Gonna disagree, Holtby was outstanding this season. And played on a team not nearly as good. And to reiterate what JJ and Mexico have both been saying, including this blog, there are a few NHL goalies that can win with the Hawks, and I'd include Holtby on that list.

And their numbers are almost identical. So no, I don't see a huge drop off.

CC
14-15 .924 2.27 2 SO
Career .917 2.34 12 SO

Holtby
14-15 .923 2.22 9 SO
Career .921 2.44 20 SO
- scottak

No doubt you've made a good argument. But to play devil's advocate, that's also Holtby in a Barry Trotz system. If you're a competent enough goalie I feel like you'll get a boost in your numbers under Trotz no matter what.

Isn't Holtby looking for 8 mil too? He should take a look at Price's numbers the past couple of seasons or CC's resume then look back at himself and really think about if he is in fact worth more than both of those players.

No former Ice Hog dman has been part of the team as a regular on defense since Hammer came through Rockford.
- Al

I see what you are saying, part of the Hawks.

I thought your original point was that no Dman had ever been developed in Rockford.

In the present tense without Crawford I don't think they win either Cup....Most definitely not in 2013 and most likely not this year, especially if his replacement was Darling.

We had a nice discussion about Crawford last night-some thought he is a bargain.

I listed a bunch of goalies making $5.9 up to $ 7mill and there wasn't one who I would take over Crawford. So because he can't be replaced for same money or less he is a value imo....not necessarily a bargain.

No doubt the Hawks would not have won any of the Cups without the players you mentioned but judging how Crawford performed in 2013 or 2015, in my view they don't win those Cups without him.

The only reason Crawford didn't win the Conn Smythe in 2010 is because the national guys who almost to a man aren't watching every game of the Hawks in the first two rounds- And most of the voters don't see them for an entire series until the Finals voted for Kane. Kane himself said Crawford should have won.

I have not met anyone who watched Crawford in every game in 2010 that is credentialed and also John included, that didn't think Crawford was the best player throughout the 2013 post season. I know all the beat writers who had a vote, and I think it was Kuc and Sassone only, voted for Crawford.

But at some point it all revolves on a math problem-Toews, Kane, Hossa, Keith, Hammer and most likely Seabrook aren't going anywhere-So that leaves Crawford as they only larger cap hit left who by himself could solve some cap misery.

But in the same regard he is more of a goalie in the top 1/4-1/3 of the NHL-His numbers in important categories were in close range to Price who won a lot of hardware this year.

Beyond save % and GAA analytics help justify Crawford as one of the best. His save % against quality scoring chances in the playoffs were even better than Price and I believe everyone else.

Can he be traded-Sure but very risky for sure-at least now.
If Darling puts up sold #'s for 30+ games and makes some playoffs start next season and shines then the trade Crawford saga takes on much more significance and becomes more likely.
- Al

Well said. I would also add they don't go to the 2014 WCF without Crawford, either. He is more consistent in the playoffs than even Quick, who kind of lost it after being damned near supernatural in 2012. He's better than Price and Lundqvist in clutch playoff situations and against A+ chances, as well. MAF? Falls on his face every post season.

All the core guys mentioned were present in 2011 and 2012, and I didn't see them get out of the first round with Turco and Emery.

What's funny to me is that, if we had Quick, Price or Lundqvist on the roster right now making $6M instead of Crawford, there would be screams of trade the kitchen sink, but save our "elite" goaltender!

I see what you are saying, part of the Hawks.

I thought your original point was that no Dman had ever been developed in Rockford.
- vabeachbear

Not ever but as I mentioned 22 games for Leddy...2013 was the lockout otherwise Leddy isn't in Rockford. So 22 games isn't enough time for me to Rockford development.

The others were either traded too late for little or this year Clendenning-Dahlback and Johns becasue Bowman needed to make the deals.

Hammer was the last significant dman to spend at least a half season in Rockford-
47 games and that was 10 years ago.

Well said. I would also add they don't go to the 2014 WCF without Crawford, either. He is more consistent in the playoffs than even Quick, who kind of lost it after being damned near supernatural in 2012. He's better than Price and Lundqvist in clutch playoff situations and against A+ chances, as well. MAF? Falls on his face every post season.

All the core guys mentioned were present in 2011 and 2012, and I didn't see them get out of the first round with Turco and Emery.

