Hawks vs Coyotes 10/30

[ebonyraptor]

Nov 1, 2023 5:33:33 GMT -6 galaxytrash said:

worst part (for me) losing 8-1 before a 4 day break is the boards are in a surly mood (understandably), and the chatter is mostly negative (understandably). certainly our luck will improve with the weak sisters (florida, jersey, tampa, florida and tampa) waiting in the wings.

So, it's positivity ya want eh? OK. I predict they will go 6-0 in these next 5 games outscoring those weak sisters by a combined 30-2. There ... ya happy now?  

[LordKOTL]

Nov 1, 2023 11:21:30 GMT -6 jacksalmon said:

Nov 1, 2023 10:20:45 GMT -6 LordKOTL said:

Perhaps, but on the other hand, late bloomers are a thing.  See also:  Sharp.

Plus, as others have mentioned, we have prospect and draft capital that can be moved into other pieces which we might need.  The issue is that Kyle from Chicago needs to be Savvy--much more so than his predecessor.  He needs to listen to his scouts and hockey-braintrust to know which prospects are likely to stick, which are superfluous, and what potential incoming talent might be worth more than the throw-of-the-dice for a given draft pick.

So, at least in my opinion:  Vlassic has proven himself to be the kid who, right now, is the most NHL-ready of all of the youth defensemen (and the vets, but that's a separate tragedy)--in spite of his injury.  So, naturally, we'll want to keep him.  So, if there is someone else who plays his game, he's superfluous.  If we can't move a superfluous vet for incoming needed pieces, what about a prospect?  If there is a kid who plays Vlassic's game but is not as-good, why not?    Plus, there could be a prospect who plays Vlassic's game, but is long-in-the-tooth and there's a younger prospect who might have more upside than the long-in the tooth prospect.

It won't be easy and nothing is guaranteed.  Plus, If the team is shit this year, that's another chance for a high pick.  After all, the 2006 team was shit, had both Keith and Seabrook, and for the effort (or lack thereof from the at-the-time vet presence), we got Toews for our troubles with that 3oa pick.  Same with the following year with Kane.  Hell, back then we even previously squandered a 3oa pick with Cam barker (much like Kirby Dach) and still came out alright.

Like said, Keith and Seabrook played on a right abysmal team their rookie year (and also got obliterated by a then-up-and-coming-but-bad Canucks team). Back then who was the upcoming FWD core?  Ruutu?  St. Pierre?  It was pretty dismal.  

I was expecting this year to pretty much be the Bedard Highlight Show...and that's about it.  We also got Vlassic which I'm happy about and hope that he bounces back fine.  Baby steps.

I agree that the situation with the dmen is in pretty good shape, so I would let it go and work on getting some decent forwards.  I think that if they want to get significantly better they will have to use the prospects and draft capital and turn them into other pieces as you suggest.  However, those other pieces must be proven good NHL forwards----no Reichel clones.  Then, they also have money to buy some free agents.  How well  they put all that together will determine whether they will become a Cup competitive team.  Personally, I would rather see them do it sooner rather than  later.  I am getting tired of watching their miserable offensive performances game after game.  There is some hope, but it is getting to be time to turn the hopes into  reality.  

Exactly.  The hawks should only be moving from a place of low risk.  They shouldn't be trying to take on projects.  They need to have realistic assessments of the players we have and the players we need.

Even though Reichel might make himself more useful on wing, I do think that this year has to b e a feeling out period.  i.e. Reichel has proven to not be a good center--so we know that's a void that needs to be filled.  If he's not good at being a winger, same--we have another void.  As we're discovering these voids we should be looking at how best to fill them.  So hypothetically:  #2C.  Reichel ain't cutting it.  How far away is Nazar (picking on him)?  What is the chance he will be an effective #2C?  If not, can we mitigate the lack of a #2C (i.e. 2010 the 3rd line made it easier for us to be without a good #2C).  Is he a C at all?  Would it be easier and more expedient to try and pick up a #2C on the FA/Trade market?  If so, what is the net cost?  These are the questions that Kyle from Chicago has to answer--correctly.  But, this year is still a feeling out year.  Kyle should be working behind the scense to start layting the groundwork now, but I won't expect too many moves that turn us from bottom-3rd to playoff contender this season alone.

