Which rookies will make biggest impact?

[Taze em]

Agreed. I have no clue but I didn't see the skill others are talked about. This is his time I will give that. If doesn't make team, you gotta think he asks to be moved. But if he can't make our team with all these openings, how can he be an NHL player at that point. Again, would love to be wrong.

I don't even care if he makes the team. Maybe he shouldn't this year. Hartman still does dumb stuff all the time. I don't remember Shaw hurting people on the ice much. He was just ugly, looked like a plug and got in peoples faces, and was always there so he was annoying and pesty. Hartman injures people and gets suspended for really egregious acts. Hartman sometimes reminds me of Raffi Torres.

It was just the skill piece that I objected to.

 

[tdfxman]

I just refuse to even let this harmless one go now. No, Hartman was a first round pick in his draft year and Shaw went 5th round in his 3rd. Hartman has real skill just because he pops off like Shaw doesn't make them the same. They both are right on track production wise at Hartman's stage of his career.

You can see Hartman has more skill if you watch them. Doesn't mean he'll come close to the same player, though. Shaw is next level, elite greasy.

OK last one on this. To me skilled means you can produce in this league. Logic tells me if you are unskilled you won't produce and it takes skill to produce. Stick handling is a tool, skating fast is a tool. Good hands are a tool. These tools then the players can take and mold into skill at their craft/job. If you don't produce points as a "skilled" player, to me you are not skilled at your job.
Ken Yarmenchuk is the classic example. What, 140 pts in Jr. Then can't score in the NHL, 20pts?. To me he wasn't skilled (enough), but anyway I am probably wrong with my semantics. I just know one thing for sure, "skill" guys that can't score in this league aren't in this league long.

I just remember hartman as the guy with the big hit. Funny in this clip, TooToo hits hartman back as a sign of "grit" talked about in another thread lol.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpghVVYzW_0

Anyway, I hope he can use the skills you all say he has and translates that into being skilled player in the NHL and not some 10 pt grit guy, a poor man's shaw.

 

[Taze em]

Hartman sticking a Russian in the face while he celebrates.

http://www.diehardsport.com/hockey/...inning-world-juniors-ryan-hartman-retaliates/

Hit to the head vs. Canada


Hit to the head suspension:

http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/mad...Hartman-Suspended-Three-Games--363403551.html

Stick to the head a month later:
http://thethirdmanin.com/2015/01/21...ame-blackhawks-add-member-to-equipment-staff/

Does this look like Shaw tho? Especially post fight



I've seen him go knee to knee on guys open ice and miss, jump into hits with flying elbows. Dude is crazy.
I have very complicated feelings about him lol he cracks me up. He's a beauty but man he is going to be hard to defend when he does crazy ****.

 

[SAADfather]

I wouldn't say he's more skilled than Shaw just yet but Hartman definitely has a higher offensive ceiling.

I don't even care if he makes the team. Maybe he shouldn't this year. Hartman still does dumb stuff all the time. I don't remember Shaw hurting people on the ice much. He was just ugly, looked like a plug and got in peoples faces, and was always there so he was annoying and pesty. Hartman injures people and gets suspended for really egregious acts. Hartman sometimes reminds me of Raffi Torres.

It was just the skill piece that I objected to.

Shaw used to do a lot more dumb **** when he was younger too. He's gotten better about it the past couple years.

 

[BobbyJet]

I went Kempny since that is the right answer, he will get the most TOI and has shown he can play against the men. ALL the others haven't been to this level, yet.

I can't wait to see Kempny at the World Cup, that will be awesome. As to the undercard kids, I have posted I think Motte will be the most solid and I hope wins a 3rd line spot with Kruger and Hossa. OK 2 HF Posters naming the same line, it means Q will never do it.

What is all the love with Hartman? wow. If he scores HALF of what shaw did I would be shocked. 16 pts on Hartman, I would eat my shorts. When he was up, he was invisible, expect for that big hit on his first shift, wasn't that him. Didn't really notice any skill with him, at all. He looked like Moose, not a lot of skill.

Yeah. That was him ... then settled in to be mediocre at best. I doubt he can replace a Shaw but that remains to be seen. I can easily see McNeil slip into that spot ahead of Hartman.... unless of course Q has already made up his mind that he won't be playing for this team.

 

[BK]

Yeah. That was him ... then settled in to be mediocre at best. I doubt he can replace a Shaw but that remains to be seen. I can easily see McNeil slip into that spot ahead of Hartman.... unless of course Q has already made up his mind that he won't be playing for this team.

