Chicago vs. Pittsburgh: Paradigms, Thoughts and Concerns V.2

[Dipsy Doodle]

A few wanna-be mods are in a tizzy over the placement of this post, so here's a dedicated thread.

Just to punctuate the difference between what the Hawks and Pens had to work with when Shero took over in May 2006, I decided to list the quality young assets (either became a top 6 forward/top 4 defenseman/starting goalie for their team or yielded a 2nd round pick or better asset via trade) that each organization had at that point. If I missed anyone, please let me know:

Pens:

Crosby
Malkin
Malone (left via UFA)
Kennedy (begat a 2013 2nd)
Letang
Whitney (begat Kunitz)
Goligoski (begat Neal and Nisky)
Scuderi (left via UFA)
Orpik
Fleury

Hawks:

Sharp
Bourque (begat a 2009 2nd)
Ruutu (begat Ladd, who begat a 2011 2nd)
Byfuglien (begat 2010 1st and 2nd)
Bolland (begat 2013 2nd)
Brouwer (begat 2011 1st)
Skille (begat Frolik)
Keith
Seabrook
Hjalmarsson
Barker (begat Leddy)
Crawford

In subsequent lotteries, the Pens took Staal and the Hawks took Toews and Kane.

The Pens had the better top end, but the Hawks had better depth. Now consider that the Pens lost Scuderi and Malone because Sid and Geno became elite talents right away and effectively eliminated the bridge contract that Toews and Kane got, and you can see how the Hawks have been able to establish and maintain the sort of depth that eludes the Pens.

Click to read more...

 

[Crafton]

A few wanna-be mods are in a tizzy over the placement of this post, so here's a dedicated thread.

danke

 

[Michael8771*]

The passing on Toews is something that's hard to reconcile for me. Yes we won a cup, And that is something I was thrilled with. That said, and relative to my expectations of this team, we'd be much closer to a dynasty IMO with Toews than Staal.

 

[Ragamuffin Gunner]

CHI's excellent management allowed them to build a Cup winner, re-tool due to cap reasons and win another Cup. They also have a competent coach.


You might not want to hear it but Shero was gifted a much better core than CHI. We're where we are because of his bad choices.

Also, way to totally gloss over the fact that he took Staal over Toews and Kessel.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

The passing on Toews is something that's hard to reconcile for me. Yes we won a cup, And that is something I was thrilled with. That said, and relative to my expectations of this team, we'd be much closer to a dynasty IMO with Toews than Staal.

Many on the board, myself included, really wanted Toews there. But that's not a depth issue, it's a quality issue.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

I posted similar in another thread, but for me one of the bigger differences between Bowman and Shero is Bowman focused his money on keeping the core pieces of his club, while shedding the complimentary pieces when he had to (ie. getting rid of his "depth" from the 2010 Cup team, but none of the actual core guys), whereas Shero's kept around too many guys who are more complimentary than core at expensive salaries.

In other words, I think Bowman's done a better job of identifying who the Hawks' key guys are and keeping them, while moving salaries of the complimentary pieces and using youngsters to replace them. Shero's evaluation of who truly is a "key piece" hasn't been as strong, as illustrated by his absolute need to keep guys like Orpik and Dupuis around, and re-sign a guy like Scuderi, rather than look to internal options who cost less and would free up that money to fill other holes.

 

[Michael8771*]

Many on the board, myself included, really wanted Toews there. But that's not a depth issue, it's a quality issue.

I don't disagree, I just thought at the time his name was called ''uh ohh'' (pretty Iffy pick).

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Just a note though that it has been speculated that Toews and Kane could each get $12 million per. Whatever they get the Blackhawk's depth is soon going to take a hit with their signings.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

I posted similar in another thread, but for me one of the bigger differences between Bowman and Shero is Bowman focused his money on keeping the core pieces of his club, while shedding the complimentary pieces when he had to (ie. getting rid of his "depth" from the 2010 Cup team, but none of the actual core guys), whereas Shero's kept around too many guys who are more complimentary than core at expensive salaries.