[jacksalmon]

Nov 1, 2023 17:25:41 GMT -6 Nikos said:

Nov 1, 2023 17:12:28 GMT -6 malagahawks said:

Reichel practicing with 2nd line as a winger.

I really hope he turns this around weather on wing or center. Not many forwards ready yet, I am pleasantly optimistic on the D though.

Reichel looked "fast" and confident in camp/preseason. Not sure what changed or happened. I understand that is preseason and the regular season is a whole new level or levels. Man, he does not look good out there right now. Boy a goal or two would really help.

What changed or happened was that the real season began.  Reichel may not have changed, he just may be mostly incapable of playing real season hockey in the NHL.  I hope not, but it certainly looks that way.  Without  some output from him, the Hawks have nothing in their younger offensive players except Bedard and that ain't a good place for the team.  

[jacksalmon]

Nov 2, 2023 11:17:38 GMT -6 LordKOTL said:

Nov 1, 2023 11:21:30 GMT -6 jacksalmon said:

I agree that the situation with the dmen is in pretty good shape, so I would let it go and work on getting some decent forwards.  I think that if they want to get significantly better they will have to use the prospects and draft capital and turn them into other pieces as you suggest.  However, those other pieces must be proven good NHL forwards----no Reichel clones.  Then, they also have money to buy some free agents.  How well  they put all that together will determine whether they will become a Cup competitive team.  Personally, I would rather see them do it sooner rather than  later.  I am getting tired of watching their miserable offensive performances game after game.  There is some hope, but it is getting to be time to turn the hopes into  reality.  

Exactly.  The hawks should only be moving from a place of low risk.  They shouldn't be trying to take on projects.  They need to have realistic assessments of the players we have and the players we need.

Even though Reichel might make himself more useful on wing, I do think that this year has to b e a feeling out period.  i.e. Reichel has proven to not be a good center--so we know that's a void that needs to be filled.  If he's not good at being a winger, same--we have another void.  As we're discovering these voids we should be looking at how best to fill them.  So hypothetically:  #2C.  Reichel ain't cutting it.  How far away is Nazar (picking on him)?  What is the chance he will be an effective #2C?  If not, can we mitigate the lack of a #2C (i.e. 2010 the 3rd line made it easier for us to be without a good #2C).  Is he a C at all?  Would it be easier and more expedient to try and pick up a #2C on the FA/Trade market?  If so, what is the net cost?  These are the questions that Kyle from Chicago has to answer--correctly.  But, this year is still a feeling out year.  Kyle should be working behind the scense to start layting the groundwork now, but I won't expect too many moves that turn us from bottom-3rd to playoff contender this season alone.

My opinion is that they have nothing in the young good forward pantry ready for NHL play except Bedard and that includes their entire system.  Therefore, as you have mentioned before, if they want to improve this team it is time to start picking up some proven forwards and end the experiment with the young forward prospects.  It is really not a good position in which to be because they might have to give up on  some before they really know for sure how they will perform and they might have to admit that they have achieved not much, or nothing, from their forward draft picks.  How they would get proven forwards from a bunch of young unproven prospects and high draft picks will be a daunting task.  But, without trying to get it done, their offense will go nowhere in the next few years.  

[steamer]

Well it hasn’t helped to have Taylor Hall on the sidelines. He was one of the more substantial FA acquisitions and brought in for offense. He’s still nowhere near enough what they need to contend but it would be helpful to have him play.

[hsbob]

Nov 1, 2023 11:21:30 GMT -6 jacksalmon said:

Nov 1, 2023 10:20:45 GMT -6 LordKOTL said:

Perhaps, but on the other hand, late bloomers are a thing.  See also:  Sharp.

Plus, as others have mentioned, we have prospect and draft capital that can be moved into other pieces which we might need.  The issue is that Kyle from Chicago needs to be Savvy--much more so than his predecessor.  He needs to listen to his scouts and hockey-braintrust to know which prospects are likely to stick, which are superfluous, and what potential incoming talent might be worth more than the throw-of-the-dice for a given draft pick.

