2024-25 Roster…too soon?

[crazyhawk]

I think given that Hossa is a HOF'er that merits his getting his number retired in Chicago.
Neither Hammer, Sharp or Seabs are likely to make the HOF and though their Chicago years are arguably as good or better than Hossa's I feel this was enough to push him over the edge.
Would love to see Larmer get his retired though!

 

[MicronMega]

THe Shane Wright trade would be good if the cost is Reichel and Crevier plus a pick. Seems like a fair price. Seattle might want a better player than Reichel. I could see Reichel and Berniers being a solid tandem. Both are give and go type players.

Hopefully Reichel can figure it out this year, because if he can't play in the top 9 then there is no place for him in this line up and he's back down in Rockford then somewhere else

 

[BHawk21]

Retired numbers-
1, 3, 9,18,21, 35,81,7

Future Retired numbers 27 88 19 2

When they make the ring of honor - Larmer Belfour Amonte Hammer Sharp Crawford Seabrook Wilson Secord Stapleton White Martin Hull Nesterenko Murray Foley Murray

 

[hawksfan50]

Bertuzzi Bedard Hall
TT Reichel Mikheyev
AA Dickinson Kurashev
Maroun C.Smith Foligno

Vlasic S.Jones
Martinez T.J.Brodie
Kaiser Murphy
Phillips

 

[statswatcher]

Bertuzzi Bedard Hall
TT Reichel Mikheyev
AA Dickinson Kurashev
Maroun C.Smith Foligno

Vlasic S.Jones
Martinez T.J.Brodie
Kaiser Murphy
Phillips

fiddy still dreaming the reichel at 2c dream.

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

Retired numbers-
1, 3, 9,18,21, 35,81,7

Future Retired numbers 27 88 19 2

When they make the ring of honor - Larmer Belfour Amonte Hammer Sharp Crawford Seabrook Wilson Secord Stapleton White Martin Hull Nesterenko Murray Foley Murray

No #27 if #24 doesn't go up

#2, #19 and #88 go up

#24 and #28 should go up but never will at this point, If Hawks ever grow up they should go up

The idea we have too many or will have too many #'s retired is absurd

Franchise is nearing its 100th year, having 11-13 #'s retired shouldn't be issue or problem

 

[statswatcher]

having 11-13 #'s retired shouldn't be issue or problem

phew. i wasn’t worried about it being an issue, but i was very anxious about it being a problem. thank you for the reassurance.

 

[TheFridge]

No #27 if #24 doesn't go up

#2, #19 and #88 go up

#24 and #28 should go up but never will at this point, If Hawks ever grow up they should go up

The idea we have too many or will have too many #'s retired is absurd

Franchise is nearing its 100th year, having 11-13 #'s retired shouldn't be issue or problem

Montreal leads the way with 15 and the Hawks have done a lot less winning than Montreal.

The pre-requisites for jersey retirement should have been: 1000+ GP for players/500+ GP for goaltenders with the team and Stanley Cup Champion and/or HHoF inductee with team.

Hossa wouldn't go up, nor would Roenick, Chelios, Wilson or Larmer.

You'd be left with:

1, 3, 9, 18, 21 and 35

Followed by:

2, 7, 19, 88

That's how it should have been.

You're supposed to be stingy with jersey retirements. No one even knows what the bar is now with Hossa's number being retired. It was a blunder for some good PR at a time they were desperate for some.

 

[x Tame Impala]

We may not win a Cup for another 60 years. Hossa was key in 3 Cup wins and he's a HoFer. Put his damn number up there who the hell cares?

 

[clydesdale line]

Hossa was Rocky Wirtz favorite player during that dynasty era. He said it as much and already stated Hossa's number was going to be retired before he died. Rightfully or not, that is why Hossa is up there

 

[ClydeLee]

Montreal leads the way with 15 and the Hawks have done a lot less winning than Montreal.

The pre-requisites for jersey retirement should have been: 1000+ GP for players/500+ GP for goaltenders with the team and Stanley Cup Champion and/or HHoF inductee with team.

Hossa wouldn't go up, nor would Roenick, Chelios, Wilson or Larmer.

