One is the kid they get in the 2021 Entry draft with others being Boqvist, Mitchell...te rest of the Lucas Carlsson, and two guys that are also comfortable on with side, Nicolas Beaudin,and Wyatt Kalynuk, and add bumper position/ defenseman Alec Regula will all be given ample chances to be players
Alex Vlasic will be afforded the time to adjust.
Wyatt Kaiser you wait for and he is our mailman, and plays similar to te smaller new age guys already close to getting auditions.

There is no Hedman in that group.
Owen Power

So long term they are one dominant big defender, and one big aggressive scoring wing from being close to being added to conversations for Stanley Cups...

Umm, Goalie? Long term they have Kane, Toews, Hossa, Sharp to replace up front.

Pat Foley - so then the country can enjoy "soft serve" jokes......
- powerenforcer

Pat would probably be fine if they paired him with someone besides Edzo.

Forslend is really enjoyable to listen to his games

The guy from Carolina?

Yes.

(Altho I still am a big fan of Doc.)
- StLBravesFan

Not from Carolina anymore

https://abc11.com/hurrica...carolina-caniacs/6564246/

Theo, I'm not sure if I am wording this right, but I'll try. I understand the want to recreate what worked in the past both here and elsewhere (Big 3), but would another model be better and/or more sustainable?

Would a blueline full of 2-3-4's be more beneficial if all of them were laser focused on playing as a unit? I look at teams like Washington, Pitt, and Boston (to a degree) that have a solid collection of depth where there are few, if any "Runblad's". I would think if you had 6 deep of very good, top-4 type players instead of an outstanding top three and fill in the blanks for the rest, you not only could build more consistency, but it would be a bit easier to handle an inevitable injury.

Just a thought...

Theo, I'm not sure if I am wording this right, but I'll try. I understand the want to recreate what worked in the past both here and elsewhere (Big 3), but would another model be better and/or more sustainable?

Would a blueline full of 2-3-4's be more beneficial if all of them were laser focused on playing as a unit? I look at teams like Washington, Pitt, and Boston (to a degree) that have a solid collection of depth where there are few, if any "Runblad's". I would think if you had 6 deep of very good, top-4 type players instead of an outstanding top three and fill in the blanks for the rest, you not only could build more consistency, but it would be a bit easier to handle an inevitable injury.

Just a thought...
- Chunk

Hey Chunk, i like your model a lot!! reminds me of successful SC teams that can ROLL 4 lines. To be able to ROLL 3 D lines would be amazing. Not that i want to get into the whole JC thing here...but he doesnt seem to be the coach to manage that. Maybe JC is equivalent to the Sox Renteria?

Theo, I'm not sure if I am wording this right, but I'll try. I understand the want to recreate what worked in the past both here and elsewhere (Big 3), but would another model be better and/or more sustainable?

Would a blueline full of 2-3-4's be more beneficial if all of them were laser focused on playing as a unit? I look at teams like Washington, Pitt, and Boston (to a degree) that have a solid collection of depth where there are few, if any "Runblad's". I would think if you had 6 deep of very good, top-4 type players instead of an outstanding top three and fill in the blanks for the rest, you not only could build more consistency, but it would be a bit easier to handle an inevitable injury.

Just a thought...
- Chunk

Good thought. I don't think there is a definite #1 among the defensemen listed by Theo. Maybe Mitchell, Kalynuk or Boqvist (because of his offensive skills) project to a #2, with Beaudin, Carlsson, etc as 3, 4 and 5 types.

Noticed Regula wasn't listed by Theo. Is he that much of a reach?

If the Hawks on in the lottery next year, maybe Owen Power will project as the #1D.

One is the kid they get in the 2021 Entry draft with others being Boqvist, Mitchell...te rest of the Lucas Carlsson, and two guys that are also comfortable on with side, Nicolas Beaudin,and Wyatt Kalynuk, and add bumper position/ defenseman Alec Regula will all be given ample chances to be players
Alex Vlasic will be afforded the time to adjust.
Wyatt Kaiser you wait for and he is our mailman, and plays similar to te smaller new age guys already close to getting auditions.

There is no Hedman in that group.
Owen Power

So long term they are one dominant big defender, and one big aggressive scoring wing from being close to being added to conversations for Stanley Cups...

Umm, Goalie? Long term they have Kane, Toews, Hossa, Sharp to replace up front.
- rpeters01

What do you mean when you say replace? Production? Style of play? You are not going to replace these guys one-for-one. I tend to agree with Theo in that you build a team with as many high effort, engaged players as possible. Obviously, you need to have enough high talent guys that play this way, but I would guess that having a team full of guys that follow the same mantra would be the best (and most sustainable) path forward.

Theo, I'm not sure if I am wording this right, but I'll try. I understand the want to recreate what worked in the past both here and elsewhere (Big 3), but would another model be better and/or more sustainable?