So, at least in my opinion:  Vlassic has proven himself to be the kid who, right now, is the most NHL-ready of all of the youth defensemen (and the vets, but that's a separate tragedy)--in spite of his injury.  So, naturally, we'll want to keep him.  So, if there is someone else who plays his game, he's superfluous.  If we can't move a superfluous vet for incoming needed pieces, what about a prospect?  If there is a kid who plays Vlassic's game but is not as-good, why not?    Plus, there could be a prospect who plays Vlassic's game, but is long-in-the-tooth and there's a younger prospect who might have more upside than the long-in the tooth prospect.

It won't be easy and nothing is guaranteed.  Plus, If the team is shit this year, that's another chance for a high pick.  After all, the 2006 team was shit, had both Keith and Seabrook, and for the effort (or lack thereof from the at-the-time vet presence), we got Toews for our troubles with that 3oa pick.  Same with the following year with Kane.  Hell, back then we even previously squandered a 3oa pick with Cam barker (much like Kirby Dach) and still came out alright.

Like said, Keith and Seabrook played on a right abysmal team their rookie year (and also got obliterated by a then-up-and-coming-but-bad Canucks team). Back then who was the upcoming FWD core?  Ruutu?  St. Pierre?  It was pretty dismal.  

I was expecting this year to pretty much be the Bedard Highlight Show...and that's about it.  We also got Vlassic which I'm happy about and hope that he bounces back fine.  Baby steps.

I agree that the situation with the dmen is in pretty good shape, so I would let it go and work on getting some decent forwards.  I think that if they want to get significantly better they will have to use the prospects and draft capital and turn them into other pieces as you suggest.  However, those other pieces must be proven good NHL forwards----no Reichel clones.  Then, they also have money to buy some free agents.  How well  they put all that together will determine whether they will become a Cup competitive team.  Personally, I would rather see them do it sooner rather than  later.  I am getting tired of watching their miserable offensive performances game after game.  There is some hope, but it is getting to be time to turn the hopes into  reality.  

I don't think anybody considers me completely 'bought-in' either jack but the beat-down in AZ means nothing more than than hanging Vegas' only loss on em means IMO. I said at the start of last season, and again this season..."an under-manned team will out-work opponents for only so long",it takes a toll. I also don't believe the FO is looking to make the team competitive this year,BUT I do expect progress once they do look to do so. How much progress and when are legitimate questions and should be asked soon.

I don't see the team having to trade any prospects and only a fraction of the massive draft assets they now have in order to improve substantially. They could fetch quite a lot by dangling two 1st's and three 2nd's(none of their own picks either),and still have three 1st's and five 2nd's the next three drafts to go along with the ability to eat a short-term deal or two cap-wise also.

All I really know about Lucas Reichel is,he looked like he belonged last year and I'm gonna give him more than 9 games to figure things out or how to play with old/slow linemates.  


   

[jacksalmon]

Nov 2, 2023 12:41:54 GMT -6 hsbob said:

Nov 1, 2023 11:21:30 GMT -6 jacksalmon said:

I agree that the situation with the dmen is in pretty good shape, so I would let it go and work on getting some decent forwards.  I think that if they want to get significantly better they will have to use the prospects and draft capital and turn them into other pieces as you suggest.  However, those other pieces must be proven good NHL forwards----no Reichel clones.  Then, they also have money to buy some free agents.  How well  they put all that together will determine whether they will become a Cup competitive team.  Personally, I would rather see them do it sooner rather than  later.  I am getting tired of watching their miserable offensive performances game after game.  There is some hope, but it is getting to be time to turn the hopes into  reality.  

I don't think anybody considers me completely 'bought-in' either jack but the beat-down in AZ means nothing more than than hanging Vegas' only loss on em means IMO. I said at the start of last season, and again this season..."an under-manned team will out-work opponents for only so long",it takes a toll. I also don't believe the FO is looking to make the team competitive this year,BUT I do expect progress once they do look to do so. How much progress and when are legitimate questions and should be asked soon.

I don't see the team having to trade any prospects and only a fraction of the massive draft assets they now have in order to improve substantially. They could fetch quite a lot by dangling two 1st's and three 2nd's(none of their own picks either),and still have three 1st's and five 2nd's the next three drafts to go along with the ability to eat a short-term deal or two cap-wise also.