You'd be left with:

1, 3, 9, 18, 21 and 35

Followed by:

2, 7, 19, 88

That's how it should have been.

You're supposed to be stingy with jersey retirements. No one even knows what the bar is now with Hossa's number being retired. It was a blunder for some good PR at a time they were desperate for some.

They literally listed a criteria... no one knows? We all know.

It's close to your point but it says 1000gp or HHOFer. More of a 500 Games needed with the team.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/4844185/2023/09/08/blackhawks-chris-chelios-number-retirement?source=user-shared-article

Pretty sure this article is free and has a list. All the typical Hawks fans want them, like Larmer/Belfour fit that list. The should argument is pointless I think. There doesn't need to be universal standards but I'm pro Avs retiring Borque as well. I think it's great and funny people being it up with annoyance.

It also lists 3 Years out of retirement not LTIR. But next year Keith is HHOF eligible and will go in. 25-26 he should see a retirement.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

I genuinely don't give a shit about numbers being retired but it's goofy to me when a guys number gets retired so far after the fact and like seven guys have worn it after.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Like Anders Bjork and Jaycob Megna have worn 24. It's over.

 

[statswatcher]

they should retire every number except 51 through 73, excluding 55 and 66. that leaves 20 nfl lineman numbers and no ego numbers for all future hawks to cycle through.

 

[TheFridge]

They literally listed a criteria... no one knows? We all know.

It's close to your point but it says 1000gp or HHOFer. More of a 500 Games needed with the team.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/4844185/2023/09/08/blackhawks-chris-chelios-number-retirement?source=user-shared-article

Pretty sure this article is free and has a list. All the typical Hawks fans want them, like Larmer/Belfour fit that list. The should argument is pointless I think. There doesn't need to be universal standards but I'm pro Avs retiring Borque as well. I think it's great and funny people being it up with annoyance.

It also lists 3 Years out of retirement not LTIR. But next year Keith is HHOF eligible and will go in. 25-26 he should see a retirement.

Missed the Athletic article about it.

Their criteria is way too broad. You read their eligibility guidelines and have to think Sharp, Hammer, Seabrook, Crawford, etc., will all have their numbers retired from the Cup teams, in addition to Keith, Toews and Kane.

I don't know. I feel like when you're talking about taking a number out of circulation forever, the standard should be exceptionally high and these guidelines fall short.

Two of these guidelines seem like they were formulated specifically just to allow certain players to have their numbers retired. "Minimum 500 GP" for Hossa and "played more games with the Blackhawks than any other team" for Chelios.

By this criteria, Roenick should be going up, Wilson should be going up. Hell, is Olczyk's number going to go up? Certainly seems like they crafted the last criteria specifically for him. He falls just short of the GP guideline, but they're just guidelines right?

 

[statswatcher]

Missed the Athletic article about it.

View attachment 895768

Their criteria is way too broad. You read their eligibility guidelines and have to think Sharp, Hammer, Seabrook, Crawford, etc., will all have their numbers retired from the Cup teams, in addition to Keith, Toews and Kane.

I don't know. I feel like when you're talking about taking a number out of circulation forever, the standard should be exceptionally high and these guidelines fall short.

Two of these guidelines seem like they were formulated specifically just to allow certain players to have their numbers retired. "Minimum 500 GP" for Hossa and "played more games with the Blackhawks than any other team" for Chelios.

By this criteria, Roenick should be going up, Wilson should be going up. Hell, is Olczyk's number going to go up? Certainly seems like they crafted the last criteria specifically for him. He falls just short of the GP guideline, but they're just guidelines right?

i don’t understand why you care this much about what numbers hang from the rafters of the airplane company building, but i won’t try to take it away from you.

 

[ClydeLee]

Missed the Athletic article about it.

View attachment 895768

Their criteria is way too broad. You read their eligibility guidelines and have to think Sharp, Hammer, Seabrook, Crawford, etc., will all have their numbers retired from the Cup teams, in addition to Keith, Toews and Kane.