In other words, I think Bowman's done a better job of identifying who the Hawks' key guys are and keeping them, while moving salaries of the complimentary pieces and using youngsters to replace them. Shero's evaluation of who truly is a "key piece" hasn't been as strong, as illustrated by his absolute need to keep guys like Orpik and Dupuis around, and re-sign a guy like Scuderi, rather than look to internal options who cost less and would free up that money to fill other holes.

Don't you think that having those assets to begin with is the root of that though? Bowman has the luxury of letting players move on because of the pre-established depth. Shero doesn't.

Forgetting for the moment that the Hawks had more depth to begin with...when Chicago won the Cup, their complementary guys were becoming RFAs. Those will yield returns. Our complementary guys were UFAs. Those will not.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

I don't disagree, I just thought at the time his name was called ''uh ohh'' (pretty Iffy pick).

For sure. Being a Manitoban, I've been a huge Toews fan from very early on.

 

[Jedi Pengu*]

I said it in another thread but, when the Islanders were winning cups they changed there bottom six annually. The core stayed the same but there was always fresh faces in the room. According to Dennis Potvin, that's what kept them hungry and never satisfied. Chicago employs this perfectly, and notice how they don't just lose players, they trade them and get a return. The fact that we still employ Orpik right now is a great example of how Shero is missing the boat.

 

[Jedi Pengu*]

The fact that we don't have Jonathen Toews is another example of Shero's horrible decisions. I almost smashed my TV when he made that pick. It haunts me every day.

 

[IcedCapp]

I have been a big fan of Shero. I would argue with Kirk and Burgundy and those guys for a while.

But for me, the biggest difference between Shero and the Blackhawks brain trust is the Penguins refusal to cut ties with ****** players.

Tanner Glass and Craig Adams aren't good. They aren't necessary. They aren't vital.

Most people understand and accept the issues Shero has had to deal with.

No one is expecting a farm ripe with talent and the deepest, top-to-bottom NHL roster.

But Shero can't even turn the bottom-6 over with any regularity.

ALL sports teams need turnover. They need hunger. They need fresh blood. This isn't romanticizing sports, but acknowledging that complacency and comfort are real.

The Penguins, when their AHL players are in there fighting for their lives, are a different team. No one can deny this.

No one other than the people running the team.

If Shero could cut the fat and inject new blood and hunger every year, things would look differently.

 

[Fire Shero*]

The passing on Toews is something that's hard to reconcile for me. Yes we won a cup, And that is something I was thrilled with. That said, and relative to my expectations of this team, we'd be much closer to a dynasty IMO with Toews than Staal.

But Toews wouldn't have gotten you Brandon Sutter, haha.

Shero can't find 4 respectable wingers, Toews would be playing with garbage here.

Don't attack Shero, they'll close the thread. I think the mods work for the pens

 

[Shrimper]

Just a note though that it has been speculated that Toews and Kane could each get $12 million per. Whatever they get the Blackhawk's depth is soon going to take a hit with their signings.

I doubt that they'd actually ask for that though. Would hurt the team and make them look bad in my opinion as well.

The biggest problem we have is that we have over $10m tied in 3 unreliable players. Orpik, Scuderi and Fleury. Fleury is fine in the regular season but beyond that it is a lottery. Orpik and Scuderi are just bleh.

 

[WayneSid9987]

Something tells me Toews would've walked as well. Only thing relevant in Op's post is the bridge contracts allowing the Hawks to ice deeper teams.

Shero could've, at the very least, drafted 1 more winger in the 1st round.

The biggest difference is the coaching and evaluation of players on the roster.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Don't you think that having those assets to begin with is the root of that though? Bowman has the luxury of letting players move on because of the pre-established depth. Shero doesn't.

Forgetting for the moment that the Hawks had more depth to begin with...when Chicago won the Cup, their complementary guys were becoming RFAs. Those will yield returns. Our complementary guys were UFAs. Those will not.

Partially, but at the same time, Shero seems too married to his veterans to cut ties when he should. A guy like Orpik might have yielded a similar return to what guys like Versteeg, Byfuglien, or Ladd did a year or so ago when he still had time left on his contract. But Shero instead saw him as a "core" guy, instead of as a declining player who was just taking a spot away from one of the many good young defensemen.