All I really know about Lucas Reichel is,he looked like he belonged last year and I'm gonna give him more than 9 games to figure things out or how to play with old/slow linemates.  


   

I agree about the real meaning of the AZ beatdown.  My concerns are not based on the results of that game.  They are based on the performance so far this year of their "offense", which has been next to miserable, imo.  I just haven't seen any real talent out there that impresses  me as having the potential  to  make this team a viable threat to succeed.  As you say, an under-manned team can only outwork opponents for only so long.  Or, to put it a different way, eventually talent will triumph over hard work, as long as the talent is property utilized.  In other words, the hard-working Hawks ain't gonna steal the Cup from the Avs by out-working them.  

If they can give up  some of  their draft assets to improve substantially, that is fine with me.  But, I believe they will have to  turn some of those assets, or maybe even prospects, into real bona fide NHL players who have had some success in the league, instead of believing that their  draft picks/prospects will do the job.  I just don't believe that the latter will  do the trick as it has certainly not worked so far and they have been rebuilding for several years so far and have nothing offensively to show for it except Bedard; and getting him was  a matter of pure luck and some skill in finishing where they finished, if that can really be called a skill.    

As for Reichel, giving him more than 9 games is perfectly reasonable and he may show something yet.  It is just that to me, so far, he is mostly invisible and when he does get a shot he puts right in the goalie's bread basket.  So, I am not at all excited about him.  I am also smart enough to know that my present impression of him has nothing to do  with whether he will ultimately succeed or not,  so  good  luck to  him.  

[T-man2010]

Nov 2, 2023 14:53:49 GMT -6 jacksalmon said:

Nov 2, 2023 12:41:54 GMT -6 hsbob said:

I don't think anybody considers me completely 'bought-in' either jack but the beat-down in AZ means nothing more than than hanging Vegas' only loss on em means IMO. I said at the start of last season, and again this season..."an under-manned team will out-work opponents for only so long",it takes a toll. I also don't believe the FO is looking to make the team competitive this year,BUT I do expect progress once they do look to do so. How much progress and when are legitimate questions and should be asked soon.

I don't see the team having to trade any prospects and only a fraction of the massive draft assets they now have in order to improve substantially. They could fetch quite a lot by dangling two 1st's and three 2nd's(none of their own picks either),and still have three 1st's and five 2nd's the next three drafts to go along with the ability to eat a short-term deal or two cap-wise also.

All I really know about Lucas Reichel is,he looked like he belonged last year and I'm gonna give him more than 9 games to figure things out or how to play with old/slow linemates.  


   

I agree about the real meaning of the AZ beatdown.  My concerns are not based on the results of that game.  They are based on the performance so far this year of their "offense", which has been next to miserable, imo.  I just haven't seen any real talent out there that impresses  me as having the potential  to  make this team a viable threat to succeed.  As you say, an under-manned team can only outwork opponents for only so long.  Or, to put it a different way, eventually talent will triumph over hard work, as long as the talent is property utilized.  In other words, the hard-working Hawks ain't gonna steal the Cup from the Avs by out-working them.  

If they can give up  some of  their draft assets to improve substantially, that is fine with me.  But, I believe they will have to  turn some of those assets, or maybe even prospects, into real bona fide NHL players who have had some success in the league, instead of believing that their  draft picks/prospects will do the job.  I just don't believe that the latter will  do the trick as it has certainly not worked so far and they have been rebuilding for several years so far and have nothing offensively to show for it except Bedard; and getting him was  a matter of pure luck and some skill in finishing where they finished, if that can really be called a skill.    

As for Reichel, giving him more than 9 games is perfectly reasonable and he may show something yet.  It is just that to me, so far, he is mostly invisible and when he does get a shot he puts right in the goalie's bread basket.  So, I am not at all excited about him.  I am also smart enough to know that my present impression of him has nothing to do  with whether he will ultimately succeed or not,  so  good  luck to  him.  

It's like I been saying is the problem may be Derek King.
As much of a "nice guy" that he may be, he has been the offensive coach last season 
and during the colliton era. We have seen nothing but the same predictable system.

