The Great Dale Weise Debate (& other ex-Hawks) volume 3

[BK]

He would be a top 4 Dman on the Hawks

This year he would but I don't think he will going forward as Mitchell/HJ/Forsling have much higher potential. He would be our 3rd best D this season.

 

[Robsker]

He would be a top 4 Dman on the Hawks

Probably would be. But that is not saying much.

There are 31 teams and, for simplicity, 6 Dmen a team. 186 D-men. The top 1/3 or top 62 D-men are --- for the sake of this argument --- legit top pairing guys. the Hawks have one player that makes that criterion --- Duncs. he is in the lower 1/3 of that grouping and is headed the wrong way. A legit 2nd pairing guy would be a #63-#124 (of the 186). The Hawks have maybe --- maybe --- one guy that meets that criteria --- Murphy. If he does meet that criteria, he does so near the bottom of that grouping. So, the Hawks really have only 2 top 4 guys. Currently, the rest of the Hawks D-men are 3rd pairing types or bubble players (NHL-AHL tweeners). Down the road, once developed some of the Hawks guys may be top-4 caliber--- but that would be in the future. Again, there is a difference between being in the Top-4 and being top-4 caliber. the Hawks, of course, have a top-4 --- but only two of those 4 are playing at that level currently. So...

Yes, Johns would likely make our top 4. is he actually top-4 legit --- as in among the top 124? I do not know. If so, he would probably be among the lowest rated in that group --- or perhaps he is among the better rated of the 3rd-pairing-level guys. Overall, a solid guy --- but nothing special.

The Hawks D is really bad. They are, however, young. If a new coach comes in and they are deployed differntly and able to play w/o fear of failure --- then some of these guys like Osterle, Gus, Murphy, Forsling, even Rutta can improve and the D could be better next year. But 1 --- and better still --- 2 legit top-4 level guys need to come in. From where? How do we pay them? Who? Not sure. But the D needs some serious talent infusion.

Again, Johns being in our top-4 is not a major accomplishment.

 

[AmericanDream]

Just spent ten minutes searching for that hit...couldn't find it...not on NHL highlights, not on You Tube...nowhere. Bah.

they replayed it on NHL tonight as well....it wasn't anything epic, just a good physical play but I enjoyed seeing Johns knock Malkin on his ass

 

[BobbyJet]

This year he would but I don't think he will going forward as Mitchell/HJ/Forsling have much higher potential. He would be our 3rd best D this season.

Hopefully, the three dmen you mention with all this potential bring at least some physicality to the defense. Hawks could certainly use Johns or preferably a solid veteran guy who isn't afraid of his own shadow.

 

[BK]

Hopefully, the three dmen you mention with all this potential bring at least some physicality to the defense. Hawks could certainly use Johns or preferably a solid veteran guy who isn't afraid of his own shadow.

The more I think about it I would pair 2-HJ and 42-5 (5 provides a physical presence for 42). HJ is not big but I think he will have some fight to his game (like Keith).

 

[Robsker]

Hopefully, the three dmen you mention with all this potential bring at least some physicality to the defense. Hawks could certainly use Johns or preferably a solid veteran guy who isn't afraid of his own shadow.

Not sure of the other two --- but Forsling is not overly physical. That said, the Q system does not have the D-men sweep the opponent out of the net front and is, in general, inherently non-physical. So... if Forsling were in a typical system --- maybe he would be modestly physical. He is not built for physicality though. That all said, he does not shy away from contact, which is good.

Not sure of Mitchell or Jokiharu --- both are pretty small though --- or, at least not big. Not sure if the Hawks really have a D-guy that has the body to be overly physical other than Seabs really. Again, not that has mattered overly --- physicality is not part of the Q system overly. A Johns body type does not seem to be in Hawks system --- at least not nearing any sort of Hawk audition.

 

[BK]

We don't need a D who is going to just crunch and have big hits. We just need D who will engage physically.

 

[Robsker]

We don't need a D who is going to just crunch and have big hits. We just need D who will engage physically.

agreed. And, ideally sweep the opponent out from our net front [not part of the current system but part of most other teams systems and, if we get a new coach, likely part of the next system]

 

[ChiHawks10]

Not sure of the other two --- but Forsling is not overly physical. That said, the Q system does not have the D-men sweep the opponent out of the net front and is, in general, inherently non-physical. So... if Forsling were in a typical system --- maybe he would be modestly physical. He is not built for physicality though. That all said, he does not shy away from contact, which is good.

Not sure of Mitchell or Jokiharu --- both are pretty small though --- or, at least not big. Not sure if the Hawks really have a D-guy that has the body to be overly physical other than Seabs really. Again, not that has mattered overly --- physicality is not part of the Q system overly. A Johns body type does not seem to be in Hawks system --- at least not nearing any sort of Hawk audition.

