Nazar gets paid

[Pierre McGuire]

That didn’t take long

https://www.tsn.ca/nhl/chicago-blackhaw ... -1.2348770

[bluetunehead]

I think he’s going to be good but man. GMs want to get ahead of the rising cap big time.

[BalotelliMassive]

I think he’s going to be good but man. GMs want to get ahead of the rising cap big time.

I believe this is why the Hawks have been burning the first years of their top prospects like Moore, Nazar, Rinzel, and Levshunov. The cap guru guy they stole from Minnesota has been busy.

[Hockey Pete]

That didn’t take long

https://www.tsn.ca/nhl/chicago-blackhaw ... -1.2348770

The kid has promise, but this is definitely a bit of a gamble by the Hawks...

He ended the season strong, but he REALLY struggles in two zones (neutral and defensive) and against bigger teams, in addition to the fact that he was a flat out turn-over machine (57 GVA to 8 TKA). The kid is talented, but like other prospects on the Hawks, he's smallish and has yet to prove a commitment put on weight to make a true difference on the ice.

[theograce]

That didn’t take long

https://www.tsn.ca/nhl/chicago-blackhaw ... -1.2348770

The kid has promise, but this is definitely a bit of a gamble by the Hawks...

He ended the season strong, but he REALLY struggles in two zones (neutral and defensive) and against bigger teams, in addition to the fact that he was a flat out turn-over machine (57 GVA to 8 TKA). The kid is talented, but like other prospects on the Hawks, he's smallish and has yet to prove a commitment put on weight to make a true difference on the ice.

Thomas had 22 takeaways and 99 giveaways
Buchnevich 15 takeaways 70 giveaways.

[skilles]

That didn’t take long

https://www.tsn.ca/nhl/chicago-blackhaw ... -1.2348770

The kid has promise, but this is definitely a bit of a gamble by the Hawks...

He ended the season strong, but he REALLY struggles in two zones (neutral and defensive) and against bigger teams, in addition to the fact that he was a flat out turn-over machine (57 GVA to 8 TKA). The kid is talented, but like other prospects on the Hawks, he's smallish and has yet to prove a commitment put on weight to make a true difference on the ice.

Is it really though considering the situation?

What we have seen in recent history with these full on tear down and rebuilds are players getting out of town faster than they can collect and develop enough of them to climb out of the cellar. I'd guess the Hawks have recognized this.

I mean everything is a gamble, specially at this level. I personally love it.

While you might not get as much heat for it(out of sight out of mind) living inside the box is just as risky.

While nobody would recognize it not signing a deal like that could also cost you a cup in 7 years or make you far less successful. Everyone talks about/recognizes things you did and shouldn't have but half the mistakes are things you didn't do and should have if not more.

[skilles]

I'm going to say there is somethings very suspect about the take away/give away stat, at least the way it is interpreted.

My guess is the two are nowhere near as relatable as people think. Like giving the puck away is a regular occurrence and very often the right decision while take aways are not the counter part to that at all.

I'd be interested to read the definition of those stats.

Stealing the puck directly from the other team is not a counterpart to dumping the puck to the other team in a more safe area of the ice on purpose.

give aways and take aways are not counter parts.

[theograce]

I'm going to say there is somethings very suspect about the take away/give away stat, at least the way it is interpreted.

My guess is the two are nowhere near as relatable as people think. Like giving the puck away is a regular occurrence and very often the right decision while take aways are not the counter part to that at all.

I'd be interested to read the definition of those stats.

Stealing the puck directly from the other team is not a counterpart to dumping the puck to the other team in a more safe area of the ice on purpose.

Something changed last year. Nobody did well compared to previous years. It typically held some value in context, but the stat was meaningless last year.

[skilles]

I'm going to say there is somethings very suspect about the take away/give away stat, at least the way it is interpreted.

My guess is the two are nowhere near as relatable as people think. Like giving the puck away is a regular occurrence and very often the right decision while take aways are not the counter part to that at all.

I'd be interested to read the definition of those stats.

Stealing the puck directly from the other team is not a counterpart to dumping the puck to the other team in a more safe area of the ice on purpose.

Something changed last year. Nobody did well compared to previous years. It typically held some value in context, but the stat was meaningless last year.

They are probably useful, just not when compared as counter parts like they are equal opposites. Some of the best players in the world have always had high giveaway numbers.

I suspect maybe things like possessing the puck in the d zone and giving it away to an opposing player in the neutral zone is problematic.

[theograce]

I'm going to say there is somethings very suspect about the take away/give away stat, at least the way it is interpreted.

My guess is the two are nowhere near as relatable as people think. Like giving the puck away is a regular occurrence and very often the right decision while take aways are not the counter part to that at all.

I'd be interested to read the definition of those stats.

Stealing the puck directly from the other team is not a counterpart to dumping the puck to the other team in a more safe area of the ice on purpose.

Something changed last year. Nobody did well compared to previous years. It typically held some value in context, but the stat was meaningless last year.

They are probably useful, just not when compared as counter parts like they are equal opposites. Some of the best players in the world have always had high giveaway numbers.

I suspect maybe things like possessing the puck in the d zone and giving it away to an opposing player in the neutral zone is problematic.

Something dramatically changed in the way things were recorded last year. Compare guys numbers to the year(s) prior across the league.

[zamadoo]

I'm going to say there is somethings very suspect about the take away/give away stat, at least the way it is interpreted.

My guess is the two are nowhere near as relatable as people think. Like giving the puck away is a regular occurrence and very often the right decision while take aways are not the counter part to that at all.

I'd be interested to read the definition of those stats.

