Heh.

Funny how even when the Canucks win, their fans think that the only reason it was close was because of the refs. You guys are spot on on a couple of things though:

1. Raffi Torres absolutely didn't deserve a penalty for hitting Seabrook. In fact, to keep the game even, the refs should have called one on Seabrook for getting in Torres' way.

2. Toews, Kane, Sharp, Keith and Seabrook are lucky the departed Hawks' players won them a Cup last year. Hell, now that those guys aren't with the team, I wouldn't be surprised if the Hawks just buried their useless core in the minors to save cap space and sign REAL players. I mean seriously, Gold Medals, Norris Trophies, Conn Smythes, All-Star MVPs, Stanley Cups, World Junior Golds...obviously all these guys have always been carried to championships and awards by teammates. I don't even get why they have jobs in the NHL.

3. The Canucks and their fans FINALLY overcome the global consipracy against them and beaten the Hawks. It had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the fact that the Hawks were missing 10 forwards last night from last year's team that played the Canucks. The ONLY reasons the Canucks lost before was because of the refs and Byfuglien anyway. That and that the NHL didn't want them to win.

The interesting thing will be whether or not the Canucks can close the deal when they're expected to, like the Hawks did last season, and whose fault it'll be if they can't, because surely the only way they can lose is if the refs or the NHL doesn't want them to.

You guys criticize Hawks fans of over-valuing our team/players, and although I can't speak for everyone, I've never once complained that the Hawks lost because of something other than their own sub-standard play or a better opponent, including this season. All I hear from you guys is that the Canucks lost because of the Refs, or because the NHL hates them. Maybe they just weren't good enough, or maybe the team at the other end was just plain better.

I also find it interesting that the last two years the Hawks beat the Canucks, the better team lost according to you because the refs screwed them. Now all of a sudden you guys are willing to give credit only to the players that left. What will happen when Brian Campbell, or Patrick Kane, or Patrick Sharp are wearing a different sweater? Will they all of a sudden be difference makers in those series? Please, stop the hypocrisy. That's reserved for Leafs and Habs fans. The better team won this series, as well as the last two.

Typical jealous ramblings from the haters. I love it!

Torres's play was dirty as it gets. It's simply indefensible, especially when that clown was just coming off a 4 game suspension for the exact same thing.

Looks like I'll be blocking a few posters when I get home later. I love banter, but will not abide blatant retardation.

Muddy/Andru - you two should read hockybuzz.com's john jaeckel blogs if you don't already. I find I agree w/ nearly everything he's said in the last week. I'm shocked to find I even agree with anything a hawks fan says - never mind one of their bloggers ;)

Posted by mudbone1969 on 4/18/2011 11:00:00 AM (view original):
Typical jealous ramblings from the haters. I love it!

Torres's play was dirty as it gets. It's simply indefensible, especially when that clown was just coming off a 4 game suspension for the exact same thing.

Looks like I'll be blocking a few posters when I get home later. I love banter, but will not abide blatant retardation.

Was gliding not skating, behind the net, puck was there, no elbow, first contact with chest.

Also, though he obviously tried to hit him, I don't think he could have avoided contact if he tried.

Posted by peter_puck on 4/18/2011 12:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mudbone1969 on 4/18/2011 11:00:00 AM (view original):
Typical jealous ramblings from the haters. I love it!

Torres's play was dirty as it gets. It's simply indefensible, especially when that clown was just coming off a 4 game suspension for the exact same thing.

Looks like I'll be blocking a few posters when I get home later. I love banter, but will not abide blatant retardation.

Was gliding not skating, behind the net, puck was there, no elbow, first contact with chest.

Also, though he obviously tried to hit him, I don't think he could have avoided contact if he tried.

Yeah, you're totally right peter. first contact with the chest, and no elbow, as evidenced by this still...



It was a blind side hit to the head. Period. Suspension under the league's headshot rule, and should have been a major penalty.

Interesting tidbit I found out about Brian Campbell's contract...his no-move clause is unique in that it allows him to chose 8 teams to be traded to. That severly limits the options they have because it's entirely possible that none of those 8 teams would want or need him.

Posted by andru2797 on 4/18/2011 12:52:00 PM (view original):
Interesting tidbit I found out about Brian Campbell's contract...his no-move clause is unique in that it allows him to chose 8 teams to be traded to. That severly limits the options they have because it's entirely possible that none of those 8 teams would want or need him.

I'm pretty sure most, not all, players have that stipulation in their NTC contracts (I.e. gagne, pronger, etc have them). He wouldn't be impossible to trade but the hawks would have to deal more to compensate for the large contract. But throw in the right amount of picks and you'll find a team.... then sign a guy like hamhuis or meszaros who will sign for $4 mil a year. I doubt the hawks would give up that much though.

Posted by moy23 on 4/18/2011 1:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by andru2797 on 4/18/2011 12:52:00 PM (view original):
Interesting tidbit I found out about Brian Campbell's contract...his no-move clause is unique in that it allows him to chose 8 teams to be traded to. That severly limits the options they have because it's entirely possible that none of those 8 teams would want or need him.

