lfd250 1 Report post Posted July 2, 2009 So we all know that the NHLPA has to agree to extend the contract by the end of summer, if they don't then it's only good through 2011. With all that is going on in the US and the cap not growing as fast and may even shrink, might the NHLPA pull the plug and start over? AKA no cap. Now we all think that Chicago was crazy for leaving no room for their stars next year, what if there isn't a next year as in another lock out. Or are they smart and might think there won't be a cap. Crazy? may be but something to think about. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MadMan Mark 0 Report post Posted July 2, 2009 Hawks trying to get their Cup through offense only. They have a 1 yr window. Their goalie has never won anything and their D is mediocre, at best. Wouldn't it be funny to see Hawks and Sharks in Round 1 and this is the year the Sharks show some life in the playoffs. . . ha ha money well spent Dale Talon. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HawksFan4Life 0 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 Sharks DID show life in the playoffs. See: 2004 I don't get why our defense is getting slammed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
henrik40 76 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 Maybe a 3-on-1 in game 1 of the Conference Finals, giving up 6 goals in game 4, giving up 6 goals in a game against the Canucks, etc. Your top d-man is an overpaid Mike Green Jr. who can't play a lick of defense. Your best pairing of Seabrook and Keith might not even be there after next season. That's why your defense is getting slammed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tr!PoD#19 524 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 Sharks DID show life in the playoffs. See: 2004 I don't get why our defense is getting slammed. As Red Wings fans, it is our job to slam anything Blackhawks. They are wrong about your defense, though. It is a great young defense who will only get better. I believe it has the potential to become a top 5 defense next year, but who knows. Goaltending is the real problem. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HawksFan4Life 0 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 Keith and Seabrook are good D-Men. Sure, they fell when we played you guys. Nonetheless, they are a huge dynamic duo here in Chicago. Keith and Seabrook are here at least one more year, and without Matt Walker, it gets better. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wingsdiehard13 33 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 Maybe a 3-on-1 in game 1 of the Conference Finals, giving up 6 goals in game 4, giving up 6 goals in a game against the Canucks, etc. Your top d-man is an overpaid Mike Green Jr. who can't play a lick of defense. Your best pairing of Seabrook and Keith might not even be there after next season. That's why your defense is getting slammed. If you really think the 'Hawks #1 defensemen is Brian Cambell, then I can't take your post seriously. I think you are refering to his salary though. Am I wrong? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
titanium2 867 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 Keith and Seabrook are good D-Men. Sure, they fell when we played you guys. Nonetheless, they are a huge dynamic duo here in Chicago. Keith and Seabrook are here at least one more year, and without Matt Walker, it gets better. It's tough. You're debating with Wings fans who have always had a supreme top-2 on the back end along with depth guys who could be top pairing dmen on mediocre teams. And so, when we think about CHI defense, of course we see Keith and Seabrook (some of us secretely hope to steal away Keith even though we know it won't happen), but beyond those two of course we're going to have a hard time feeling the least bit threatened by the bottom four. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HawksFan4Life 0 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 It's tough. You're debating with Wings fans who have always had a supreme top-2 on the back end along with depth guys who could be top pairing dmen on mediocre teams. And so, when we think about CHI defense, of course we see Keith and Seabrook (some of us secretely hope to steal away Keith even though we know it won't happen), but beyond those two of course we're going to have a hard time feeling the least bit threatened by the bottom four. May I introduce you to a gentleman named Nicklas Hjalmarsson? He saw limited action, and he is no Keith or Seabs, but he showed promise this past season. At 22, he'll only grow. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thedisappearer 291 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 May I introduce you to a gentleman named Nicklas Hjalmarsson? He saw limited action, and he is no Keith or Seabs, but he showed promise this past season. At 22, he'll only grow. Just keep in mind- you are introducing players we'd keep in the AHL for 2 more years. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