I don't know. I feel like when you're talking about taking a number out of circulation forever, the standard should be exceptionally high and these guidelines fall short.

Two of these guidelines seem like they were formulated specifically just to allow certain players to have their numbers retired. "Minimum 500 GP" for Hossa and "played more games with the Blackhawks than any other team" for Chelios.

By this criteria, Roenick should be going up, Wilson should be going up. Hell, is Olczyk's number going to go up? Certainly seems like they crafted the last criteria specifically for him. He falls just short of the GP guideline, but they're just guidelines right?

It was certainly a idea crafted to fit the lines of Hossa/Chelios.

But I do agree with what what Disgruntledhawkfan said that it doesn't really make sense to retire guys from w0 years back when plenty other people wore that number.

That does contrast retiring Chelios but i think it's a gaurenteed joint retirement in 3-4 years when they'll Honor Seabrook to join him.

 

[bwanajamba]

Missed the Athletic article about it.

View attachment 895768

Their criteria is way too broad. You read their eligibility guidelines and have to think Sharp, Hammer, Seabrook, Crawford, etc., will all have their numbers retired from the Cup teams, in addition to Keith, Toews and Kane.

I don't know. I feel like when you're talking about taking a number out of circulation forever, the standard should be exceptionally high and these guidelines fall short.

Two of these guidelines seem like they were formulated specifically just to allow certain players to have their numbers retired. "Minimum 500 GP" for Hossa and "played more games with the Blackhawks than any other team" for Chelios.

By this criteria, Roenick should be going up, Wilson should be going up. Hell, is Olczyk's number going to go up? Certainly seems like they crafted the last criteria specifically for him. He falls just short of the GP guideline, but they're just guidelines right?

They're minimum standards, it doesn't mean everyone who fits the criteria is getting their number retired

 

[TheFridge]

i don’t understand why you care this much about what numbers hang from the rafters of the airplane company building, but i won’t try to take it away from you.

If by "this much", you mean enough to argue against it on a hockey forum, then sure.

They're minimum standards, it doesn't mean everyone who fits the criteria is getting their number retired

How are you going to argue against any of the players mentioned? They check multiple boxes for their guidelines.

 

[statswatcher]

If by "this much", you mean enough to argue against it on a hockey forum, then sure.

yes. that is exactly what i mean, being as that describes what we are currently engaged in. i do not know why you care enough about it to argue against it on a hockey forum. is there anything else i can clarify?

 

[statswatcher]

How are you going to argue against any of the players mentioned? They check multiple boxes for their guidelines.

i don’t think he has to “argue” against any of them, unless his last name is wirtz or something.

 

[Hawkaholic]

Sharp, Seabrook, Hammer, and Crawford aren't going to be HOFers. They haven't won major individual awards, and weren't really perennial All Stars. There's no case for them.

 

[TheFridge]

yes. that is exactly what i mean, being as that describes what we are currently engaged in. i do not know why you care enough about it to argue against it on a hockey forum. is there anything else i can clarify?

It's just, statswatcher, generally when people say they care about something "this much", it's to a greater extent than voicing an opinion on a hockey forum that crashes when it has more than 1000 users on it at the same time.

i don’t think he has to “argue” against any of them, unless his last name is wirtz or something.

I don't think he has to argue against any of them either. "You" being anyone -- like someone with the last name Wirtz, for instance -- not specifically him.

 

[dj Mahoney]

Curious if Jakob Chychrun ends up a ufa next season . He might wanna play for his Uncle Luke? What would be a fair price ,I'm guessing about 5.3 x 5 or 6 years. Good signing for us or not?

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

Curious if Jakob Chychrun ends up a ufa next season . He might wanna play for his Uncle Luke? What would be a fair price ,I'm guessing about 5.3 x 5 or 6 years. Good signing for us or not?

Chyrcrun is a really strange player who has the unfortunate circumstance of playing on 2 of the most dysfunctional teams in the league. When healthy, he can certainly generate offense from the back end, but I struggle to differentiate his D issues vs. organizational defense struggles. I would hope for a little less term than that with what the Hawks have in the pipeline, but you should be able to move that contract for value unless he just craters here.