The Calgary hockeybuzz writer evaluation of their roster has two reserves listed on defense.

I have Iiked Petrovic previously. Perhaps he just did not develop and sort of sucks. He is big, mean and has some experience. I would consider him for depth on third pair.

Readers can chip in if they like Petrovic for this role. I don't know if we have what Calgary would want. I would make Carpenter available

Petrovic > Seeler. Petrovic could mean a kid stays in Rockford playing regularly. Petrovic means possibly that Murphy is traded at trade deadline. Murohy goes so then we can protect Carlsson for Exoansion Draft.

The Calgary hockeybuzz writer evaluation of their toster has two reserves listed on defense.

I have Iiked Petrovic previously. Perhaps he just did not develop and sort if sucks. He is big, mean and has some experience. I would consider him for depth on third pair.

Readers can chip in if they like Petrovic for this role. I don't know if we have what Calgary would want. I would make Carpenter available

Petrovic > Seeler
- jhawk59

To be honest I don’t want either on the team. The Hawks already have a #7 defenseman in #7.

I think one of the veteran depth forwards (like Carpenter) could be dealt but I could see it for a goaltender if all three soil the sheets.

While he’s not ideal and not my first choice I could see Stan dealing for Rittich from Calgary. One of the netminders from Carolina would be a better option, but probably more expensive to acquire.

To be honest I don’t want either on the team. The Hawks already have a #7 defenseman in #7.

I think one of the veteran depth forwards (like Carpenter) could be dealt but I could see it for a goaltender if all three soil the sheets.

While he’s not ideal and not my first choice I could see Stan dealing for Rittich from Calgary. One of the netminders from Carolina would be a better option, but probably more expensive to acquire.
- DarthKane

What a bizarre turn of events. Yeah I don't want any of the aforementioned either and think Carpenter is likely a 13th fwd this season.

To be honest I don’t want either on the team. The Hawks already have a #7 defenseman in #7.

I think one of the veteran depth forwards (like Carpenter) could be dealt but I could see it for a goaltender if all three soil the sheets.

While he’s not ideal and not my first choice I could see Stan dealing for Rittich from Calgary. One of the netminders from Carolina would be a better option, but probably more expensive to acquire.
- DarthKane

Darth,

I have asked in all seriousness and you have not responded with an evaluation:

Re: Caufield role in Montreal given Toffoli signed

I predict Caufueld remains pencil in for a scoring role. I do not know if Caufield would spend not only this season as a collegiate (per Bergevin request), but also one season in the AHL. Caufield is an intriguing prospect. I think he can score anywhere, even in a telephone booth. But playing against large men, Caufield perhaps should gain some pro experience in the AHL. Practice how to be elusive yet also contribute defensively.

Darth,

I have asked in all seriousness and you have not responded with an evaluation:

Re: Caufield role in Montreal given Toffoli signed

I predict Caufueld remains pencil in for a scoring role. I do not know if Caufield would spend not only this season as a collegiate (per Bergevin request), but also one season in the AHL. Caufield is an intriguing prospect. I think he can score anywhere, even in a telephone booth. But playing against large men, Caufield perhaps should gain some pro experience in the AHL. Practice how to be elusive yet also contribute defensively.
- jhawk59

I think Caufield can and should start in the NHL next season. Size is less of a factor than it use to be. Small guys like DeBrincat can be effective contributors, so can Caufield. However, like with any young prospect it’s all about HOW they’re introduced to the NHL. I’d ease Caufield into the league with 3rd line and 2nd PP unit time.

I think Caufield can and should start in the NHL next season. Size is less of a factor than it use to be. Small guys like DeBrincat can be effective contributors, so can Caufield. However, like with any young prospect it’s all about HOW they’re introduced to the NHL. I’d ease Caufield into the league with 3rd line and 2nd PP unit time.
- DarthKane

On defense which is the toughest position to fast.track a player, Chicago tried to bring Forsling in ahead of his nhl timetable. Forsling still struggling.

Interestingly how Julien brings Caufield along in light of Kotkimeini experience. Also quite likely Gallagher will get injured

On defense which is the toughest position to fast.track a player, Chicago tried to bring Forsling in ahead of his nhl timetable. Forsling still struggling.