Murphy says hi.

 

[migi]

This team has been good enough to win Cups when there has been only one physical Dman who also has delivered in other stuffs.

Like @BK said, we need Dman who engages. Hammer did that. Keith does it a bit. Seabrook did and does it. Oduya also.

I dont see Mitchell, Forsling and Jokiharju for example being afraid a bit physicality and engaging.

 

[BobbyJet]

We don't need a D who is going to just crunch and have big hits. We just need D who will engage physically.

or better still .... We just need D who will engage physically and a new coach who will encourage it.

 

[BK]

or better still .... We just need D who will engage physically and a new coach who will encourage it.

If that is what happens then we both know I am all for it. I don't care about big hits but you have to engage.

 

[Robsker]

Murphy says hi.

yeah... forgot about him. Quite right.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

We need some defenseman who can play defense.

 

[BobbyJet]

We need some defenseman who can play defense.

Unfortunately, the number one criteria for acquiring dmen in Chicago these days seems to always be puck movement and finesse; defense is secondary and the results are what we have seen on the ice this season. Playing defense in Sweden (or in Europe) on the big ice surface is different than the NHL game but evidently, that is a fundamental that Stan doesn't seem to understand.

 

[Robsker]

Unfortunately, the number one criteria for acquiring dmen in Chicago these days seems to always be puck movement and finesse; defense is secondary and the results are what we have seen on the ice this season. Playing defense in Sweden (or in Europe) on the big ice surface is different than the NHL game but evidently, that is a fundamental that Stan doesn't seem to understand.

Nope... the # one criteria has been cheap and available --- and settle for what you get. Within that, yes, an emphasis has been as you say. but who we get is what we can afford --- and you get what you pay for. Murphy, the most costly by far is by no means a puck mover. So... again, the prevailing primary criteria is chaep and available.

 

[BobbyJet]

Nope... the # one criteria has been cheap and available --- and settle for what you get. Within that, yes, an emphasis has been as you say. but who we get is what we can afford --- and you get what you pay for. Murphy, the most costly by far is by no means a puck mover. So... again, the prevailing primary criteria is chaep and available.

Yep. Can't argue that. Even in the draft, SB has a penchant for taking players that are bypassed by other teams (usually for good reason).

 

[CallMeShaft]

Unfortunately, the number one criteria for acquiring dmen in Chicago these days seems to always be puck movement and finesse; defense is secondary and the results are what we have seen on the ice this season. Playing defense in Sweden (or in Europe) on the big ice surface is different than the NHL game but evidently, that is a fundamental that Stan doesn't seem to understand.

Aren't you Snuggerud's biggest fan here?

 

[BobbyJet]

Aren't you Snuggerud's biggest fan here?

I'd like to be. Don't know much about him other than glimpses of his play.

 

[CallMeShaft]

I'd like to be. Don't know much about him other than glimpses of his play.

My point is that you've been pretty high on him, despite seeing little of him, yet he's the exact type of defensemen that you just criticized the Hawks front office for drafting (puck moving/finesse type).

 

[BobbyJet]

My point is that you've been pretty high on him, despite seeing little of him, yet he's the exact type of defensemen that you just criticized the Hawks front office for drafting (puck moving/finesse type).

I mentioned once that I would like to see him promoted to Hawks to see what he is made of. I'm disappointed if he is yet another softie..... Geeeesh. How many more of these clones are out there that SB has drafted?

 

[CallMeShaft]

I mentioned once that I would like to see him promoted to Hawks to see what he is made of. I'm disappointed if he is yet another softie..... Geeeesh. How many more of these clones are out there that SB has drafted?

I'm pretty certain I've heard you mention that you liked him multiple times. Specifically you hating on Forsling because Snuggerud impressed you so much when he played half a preseason game before this season started.

 

[BobbyJet]

I'm pretty certain I've heard you mention that you liked him multiple times. Specifically you hating on Forsling because Snuggerud impressed you so much when he played half a preseason game before this season started.

Not me. As I said, I mentioned I'd like to see him in Chicago to see what he is made of, but know nothing of this guy other than what I read. I definitely wanted to see him ahead of Gus.

 

[CallMeShaft]

Not me. As I said, I mentioned I'd like to see him in Chicago to see what he is made of, but know nothing of this guy other than what I read. I definitely wanted to see him ahead of Gus.

Could've sworn you were higher on him. Maybe between you mentioning him a time or two and you hating Forsling, made me incorrectly think you were a lot higher on him.

 

[BobbyJet]

No hate. Forsling needs seasoning, as does Gus, Rutta and more than likely Snugs as well.

I repeat, Hawks need to get serious about bringing in a solid defenseman who actually can play defense. Otherwise, the growing pains will continue.