Jump to content
The Official Site of the Chicago Blackhawks

Granada

Full Member
  • Content count

    6,809
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    47

Granada last won the day on January 22

Granada had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,657 Excellent

About Granada

  • Rank
    Hall of Famer

Recent Profile Visitors

8,365 profile views
  1. Stan As Gm

    A lot or rabble rousing for such a meh-for-meh trade. People are acting like we just traded Kane or something. It was Ville Pokka: a guy who was like 10th on the depth chart behind Gus, Oesterle, Forsling, Kempny, Rutta, Dahlstrom, etc. Don't get me wrong: I wouldn't mind Bowman being fired, especially before Q, but this trade is probably nothing more than a Rockford trade, at best. Guess I don't get all the rage at such a blah trade. He warned us this is what he was going to do a couple weeks ago.
  2. How the Hawks Get Better

    Yay?
  3. Stan As Gm

    It's a good question and you can debate this until the cows come home, but for me, it's pretty simple: this team is a very shallow team that any coach would have trouble with, and it certainly doesn't help that the core is getting long in the tooth. You can say that Q should be better able to "motivate his players," but I don't buy that, really -- a 3x Cup Winning core shouldn't need their head coach to motivate them; these aren't rookie players we're talking about. We don't even have 2 top lines; our D core is in shambles; and our goalie situation is as bad as it can get, since the backup role wasn't adequately addressed in the off-season. That could have been the reason why Savard was terminated, but then again, Quenneville was already a very well-established and accomplished coach; in a way, he became available at the perfect time and he was the best coach available out of the lot. You need to get players that fit the coaches system. Bowman is trying to provide the players Q wants; it's just that, his hands are tied with the cap, and these are the best he can muster. That's how I see it anyway.
  4. Around The League - Other Teams' News

    Surprised no one mentioned this yet: https://www.nhl.com/kings/news/la-kings-acquire-phaneuf-thompson-trade-gaborik-shore-to-senators/c-295939090
  5. How the Hawks Get Better

    This article says nothing about how the Hawks will get better, other than mentioning Jokiharu. There's zero substance to it, and just rehashes stats and moves. Do yourself a favor and stay away from BSPN when it comes to anything Hockey-related, because they know d*** about the subject.
  6. Stan As Gm

    That's a pretty tough question, honestly. For a while, I thought Glass; but now, it's pretty much a crap (I stress, crap) shoot.
  7. Stan As Gm

    Agree also, and just to add: I know people are calling for Q's head, but there might be a lot of players who would relish the opportunity to play for a Hall of Fame coach -- I'm just saying.
  8. 2/12 Hawks vs Yotes

    That's fine, but no one wants to read endless walls of text; just a friendly suggestion. We're talking hockey here; we're not curing cancer. And no, anecdotal evidence isn't better than no evidence at all, because it's just as useless and is a logical fallacy. Why would Crawford be moved then? His game could rapidly deteriorate by then. His value is quite high right now, even with his recent injury history. Teams will know they can just wait until the off-season. You're banking on a contender in 2020 absolutely needing a goalie at the deadline, which is impossible to foresee. You already need to acquire a backup; and it needs to be a good backup at that. Glass was waived, and Forsberg is Salak (i.e. just as useless). There is absolutely no one in the system. How much money are you going to want to invest in your goaltending tandem by keeping Crawford? 8 million (it'll cost at least 2 for a decent back-up)? Because we've seen what a sub-million dollar goalie acquisition gets you this current season.8 million for 2 players who won't play every game (half if we're lucky, and at this point, it's a question mark that Crawford can even play half of a season) is too much to invest on a team that is already invested up to its neck. My point is, is it really going to be worth it to keep Crawford and take the back-up role for granted again? Because that's exactly what you're going to have to do if you want to keep Crawford.
  9. Stan As Gm

    He got saadomized?
  10. 2/12 Hawks vs Yotes

    You don't need all those words. If there are no takers for Crawford, you don't trade him. Simple. If there are, you do. Also, it doesn't have to be a goalie for goalie swap. It could be Crawford for a bag of pucks; the point is opening up space.
  11. 2/12 Hawks vs Yotes

    No, it doesn't. That's totally anecdotal evidence.
  12. Stan As Gm

    ^ We don't know the minimum because we don't know what Columbus' first offer was. They could have simply been okaying Saad's counter with 6.
  13. Stan As Gm

    It's conjecture either way. The fact he did sign for 6 million would indicate that is what he and his agent wanted from the Hawks, but that's just one opinion.
  14. Stan As Gm

    ^ That's not how the story goes. Bowman supposedly offered Saad 5 and he said no, so he was traded. That's what was reported at the time, anyway.
×