Crawford should have won the Conn Smythe this year hands down. He bailed out the d a whole lot more often then they did him. Oduya, Hjarmalsson, Roszival and even Seabrook all had games or times in games when they were running around with chickens with their heads cut off. He was a lot more influential to this team's cup then Niemi was in 2010. If he leaves after this contract is up it's because none of you clowns give him any respect not money. Do you think the Hawks would waste all this time developing just to let him go so some unproven FA signing can step in? That's just Bowman doing what he's done all along, have depth. (Another guy most you guys female dog about)
Anybody who thinks Luongo or Price is better didn't watch Luongo's last Olympics (they won in spite of him and his last minute crappy goals) or the OTT-MON series last year. And since when is Mike Smith god? One good season and a good series against Chicago and suddenly he's superman. You're nothing as a goalie in this league until you win the Stanley Cup, and Crawford's done that. Did the team in front of him help? Yes. But he earned that and deserves more respect than you clowns are giving him.
- mcmasterkev

Goalie is such a difficult position to analyze. Crow and Niemi both won the Cup with the Hawks, but for some reason Niemi is forever loved and Crow is not. I think it is because Niemi left and never had a chance to play poorly here (he did go through some rough patches in SJ). People seem to get their own impression of a goalie and there is always and argument in your favor with goalies if you want to like one of them. For me, I don't get how people think Miller is good - he played well in the Olympic tournament but has played like crap in the NHL. Price looks like he craps the bed often to me when I see him, but the same people who love him don't like Crawford. I also don't think Ward has been good in awhile. And Rask took a team to the Finals in his second year as a starter and got $7M for 8 years from the Bruins. Many fans of the team they lost to want to give Crawford less than half that or let him walk. Some will say "look at the team Crawford had in front of him..." I don't think the Hawks were significantly better than the Bruins yet the Hawks won - maybe the Hawks goalie was one (of many) reasons they won?

Crow's gonna leave because we female dog him on hockeybuzz? Ok man. They won in spite of Luongo's .927 and 9 goals in a 5-0 campaign? I'm sure. The team that gave up such a few number of shots in the playoffs was bailed out by their goalie, that's good to know. Again, good to know Fleury and Crawford are better than Rinne and Lundquist too because of their team accomplishments. Also by your logic no player would ever reach free agency that is developed by his own team. Get off your high horse.
- rollpards19

Dude, anybody could look good playing behind Canada's team.... Have you seen has many great players they have? You or I could have won the Gold with that team in front of us! If Crawford were to start and win the Gold, there are many on here who would say that exact thing.

Been watching some NHL Network lately, including the SCF from the 50s with DET sweeping MTL, and the islanders - Flyers from the 70s. A few things ere dramatic:

No head shots, because no one was wearing a helmet.

No face wash/scrums/high sticks etc In the crease after the whistle. They just skate away!

The goalies are tiny. In he 50s, Terry Sawchuck's shoulder was below the crossbar, so was the Canadian's goalie.
- scottak

This is really noticeable - and that the goalies in the 50's - without masks - did not go down unless absolutely necessary - stick and skate saves were the preferred save mechanisms.

One other thing from the 50s and 60s: no ads on the boards. Makes the rinks look pretty barren (certainly on black and white TV) - hate to say it, but the commercialization of the ice has at least given some color to the rinks.

Been watching some NHL Network lately, including the SCF from the 50s with DET sweeping MTL, and the islanders - Flyers from the 70s. A few things ere dramatic:

No head shots, because no one was wearing a helmet.

No face wash/scrums/high sticks etc In the crease after the whistle. They just skate away!

The goalies are tiny. In he 50s, Terry Sawchuck's shoulder was below the crossbar, so was the Canadian's goalie.
- scottak

I have said that the mandatory helmet rule has hurt the game. Most players do not even wear the helmet correctly, it is not tight to the head. I feel that since players know they have helmets, they target the head more.

This is really noticeable - and that the goalies in the 50's - without masks - did not go down unless absolutely necessary - stick and skate saves were the preferred save mechanisms.

One other thing from the 50s and 60s: no ads on the boards. Makes the rinks look pretty barren (certainly on black and white TV) - hate to say it, but the commercialization of the ice has at least given some color to the rinks.
- StLBravesFan

And the players' sticks were made of wood and had straight blades, so the game was played along the ice more. I agree on the ads - the visuals are a lot better today. Also, HDTV is a godsend!