Maybe I am the only one but I think McNeil could be a good 3c/4c for us. He can score and is physical.

 

[tdfxman]

Maybe I am the only one but I think McNeil could be a good 3c/4c for us. He can score and is physical.

I think foot speed and over-all skating will be what holds him back in the end.

 

[BK]

I think foot speed and over-all skating will be what holds him back in the end.

You also said Hartman could not skate around Getzlaf like Shaw did. McNeil is by no means a speed player but he is not a turtle skating around out there.

 

[tdfxman]

No.

I said Hartman didn't have the skill to make that play at speed. I brought up the shaw over getzlaf play to make the point shaw is "skilled" and has excellent hands. The skating part was never in view, to me at least. And it still isn't.

McNeil is the guy with speed issues. hartman can move around fine.

 

[BK]

No.

I said Hartman didn't have the skill to make that play at speed. I brought up the shaw over getzlaf play to make the point shaw is "skilled" and has excellent hands. The skating part was never in view, to me at least. And it still isn't.

McNeil is the guy with speed issues. hartman can move around fine.

And what you said was wrong.

Shaw doesn't have excellent hands. His hands are fine but not close to excellent. Excellent hands are players that are step below Kane so Toews, Perry, etc. You will bring up that you are talking about in front of the net and corners but even in those situations his hand are just "fine" and excellent hand in those places would be Pavelski. You can bring up that play but I could bring up other plays where Shaw struggled to receive passes or fumbled the puck while stick handling. Shaw was a good player but he was not a skill player like you think he was.

 

[BK]

I just refuse to even let this harmless one go now. No, Hartman was a first round pick in his draft year and Shaw went 5th round in his 3rd. Hartman has real skill just because he pops off like Shaw doesn't make them the same. They both are right on track production wise at Hartman's stage of his career.

You can see Hartman has more skill if you watch them. Doesn't mean he'll come close to the same player, though. Shaw is next level, elite greasy.

You refuse to let it go? Nice.

Once you are drafted where you were drafted means nothing excepts when it comes to the chances a player gets. No where did I say they were the same player but I will now say they are similar players. Hartman plays a greasy game just like Shaw does. They are both agitators and they do play similar styles. Hartman and Shaw have similar skills (I agree Hartman has more of "pure" skills but the gap is not big) and are both top 9 players. So next time you decide to pop off actually read the context in which people are talking.

Thanks for not "letting it go"!

The best part is that they are statistically as close as you can get to being clones.

 

[x Tame Impala]

Shaw was never a skill player. He had flashes of it but he never had the consistency to be labeled as such. Whatever skill-related things he brought to the team won't be missed. His tenacity and grit are what's going to be missed more than anything IMO.

Shaw's first goal. Ironically he burnt Timmonen on the play

 

[BK]

Shaw was never a skill player. He had flashes of it but he never had the consistency to be labeled as such. Whatever skill-related things he brought to the team won't be missed. His tenacity and grit are what's going to be missed more than anything IMO.

Shaw's first goal. Ironically he burnt Timmonen on the play

And now we know why Bryz is not in the league....

 

[BobbyJet]

And what you said was wrong.

Shaw doesn't have excellent hands. His hands are fine but not close to excellent. Excellent hands are players that are step below Kane so Toews, Perry, etc. You will bring up that you are talking about in front of the net and corners but even in those situations his hand are just "fine" and excellent hand in those places would be Pavelski. You can bring up that play but I could bring up other plays where Shaw struggled to receive passes or fumbled the puck while stick handling. Shaw was a good player but he was not a skill player like you think he was.

Exactly. It was for this reason that I did not like to see Shaw on the PP.

 

[clydesdale line]

You can see Hartman has more skill if you watch them.

It's not even close either. You remember that behind the net no look pass to Bickell (and obviously Bicks couldn't bury it)? Never seen Shaw do anything like that. Hell, Hartman should've had 3-4 points if he buried his chance and Bickell actually scores.

 

[BK]

It's not even close either. You remember that behind the net no look pass to Bickell (and obviously Bicks couldn't bury it)? Never seen Shaw do anything like that. Hell, Hartman should've had 3-4 points if he buried his chance and Bickell actually scores.

If you are using points as an indicator then you should know they are clones statistically.

 

[tdfxman]

And what you said was wrong.

Shaw doesn't have excellent hands. His hands are fine but not close to excellent. Excellent hands are players that are step below Kane so Toews, Perry, etc. You will bring up that you are talking about in front of the net and corners but even in those situations his hand are just "fine" and excellent hand in those places would be Pavelski. You can bring up that play but I could bring up other plays where Shaw struggled to receive passes or fumbled the puck while stick handling. Shaw was a good player but he was not a skill player like you think he was.