Maybe some has to do with lack of talent, but to me the system needs to be adjusted to fit the talent.

[jacksalmon]

Nov 2, 2023 15:21:40 GMT -6 T-man2010 said:

Nov 2, 2023 14:53:49 GMT -6 jacksalmon said:

I agree about the real meaning of the AZ beatdown.  My concerns are not based on the results of that game.  They are based on the performance so far this year of their "offense", which has been next to miserable, imo.  I just haven't seen any real talent out there that impresses  me as having the potential  to  make this team a viable threat to succeed.  As you say, an under-manned team can only outwork opponents for only so long.  Or, to put it a different way, eventually talent will triumph over hard work, as long as the talent is property utilized.  In other words, the hard-working Hawks ain't gonna steal the Cup from the Avs by out-working them.  

If they can give up  some of  their draft assets to improve substantially, that is fine with me.  But, I believe they will have to  turn some of those assets, or maybe even prospects, into real bona fide NHL players who have had some success in the league, instead of believing that their  draft picks/prospects will do the job.  I just don't believe that the latter will  do the trick as it has certainly not worked so far and they have been rebuilding for several years so far and have nothing offensively to show for it except Bedard; and getting him was  a matter of pure luck and some skill in finishing where they finished, if that can really be called a skill.    

As for Reichel, giving him more than 9 games is perfectly reasonable and he may show something yet.  It is just that to me, so far, he is mostly invisible and when he does get a shot he puts right in the goalie's bread basket.  So, I am not at all excited about him.  I am also smart enough to know that my present impression of him has nothing to do  with whether he will ultimately succeed or not,  so  good  luck to  him.  

It's like I been saying is the problem may be Derek King.
As much of a "nice guy" that he may be, he has been the offensive coach last season 
and during the colliton era. We have seen nothing but the same predictable system.

Maybe some has to do with lack of talent, but to me the system needs to be adjusted to fit the talent.

Then get more talent and readjust the system.  The present combination of system and talent isn't working.  

[T-man2010]

Nov 2, 2023 16:48:46 GMT -6 jacksalmon said:

Nov 2, 2023 15:21:40 GMT -6 T-man2010 said:

It's like I been saying is the problem may be Derek King.
As much of a "nice guy" that he may be, he has been the offensive coach last season 
and during the colliton era. We have seen nothing but the same predictable system.

Maybe some has to do with lack of talent, but to me the system needs to be adjusted to fit the talent.

Then get more talent and readjust the system.  The present combination of system and talent isn't working.  

The last 3 years before the current regime, kept changing talent but not the system.
Previous years there were guys like Kane, Toews and D-Cat despite the system will score.

[jacksalmon]

Nov 2, 2023 17:37:28 GMT -6 T-man2010 said:

Nov 2, 2023 16:48:46 GMT -6 jacksalmon said:

Then get more talent and readjust the system.  The present combination of system and talent isn't working.  

The last 3 years before the current regime, kept changing talent but not the system.
Previous years there were guys like Kane, Toews and D-Cat despite the system will score.

OK, they got nothing to lose but experimenting.  So, to start, keep the present talent and can King.  Get the new system with King's replacement and see what happens.  If that doesn't work can his replacement and try another system.  Eventually by the second, or third new system, they can start moving the talent and replacing it.  There is nothing to lose as this team is going nowhere this year except to the draft lottery.  

[galaxytrash]

Nov 1, 2023 19:26:26 GMT -6 vadarx said:

Nov 1, 2023 11:48:15 GMT -6 Nikos said:

I say they will not break that record. Teams today take off on some nights.

probably not, but they have nine (9!) goals through nine games... lol

edit: numbers to be updated. currently 9 10-0 for the canucks over the sharks and quinn hughes is at 1g, 4a so far.

[jacksalmon]

Nov 1, 2023 11:48:15 GMT -6 Nikos said:

Nov 1, 2023 11:25:13 GMT -6 jacksalmon said:

Thank whoever one wants to than for all the games against  the Sharks.  I wonder if the Sharks will beat the record for the worst regular season record in the NHL set by the 74-5 Caps who totaled 21 points with a 8/67/5 record back when they only played 80 games.  I think they got a good shot at it.  