I have said that the mandatory helmet rule has hurt the game. Most players do not even wear the helmet correctly, it is not tight to the head. I feel that since players know they have helmets, they target the head more.
- powerenforcer

True dat. Also, many concussions happen with the sudden stopping of the head rather than the initial hit (such as the head hitting the ice) - the head stops but the momentum of the brain, which is soft, continues until being squished against the skull. Helmets cannot do anything about these types of concussions. I saw recently that concussions have increased since the anti-head shot rule went into effect.

Quick thoughts

-Hawks may sign another vet for depth at F, but I fully expect them to give Pirri, Morin and Smith a crack at the everyday line up. Honestly I'm not really bothered by it. A majority of the Cup team is back unlike 2010-2011. I expect this team to be a juggernaut once again.

-As for Crawford, if he wants big money he probably won't find it here and I would not blame him if he went and cashed in elsewhere. Next Summer could be wide open for goalies as well. Currently guys who would be UFA's next year are Crawford, Halak, Elliot, Lundqvist, Miller, Hiller, Emery, Vokoun, Gigure and Nabokov. I think the Hawks go to up to $4-$4.5 mil a year for CC but that's it. If all goes well and they win the Cup again, he'll probably completely price himself out of Chicago.

here is the link to the guy who builds the table hockey game is Rick Benej :

http://www.tablehockey.com

the guy who made it a Blackhawk personalized version is Kevin who commented below on you tube comment section on that below the video Kevinem82....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=venC2oQdMGA
- wiz1901

Here's a cool viddy I found on the site

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Bzc9a6ZOBI

On my old block of 2700 North Dayton street (and Diversey) and pretty ctaching up with so many friends we haven't seen.
Came on because I saw a hawk shirt I need to get from whichever official unauthorized T shirt person made it.
It was like an x-ray with the skeletal bones and where the heart was, well you know, was the Indianhead.

To answer a few of the questions asked about St. Stanislaw Kostka and Theo Peckham.

...and that "pretty sure Kostka didn't sign to play in the minors" take a deep breath before blowing wind that this is some signal that another defenders leaving.

Stan has always said the model is to have as many NHL experienced dee-men in the system as you can so that if you do catch two big injuries you HAVE someone who has at least been in the dance hall.

Do you REALLY think Kostka would have NOT been offered a contract even IF they were committed to Morgan Rielly in a baptism by fire "because he is TOO good to play in juniors....if he was a lock as a part of their blue line?
It's chump change money, and the Leafs went elsewhere spending and they probably don't think he is a long term investment with enough upside to compete with the youngtsters down the road...they probably were honest to Kostka, that even if he was signed he would be fighting a number battles in the next couple too.
He chose to play in an organization thta DID offer him a contract, and maybe a possible callup.
These two defenseman moves DID have a two fold purpose,but let me change streams to address the Raanta Now rant posted.

If you think there is ANY chance that the "Electric Eel" can play in the NHL without a hankering of smaller ice in the "A", you don't understand the differences in ice size in Europe to here and it's effect on goalers.

I think when you all finally SEE Raanta in actions, you are going to surprised at how divergent (not the book or movie, btw) his style is from the new NHL standard of "stand big & square, technique over free style, protetc bottom as first priority, and still stay tall to cover the high spots near the bar."
He and Crow (not you, Tommyhawk) are like night and day, and I think at first you may not buy in quickly TO him.
He is going to have to learn tracking the puck on the smaller rinks, and how to handle the front and holding ground, besides the fact that NHL forwards turneach other inside out on possessions.
You are going to be surpirsed at how Raanta gets two inches from the ice and tries to track and pop (up) using his slippery eel like agility to make saves and will look closer to that hasek style of tossing and tumbling in his attempts to take away and reposition as the play goes on...I wonder if you are gonna like it? If you will give it a chance? He relies on his glove not just high but with regualrity pretty much whenver he needs another impedment...he will try and take pucks out of the corners with the glove. The glove won't be helf too low like Huet...you won't be able to pigeoam hole because it is a multi-purposed tool for him even with it on the wet ice.