Stealing the puck directly from the other team is not a counterpart to dumping the puck to the other team in a more safe area of the ice on purpose.

Something changed last year. Nobody did well compared to previous years. It typically held some value in context, but the stat was meaningless last year.

They are probably useful, just not when compared as counter parts like they are equal opposites. Some of the best players in the world have always had high giveaway numbers.

I suspect maybe things like possessing the puck in the d zone and giving it away to an opposing player in the neutral zone is problematic.

Something dramatically changed in the way things were recorded last year. Compare guys numbers to the year(s) prior across the league.

This is true. I was baffled when I first noticed.

[Old_Goat]

I'm going to say there is somethings very suspect about the take away/give away stat, at least the way it is interpreted.

My guess is the two are nowhere near as relatable as people think. Like giving the puck away is a regular occurrence and very often the right decision while take aways are not the counter part to that at all.

I'd be interested to read the definition of those stats.

Stealing the puck directly from the other team is not a counterpart to dumping the puck to the other team in a more safe area of the ice on purpose.

Something changed last year. Nobody did well compared to previous years. It typically held some value in context, but the stat was meaningless last year.

You throw out stats to support some idiotic narrative, and then you say they are meaningless. You need to try harder.
And how can you sniff those Jocks if they don't know you or know that you even exist? And how can we know that the guy you work with & knows Neighours is really YOUR friend, or that he even knows you or cares about you??
Don't bother answering. You are only good for rumors not truth.

[dhsux]

That didn’t take long

https://www.tsn.ca/nhl/chicago-blackhaw ... -1.2348770

The kid has promise, but this is definitely a bit of a gamble by the Hawks...

He ended the season strong, but he REALLY struggles in two zones (neutral and defensive) and against bigger teams, in addition to the fact that he was a flat out turn-over machine (57 GVA to 8 TKA). The kid is talented, but like other prospects on the Hawks, he's smallish and has yet to prove a commitment put on weight to make a true difference on the ice.

Is it really though considering the situation?

What we have seen in recent history with these full on tear down and rebuilds are players getting out of town faster than they can collect and develop enough of them to climb out of the cellar. I'd guess the Hawks have recognized this.

I mean everything is a gamble, specially at this level. I personally love it.

While you might not get as much heat for it(out of sight out of mind) living inside the box is just as risky.

While nobody would recognize it not signing a deal like that could also cost you a cup in 7 years or make you far less successful. Everyone talks about/recognizes things you did and shouldn't have but half the mistakes are things you didn't do and should have if not more.

I agree....this is a "who knows" situation.

I see both sides and the Hawks picked one. No one will know until the games are played.

But I do agree it's likely an inflationary signing whether it's a gamble or not.

[Pierre McGuire]

The talk about the turnovers is mind boggling. Useless stat…players that have the puck, turn it over. Players whose job is to try and make plays turn it over.

[TAFKAP]

That didn’t take long

https://www.tsn.ca/nhl/chicago-blackhaw ... -1.2348770

The kid has promise, but this is definitely a bit of a gamble by the Hawks...

He ended the season strong, but he REALLY struggles in two zones (neutral and defensive) and against bigger teams, in addition to the fact that he was a flat out turn-over machine (57 GVA to 8 TKA). The kid is talented, but like other prospects on the Hawks, he's smallish and has yet to prove a commitment put on weight to make a true difference on the ice.

Is it really though considering the situation?

What we have seen in recent history with these full on tear down and rebuilds are players getting out of town faster than they can collect and develop enough of them to climb out of the cellar. I'd guess the Hawks have recognized this.

I mean everything is a gamble, specially at this level. I personally love it.

While you might not get as much heat for it(out of sight out of mind) living inside the box is just as risky.

While nobody would recognize it not signing a deal like that could also cost you a cup in 7 years or make you far less successful. Everyone talks about/recognizes things you did and shouldn't have but half the mistakes are things you didn't do and should have if not more.

I agree....this is a "who knows" situation.

I see both sides and the Hawks picked one. No one will know until the games are played.

But I do agree it's likely an inflationary signing whether it's a gamble or not.

I personally hope it ages like Darnell Nurse. That would be nice, I wish them nothing but the worst.

[dhsux]

That didn’t take long

https://www.tsn.ca/nhl/chicago-blackhaw ... -1.2348770

The kid has promise, but this is definitely a bit of a gamble by the Hawks...

He ended the season strong, but he REALLY struggles in two zones (neutral and defensive) and against bigger teams, in addition to the fact that he was a flat out turn-over machine (57 GVA to 8 TKA). The kid is talented, but like other prospects on the Hawks, he's smallish and has yet to prove a commitment put on weight to make a true difference on the ice.

Is it really though considering the situation?

What we have seen in recent history with these full on tear down and rebuilds are players getting out of town faster than they can collect and develop enough of them to climb out of the cellar. I'd guess the Hawks have recognized this.

I mean everything is a gamble, specially at this level. I personally love it.

While you might not get as much heat for it(out of sight out of mind) living inside the box is just as risky.

While nobody would recognize it not signing a deal like that could also cost you a cup in 7 years or make you far less successful. Everyone talks about/recognizes things you did and shouldn't have but half the mistakes are things you didn't do and should have if not more.

I agree....this is a "who knows" situation.

I see both sides and the Hawks picked one. No one will know until the games are played.

But I do agree it's likely an inflationary signing whether it's a gamble or not.

I personally hope it ages like Darnell Nurse. That would be nice, I wish them nothing but the worst.

They haven't finished better than 6th Central in 10 years, since they won a Cup. Imagine the bounty in that draft position for 10 years.

I'd say they have a problem in multiple areas of management.