I say they will not break that record. Teams today take off on some nights.

9-0 Canucks over Sharks tonight with 15 minutes left in the 3d.  Do you still think the Sharks will not break the worst regular season record?  The Hawks need some Shark games soon.  

[galaxytrash]

Nov 1, 2023 11:48:15 GMT -6 Nikos said:

Nov 1, 2023 11:25:13 GMT -6 jacksalmon said:

Thank whoever one wants to than for all the games against  the Sharks.  I wonder if the Sharks will beat the record for the worst regular season record in the NHL set by the 74-5 Caps who totaled 21 points with a 8/67/5 record back when they only played 80 games.  I think they got a good shot at it.  

I say they will not break that record. Teams today take off on some nights.

record of ineptitude belongs to the 1974/75 capitals who owned a record of 8 wins 64 losses and 5 ties for a .131 points percentage. their average goals/game was 2.25 for and 5.58 against.

after 10 games the sharks are 0 wins 9 losses and 1 o/t loss for a .050 points percentage. their average goals/game is 1 goal for and 4.50 goals against.

after 10 games, the 74/75 caps were 1-8-1 and their goals/game was 1.70 goals for and 4.00 goals against.

i agree...if i was going to bet i'd say the sharks don't break the record because i don't believe they're that bad...but they obviously are well onto their way of doing just that.

[Nikos]

Nov 2, 2023 22:49:09 GMT -6 jacksalmon said:

Nov 1, 2023 11:48:15 GMT -6 Nikos said:

I say they will not break that record. Teams today take off on some nights.

9-0 Canucks over Sharks tonight with 15 minutes left in the 3d.  Do you still think the Sharks will not break the worst regular season record?  The Hawks need some Shark games soon.  

I still say they will not break the record, finish last good chance.

[vadarx]

Nov 1, 2023 19:26:26 GMT -6 vadarx said:

Nov 1, 2023 11:48:15 GMT -6 Nikos said:

I say they will not break that record. Teams today take off on some nights.

probably not, but they have nine (9!) goals through nine games... lol

10 goals in 10 games now... 0 wins....

[jacksalmon]

Nov 3, 2023 7:00:38 GMT -6 Nikos said:

Nov 2, 2023 22:49:09 GMT -6 jacksalmon said:

9-0 Canucks over Sharks tonight with 15 minutes left in the 3d.  Do you still think the Sharks will not break the worst regular season record?  The Hawks need some Shark games soon.  

I still say they will not break the record, finish last good chance.

Now there's a man with solid convictions.  

[jacksalmon]

Nov 1, 2023 10:20:45 GMT -6 LordKOTL said:

Oct 31, 2023 18:29:26 GMT -6 jacksalmon said:

You could be right as even  the blind squirrel  finds a nut  sometimes.   But,  what concerns  me, but doesn't put me on the ledge,  is that they have no forwards  other than Bedard who is worth  anything on the current roster.    The Rockford  roster does not have anyone either; and who  knows about the other Blackhawk property forwards  currently playing in Juniors and college.  There is a big difference between playing in the hinterlands  and under the spotlights.   Just ask Reichel, altho he was no superstar  at lower levels either.  

Perhaps, but on the other hand, late bloomers are a thing.  See also:  Sharp.

Plus, as others have mentioned, we have prospect and draft capital that can be moved into other pieces which we might need.  The issue is that Kyle from Chicago needs to be Savvy--much more so than his predecessor.  He needs to listen to his scouts and hockey-braintrust to know which prospects are likely to stick, which are superfluous, and what potential incoming talent might be worth more than the throw-of-the-dice for a given draft pick.

So, at least in my opinion:  Vlassic has proven himself to be the kid who, right now, is the most NHL-ready of all of the youth defensemen (and the vets, but that's a separate tragedy)--in spite of his injury.  So, naturally, we'll want to keep him.  So, if there is someone else who plays his game, he's superfluous.  If we can't move a superfluous vet for incoming needed pieces, what about a prospect?  If there is a kid who plays Vlassic's game but is not as-good, why not?    Plus, there could be a prospect who plays Vlassic's game, but is long-in-the-tooth and there's a younger prospect who might have more upside than the long-in the tooth prospect.