Anyway...I see Rockford is going to be a reshuffle on forward too...new players like Nordstrom, Ross and the former first rounders will be jousting for the higher end - more minute jobs of the guys being promoted, and that also will be a flux...

Peckham and Kostka add to vets who settle down the front for Raanta, and help the forwards in rockfor in the re-group along with teaching Clendening Olsen and Dahlbeck what being a pro entails, since both have paid dues working for shots at the pros and how you have ot be ready...
By adding Theo Peckham you do add a possible tough guy if they send Brookbank to the minors or elsewhere...BUT the hawks press release forgot to tell you how few games theo played last year (TWELVE TOTAL).
Theo had a bad concussion

Back to didn't sign to play in minors Kotska:
in the playoffs for the leafs, he had no points was even plus minus IN THE ONE GAME HE PLAYED!!!!!!!!!!
Theo
He had a bad concussion.
- wiz1901

I'm surprised the 'all knowing' didn't know that Kotska had a broken finger, suffered in the first Boston playoff game accounting for him not playing in the remaining playoff games.

To answer a few of the questions asked about St. Stanislaw Kostka and Theo Peckham.

...and that "pretty sure Kostka didn't sign to play in the minors" take a deep breath before blowing wind that this is some signal that another defenders leaving.

Stan has always said the model is to have as many NHL experienced dee-men in the system as you can so that if you do catch two big injuries you HAVE someone who has at least been in the dance hall.

Do you REALLY think Kostka would have NOT been offered a contract even IF they were committed to Morgan Rielly in a baptism by fire "because he is TOO good to play in juniors....if he was a lock as a part of their blue line?
It's chump change money, and the Leafs went elsewhere spending and they probably don't think he is a long term investment with enough upside to compete with the youngtsters down the road...they probably were honest to Kostka, that even if he was signed he would be fighting a number battles in the next couple too.
He chose to play in an organization thta DID offer him a contract, and maybe a possible callup.
These two defenseman moves DID have a two fold purpose,but let me change streams to address the Raanta Now rant posted.

Peckham and Kostka add to vets who settle down the front for Raanta, and help the forwards in rockford in the re-group along with teaching Clendening Olsen and Dahlbeck what being a pro entails, since both have paid dues working for shots at the pros and how you have ot be ready...
By adding Theo Peckham you do add a possible tough guy if they send Brookbank to the minors or elsewhere...BUT the hawks press release forgot to tell you how few games theo played last year (TWELVE TOTAL).
Theo had a bad concussion

Back to didn't sign to play in minors Kotska:
in the playoffs for the leafs, he had no points was even plus minus IN THE ONE GAME HE PLAYED!!!!!!!!!!
Theo
He had a bad concussion.
- wiz1901

This.

I haven't seen either play. However, I don't get the glorification of Kostka. He's a 27 year old minor league journeyman. Sure, he averaged 20 minutes a game in Toronto last season. So did Brookbank when he played in Anaheim during the '11-'12 season? How well did that turn out for the Hawks? How deep was Toronto's blue line corps last season? What's to really fall in love with here?

I think you hit the nail on the head. Peckham and Kostka were brought in as a veteran presence to the back end of the 'Hogs, with the idea of adding extra depth on defense for the Hawks in case of injury. The only way either guy challenges for a spot is if either the Hawks go with 8 defensemen, or Brookbank is dealt. Then I could see these two guys thrown into the jackpot with Ryan Stanton to challenge for the 7th defenseman spot on the Hawks.

I actually think there is no connection to 6 million dollars in Frolik, Bolland, & Stalberg launches to adding anyone else at forward.
I am not saying that some UFA doesn't give them a call with hat in hand and looking to work for scraps...
but that money was to re-sign Bickell and pay Leddy and Kruger and the re-ups of Handzus, Roszival.

I actually don't think Stan is flapping his gums about promotions form the farm.

I actually think that speed on the back end and the veterans up front is enough to continue to sustain and attack in the offensive zone.
There are clearly enough positives in the games of the Rockford guys to see they can add their strengths in the offensive zone without hampering defensive coverages.

I think they KNOW that even if there are clear drops in the new guys over the lost boys, the new Rockfords will be ready to usurp this years newbies in 2014-15.

They are not gonna reach, panic or stretch with guys who are not ready from within.

At the deadline, I bet they will address the areas where they think they need to address but again, not at any large costs...