What's funny to me is that, if we had Quick, Price or Lundqvist on the roster right now making $6M instead of Crawford, there would be screams of trade the kitchen sink, but save our "elite" goaltender!

- Q...argh

Depth, chemistry, and overall skill level are your answers for that. The Hawks had the core, but not as much depth and chemistry as they did in 2013. Just my opinion

Well said. I would also add they don't go to the 2014 WCF without Crawford, either. He is more consistent in the playoffs than even Quick, who kind of lost it after being damned near supernatural in 2012. He's better than Price and Lundqvist in clutch playoff situations and against A+ chances, as well. MAF? Falls on his face every post season.

All the core guys mentioned were present in 2011 and 2012, and I didn't see them get out of the first round with Turco and Emery.

What's funny to me is that, if we had Quick, Price or Lundqvist on the roster right now making $6M instead of Crawford, there would be screams of trade the kitchen sink, but save our "elite" goaltender!

- Q...argh

Not sure the last statement is so becasue there isn't another big money player most would want to keep over whomever was the goalie....

With regards to Kruger, here's another important point to consider. The new faceoff rule:

Rule 76.4, Face-Offs – Paragraph 2

When the face-off takes place at any of the nine face-off spots, the players taking part shall take their position so that they will stand squarely facing their opponent's end of the rink, and clear of the ice markings (where applicable). The sticks of both players facing-off shall have the blade on the ice, within the designated white area. At the eight face-off spots (excluding center ice face-off spot), the defending player shall place his stick within the designated white area first followed immediately by the attacking player. When the face-off is conducted at the center ice face-off spot, the visiting player shall place his stick on the ice first.

Kruger had virtually no drop off in faceoffs wins in his away faceoffs last year.

Overall he was 53.3% home 53.4% away 53.2%
- walleyeb1

Is that the current rule?

Because it seems to say that position of the FO determines who has to put his stick down first - I thought it was always the visiting player - your quote implies that's only true at center ice. Otherwise, it's the defending player - meaning (if I'm reading it correctly) the player on the team closest to their own goal.

Also answered you below...
- Al

I read it, thanks

You have a point.

Doesn't change your act of defending the indefensible being moronic - only that I can be as hypocritical as the next guy.

At least I recognize it: you apparently delight in your ignorance.
- StLBravesFan

Can you guys knock it off please. It doesn't belong here and every time someone comments on this there are 6 or 7 other posters that feel compelled to throw in their 2 cents.

If the goal is to drive away people who come to this site to discuss hockey without all the real world turmoil - keep up the political discussion - else just please stop.

The more I think about it, I am really on the fence with CC. I don't disagree with your argument, I just think that there is a drop-off in that Holtby has never been in a final, and can you really say regular season games are the same as playoff and final games? I understand that moving CC could be needed, and moving him would really help the cap situation, but won't Holtby want a big chunk of that back?
- powerenforcer

My premise was CC and Bickell for Holtby. That's $10M going to WASH. Holtby is headed to arbitration with WASH. He's asking 8, they are offering him 5.1 if I recall correctly. So assuming you sign Holby for $6-7, that's a CAP saving of $3-4M per year, more than enough to sign Krueger for $2.5 and gives some flexibility going forward.

AA, Dano and Panarin are going to be nice adds I think.
- John Jaeckel

Plus, TT for the entire season.

Assuming they find a way to sign Kruger without trading CC or Shaw, I really think by the end of the regular season they'll be better than they were the end of last year's regular season.

No doubt you've made a good argument. But to play devil's advocate, that's also Holtby in a Barry Trotz system. If you're a competent enough goalie I feel like you'll get a boost in your numbers under Trotz no matter what.

Isn't Holtby looking for 8 mil too? He should take a look at Price's numbers the past couple of seasons or CC's resume then look back at himself and really think about if he is in fact worth more than both of those players.
- teh_HAWKZ

Going to arbitration, Caps are offering 5.1, I think, he's asking for 8. Assuming you split the difference, you get him for between 6-7, dump Bickell's 4, and no drop off in goal.
No idea if WASH would do it, or if other pieces could go in either direction. But I think it makes some sense from a hockey & CAP perspective.

spare me the condescension BS...ok....i understand full well krugers play and contribution...

my point was in the era of of your top 6-7 players taking up 75% of cap space... your #9 forward is considred "essential"....
- bogiedoc

Ok then - so you can understand it - for this Hawks team to contend for the Stanley Cup - YES!!!!!! Marcus Kruger is essential.