I think he has excellent hands. That back to the net on his backhand thru his legs goal, I can remember that one. You get around 20 in this league, you have some mitts . Hadjuk has elite hands, Pavs maybe like you say elite. I am sticking with Shaw has excellent hands, one stop down.

 

[BK]

I think he has excellent hands. That back to the net on his backhand thru his legs goal, I can remember that one. You get around 20 in this league, you have some mitts . Hadjuk has elite hands, Pavs maybe like you say elite. I am sticking with Shaw has excellent hands, one stop down.

That is fine but you are wrong on this one. We all have the right to our own opinion so we will leave it at that.

 

[tdfxman]

You refuse to let it go? Nice.

Once you are drafted where you were drafted means nothing excepts when it comes to the chances a player gets. No where did I say they were the same player but I will now say they are similar players. Hartman plays a greasy game just like Shaw does. They are both agitators and they do play similar styles. Hartman and Shaw have similar skills (I agree Hartman has more of "pure" skills but the gap is not big) and are both top 9 players. So next time you decide to pop off actually read the context in which people are talking.

Thanks for not "letting it go"!

The best part is that they are statistically as close as you can get to being clones.

LOL, really.

One plays in the NHL and one doesn't and they are clones. Umm, I think they are clones when they have the SAME stats in the SAME league. I would buy that for a dollar. One guy might not make the NHL, one guy signs with term for 3.9AAV. Yeah, clones.

 

[tdfxman]

Shaw was never a skill player. He had flashes of it but he never had the consistency to be labeled as such. Whatever skill-related things he brought to the team won't be missed. His tenacity and grit are what's going to be missed more than anything IMO.

Shaw's first goal. Ironically he burnt Timmonen on the play

What's wonderfully ironic is I have to agree with JD on this one. His "skill" and ability to affect play VIA skill (sick hands) is what makes the GRIT effective and why Shaw is so valuable to a team. Yes not a "skill" player, but a player with "Skills" that allow him to succeed in this league.

 

[tdfxman]

Exactly. It was for this reason that I did not like to see Shaw on the PP.

And yet it was the reason WHY he was. lol

 

[BK]

LOL, really.

One plays in the NHL and one doesn't and they are clones. Umm, I think they are clones when they have the SAME stats in the SAME league. I would buy that for a dollar. One guy might not make the NHL, one guy signs with term for 3.9AAV. Yeah, clones.

Yes really. They scored at the same rate in the OHL and AHL and they are also penalized at the same rate. Shaw made the jump to the NHL at age 21 and it is looking like Hartman will do the same. You should actually try doing so research before posting, it would help.

 

[tdfxman]

That is fine but you are wrong on this one. We all have the right to our own opinion so we will leave it at that.

That's a deal.

 

[tdfxman]

Yes really. They scored at the same rate in the OHL and AHL and they are also penalized at the same rate. Shaw made the jump to the NHL at age 21 and it is looking like Hartman will do the same. You should actually try doing so research before posting, it would help.

They can't be clones statically since it is apples to oranges right now. Let's compare smokers and non-smokers shall we. You could say lots of other things that would actually make sense, like thru age 21 they are clones statically (similar players), same trends etc. Or, well in their AHL days, they were clones statically. But yeah that statement, that sets off the BS meter, sorry. With more color, I now know what you are talking about. I hope hartman makes it.

 

[BK]

They can't be clones statically since it is apples to oranges right now. Let's compare smokers and non-smokers shall we. You could say lots of other things that would actually make sense, like thru age 21 they are clones statically (similar players), same trends etc. Or, well in their AHL days, they were clones statically. But yeah that statement, that sets off the BS meter, sorry. With more color, I now know what you are talking about. I hope hartman makes it.

Terrible analogy. We are a talking about 2 players who have take the same career path to the NHL at the same ages. Smokers to Non-smokers? Really that is what you thought of?

They are on the same career trajectory statistically and if you watch them play they both play a greasy game but Hartman has the same skill if not more "pure skills" than Shaw. Look at how they perform at each level and you will see they produce at the same rates (except Hartman produces a tad bit more) then you take the fact that Hartman is now at the same age as Shaw when he made the jump to the NHL and you will see they are as close to clones as you can get from a production stand point. Hartman if given the same opportunity as Shaw will produce at the same 25-30 point per season pace. This is not a hard trend to follow.

Seems to me that you are not good at calculating trends and/or you bs meter is broke.