Blackhawks Sign Dillon Fournier

On Monday afternoon, the Blackhawks announced that the team has agreed on a three-year, entry-level contract with defenseman Dillon Fournier.

Fournier, a second round pick in the 2012 Draft, had 32 points in 36 games in the QMJHL before an injury cut his season short. He was the first overall selection in the 2010 QMJHL Entry Draft.

This entry was posted in Prospects and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Blackhawks Sign Dillon Fournier

  1. Mike says:

    Tab, off subject, sorry. GM meetings start soon. Give us your thoughts and opinions on how to handle overtimes. Lots of talk about killing the shootout etc.

    Thanks

  2. Tab Bamford says:

    Mike – most people hate the shootout and would prefer a game be decided by PLAYING HOCKEY. The trouble is, with travel and back-to-back games, lengthy overtime(s) could kill a team for a game or two after the fact. Games have to end at some point… but how do you accomplish that and make everyone happy? Detroit GM Ken Holland has presented an idea for 5 minutes of 4-on-4 followed by 5 minutes of 3-on-3. I like that idea, but am also a fan of making regulation wins 3 points instead of 2. If you add incentive, teams will work hard to take advantage.

  3. JS says:

    I’m not Tab, but I’d like to see them adopt the European scoring.

    Regulation Win – 3 Points
    Overtime Win – 2 points
    Overtime Loss – 1 point
    Tie – 1 point each

    10 minute 4v4 with the long change.

  4. AJ says:

    <3 draws

  5. danny says:

    No ties!!!

  6. Mike says:

    Tab, JS….I am in the same thought as you…..NO shootout
    1st Choice: 8 minutes 4 on 4 and end with a tie. All games are 2 points
    2cd Choice: Still 8 minutes 4 on 4 but with the 3 point system as JS suggests.
    If it 10 minutes, that’s ok too.

    I am not in favor of 3 on 3 hockey. I love the open ice but it will put a lot of strain on key players. After an exhausting 65 minutes, tired players could more easily get hurt with all that space and chopped up ice.

  7. Jim says:

    I think to start they should just bump up the OT to a 10 minute 4 on 4. Then a shootout. If that doesn’t drop the amount of shootouts, then do a more drastic option the following year. I think ties are unsatisfying. I agree that 3 on 3 will just wear the players out too much for back to back games.

  8. ebonyraptor says:

    First a comment on Fournier – kind of another odd timing thing. He’s been injured for almost 3 months and I think he had surgery recently (shoulder?). He’s a very promise prospect but given the circumstances I would think they would like to see him play again before signing him. Plus with K.Hayes and Johns having to be signed within a short window after their college seasons end I wonder if the Fournier signing indicates they think Johns may opt to hold out and go UFA.

    Regarding shootouts and OT – I originally liked the novelty of the shootout but like most novelties – it didn’t last long. So count me into the group who want to see the shootout gone. I’d vote for the Euro-scoring that JS listed except I’d keep it a 5 minute 4v4 OT. Either that or go with a 2 points for the winner – 0 points if you don’t win so that if the game is still tied after th3 5 minute OT – neither team gets a point. That should provide sufficient incentive to go all out to score in the OT period.

  9. Mike says:

    ER, your right on. That is why they went to a shootout in the first place. Teams just kinda hung on and each grabbed a point. Going 4 on 4 has helped keep shootouts down to a reasonable level but they are still no way to end a game.
    Wow, zero points for a tie, that would spice things up……especially when playing out of conference, which is now about 36% of the games.

  10. David Bonnema says:

    Mike is correct about the strain on players with 3 on 3. Troy Murray also made that point. Plus there’s this: how do they call penalties with 3 on 3, since 3 players are required on the ice at all times?

    As for the point for an OT loss: why reward a loss? You don’t see the other sports reward for OT.

  11. Sr. Brad says:

    First, Fournier was signed now, because he has a window as well…the Hawks had to sign him, or lose his rights…he has a chance at being a dynamic NHL DMan, but has a long way to go…

    ER, as for Johns, Bowman said again, recently, that he fully expects to sign Hayes and Johns…he knows these 2 have to be signed…what’s exciting is that by month’s end we will be seeing TT, Hayes and Johns…perhaps only one in Chicago, with the other 2 in Rockford…

    Tab, I think 5 minutes of 4 on 4 is more than enough OT, BUT they need to start rewarding regulation time wins with 3 points…as you say, players/teams will then start approaching the prospect of a tie differently…

  12. Rufus T. Firefly says:

    Simplest answer is to extend a 4 v 4 OT period to 10 minutes. Nothing resolved after 10 minutes? Then it’s a 1 point tie for each team.

    KILL THE SHOOTOUT. It sucks and goes against everything this great sport is about. I say this as a crabby 50 year old man who has followed this sport since I could lace up the skates (with Mom’s help) at age 4. The SO has been a disaster for the NHL. I HATE IT.

  13. goldenbladz says:

    Yes the shootout must go. I’m ok with the 5 min OT with 4 on 4. I like the idea of a 3 point regular win (as it adds incentive to win outright) and 2 point for OT win and 0 points for OT loss. After 5 min of OT a tie is a tie 1 point each.

  14. JS says:

    The thing that sucks is that shootouts are actually exciting. Everyone is standing and they live and die with each round. However, after 65 minutes of awesome hockey, I HATE seeing the extra point decided by a skills competition that is nothing more than a coinflip.

    The thing that concerns me about the extra 5 minutes in overtime isn’t the injury factor, but rather the ice. It would probably be pretty sloppy after 30 minutes of skating on it.

    I really think the long change alone in overtime would help increase games ending during actual hockey.

  15. Mike says:

    I have some misgiving about 3 points for a win and 1 point for a tie. As I opined earlier, 10 minutes is a long time to have an overtime unless they resurface the ice. If a penalty occurs during 3 on 3 the team on the power play will probably get an extra player and they will skate 4 on 3. But let’s hope they don’t go 3 on 3

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>