Would a blueline full of 2-3-4's be more beneficial if all of them were laser focused on playing as a unit? I look at teams like Washington, Pitt, and Boston (to a degree) that have a solid collection of depth where there are few, if any "Runblad's". I would think if you had 6 deep of very good, top-4 type players instead of an outstanding top three and fill in the blanks for the rest, you not only could build more consistency, but it would be a bit easier to handle an inevitable injury.

Just a thought...
- Chunk

Probably what most teams have anyway.

This slotting thing drives me nuts sometimes.

Just give me guys who compete and play fundamentally sound.

Hammer was a 1st pairing guy on more than half the league at the time.

For whatever reason, our 5th, 6th, and 7th guys wouldn't even make other teams (Yes I'm talking to you David Rundblahhhhhh)

Probably what most teams have anyway.

This slotting thing drives me nuts sometimes.

Just give me guys who compete and play fundamentally sound.

Hammer was a 1st pairing guy on more than half the league at the time.

For whatever reason, our 5th, 6th, and 7th guys wouldn't even make other teams (Yes I'm talking to you David Rundblahhhhhh)
- vabeachbear

Indeed. The key is finding 6 deep that are 2-3-4's and not having many (if any) 6/7's.

Age is relative, right. That depends on how you live, how well you take care of yourself. Right. Usually the case .........I think we all can pretty much agree on that

So I was figuring the youth movement coming to the Blackhawks roster. Inherent in a rebuild. Arguably which has started with Dach, Boqvist as headliners. In two or three years the roster could become particularly top heavy age 30 or younger. The Blackhawks want to get younger according to Bowman.

Actually due to Covid and a flat salary cap likely most if not all teams share the same objective, have the same sentiment

I could not help but once again think of the age factor this past week as I marvel at the reknown farm system cranking out so many Dodger players. The Dodgers have to be unreal in this regard, so I took a tally

There were a few players among the 28 rostered playoff whom surprised me being over age 30.

There are 13 age 30 or older and 10 age 32 or older
I want to say this may be the youngest MLB roster his season.

Now how might the Blackhawks compare. I would be amused to see the age break down parricularly after the following season. Percentage wise the Blackhawks roster could be comparable to the Dodgers.

Theo, I'm not sure if I am wording this right, but I'll try. I understand the want to recreate what worked in the past both here and elsewhere (Big 3), but would another model be better and/or more sustainable?

Would a blueline full of 2-3-4's be more beneficial if all of them were laser focused on playing as a unit? I look at teams like Washington, Pitt, and Boston (to a degree) that have a solid collection of depth where there are few, if any "Runblad's". I would think if you had 6 deep of very good, top-4 type players instead of an outstanding top three and fill in the blanks for the rest, you not only could build more consistency, but it would be a bit easier to handle an inevitable injury.

Just a thought...
- Chunk

Honestly, my preference is just as you described rather than putting all eggs in the Top 3 basket then have a diluted Bottom 3.

I would much rather have all 6 defenders plus the 7th one as well-rounded in the mold of reliable 2nd pair players, i.e. they can eat a lot of minutes, lock it down defensively and rarely kill you with costly mistakes, and generate moderate offense.

If you can have a stereotypical Top 3 and a Bottom 3 full of 2nd pair talent, then I'd be all for that instead but that seems less realistic. The well-balanced 6-7 blueliners seems more feasible given what the Hawks have in the system.

Good thought. I don't think there is a definite #1 among the defensemen listed by Theo. Maybe Mitchell, Kalynuk or Boqvist (because of his offensive skills) project to a #2, with Beaudin, Carlsson, etc as 3, 4 and 5 types.

Noticed Regula wasn't listed by Theo. Is he that much of a reach?

If the Hawks on in the lottery next year, maybe Owen Power will project as the #1D.
- boilermaker100

IMO, Regula as well as Krys, Demin, and Galvas could be better in the 2nd and 3rd pairs. Not sure if any of them can supplant the others as the top defenders.

Next year's draft is supposed to be talent rich in D-men like it was in 2018. Even if the Hawks don't get a top 3 pick, they can still snag a pretty good one in the top 10.

Barstool Chief, who has broken Hawks news in the past, posted a cryptic tweet saying that there will be major Hawks news that will be shared this week.

Not sure what it is, but I’ve got an inkling that it has to do with the vacant presidency.

Theo, I'm not sure if I am wording this right, but I'll try. I understand the want to recreate what worked in the past both here and elsewhere (Big 3), but would another model be better and/or more sustainable?

Would a blueline full of 2-3-4's be more beneficial if all of them were laser focused on playing as a unit? I look at teams like Washington, Pitt, and Boston (to a degree) that have a solid collection of depth where there are few, if any "Runblad's". I would think if you had 6 deep of very good, top-4 type players instead of an outstanding top three and fill in the blanks for the rest, you not only could build more consistency, but it would be a bit easier to handle an inevitable injury.

Just a thought...
- Chunk

When the Kings (2013-2015) had their #1 line out there with their top pairing, you needed studs out there to win the matchup (which is a significant portion of the game). All Cup contenders have high-end top six forwards and excellent top four defenders. To beat them you need guys to match up with them who are better than them. Imo.