Interestingly how Julien brings Caufield along in light of Kotkimeini experience. Also quite likely Gallagher will get injured
- jhawk59

No doubt that the Habs experience with Kotkaniemi will influence their decision with Caufield.

Boqvist was rushed too, but I don’t think it’s ruined his career (yet). Ideally JC plays #27 less (3rd pair) and in less pressure sensitive situations. A partner like Zadorov will provide some protection too.

To be honest I don’t want either on the team. The Hawks already have a #7 defenseman in #7.

I think one of the veteran depth forwards (like Carpenter) could be dealt but I could see it for a goaltender if all three soil the sheets.

While he’s not ideal and not my first choice I could see Stan dealing for Rittich from Calgary. One of the netminders from Carolina would be a better option, but probably more expensive to acquire.
- DarthKane

I can see this as a possibility also

Same. Would like to see Beaudin get a cup of coffee at some point also.
- Assman22

I think he weighs less than 145# Boqvist?

I think Caufield can and should start in the NHL next season. Size is less of a factor than it use to be. Small guys like DeBrincat can be effective contributors, so can Caufield. However, like with any young prospect it’s all about HOW they’re introduced to the NHL. I’d ease Caufield into the league with 3rd line and 2nd PP unit time.
- DarthKane

Kind of rushing #49 prospect.

I think he weighs less than 145# Boqvist?
- rpeters01

The grown up more mature Kane might influence or personally offer suggestions how to effectively bulk up. I doubt that 145 was Boqvist weight this past playoffs. I guess 175. I do not know his body type but 190 might be a good weight. Because when you add muscle you add weight concurrently in most cases

Possibly 190 after next summer.

Sad.
- HawkintheD

I've heard that we should follow the science. Unless.....

Kind of rushing #49 prospect.
- rpeters01

The Hawks prospect/youth pool is interesting, there aren’t many predicted game breakers but there’s a good number of possible solid contributors.

Game Breakers - Dach

Solid NHLer - Boqvist, Reichel, Suter, Kurashev, Teply, Commesso, Kayumov

Depth NHLer - Beaudin, Mitchell, Vlasic, Entwistle, Hagel, Johnson, Regula, Kalynuk, Carlsson

The one prospect who’s an interesting long-shot is Chet Yetman. He’s a late bloomer, can he become another late-round steal like Shaw?

The Hawks prospect/youth pool is interesting, there aren’t many predicted game breakers but there’s a good number of possible solid contributors.

Game Breakers - Dach

Solid NHLer - Boqvist, Reichel, Suter, Kurashev, Teply, Commesso, Kayumov

Depth NHLer - Beaudin, Mitchell, Vlasic, Entwistle, Hagel, Johnson, Regula, Kalynuk, Carlsson

The one prospect who’s an interesting long-shot is Chet Yetman. He’s a late bloomer, can he become another late-round steal like Shaw?
- DarthKane

Good list, Darth.

Personally, I would bump up Mitchell as a solid NHLer with Beaudin and Kalynuk as borderline between solid and depth.

Teply and Kayumov are coming on strong.

The more I research on Slaggert and Yetman, the more I like their potential. They're both competitive, high-energy, and reliable defensively. Noticeable every shift.

Shaw is a good example for Yetman without the kamikaze style. With Slaggert I see a more effective Hartman. Maybe mix of Hartman and Caggiula.

Anyone know anything about the pro prospects of Wyatt Schingoethe? He was recently drafted in the 7th round by the Leaves. He played as a Ute with a good friend's son, but he (of course) moved up the ladder fast. Nice kid, just curious to hear any input.

Wiz speaks highly on Raty. All you mention you can see in draftsite.com preview.

I don't know we can say what position we would prefer to draft, center or defense. Too early to say. I am of the belief that best player available should be the determining factor whom to select in round one. We do need a cycle boards top line player and a stud dman who has a punishing physical game. That is, to even get to the playoffs as we are abysmal now in those areas. The truth hurts.
- jhawk59

If the 2020 draft class is any indication, I would strive to draft for compete level, defensive commitment, and impact without the puck rather than draft to fill specific player archetypes.