I'm pretty sure most, not all, players have that stipulation in their NTC contracts (I.e. gagne, pronger, etc have them). He wouldn't be impossible to trade but the hawks would have to deal more to compensate for the large contract. But throw in the right amount of picks and you'll find a team.... then sign a guy like hamhuis or meszaros who will sign for $4 mil a year. I doubt the hawks would give up that much though.

The problem isn't the Hawks finding a team and Campbell veto-ing...The problem is that he has to provide the list upon request.

If Campbell is listing 8 teams that barely have cap space that he wants to go to, it wouldn't make sense for those GMs to take him no matter how many picks they get because of the fact that he still has many years left on his deal. I'm not saying I know what teams he'd pick, but at this point I can't imagine anyone having Florida or Ottawa (for example) in the top 1/4 of preferred NHL destinations, let alone Campbell. The problem is the fact that he has the choice.

In any case, the most important thing this off-season isn't necessarily trading Campbell (or anyone in particular). The most important thing is that, if Stan Bowman and Co. want to build a healthy franchise, they must make the players who are here accountable. If they're going to follow the Detroit model, then they have to establish the culture that failure, or more specifically failure to compete, will not be tolerated.

This team locked up alot of money in what they (and I) believed was a group of players who would have them contending for many years to come. If they fail to meet the expectations that go along with those contracts, then they need to know that it's unacceptable.

I still believe that this core is good enough. I'm talking about Toews, Kane, Sharp, Hossa, Keith and Seabrook. There are good complementary players (Bolland, Hjalmarsson, Brouwer, etc.) but those 6 are the core of the team and I think they are as good as any core in the league when they play up to their potential. Now they need to figure out if those 6 guys (well, 5 because I think Toews works his *** off every shift, rain or shine) still have the desire to do that and if not, they need to re-think their core group.

I agree with the accountablility part of your post.

I disagree about a cambell deal. I don't think bowman has the brass to make a deal that will cost him more than just campbell - (i.e. a 1st rounder for 1 or 2 older but more physical depth players with shorter contracts). If the deal is good enough a team will take it - any team. Bowman needs to sweeten the pot, but won't imo. Simon Gagne had only a 1 yr $5 mil contract but the flyers gave him away in the off-season to clear cap - and it was pretty easy to do. Unlike Gagne - It would take more than just campbell for garbage to unload him because of his 5 remaining years on that contract.... but I think it could be done.

If you go to capgeek and find me the top 8 teams closest to the cap in the offseason --- I'll be the Blackhawks GM and you a GM from the other team and we will iron out an acceptable deal involving campbell. I could be wrong, but I bet we'd be able to make it happen.

Some poster to JJ on his blog about shuffling out some players of the core for other solid core players in return.



IMO, Stanbow can launch both Keith and Campbell in the off-season, saving about 13-14M in cap space. That would give you plenty of options to pick up the needed physical/skilled forwards/center and possibly 1 more physical D. You could easily get 3 good players, possibly 4 for that coin and improve the club dramatically. Sometimes addition by subtraction is what is needed.
- savvyone-1





Hawks Blogger Jack Jaeckel's response:



Campbell, as much as he sometimes means to this team is Candidate 1A and Keith is a Hawk For Life.

Campbell at $7 million plus per simply does not work— the cap relief and dollars freed by trading him outweigh the costs of losing him. And there very well might be a taker or two. Starting with Dale Tallon.

Canucks will give you Ballard for the injury-prone Seabrook. Bring him home.

Interesting experiment...I'm game...give me some time since I'm at work...I'll come up with a list of 8 teams I think Campbell could have on his list.

Kane - $6.3 x4 years remaining (NMC)
Toews - $6.3 x4 (NMC)
Hossa - $5.3 x7+
Sharp - $3.9 x1 <---- maybe signs LTC at ~$5.5 per IMO (he's 30 yrs old too)
Bolland - $3.4 x3

Campbell - $7.2 x5 (NMC)
Keith - $5.5 x7+ (NMC)
Seabrook - $5.8 x5
Hjalmarrson - $3.5 x3


Thats $47.2 for 9 players (core or not) leaving $14 mil to fill another 14 spots (and not including a Sharpie PayDay).

If they could unload Campbell they could get another defensive player to replace him like last seasons FAs {{Hamhuis ($4.5/yr), Meszaros ($4/yr), Volchenkov ($4.2/yr), P. Martin ($5/yr)}} pay grades and use the remaining monies over the next 5 seasons of Campbells contract to upgrade elsewhere. Bolland is not a bad contract but he is hurt a lot - I'd shop him too.

Posted by andru2797 on 4/18/2011 3:50:00 PM (view original):
Interesting experiment...I'm game...give me some time since I'm at work...I'll come up with a list of 8 teams I think Campbell could have on his list.

cool.