This.

I haven't seen either play. However, I don't get the glorification of Kostka. He's a 27 year old minor league journeyman. Sure, he averaged 20 minutes a game in Toronto last season. So did Brookbank when he played in Anaheim during the '11-'12 season? How well did that turn out for the Hawks? How deep was Toronto's blue line corps last season? What's to really fall in love with here?

I think you hit the nail on the head. Peckham and Kostka were brought in as a veteran presence to the back end of the 'Hogs, with the idea of adding extra depth on defense for the Hawks in case of injury. The only way either guy challenges for a spot is if either the Hawks go with 8 defensemen, or Brookbank is dealt. Then I could see these two guys thrown into the jackpot with Ryan Stanton to challenge for the 7th defenseman spot on the Hawks.
- EKolb13

Think about it! Kotska was a 1st pairing defenceman for a playoff team, albiet not a great one, for much of the regular season. Where does he have a better opportunity to play in the NHL, a team with a solid blueline like Chicago or team lacking defencemen like say Phoenix? Do you think he signed on with the Hawks because he likes the Rockford sweater? Not sure what is up but logic tells me Kotska signed because he thinks, or has been told, he has an opportunity to make the Hawks. Otherwise don't you think he signs with a team where his path to the NHL is allot easier?

This.

I haven't seen either play. However, I don't get the glorification of Kostka. He's a 27 year old minor league journeyman. Sure, he averaged 20 minutes a game in Toronto last season. So did Brookbank when he played in Anaheim during the '11-'12 season? How well did that turn out for the Hawks? How deep was Toronto's blue line corps last season? What's to really fall in love with here?

I think you hit the nail on the head. Peckham and Kostka were brought in as a veteran presence to the back end of the 'Hogs, with the idea of adding extra depth on defense for the Hawks in case of injury. The only way either guy challenges for a spot is if either the Hawks go with 8 defensemen, or Brookbank is dealt. Then I could see these two guys thrown into the jackpot with Ryan Stanton to challenge for the 7th defenseman spot on the Hawks.
- EKolb13

Barring a trade we'll start the season with the same defense as we had last season. From there who knows how things will go, an injury or cold streak could change things and one of Stanton, Peckham and Kostka could get a shot. It's nice to have an insurance plan for the defense.

Think about it! Kotska was a 1st pairing defenceman for a playoff team, albiet not a great one, for much of the regular season. Where does he have a better opportunity to play in the NHL, a team with a solid blueline like Chicago or team lacking defencemen like say Phoenix? Do you think he signed on with the Hawks because he likes the Rockford sweater? Not sure what is up but logic tells me Kotska signed because he thinks, or has been told, he has an opportunity to make the Hawks. Otherwise don't you think he signs with a team where his path to the NHL is allot easier?
- paulr

I'm not buying this at all.

There are teams out there spending to the ceiling. There are other teams that are spending on a self imposed budget. There are not a lot of jobs out there to be had for journeymen on the cusp of sticking in the NHL.

If you really want to get into the "think about it" idea, why didn't a team like Detroit go after Kostka, who probably settled for a two way deal around the league minimum? It's not like Detroit is full over on defensive help, and I'm sure he could have challenged for a NHL roster spot there, and Detroit would have had the cap room to bring him into the fold for around the league minimum.

So why sign with the reigning Stanley Cup Champs who are currently bringing back their entire blue line corps intact? That doesn't make much sense if you're Kostka and trying to challenge for a job. If the idea is to stash Brookbank in the minors, forget about it. With the Hawks running as close to the cap as they are (or will be once the roster is rounded out), blowing another $300,000 in cap penalties doesn't make a whole lot of sense, especially if the Hawks intend to have as much space open as possible in order to have room at the trade deadline.

You know what does make sense? Kostka comes in on a two way deal, and makes a salary in the AHL that is $100,000 or more while hoping that Brookbank is traded. I wouldn't be surprised if that's the case once his contract details are released.

I think Kostka went for the solid money offer, no matter where he ends up. The guy probably has a family to feed, and not a lot of (if any at all) solid NHL offers out there.

Think about it.

Barring a trade we'll start the season with the same defense as we had last season. From there who knows how things will go, an injury or cold streak could change things and one of Stanton, Peckham and Kostka could get a shot. It's nice to have an insurance plan for the defense.
- DarthKane

This.

