mvr

Full Member
  • Content count

    6,060
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    26

mvr last won the day on April 19

mvr had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,076 Excellent

About mvr

  • Rank
    Hall of Famer
  1. There are some who are capable of raising the stakes when it matters (and the Hawks core seven - up until this spring - all have that history). There are others who mail it in (or choke under pressure) during the playoffs. Panarin has been a great regular season performer, but he has disappointed in the playoffs so far. He is not that young. I would not move out a core guy to keep Panarin.
  2. Former Hawk general manager Mike Smith has long been among the most underrated thinkers of the game (and was a prime architect of the Hawks 2010 championship roster). I remember him telling reporters that he believes a team should turn over about 1/4 of a roster each year. Too few changes and a team becomes complacent. Too many moves and a team loses its identity. This team has moved out well over half its roster from the 2015 team. There has been a lot of change over the past half decade. I believe it is starting to catch up on those who remain. If I am Bowman, I'd like to slow things down some. As it stands, Darling is gone. Campbell and Oduya won't be re-signed. Van Riemsdyk or Kruger is likely off to Vegas. One or two players still have to go to become cap compliant. Desjardins, Tootoo and Rozsival should no longer be here. I would not move out any more.
  3. Vadarx _ Trading Panarin in the right deal should net this team a young top-end defencemen (Hanifan is rumoured to be available). The Hawks are going to have to trade and draft well to restock the system. They can also sign some more UFA Euro free agents. Iknowpuck - A core of seven is not that big. It will shrink to six in one or two years with Hossa's retirement. The cap problems will be less of an issue in a couple more years as revenues continue to grow. None of them are overpaid that much. I do not want any of them hoisting a cup for another team such as the Devil's John Madden did here.
  4. There is no question most would agree with you, iknowpuck. But has this new approach worked in this sport? I see teams attempting to rebuild with youth (ie the Oilers, the Islanders, the Leafs etc) and it taking them 10 years or more to be even competitive. Washington still hasn't got there. St. Louis might never. Vancouver didn't achieve what it should have given the talent it had a few years ago. A roster featuring a core of cup winners bring valuable veteran leadership and instant credibility. Loyalty to them can pay off. It is why teams on the rise trade for their services. The Rangers won their one cup in 1994 by importing half the Oiler dynasty roster. Anaheim won with New Jersey's Scott Niedermeyer. Pittsburgh added NYI's Bryan Trottier. LA had the Hurricane's Justin Williams.
  5. Jack. I do think the core players have earned that respect. The respect/loyalty shown these players will pay dividends down the road. You need them around to groom the young kids as they develop a winning pedigree. I see the Montreal Canadiens of the early 1970s as the ideal model. Scotty Bowman still had many aging former stars of the 1950-60s on his team (Henri Richard, the Road Runner etc). Lafleur, Robinson and Dryden watched them and learned.
  6. I think this situation is fairly clear. The core seven - Crawford, Keith, Seabrook, Hjalmarsson, Hossa, Toews, and Kane - are all staying (as they should). Everyone else is on the table. If I'm running the show, Panarin and Anisimov are on the trade block. Move out both and save about $8 M in cap space. If Kruger is taken by Las Vegas, you change direction and perhaps keep Anisimov. But my present trade chips are Panarin and Anisimov. I would be looking for young defenceman and centres still on rookie contracts as the return.
  7. The time to swap Crawford for Darling - if there was one - was last summer, when Big T first proposed the idea. Darling has now become too expensive. I suspect he gets $3.5 -4 M/year as a UFA. Clearly, he can play as a number-one on many teams. Signing him and moving Crawford at this point would not create enough cap space.
  8. I'm on board with making a discount offer to Thornton as well. Most teams will only go one year with a player at his age. The Hawks could go two or three, but at a low cap hit. It would be worth it. Then you trade Anisimov for a legitimate checking centre who can win faceoffs (and hold on to Kruger). Removing the two Russian players is the best way to get under the cap for next year.
  9. HNIC's Elliotte Friedman is putting Noah Hanifin's name out there in the trade rumours as someone who might be on the move. If I am Bowman, this is target number one. Hanifin makes $850 K. He has the talent and size to be a top two defenceman, and he is already a 20-minute/game guy at age 20. Carolina is overloaded on defence and needs some skill up front. I say the team offers Panarin for him, either as a straight exchange, or as the main piece of a larger trade. This kind of move would help fix the cap situation and the blueline at the same time.
  10. I strongly believe the window remains wide open. The key position which must be filled is the Dave Bolland role. The team needs a legitimate third line centre to free Toews from a checking role and win faceoffs in the defensive zone. Then the Toews line can start focusing again on scoring, providing the team with that one - two punch which has been missing the past two years. I still don't get why Bowman didn't cough up what was necessary at deadline to beat the Maple Leafs' offer for Brian Boyle. Quenneville never completely trusted Marcus Kruger.
  11. The fourth line was a disaster all year (other than for a few weeks in February). It was not fixed and was useless at both ends when it counted. Quenneville, perhaps for good reason, did not trust Kruger as the primary defensive centre. Toews can't score and stop the opponent's best players at the same time any more, especially when grooming a rookie on his left side. The core has lost a small step, and there is no question it did not exert itself as expected. But it can't do the whole job by itself. Bowman did not add legitimate talent at deadline, and Quenneville refused to load up with young talent (as his general manager expected).
  12. This team has on occasion been frustrated with the type of passive checking game used by Nashville since 2009. The stars do not like to dump and chase. They never have. They always have problems with teams who force this type of game on them. Bowman expected his youthful lineup to overwhelm the opponent with speed and skill and compel them to play the game the Hawks wanted them to play. Quenneville did not buy into this approach which is why Tootoo and Desjardins continued to play most nights. The coach did not load up with the speed guys Bowman provided for him, and the physical forwards available weren't capable of winning board battles. The result --- Nashville forced its game on the Hawks, not the other way around.
  13. Good questions, Tincup. We do know that the coach did not anticipate replacing his assistants. He did not think they were the problem, which means he sees the loss as primarily a roster-related issue (either a lack of talent or a bad mix of players). For the most part, so do I.
  14. Galaxy - the difference here is that Kitchen is a personal friend of the coach. We know the coach is loyal to a fault with his players. This will not sit well with him. Tom - Your comments are fair. I see this firing as an aggressive move by the general manager against the coach. The coach must recognize this move for what it is. We will see in the coming days how he responds to it. I believe the general manager needs to take some ownership in what happened. This move suggests something else entirely. The bottom of the roster was atrocious all year long. The coaches did not have much legitimate talent to work with for the checking assignments. Clearly, Bowman is pointing a finger elsewhere.
  15. Both Dineen and Kitchen are Quenneville cronies. Why keep one but not the other? Kitchen has been here longer and has the two rings. Both coaches do work on the special teams. How can you separate the job of one from the other. Should a coach not choose his own assistants?