It won't be easy and nothing is guaranteed.  Plus, If the team is shit this year, that's another chance for a high pick.  After all, the 2006 team was shit, had both Keith and Seabrook, and for the effort (or lack thereof from the at-the-time vet presence), we got Toews for our troubles with that 3oa pick.  Same with the following year with Kane.  Hell, back then we even previously squandered a 3oa pick with Cam barker (much like Kirby Dach) and still came out alright.

Like said, Keith and Seabrook played on a right abysmal team their rookie year (and also got obliterated by a then-up-and-coming-but-bad Canucks team). Back then who was the upcoming FWD core?  Ruutu?  St. Pierre?  It was pretty dismal.  

I was expecting this year to pretty much be the Bedard Highlight Show...and that's about it.  We also got Vlassic which I'm happy about and hope that he bounces back fine.  Baby steps.

I am writing to address only that part of your post I highlighted.  I saw that Hughes of NJ got two more points last night, so I decided to look up his stats.  He started in the NHL at 18 and in his first two years got 21 and 31 points respectively.  In his fourth year, which was last  year, he had 99 and this year he is averaging over two points per game so far with 20 in 9 games.  Whether that makes him a late bloomer, or not, is irrelevant, but it does show how sometimes it might take a year, or two, for a player to really catch on and start performing spectacularly.  I am not saying that will happen with Reichel, but Hughes' history shows that it might be too early to give up on Reichel like I have.  

[mikeveisor]

Nov 3, 2023 10:46:19 GMT -6 jacksalmon said:

Nov 1, 2023 10:20:45 GMT -6 LordKOTL said:

Perhaps, but on the other hand, late bloomers are a thing.  See also:  Sharp.

Plus, as others have mentioned, we have prospect and draft capital that can be moved into other pieces which we might need.  The issue is that Kyle from Chicago needs to be Savvy--much more so than his predecessor.  He needs to listen to his scouts and hockey-braintrust to know which prospects are likely to stick, which are superfluous, and what potential incoming talent might be worth more than the throw-of-the-dice for a given draft pick.

So, at least in my opinion:  Vlassic has proven himself to be the kid who, right now, is the most NHL-ready of all of the youth defensemen (and the vets, but that's a separate tragedy)--in spite of his injury.  So, naturally, we'll want to keep him.  So, if there is someone else who plays his game, he's superfluous.  If we can't move a superfluous vet for incoming needed pieces, what about a prospect?  If there is a kid who plays Vlassic's game but is not as-good, why not?    Plus, there could be a prospect who plays Vlassic's game, but is long-in-the-tooth and there's a younger prospect who might have more upside than the long-in the tooth prospect.

It won't be easy and nothing is guaranteed.  Plus, If the team is shit this year, that's another chance for a high pick.  After all, the 2006 team was shit, had both Keith and Seabrook, and for the effort (or lack thereof from the at-the-time vet presence), we got Toews for our troubles with that 3oa pick.  Same with the following year with Kane.  Hell, back then we even previously squandered a 3oa pick with Cam barker (much like Kirby Dach) and still came out alright.

Like said, Keith and Seabrook played on a right abysmal team their rookie year (and also got obliterated by a then-up-and-coming-but-bad Canucks team). Back then who was the upcoming FWD core?  Ruutu?  St. Pierre?  It was pretty dismal.  

I was expecting this year to pretty much be the Bedard Highlight Show...and that's about it.  We also got Vlassic which I'm happy about and hope that he bounces back fine.  Baby steps.

I am writing to address only that part of your post I highlighted.  I saw that Hughes of NJ got two more points last night, so I decided to look up his stats.  He started in the NHL at 18 and in his first two years got 21 and 31 points respectively.  In his fourth year, which was last  year, he had 99 and this year he is averaging over two points per game so far with 20 in 9 games.  Whether that makes him a late bloomer, or not, is irrelevant, but it does show how sometimes it might take a year, or two, for a player to really catch on and start performing spectacularly.  I am not saying that will happen with Reichel, but Hughes' history shows that it might be too early to give up on Reichel like I have.  