Barstool Chief, who has broken Hawks news in the past, posted a cryptic tweet saying that there will be major Hawks news that will be shared this week.

Not sure what it is, but I’ve got an inkling that it has to do with the vacant presidency.
- TommyHawk

he mentioned he is hoping to update it more Tuesday evening. and that it would be worth the wait.

Honestly, my preference is just as you described rather than putting all eggs in the Top 3 basket then have a diluted Bottom 3.

I would much rather have all 6 defenders plus the 7th one as well-rounded in the mold of reliable 2nd pair players, i.e. they can eat a lot of minutes, lock it down defensively and rarely kill you with costly mistakes, and generate moderate offense.

If you can have a stereotypical Top 3 and a Bottom 3 full of 2nd pair talent, then I'd be all for that instead but that seems less realistic. The well-balanced 6-7 blueliners seems more feasible given what the Hawks have in the system.
- Theo Fox

Always good to have more talent than less. Having lots of guys in the system who can be top four is great. But if none of them develops into legit, high end championship level defensemen, you're not going to win. Why? Because the other team's top line will soundly defeat the "solid, but not excellent" pair sent out against them.

Barstool Chief, who has broken Hawks news in the past, posted a cryptic tweet saying that there will be major Hawks news that will be shared this week.

Not sure what it is, but I’ve got an inkling that it has to do with the vacant presidency.
- TommyHawk

Uncle Dale for President!!!!

For some reason, the way he says "Power play" really grates on me. I always hear "Powher plughy." Might just be me, but it sounds weird the way he says it.
- Jance

It's funny how those little things can bug ya when they're repeated a lot. One of my pet peeves is how Troy Murray pronounces 'opportunity'. I love Troy as an analyst but this one little thing bugs me. The word opportunity has 5 syllables but the way Troy says it it has only 4 syllables. He omits the 4th syllable - "it". He says it like op-per-too-nee.

When the Kings (2013-2015) had their #1 line out there with their top pairing, you needed studs out there to win the matchup (which is a significant portion of the game). All Cup contenders have high-end top six forwards and excellent top four defenders. To beat them you need guys to match up with them who are better than them. Imo.
- mohel

I don't disagree. The problem is that those high end D-men are hard to find (especially all around ones). E Karlsson is (or at least was) considered an elite #1 D-man, but that was almost completely due to his offense. I believe that is a serious detriment to the ability of a team to compete.

I guess I'm saying try to raise the bottom end of blueline performance so there is not such a large gradation in performance.

Uncle Dale for President!!!!
- mohel

Ha ha, beat me to it.

I don't disagree. The problem is that those high end D-men are hard to find (especially all around ones). E Karlsson is (or at least was) considered an elite #1 D-man, but that was almost completely due to his offense. I believe that is a serious detriment to the ability of a team to compete.

I guess I'm saying try to raise the bottom end of blueline performance so there is not such a large gradation in performance.
- Chunk

That would work very well if the other team was nice enough to have four 2nd/3rd lines. The third pair plays against the other teams' lesser players; so they need to be good enough to beat them. Each pairing is gonna play against (generally) a certain quality of competition - that pairing needs to be good enough to do so.

I hope you're well, Chunk.

Always good to have more talent than less. Having lots of guys in the system who can be top four is great. But if none of them develops into legit, high end championship level defensemen, you're not going to win. Why? Because the other team's top line will soundly defeat the "solid, but not excellent" pair sent out against them.
- mohel

Didn’t VGK make a good run with a bunch of 2/3/4 defensemen and middle-6 forwards coming out of the expansion draft?

They had 4 blue-liners with 20-22 minutes ATOI (over 60 games each).

If you have basically all defensemen at 2/3/4 level, with forwards who consistently are responsible in the dzone - being in position to help the defensemen quickly transition the puck out - which is what Vegas had....

What do you mean when you say replace? Production? Style of play? You are not going to replace these guys one-for-one. I tend to agree with Theo in that you build a team with as many high effort, engaged players as possible. Obviously, you need to have enough high talent guys that play this way, but I would guess that having a team full of guys that follow the same mantra would be the best (and most sustainable) path forward.
- Chunk

My point really is I think we are much farther than two players away from contending for the SC. MUCH MUCH farther than two players away.

That would work very well if the other team was nice enough to have four 2nd/3rd lines. The third pair plays against the other teams' lesser players; so they need to be good enough to beat them. Each pairing is gonna play against (generally) a certain quality of competition - that pairing needs to be good enough to do so.

I hope you're well, Chunk.
- mohel

All sunshine and unicorn farts here. I hope you are well, also.

I like that the Hawks have built up the blueline prospects with guys that are plus skaters, and they all seem to speak a lot about developing their defensive game. It will all come down to how well that is executed in the NHL. My dark horse to be the best overall D-man is Beaudin. He needs to improve some of the details of playing the position, but there is virtually no panic (or Panik) in his game. Smart, sound, heady, and can produce points as well.