Been watching some NHL Network lately

No head shots, because no one was wearing a helmet.

No face wash/scrums/high sticks etc In the crease after the whistle. They just skate away!

The goalies are tiny. In he 50s, Terry Sawchuck's shoulder was below the crossbar, so was the Canadian's goalie.
- scottak

Terry Sawchuck was the best goalteander in the era....great reflexes and glove.
All the goalies were like shortstops.
You failed to metion how more North-South lane skating, with forwards staying in the straight lines going back and on the attack except for maybe one forward with the puck going lateral.
The very reason you saw no high sticks or after whistle crap, is you PAID later when the one ref was occupied and you caught more than a Shaw wallop.
Players basically respected the fact that the sticks were easily weapons and you played the guy you hit with at least eight times so if you really didn't kill him, he would find ways to make you wish you did.

With no third man penalties the strong survivied but if they couldn't handle the heat, there was always a teammate who could and would.

All that business really started with eth expansion to 12 teams and then the WHA further diluting the ability levels and all the stuff the league turned a blind eye to with the Broad Street bullies because they oh so knoe that at one pointbthere were standing EQUAL to the NBA ....but suddenly the NBA TV ratings skyrockets and the NHL needed some hook...

I'm not buying this at all.

There are teams out there spending to the ceiling. There are other teams that are spending on a self imposed budget. There are not a lot of jobs out there to be had for journeymen on the cusp of sticking in the NHL.

If you really want to get into the "think about it" idea, why didn't a team like Detroit go after Kostka, who probably settled for a two way deal around the league minimum? It's not like Detroit is full over on defensive help, and I'm sure he could have challenged for a NHL roster spot there, and Detroit would have had the cap room to bring him into the fold.

So why sign with the reigning Stanley Cup Champs who are currently bringing back their entire blue line corps intact? That doesn't make much sense if you're Kostka and trying to challenge for a job. If the idea is to stash Brookbank in the minors, forget about it. With the Hawks running as close to the cap as they are (or will be once the roster is rounded out), blowing another $300,000 in cap penalties doesn't make a whole lot of sense, especially if the Hawks intend to have as much space open as possible in order to have room at the trade deadline.

You know what does make sense? Kostka comes in on a two way deal, and makes a salary in the AHL that is $100,000 or more while hoping that Brookbank is traded. I wouldn't be surprised if that's the case once his contract details are released.

I think Kostka went for the solid money offer, no matter where he ends up. The guy probably has a family to feed, and not a lot of (if any at all) solid NHL offers out there.

Think about it.
- EKolb13

Time will tell my friend.

I'm not buying this at all.

There are teams out there spending to the ceiling. There are other teams that are spending on a self imposed budget. There are not a lot of jobs out there to be had for journeymen on the cusp of sticking in the NHL.

If you really want to get into the "think about it" idea, why didn't a team like Detroit go after Kostka, who probably settled for a two way deal around the league minimum? It's not like Detroit is full over on defensive help, and I'm sure he could have challenged for a NHL roster spot there, and Detroit would have had the cap room to bring him into the fold.

So why sign with the reigning Stanley Cup Champs who are currently bringing back their entire blue line corps intact? That doesn't make much sense if you're Kostka and trying to challenge for a job. If the idea is to stash Brookbank in the minors, forget about it. With the Hawks running as close to the cap as they are (or will be once the roster is rounded out), blowing another $300,000 in cap penalties doesn't make a whole lot of sense, especially if the Hawks intend to have as much space open as possible in order to have room at the trade deadline.

You know what does make sense? Kostka comes in on a two way deal, and makes a salary in the AHL that is $100,000 or more while hoping that Brookbank is traded. I wouldn't be surprised if that's the case once his contract details are released.

I think Kostka went for the solid money offer, no matter where he ends up. The guy probably has a family to feed, and not a lot of (if any at all) solid NHL offers out there.

Think about it.
- EKolb13

Yeah...if Kostka had a whole lot of options, he oviously wasn't being asked or given guarantees.

He takes the Hawks up, with the idea IT might happen, he might get a chance, that teh 7th spot is an opening one...
and he chosses a team that is good over ones that bad...he knows he looks better with better players and even if he gets a dozen games, maybe it opens a job the season after...
it is all about sustainablity so YOU CAN make more money and PLAY in the NHL.