titanium2 867 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 Just keep in mind- you are introducing players we'd keep in the AHL for 2 more years. I was just about to dish out a comparison to Ericsson or perhaps Kindl, who has more offensive upside but probably won't be better than Chalmerson defensively. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Detroit # 1 Fan 2,204 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 Chicagos top 3 is solid in Keith, Seabrook and Barker. With Walker gone, they'll rely on Campbell more, and that Hjarlmalson kid, and as of now they dont have Barker even signed. They got some things to sort out, but they'll be good. (I still hate them with a passion though ) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HawksFan4Life 0 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 I think Campbell-Hjalmarsson would make a nice second line defense. Walker and Campbell were a horrific pairing. But Campbell with Hjalmarsson was much more promising. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
henrik40 76 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 If you really think the 'Hawks #1 defensemen is Brian Cambell, then I can't take your post seriously. I think you are refering to his salary though. Am I wrong? I should have phrased that better. Campbell was signed to be their #1 although he's definitely not. And yes I was referring to his salary. Either way they have to rely on him a ton for the money they gave him. Relying on Campbell is not a good thing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zion 93 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 Keith and Seabrook are an excellent defensive pair. The Hawks are going for it this year... and why not? In this era, it's becoming near impossible to put out the product the Wings are putting out, and look at us now... we can still win it, but it won't be as assured as the past 2 years... we may end up looking a little like 2007. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ben_usmc 253 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 I think Chi has made some great moves if they are going for it all this year, though this could screw them hard if they don't dump Campbell Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
betterREDthandead 58 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 Has Chicago really improved? Hossa's very strong defensively, so they get a boost inside their own blueline and in the neutral zone. Offensively, what's changed? They swapped out Havlat for Hossa, basically, which is pretty close to a wash. Other than the ongoing maturation of Kane and Toews, they really won't be much different offensively. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HadThomasVokounOnFortSt 878 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 Yeah, maybe score a couple more goals. There goalie is the big downfall. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeverForgetMac25 483 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 I think Campbell-Hjalmarsson would make a nice second line defense. Walker and Campbell were a horrific pairing. But Campbell with Hjalmarsson was much more promising. Ouch.....$7 mil+ for a second line defenseman. That can't taste too well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VM1138 1,921 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 Lidstrom-Rafalski-Stuart-Kronwall-Ericcson-Lilja > Keith-Seabrook-Hjalmarsson-rest of Chicago defense. Someone had to say it. I like Keith and Seabrook, I've heard good things about Hjalmarsson, the rest....meh. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
b.shanafan14 733 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 I think Campbell-Hjalmarsson would make a nice second line defense. Walker and Campbell were a horrific pairing. But Campbell with Hjalmarsson was much more promising. Hjalmarsson is a promising defenseman, Campbell.... not so much. Campbell is a good offensive player and a TERRIBLE defensive player, locking him up for a long term at $7mil+ was the worst move I've seen in a long time. The guy will never even half live up to it, I'd take Kronwall over Campbell any day, and for dirt cheap Keith and Seabrook are a great pair, others have a lot of potential, but potential can swing both ways. And with poor goaltending, the confidence of a young defensive squad doesn't exactly thrive. Between Campbell and Huet, I think Talon was just trying to make a splash for the fanbase, but thats $12mil+ of cap anchor that is going to strangle the life out of the Hawks in years to come. I think the Hossa deal is a great deal for both parties, but people think it may be foolish because the other two useless, immovable salaries have already jeopardized long-term success. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
b.shanafan14 733 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 Lidstrom> Keith-Seabrook-Hjalmarsson-rest of Chicago defense. Someone had to say it. I like Keith and Seabrook, I've heard good things about Hjalmarsson, the rest....meh. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OsGOD 3 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 cant fault them... it worked for us in 2002 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeverForgetMac25 483 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 cant fault them... it worked for us in 2002 There was no cap back then, the Wings' defense was more stacked in 2002 than the current Blackhawks roster and the Wings had arguably the best goaltender in the league. Apples to oranges. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OsGOD 3 Report post Posted July 3, 2009 There was no cap back then, the Wings' defense was more stacked in 2002 than the current Blackhawks roster and the Wings had arguably the best goaltender in the league. Apples to oranges. doesn't mean they are not trying to buy their chance this year "under the cap rules" now... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