Skills can always be taught. The intangibles like compete, commitment, and consistency are much harder to teach. You either have it or don't.

Yes, many draftees may end up being role players or simply busts but some could truly blast off with development and grow to be top-shelf players.

I've heard that we should follow the science. Unless.....
- mohel

I don't think it's a bad idea. I know there was a time (before my time) when it wasn't uncommon for people to get things like Polio, Diptheria, Whooping Cough, etc.

And then it wasn't so common and then Polio pretty much all but disappeared in the modern world due to mandatory immunizations.

Pertussis and Measles outbreaks pretty much were unheard of until people decided vaccines were more harmful than the diseases they prevented or a gov't conspiracy or whatever reason they latched onto. The research with the causal link to autism proved untrue.

I don't know a lot, but I do know vaccines represent one of the most cost effective tools at the disposal of modern medicine.

Oh, and Stan still sucks...

Edit - Feel like this PSA should be sponsored...

The Hawks prospect/youth pool is interesting, there aren’t many predicted game breakers but there’s a good number of possible solid contributors.

Game Breakers - Dach

Solid NHLer - Boqvist, Reichel, Suter, Kurashev, Teply, Commesso, Kayumov

Depth NHLer - Beaudin, Mitchell, Vlasic, Entwistle, Hagel, Johnson, Regula, Kalynuk, Carlsson

The one prospect who’s an interesting long-shot is Chet Yetman. He’s a late bloomer, can he become another late-round steal like Shaw?
- DarthKane

Those two should be better than depth players and hopefully we find "lightening in a bottle" with one or two more. One thing Theo's post doesn't cover is future prospects. By turning to rebuild there SHOULD be more hi level prospects in the pipeline the next 2-3 years than we have now. The huge risk is we become the Kings and Wings carrying the core four. It's not guaranteed there is a way out of that mess with any GM. Stan is going to need some luck.

I don't think it's a bad idea. I know there was a time (before my time) when it wasn't uncommon for people to get things like Polio, Diptheria, Whooping Cough, etc.

And then it wasn't so common and then Polio pretty much all but disappeared in the modern world due to mandatory immunizations.

Pertussis and Measles outbreaks pretty much were unheard of until people decided vaccines were more harmful than the diseases they prevented or a gov't conspiracy or whatever reason they latched onto. The research with the causal link to autism proved untrue.

I don't know a lot, but I do know vaccines represent one of the most cost effective tools at the disposal of modern medicine.

Oh, and Stan still sucks...
- HawkintheD

Of course he sucks - the science will tell you that, chief!

I'm all for a vaccine. Hopefully it will be extremely effective and a very high percentage of people will take it Many who used to mock anti-vaxxers are becoming new members of that elite club, despite what the science says.

The problem comes in if/when the vaccine proves only partially effective. Way back at the beginning of the Vid, it was said that we needed to shut down in order to ensure that the health care system was not overrun. Mission accomplished - we're nowhere near that. Somewhere along the way, the goal posts moved considerably - now we need to make sure nobody will get sick going to a sporting event. What do we do when the vaccine is only 70% effective? Do we keep sports shut down forever? What is the acceptable level of risk? If the measures taken have reduced deaths from the Vid are indeed effective, wouldn't they also decrease flu deaths every year? How can we have sports - especially in the cold and flu season - knowing for certain that some will die because of the big crowds?

Hockey is the financially weakest sport of the majors. The NHL is going to have major, existential, issues if they have to play another whole season with no fans. This says nothing about the financial impact of lower levels of hockey in North America.

And BTW, Stan still sucks. So does JC. Q sucked, too, until he was no longer the coach, at which time he was retroactively perfect.

What's your point?
How many GM"s have built a championship team?
- rpeters01

We all know Scotty Bowman is the best at seeing talent, without Scotty and Q, Stan might fall. Stan didn’t pick any of todays core.

We all know Scotty Bowman is the best at seeing talent, without Scotty and Q, Stan might fall. Stan didn’t pick any of todays core.
- Tee56

Scotty is 107 years old and probably hasn't been good at seeing his own unit, much less talent, in many years now.