I think Reichel will become a poor man's Martin Havlat -- after he adds 20-25 more lbs. to his frame. I see a quick, skilled forward who gets rag-dolled an awful lot in his early career. Like most youngsters (Eric Lindros is the only guy I can recall - and I know that I am missing more guys - that came into the league a fully-formed man at a young age), he is learning that his skills alone cannot compensate for other teams' not giving him space. Same with CB, but CB's skill level is a full step above Reichel's so he is not suffering nearly as much while his frame is advancing from a somewhat beefy 18 y/o into becoming the guy he will be with a few more years' maturation. JMO.

[LordKOTL]

Nov 4, 2023 5:21:50 GMT -6 mikeveisor said:

Nov 3, 2023 10:46:19 GMT -6 jacksalmon said:

I am writing to address only that part of your post I highlighted.  I saw that Hughes of NJ got two more points last night, so I decided to look up his stats.  He started in the NHL at 18 and in his first two years got 21 and 31 points respectively.  In his fourth year, which was last  year, he had 99 and this year he is averaging over two points per game so far with 20 in 9 games.  Whether that makes him a late bloomer, or not, is irrelevant, but it does show how sometimes it might take a year, or two, for a player to really catch on and start performing spectacularly.  I am not saying that will happen with Reichel, but Hughes' history shows that it might be too early to give up on Reichel like I have.  

I think Reichel will become a poor man's Martin Havlat -- after he adds 20-25 more lbs. to his frame. I see a quick, skilled forward who gets rag-dolled an awful lot in his early career. Like most youngsters (Eric Lindros is the only guy I can recall - and I know that I am missing more guys - that came into the league a fully-formed man at a young age), he is learning that his skills alone cannot compensate for other teams' not giving him space. Same with CB, but CB's skill level is a full step above Reichel's so he is not suffering nearly as much while his frame is advancing from a somewhat beefy 18 y/o into becoming the guy he will be with a few more years' maturation. JMO.

Let's hope he doesn't have Havlat's injury history.

[LordKOTL]

Nov 2, 2023 11:47:15 GMT -6 jacksalmon said:

Nov 2, 2023 11:17:38 GMT -6 LordKOTL said:

Exactly.  The hawks should only be moving from a place of low risk.  They shouldn't be trying to take on projects.  They need to have realistic assessments of the players we have and the players we need.

Even though Reichel might make himself more useful on wing, I do think that this year has to b e a feeling out period.  i.e. Reichel has proven to not be a good center--so we know that's a void that needs to be filled.  If he's not good at being a winger, same--we have another void.  As we're discovering these voids we should be looking at how best to fill them.  So hypothetically:  #2C.  Reichel ain't cutting it.  How far away is Nazar (picking on him)?  What is the chance he will be an effective #2C?  If not, can we mitigate the lack of a #2C (i.e. 2010 the 3rd line made it easier for us to be without a good #2C).  Is he a C at all?  Would it be easier and more expedient to try and pick up a #2C on the FA/Trade market?  If so, what is the net cost?  These are the questions that Kyle from Chicago has to answer--correctly.  But, this year is still a feeling out year.  Kyle should be working behind the scense to start layting the groundwork now, but I won't expect too many moves that turn us from bottom-3rd to playoff contender this season alone.

My opinion is that they have nothing in the young good forward pantry ready for NHL play except Bedard and that includes their entire system.  Therefore, as you have mentioned before, if they want to improve this team it is time to start picking up some proven forwards and end the experiment with the young forward prospects.  It is really not a good position in which to be because they might have to give up on  some before they really know for sure how they will perform and they might have to admit that they have achieved not much, or nothing, from their forward draft picks.  How they would get proven forwards from a bunch of young unproven prospects and high draft picks will be a daunting task.  But, without trying to get it done, their offense will go nowhere in the next few years.  

Other teams have different timelines and needs. Plus other teams might have surpluses who they can't keep all of. Further there could be a player who needs a change in scenery. Or even a GM who wants a project. Who knows?

KD just needs to keep his ear to the ground and be realistic in assessment. That means listening to actual hockey minds.