, 2 D and 2 Goalies. That's about $1.3 million per player...in 2011-2012!
A really tough decision is going to have to be made either way. The Hawks have a cup in their pocket, now they need to decide how legit their D prospects are and how far away are they.
So forget Mr. Sassone's question about Hjamarlsson or Niemi...it's Hjamaralsson or Seabrook as long as Brian Campbell's contract is here.
And BTW, to anyone who thinks Bowman is an idiot for not just dumping Campbell somewhere, realise this: Only ONE...ONE defenceman in the NHL carries a bigger cap hit than Brian Campbell, and that's Chara. It's just an unmoveable deal.
It's a shame, because he is a very good player, and seems like a truly good guy and this team does not win the Cup without him. The blame for his deal goes to everyone involved from the coaches at the time, to the GM at the time, to the Owner and I am so sick of hearing fans just say moronic things about whichever part of management they don't like based on nothing more than opinion.
Sadly, the Hawks will continue to have to lose about two talented young players a year AFTER this scourge is over until 2016 or until the CBA is redone in two years and hope that a proposition to allow a team to buy out ONE "bad" contract and not have it count against the cap, is installed.
I think/hope they can perhaps sign him to a two-three year contract extension at about 4 mil. Say until Sharpie is a free agent. Then they decide who to keep based on performance, what's available in the free market, and who's in the system and ready to step up.
I think gets closer to 5 and over a longer term. JMHO.
but you can get a year out of hjarlmmer before the Seabrook contract.
Heady
you only get 1 crack at an offer sheet, if the hawks match...............sj will be s. o. l. rearding another sheet..............................now if the hawks don't match..............i posted yesterday................stan will have to figure it out.....................pay the sharks right back , reading their papers and web sites, if hjalmer comes to them , they are sweating it out with settogucchi and won't have the coin to pay him and others..............throw a sheet at settogucchi....................you lose nik but gain a hell of a power forward,toews,kane settogucchi!!.you got some prospects on the way, some vets out there also...............bend over doug! here comes one right back at you!!
Don't match and then tender an offer sheet to Setogucchi and you send back essentially the same picks... If it would work -- I don't know the numbers -- it would be brilliant. The Hawks need another forward but I don't know how you replace Hjallmarsson. I don't think that can easily be done.
wilson crossed the line among gm's right? now he's got no coin to sign setto! what does he think he's gonna play for 800k?he's almost inthe same ball park as us.taking on nik,no scratch for setto, i would stick it to him the same way just to prove a point, even front load that contract so sj can't match it even if it means rolling the dice on niemi!!....even though the structure and language was different, years ago st.louis screwed around and made an offer to brendan shananhan while he was playing in nj. the blues though they were home free until an arbitrator ruled you must give the devils scott stevens, and you know the rest with scotty , H O F! actually both players will be there, but the same concept orch! you screw us ,here's one right back at you!ya it will hurt to loose nik, but setto, kane and toews could be fun to watch for years!the switch of picks ? rolll the dice ! bick ans skille ? take it or leave it. sj has the same problem with signing some bottom players left also! i just hope stan, scotty and mcD see it the same way! i could care a less about the prospects camp! i am worried about next season! and besides i just laid out 10 large for tix! i don't want to watch a 500 team at those prices! .............aannnddd where is niks loyalty in all this? no one held a gun to his head to sign that or did they?!
Just got back from today's prospect camp. A few players that looked good were Mathis Olimb from Sweeden. He skates really well and is a good stickhandler. He has speed and put on a couple of sweet moves in the scrimmage. Ludvig Rensfeldt was drafted as a winger but was playing center for the first half of the scrimmage. He won quite a few faceoffs and looks strong on his skates. I didn't see a lot of boardwork from him probably because he was at the center position.
Shawn Lalonde is physical with a little nasty thrown in and moved the puck well. A couple of free agent invities that caught my eye were Terry Broadhurst who is 5'11 155lbs. The guy has speed and is not afraid to go in the corners. He was one of the better players in the scrimmage and had the first goal. The other free agent invitee that was impressive was Eriah Hayes 6'3 and 210lbs a forward who has speed and size from Minnesota St - Mankato.
I wasn't impressed with Nick Leddy the d-man the Hawks got in the Cam Barker
trade. I didn't see much from him. Hopefully Leddy was just having a bad game. He didn't appear as fast as advertised. He was paired with Lalonde and Lalonde looked much better.
Saturdays camp . In the first game Jimmy and Kevin Hayes had good games. They are both skilled and can skate. Kevin will only get better and bigger at B.C. Both will be Pros in 2 years. Goalie Mac Carruth played well. Dylan Olsen looks like a good defenseman but he is still 2 years away. (A year at Minn- Duluth and one year in Rockford.) Kyle Beach is a dissapointment. Cant skate and does not seem to have skill. I do not see him making the team. See how he does in Rockford. Game 2 I agree Lalande looked good and the swedes looked good. (Kruger, Rensfeldt, Nordstrom, and Olimb) Olimb a little on the small side but great skill. But he is 24 years old. Nick Leddy again was a disappointment.
Viktor Stalberg?Was he there too?Or does he not go to prospects camp because he played 40 games last year...anyone think this guy will be any good?
JohnnyBToews, if Stalberg shows the form prior to his concussion ( Volchenkov really creamed him last year) he will be a nice addition to the team. He has size, speed and goes to the net. He wasn't quite as aggressive coming back from the injury so we'll have to see which player shows up for us. The leafs had him on a line with two other youngsters during preseason ( Bozek and Hansen) and they were arguably the best line for them Stalberg scored several goals and was the only one of the thee to break camp with the team. He started on the second line and played well until the injury. Limited NHL experience to determine whether he is a keeper but has lots of potential.
is a pro.
and Jhawk 159, you need to get your glasses checked on Leddy, because he moved the puck very very accurately. If you were looking for Olsen type size or close, it is not what he does. He is tree year from touching a puck in any pro building, but he has got feet and superb passing skills.
I wish you could have seen Duncan Keith in his first propsects camp...
...and whatever made you see some outstanding quality that let's you say "Olsen good, needs two years..." explain it.
I am curious what you SAW ...can you describe what allowed this evaluation other than you knew he was pciked in the late first round?
I knew he didn't have Olsen's size. I think I was looking for more speed from him. His passing was good. Someone posted on Fridays scrimmage that Lalonde was hanging Leddy out to dry defensively. Is there anything to that?
I was with a group including RealWiz at sat scrimmages. Leddy used his stick in defensive posture in several instances and did not look like he was overmatched. He looked ok but you come away wanting to see more from this kid in the one-on-one situations. My fear is that he may have some of that sometimes Barker deer in the headlight in his game. I would not be at all surprised if he has a step up with a solid collegiate season. Now Lalonde he gambles like almost always and he obviously could play better defense if he choose to do so. Players skated around/past him often; Olimb in the early going got everyone's attention by doing exactly this. If you want a Campbell clone, that is how Lalonde performed/compares. You should not force feed this kid. He has obvious skill and skates very well, plus he has a mean streak. Would love to see him make it as an NHL third pair in his rookie NHL season. But Vishnevsky may be ok in that role and has pro experience, so no way does a Lalonde move ahead of him -- even if salary cap is an issue (Lalonde is a third round salary cap hit). I would guess Connelly is ahead of Lalonde, anyway, but I really want to see Connelly in preseason compete against large size NHL forwards.