Of course he sucks - the science will tell you that, chief!

I'm all for a vaccine. Hopefully it will be extremely effective and a very high percentage of people will take it Many who used to mock anti-vaxxers are becoming new members of that elite club, despite what the science says.

The problem comes in if/when the vaccine proves only partially effective. Way back at the beginning of the Vid, it was said that we needed to shut down in order to ensure that the health care system was not overrun. Mission accomplished - we're nowhere near that. Somewhere along the way, the goal posts moved considerably - now we need to make sure nobody will get sick going to a sporting event. What do we do when the vaccine is only 70% effective? Do we keep sports shut down forever? What is the acceptable level of risk? If the measures taken have reduced deaths from the Vid are indeed effective, wouldn't they also decrease flu deaths every year? How can we have sports - especially in the cold and flu season - knowing for certain that some will die because of the big crowds?

Hockey is the financially weakest sport of the majors. The NHL is going to have major, existential, issues if they have to play another whole season with no fans. This says nothing about the financial impact of lower levels of hockey in North America.

And BTW, Stan still sucks. So does JC. Q sucked, too, until he was no longer the coach, at which time he was retroactively perfect.
- mohel

From my amateur’s readings - not direct scientific knowledge:

Vaccines (and several are still in the running) probably will be only 70% +/- effective. That’s usual / common.

But that - if enough people receive a vaccine - along with the “natural” immunity that people will have from becoming infected (and surviving) - should be enough to provide the “herd immunity” (estimated to be at between 60%-70% immunity) that will get the “R0” factor to fall below 1 and force the virus to put itself out of business. Not entirely - apparently, the thinking now is that it won’t be eradicated - but like influenza, the infections will be reduced to manageable levels. This may require annual inoculations for people, like with the flu vaccines most of us get every year.

That - along with better, more effective therapeutics which hopefully will be developed in a similar time frame as the vaccines (Remdesivir was just approved, for instance - maybe the steroids that Trump was administered, maybe Regeneron...) - will allow us to get back to normal living - included attending hockey games maskless - with relatively minimal chance of becoming infected, and much better chances of being cured if we are.

And BTW - I’m not sure if Stan sucks or not - but he’s our “suckor” if he does for the current portion of the rebuild.

Scotty is 107 years old and probably hasn't been good at seeing his own unit, much less talent, in many years now.
- mohel

I’ll lend him my tweezers and microscope....

From my amateur’s readings - not direct scientific knowledge:

Vaccines (and several are still in the running) probably will be only 70% +/- effective. That’s usual / common.

But that - if enough people receive a vaccine - along with the “natural” immunity that people will have from becoming infected (and surviving) - should be enough to provide the “herd immunity” (estimated to be at between 60%-70% immunity) that will get the “R0” factor to fall below 1 and force the virus to put itself out of business. Not entirely - apparently, the thinking now is that it won’t be eradicated - but like influenza, the infections will be reduced to manageable levels. This may require annual inoculations for people, like with the flu vaccines most of us get every year.

That - along with better, more effective therapeutics which hopefully will be developed in a similar time frame as the vaccines (Remdesivir was just approved, for instance - maybe the steroids that Trump was administered, maybe Regeneron...) - will allow us to get back to normal living - included attending hockey games maskless - with relatively minimal chance of becoming infected, and much better chances of being cured if we are.

And BTW - I’m not sure if Stan sucks or not - but he’s our “suckor” if he does for the current portion of the rebuild.
- StLBravesFan

What is a manageable level? What number is a relatively minimal chance of becoming infected? What government official gets to decide for us what number is a "minimal enough" chance of being infected. And how much better than a 99.5% IFR is necessary for said minister to allow us the freedom to assemble?

Anyone know anything about the pro prospects of Wyatt Schingoethe? He was recently drafted in the 7th round by the Leaves. He played as a Ute with a good friend's son, but he (of course) moved up the ladder fast. Nice kid, just curious to hear any input.
- mohel

Wyatt has one leg longer then the other so he skates in circles. But he is a great kid.