Jump to content
The Official Site of the Chicago Blackhawks

Big-T

Full Member
  • Content count

    18,095
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    134

Big-T last won the day on September 4

Big-T had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

6,729 Excellent

About Big-T

  • Rank
    Hall of Famer
  • Birthday 09/14/1976

Profile Information

  • Location
    Windsor, Ontario
  • Interests
    Hockey, guitars, pool parties, garage parties, house parties, Margarita parties, and other assorted parties. Plus I'm really cool. Trust me!!!

Recent Profile Visitors

7,529 profile views
  1. 10/09 Hawks vs Leafs

    Remember, the 1st ten games are usually for the pretenders. I doubt LV, NJ will be where they’re at come Yanksgiving. The cream will always rise to the top! Hope you’re feeling “thumbs up”!!!
  2. Eddie Olczyk

    That’s good news, we found out today that Bubbles nemesis in Jim Lahey passed away today. The liquor won this time Jim, RIP!!!
  3. 10/09 Hawks vs Leafs

    I’m not sold on him yet. That team is on fire as of now, and I think Butcher had one solid game and has been a defensive liability for the most part, maybe in a month we’ll rehash this. I do agree that the end is nigh for a good chunk of our old d core. I hope Stan drafts nothing but dmen for the next 2-3 years, we need to get younger and faster very quick, Keith is 34, Seabs 32, we don’t have 5 years, maybe 2 or even 3 before Keith and Seabs need to be slotted a lot further down the lineup!!!
  4. '17/18 hawks outlook

    How many times have you seen Kane skate by his own guy on the PP? They’re pilons and don’t move, Toews goes beside the net and doesn’t screen, he waits for a tip or a rebound, it happens every now and then, but in general it does minimal. We make goalies look good by doing very little to make their life miserable. On the pp put 2 guys in front that can cycle down low, and if our D get the puck have them move and cycle then find the open man and go for a shot, Keith just stands there and shoots into a forest of legs, that has to change!!!
  5. Okay Our Defence?

    Again, it’s in its infancy and hopefully just nothing. But we’ve all seen this before. If he sits a 3rd straight game, gotta wonder why? I really feel any nhl coach would like to be consulted before roster moves are made. So we’ll see, that’s just pure speculation on my end. I have no insider info on the matter, just putting 2 and 2 together!!!
  6. Okay Our Defence?

    I’ll say this to the dismay of many. Maybe this is Qs way of getting back at Stan for all the moves with out notifying him? He canned Kitchen, traded Hammer, and Panera. Maybe this is Qs way of saying I don’t need him either, trade him, and never give him a chance? Cuz it’s weird that Murphy has been siting this much? Even if he was a 7th dman, the scratch really makes it worse!!!
  7. Okay Our Defence?

    What if he sits again???
  8. Okay Our Defence?

    No one is really doing that, well, maybe Q, I think some just said that it reeks of the Daley situation. Daley was obviously an nhl top 4, and proved it with back to back Stanley Cups. The problem is, Murphy may not be the type of dman that Q is looking for. If you take yourself out of a play to throw a hit, Q will save you goodbye. He isn’t fond of dmen being caught out of position. Hartman made a bad pass the other night, and he seen little ice time after that, and if Schmaltz was still in the lineup, I’d think that Hartman would be a healthy scratch. My point? It’s tough to get out of Qs doghouse, especially when there’s someone more than able to take your job!!!
  9. Okay Our Defence?

    I fully agree, and I’ll say this again. There is no exact timeline, but for S’s and G’s, let’s say by December 1, if he has trouble cracking the lineup, does he want to be here? So realistically we have about a month and a bit before something will give, hopefully he gets back in and becomes productive. I do not know why some think that myself or others have him written off or are hating on him. For myself, it’s not normal to see a 24 year old wh has 5 years left at 4 million per not able to crack a lineup in any capacity. The player wants to play, and I’m positive Stan won’t rob him of that, he’ll be dealt if this keeps up, that’s a guarantee!!!
  10. Okay Our Defence?

    I’ve stated we need a bigger sample size, if after a reasonable amount of time, cut your losses and get cap relief and use that for viable pieces. That’s not hard to figure out, I’m sure that’s exactly what they will do!!!
  11. Okay Our Defence?

    I have stated many times over the last 24 hours that I think it’s best to wait a while before doing anything. Gotta see what we got. But if he never plays, it’s tough to judge anything, we’ll see soon enough, I think keeping Hammer may have been the better choice at the moment!!!
  12. Okay Our Defence?

    Your right, but I also think Q wants Franson in there more than Murphy. So it’s safe to say that unless there’s an injury on the right side, we have ourselves a 4 million dollar platoon player. Once again reiterating the coach and GM probably are not on the same page. I would like to believe this would’ve been taken care of by now, and here we are again. I’m f Murphy isn’t gonna work, I hope they deal him instead of wasting him!!!
  13. '17/18 hawks outlook

    From what I gather, the PP is free reign for the players. There is absolutely no structure and it’s designed to let them do their thing, and that’s why you see the same lame plays. They need two guys in front of the net, and and quick puck movement. Also, it seems everyone on the Hawks watches the puck carrier (usually Kane) and stand around while he does his thing. It’s pointless to even attempt a PP if the team has zero movement. When guys move, it’s very easy to get lost in chaos, and that’s how guys get open. I think what they should do is hire an assistant to work solely on the pp. someone like Adam Oates, a guy who made a living off of the PP!!!
  14. Okay Our Defence?

    Ummmmm, well, Stan flat out said E Kane “Is not going to happen”. Which to me means the front office has zero interest in him. If , and I mean if we were to go the route of E Kane or Duchene etc. It’s gonna take one of Schmaltz, Dcat or Hartman. No team is gonna want some B prospects and a pick. But to answer your question, I personally would give up Hartman, and a prospect/pick for Kane. But somehow we need to unload AA along the way. Or send AA along with Hartman for Kane and Reinhardt. This way the Salary evens out and Reinhardt is a bit more sandpaper to me than Hartman. Even if we need to add in another piece, like Jurco or someone of that ilk I’d be ok with it!!!
  15. Okay Our Defence?

    You’re absolutely right. His contract will be what he’s measured by. Not one person can blame him for signing that deal. We have to look higher than him to answer why that was doled out!!!
×