Yeah...if Kostka had a whole lot of options, he oviously wasn't being asked or given guarantees.

He takes the Hawks up, with the idea IT might happen, he might get a chance, that teh 7th spot is an opening one...
and he chosses a team that is good over ones that bad...he knows he looks better with better players and even if he gets a dozen games, maybe it opens a job the season after...
it is all about sustainablity so YOU CAN make more money and PLAY in the NHL.
- wiz1901

If you say so ....

Yeah...if Kostka had a whole lot of options, he oviously wasn't being asked or given guarantees.

He takes the Hawks up, with the idea IT might happen, he might get a chance, that teh 7th spot is an opening one...
and he chosses a team that is good over ones that bad...he knows he looks better with better players and even if he gets a dozen games, maybe it opens a job the season after...
it is all about sustainablity so YOU CAN make more money and PLAY in the NHL.
- wiz1901

Or maybe he went with a job offer that has a solid AHL salary instead of having to play overseas?

Dude, anybody could look good playing behind Canada's team.... Have you seen has many great players they have? You or I could have won the Gold with that team in front of us! If Crawford were to start and win the Gold, there are many on here who would say that exact thing.
- mohel

But only a delusional few would say they won in spite of him, like this guy said Canada did with Luongo. Ignoring that they lost to the US when Brodeur played.

Goalie is such a difficult position to analyze. Crow and Niemi both won the Cup with the Hawks, but for some reason Niemi is forever loved and Crow is not. I think it is because Niemi left and never had a chance to play poorly here (he did go through some rough patches in SJ). People seem to get their own impression of a goalie and there is always and argument in your favor with goalies if you want to like one of them. For me, I don't get how people think Miller is good - he played well in the Olympic tournament but has played like crap in the NHL. Price looks like he craps the bed often to me when I see him, but the same people who love him don't like Crawford. I also don't think Ward has been good in awhile. And Rask took a team to the Finals in his second year as a starter and got $7M for 8 years from the Bruins. Many fans of the team they lost to want to give Crawford less than half that or let him walk. Some will say "look at the team Crawford had in front of him..." I don't think the Hawks were significantly better than the Bruins yet the Hawks won - maybe the Hawks goalie was one (of many) reasons they won?
- mohel

Two years ago he started 74 games!!!! and had a .926 save percentage behind the Carolina Hurricanes mediocre defense. That's one of the best goalie seasons since the lockout. The next year .915 in 68 games. They legit have no one to split time with him and that's why he got hurt this season. But a .920 SV over 140 games when you're playing almost every night is pretty darn good to me. Not to mention he has Conn Smythe pedigree. Don't let one down season (due to injury) alter you're view.

Also, the Hawks outpossessed Boston by a noticeable margin, I think its safe to say they were better. Rask saw five more shots a game from a more offensively gifted team and gave up one less goal than Crawford. I don't think goaltending was the difference for the Hawks

Been watching some NHL Network lately, including the SCF from the 50s with DET sweeping MTL, and the islanders - Flyers from the 70s. A few things ere dramatic:

No head shots, because no one was wearing a helmet.

No face wash/scrums/high sticks etc In the crease after the whistle. They just skate away!

The goalies are tiny. In he 50s, Terry Sawchuck's shoulder was below the crossbar, so was the Canadian's goalie.
- scottak

Yeah, player's had so much respect and the game was so safe!

As far as Crawford goes, I think he's somewhere in the middle between average/ok and elite. To me he's a pretty good goalie who won't necessarily steal a team many games but will never really piss any games away or let them get out of hand either. You can pretty much count on him giving up about 2 goals a game and playing on a team like the Hawks, they should win the majority of those games. I also don't think there's anything wrong with that. I'm fine with CC as the Hawks goalie this upcoming season.

All that being said he still has room to improve his game even though he just won a Cup. I look at a guy like Niemi who is a much better goalie now than when he was with the Hawks in 2010.

Also unless CC has a complete joke of season next year I expect him to cash in next Summer either Chicago or somewhere else, especially if the Hawks make another deep run.

Ok. Here is the controversial question. On Team Canada, who is 2C? Stamkos, Toews or Bergeron?