Also, as IceCapp mentioned, Shero has a penchant for hanging on to more "useless" guys than Bowman. Who has been Chicago's equivalent of Adams and Glass over the past few seasons? Maybe Jamal Mayers, maybe Adam Burrish? Bowman didn't stubbornly hang on to those guys. They were useful to the team at that point in time, but then he had no issues letting them move on because he understood they were dime a dozen guys, not key guys who absolutely had to be retained.

Shero's had enough assets to work with that he could actually made improvements, if he was willing to cut ties with certain guys. Orpik is the obvious one, but I still think committing the kind of money he did to Dupuis and re-signing Scuderi were also moves that cost money that were unnecessary and could have been spent (or combined together) on upgrades, rather than just sticking with what we've got.

I just think Bowman's done a better job of keeping the important guys while filtering off the excess than Shero has. Shero's kept too many guys, or signed guys who weren't needed, and it's part of what's hurting the depth of this team.

 

[Fire Shero*]

Chicago beats pittsburgh is every category.

Better goalie

Better coach

Better GM

Better overall defense

More depth at forward

There's not much to compare. Everyone said they'd lose Kane or Toews before they signed long-term extensions last time.

Duncan Keith gets paid almost $2 million less than Letang's new deal.

Kane and Toews signed for a cap hit of $6.3 million, $300,000 more than Shero's offer to Jordan Staal.

The only similarities between these two teams is that they both play in the nhl.

One is an efficient mega company that makes difficult decisions that is in the best interest of the shareholders, the other is a mom and pop shop with way too much loyalty and family values.

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

Many on the board, myself included, really wanted Toews there. But that's not a depth issue, it's a quality issue.

Why Toews? Three pivots back to back to back, all in the top two. I always thought it was an odd decision.

You had one of the best pure snipers at the wing position coming out in years with Kessel. It's still baffling why they just grabbed two elite pivots back to back, then decided they needed another one. Why would you not draft an elite winger there for Crosby or Malkin?

Why use a top two pick on a third line pivot? Shero could have really rounded this team out with that selection, but wanted to load up on pivots like he wants to load up on puck movers. Gotta have balance.

 

[Shrimper]

Chicago beats pittsburgh is every category.

Better goalie

Better coach

Better GM

Better overall defense

More depth at forward

There's not much to compare. Everyone said they'd lose Kane or Toews before they signed long-term extensions last time.

Duncan Keith gets paid almost $2 million less than Letang's new deal.

Kane and Toews signed for a cap hit of $6.3 million, $300,000 more than Shero's offer to Jordan Staal.

The only similarities between these two teams is that they both play in the nhl.

One is an efficient mega company that makes difficult decisions that is in the best interest of the shareholders, the other is a mom and pop shop with way too much loyalty and family values.

Duncan Keith had a new deal when the cap was lower. It is bound to be a more favourable deal now than the Letang deal will look. In 2010-11, the first year of his new 13 year $72m deal the cap was $59.4m. Compare that to the potential $70m next season when Letang's extension kicks in.

The Staal offer was an attempt to keep him as he would have been beneficial what with the 3 C model that they prefer. Don't think I would have given him that though.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Why Toews? Three pivots back to back to back, all in the top two. I always thought it was an odd decision.

You had one of the best pure snipers at the wing position coming out in years with Kessel. It's still baffling why they just grabbed two elite pivots back to back, then decided they needed another one. Why would you not draft an elite winger there for Crosby or Malkin?

Why use a top two pick on a third line pivot? Shero could have really rounded this team out with that selection, but wanted to load up on pivots like he wants to load up on puck movers. Gotta have balance.

This was what I said a couple days before the draft, so I guess that'd be about as good an answer as any:

Frankly, Staal's lack of urgency to improve and pat answer when asked who'll be the best of the Staal brothers rubs me the wrong way. It might just be the whole 17 year old thing, but I do have doubts whether he has the drive to become an elite player, and I figure he might end up a self-satisfied second-tier guy.

I see Kessel coming into the league and eventually becoming a top scorer, but when the chips are down and the expectations are high, he'll falter. Staal, I dunno. So much potential, but it's almost as though he's already resting on his laurels, and that's pretty dangerous when the most you've accomplished thus far is a ppg at the junior level.