The only person here that doesn't get that is you....

Can you guys knock it off please. It doesn't belong here and every time someone comments on this there are 6 or 7 other posters that feel compelled to throw in their 2 cents.

If the goal is to drive away people who come to this site to discuss hockey without all the real world turmoil - keep up the political discussion - else just please stop.
- EbonyRaptor

but its like freedom of speech man

edit: that's not really allowed here haha

but its like freedom of speech man

edit: that's not really allowed here haha
- BlazinMike

FWIW, 'freedom of speech' only pertains to the federal government's ability to restrict it. For instance, a company can fire you for something you say, especially in an 'at will' relationship not guided by a union contract. The USA can't censure you, in most instances.

Is that the current rule?

Because it seems to say that position of the FO determines who has to put his stick down first - I thought it was always the visiting player - your quote implies that's only true at center ice. Otherwise, it's the defending player - meaning (if I'm reading it correctly) the player on the team closest to their own goal.
- StLBravesFan

The rule changes for next season to favor the team in the offensive zone. They are trying to create more scoring. Again.

Is that the current rule?

Because it seems to say that position of the FO determines who has to put his stick down first - I thought it was always the visiting player - your quote implies that's only true at center ice. Otherwise, it's the defending player - meaning (if I'm reading it correctly) the player on the team closest to their own goal.
- StLBravesFan

That's the new rules change that goes in effect for the 2015/16 season.

Yeah that's the premise. More goals, we'll see how it pans out.

That's the new rules change that goes in effect for the 2015/16 season.
- walleyeb1

Ok then - good - I never understood why they gave the home team so many perceived (at least) advantages - last change, last stick down....

Ok then - good - I never understood why they gave the home team so many perceived (at least) advantages - last change, last stick down....
- StLBravesFan

More of the league probably tinkering to create more chances to score and also making it harder for home center to cheat at the Dot....There aren't really many home ice advantages left...Crowd noise sometimes-But otherwise every ice surface is the same except for a couple with more lively boards. Not like it was years ago in the Garden or the Stadium-all uniform now.

Ok then - good - I never understood why they gave the home team so many perceived (at least) advantages - last change, last stick down....
- StLBravesFan

I think sometimes home ice worked in reverse for the Hawks the last few seasons because some guys would be too conscious of "putting on a good show for the hometown fans" than keeping it simple. It seems that was less the case this past season (maybe as Kane has matured and is less focused on the entertainment value of his game).

More of the league probably tinkering to create more chances to score and also making it harder for home center to cheat at the Dot....There aren't really many home ice advantages left...Crowd noise sometimes-But otherwise every ice surface is the same except for a couple with more lively boards. Not like it was years ago in the Garden or the Stadium-all uniform now.
- Al

There's still last change, which is a tremendously significant advantage, particularly when it counts.

The Hockey Press (@TheHockeyPress)
7/23/15, 9:03 PM
B.Seabrook is expected to wear "A" next season, and has said he will work with the CHI on a cap-friendly extension pic.twitter.com/6oJmOB6kxh

I think that right now, Columbus needs guys like Saad. Gotta remember that Columbus isn't just trying to win the Cup, they're trying to gain fans, stay profitable, etc. Dano, while he might be great in the future, isn't helping them towards their goals right now. Saad is a guy they can sell now, and who makes their team better right now.

They very well might wish they had Dano over Saad in future, but I think they made the right decision for right now.
- SolidGoldBricks

Pretty expensive for a PR move. I think Jarmo saw Saad as a compliment to RJ that could put them over the top at F. He still has issues on D though and $6m for Saad? He's a great player but his regular seasons don't warrant that.

More of the league probably tinkering to create more chances to score and also making it harder for home center to cheat at the Dot....There aren't really many home ice advantages left...Crowd noise sometimes-But otherwise every ice surface is the same except for a couple with more lively boards. Not like it was years ago in the Garden or the Stadium-all uniform now.
- Al

Being at home and sleeping in your own bed would seem to be the primary advantage, probably equal to last change.