But that Toews, he's done nothing to show me that he is in any way complacent or nonchalant about his future. He will strive to get better in all facets of the game, and come crunch time, that is the sort of player I'd like Pittsburgh to have on a shortened bench come playoff time.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=261944

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Partially, but at the same time, Shero seems too married to his veterans to cut ties when he should. A guy like Orpik might have yielded a similar return to what guys like Versteeg, Byfuglien, or Ladd did a year or so ago when he still had time left on his contract. But Shero instead saw him as a "core" guy, instead of as a declining player who was just taking a spot away from one of the many good young defensemen.

He probably would have, but he was very good in the playoffs last year. I guess you can make the argument that it's better to trade a guy a year early than a year late, but when he was a big part of your best pairing, I don't think it's such an easy decision.

This summer, there's no choice.

Also, as IceCapp mentioned, Shero has a penchant for hanging on to more "useless" guys than Bowman. Who has been Chicago's equivalent of Adams and Glass over the past few seasons? Maybe Jamal Mayers, maybe Adam Burrish? Bowman didn't stubbornly hang on to those guys. They were useful to the team at that point in time, but then he had no issues letting them move on because he understood they were dime a dozen guys, not key guys who absolutely had to be retained.

There is that Handzus guy that caused the Hawks to deal Pirri for nothing.

But yeah, Shero has kept more grinders like Adams and Glass around for too long, no doubt. We'd be a better team without them.

Shero's had enough assets to work with that he could actually made improvements, if he was willing to cut ties with certain guys. Orpik is the obvious one, but I still think committing the kind of money he did to Dupuis and re-signing Scuderi were also moves that cost money that were unnecessary and could have been spent (or combined together) on upgrades, rather than just sticking with what we've got.

If you're talking about UFA wings last year, I don't think there was anybody worth it. Which kind of goes back to the lack of pre-established depth.

There's still a lot to be determined on the Scuderi and Dupuis fronts. I'm not going to call them mistakes yet.

I just think Bowman's done a better job of keeping the important guys while filtering off the excess than Shero has. Shero's kept too many guys, or signed guys who weren't needed, and it's part of what's hurting the depth of this team.

We could use some trimming. But not to the extent you're suggesting, IMHO.

 

[Pancakes]

I mean, we won a cup with Staal being a key part of that win so whatever. At least it wasn't a total disaster of a pick.

Who knows how those other guys turn out here anyways. If we take Toews he's a third line center and maybe doesn't reach the offensive potential he has now since he wouldn't be getting #1 pp time here. Or maybe taking Toews means we move Toews or Malkin to wing which would again hamper either one of them.

Kessel is very good now but it took him two full years in the NHL to find his stride. Maybe the Pens wouldn't have been patient with him.

Backstrom would have the same issues as taking Toews.

The Staal pick was a clear mistake in retrospect but I don't know if taking those other guys automatically would have made us an unstoppable juggernaut. They're more relied on on the teams they're on now than they would have been here.

 

[Ragamuffin Gunner]

Duncan Keith had a new deal when the cap was lower. It is bound to be a more favourable deal now than the Letang deal will look. In 2010-11, the first year of his new 13 year $72m deal the cap was $59.4m. Compare that to the potential $70m next season when Letang's extension kicks in.

The Staal offer was an attempt to keep him as he would have been beneficial what with the 3 C model that they prefer. Don't think I would have given him that though.

CHI signed two circumvention contracts (Keith and Hossa), which have helped them out a great deal since.

Shero could have done the same thing.

 

[The Big Dawg*]

Why Toews? Three pivots back to back to back, all in the top two. I always thought it was an odd decision.

You had one of the best pure snipers at the wing position coming out in years with Kessel. It's still baffling why they just grabbed two elite pivots back to back, then decided they needed another one. Why would you not draft an elite winger there for Crosby or Malkin?

Why use a top two pick on a third line pivot? Shero could have really rounded this team out with that selection, but wanted to load up on pivots like he wants to load up on puck movers. Gotta have balance.

Exactly, although lets face it, Shero ended up picking up the worst player in the top 5 picks at 2nd overall. Anyone of Backstrom, Toews, Kessel and this team is much better.