Blackhawks Shutout By Sharks

The Hawks started the game without Artemi Panarin, who was scratched because of an illness. Unfortunately, it turned out that the entire offense needed some medication.

Chicago had chances in the first period. Two power plays led to ten shots in the opening 20 minutes; San Jose was credited with only eight on net in the first. And with 2:37 remaining in the first, a puck got past Martin Jones into the San Jose net.

That puck appeared to bounce off the lower leg of Brandon Mashinter. And it appeared there might be a review of the play with the war room in Toronto.

But before that review could take place, the Sharks challenged the play. They claimed Hawks center Dennis Rasmussen had interfered with Jones.

And the league agreed.

For the second time in a week, the Blackhawks had a goal taken off the board by a coach’s challenge when it appeared the Hawks player in question was pushed into the opposing goaltender.

The second period saw more shots on net, but only one team scored. Patrick Marleau scored a power play goal 9:09 into the middle frame to give San Jose a 1-0 lead in a period that saw the Sharks out-shoot the Hawks 13-12. The Hawks didn’t generate consistent pressure until the final few minutes of the period, but Jones was up to the task.

Corey Crawford skated to the bench with his team chasing only one goal with two minutes left in regulation. He had stopped 25 of 26 to that point, but there had been no offense in front of him. Joe Thornton bounced a puck into the open net 18 seconds later to extend the lead to two. The Hawks weren’t able to get anything done the rest of the way and fell at home 2-0.

Jones stopped all 32 shots he faced to earn the victory for the visitors.

There wasn’t much to like in the box score for the Hawks. Perhaps the only two bright spots were Artem Anisimov, who won 15 of 21 at the dot, and Jonathan Toews, who won 13 of 19. Marian Hossa led the way with five shots on net, while Jiri Sekac returned to the lineup and finished tied with Teuvo Teravainen with four shots. Sekac skated only 7:44 in the game, the lowest on Chicago’s roster.

Coach Joel Quenneville spread out the ice time among his defensemen. Duncan Keith (23:18) and Brent Seabrook (23:44) predictably led the way, but the other four defensemen were all held under 20 minutes. Niklas Hjalmarsson (17:39), Erik Gustafsson (19:03), Michal Rozsival (17:29) and Trevor van Riemsdyk (17:03) didn’t help initiate the offense as the Hawks’ blue line group has done recently.

Unfortunately, Dallas won in overtime earlier on Tuesday night, cutting into the Hawks’ lead in the division. The Hawks host the Stars on Thursday night at the United Center.

65 thoughts on “Blackhawks Shutout By Sharks

  • February 9, 2016 at 10:27 pm

    Wrong call yet again on the 70 goalie interference … Nice heads up play from Mashinter.. Well that sucks big time. What can you do? .. Nuthin’

  • February 9, 2016 at 10:29 pm

    Q press conference — if you want to call it that — classic.

    I’m concerned Dan Marouelli is assisting in the war room in Toronto these days and infiltrating the on ice refs’ headsets.

  • February 9, 2016 at 10:40 pm

    How can this be fixed.

    Lineup. Get these people in charge of the goalie interference calls in a lineup.

  • February 9, 2016 at 11:03 pm

    Here,s the poop, wear a hawks uniform and touch the goalie seconds before a goal is scored ,.,.,NO Goal.
    Nuff said.

  • February 9, 2016 at 11:25 pm

    Mr Kozari,

    With all due respect, a player pushed toward the netminder, and then the netminder leans out to make sure there is some contact, (not enough to deter playing the puck) and you overturn the call on the ice? If the on ice call was no goal, then maybe your washout is acceptable, but the on ice call was good goal and your review would have been more appropriate to have said inconclusive so the call on the ice stands.

    NHL, please fix this problem with the on ice officials making up their interpretation on the fly, with a super small screen! The officials should not directly impact the score of any game. This call took the first goal of a game away, and likely impacted the final score. Shameful NHL!

  • February 9, 2016 at 11:27 pm

    moderate THIS!

  • February 9, 2016 at 11:30 pm

    With all due respect, a player pushed toward the netminder, and then the netminder leans out to make sure there is some contact, (not enough to deter playing the puck) and the call on the ice is overturned!? If the on ice call was no goal, then maybe the washout is acceptable, but the on ice call was good goal and the review would have been more appropriate to have said inconclusive so the call on the ice stands.

  • February 9, 2016 at 11:37 pm

    …and furthermore Kowal, the so-called interference occurred when the netminder went to push the player out instead of playing the puck!

  • February 9, 2016 at 11:49 pm

    Interference or not, Hawks needed more than that disallowed goal. The Dallas game will be another test for the scorers. With any luck Panarin will be back and the lines back to normal.

  • February 10, 2016 at 12:00 am

    with 32 wins of 36 on the season when the boys score first, that disallowed goal bad call was HUGE!

  • February 10, 2016 at 12:06 am

    Further more,.,.,.when you don,t score ,.,.EH ,.,.,goal,,.,.,.,.,.,.,.in a game,.,.,.,., stats prevail ,.,.,.,.ya don,t win.

  • February 10, 2016 at 12:45 am

    So the lesson for d-men around the league is to push the opposing player into your goalie and if the puck goes in it will be overturned. NHL officiating – as bad as it gets.

    But, they played out of sync all night and when they do that the don’t win most of the time. Passes off the mark, or on the mark and not received cleanly. They were not crisp and the Hawks have to play crisp to be a good team. Hopefully it was a one game thing and not the start of a swoon. With Dallas next and Anaheim on deck this is no time to be floundering.

    On a positive note, I thought Panik and Sekac played well and both showed their speed which was good to see. And I would be remiss if I failed to mention Rozsival who has played pretty well the last few games.

  • February 10, 2016 at 1:00 am

    NHL 1 – Sharks 1 – Hawks 0. Thank You Bettman!

    Throw this game in the garbage bin. On to the next game vs Sallad. (Fun fact, Dallas spelled backwards in swedish means salad).

    Go Hawks!

  • February 10, 2016 at 1:02 am

    I’m not big on blaming the refs for losses. But it is becoming more suspicious that pretty much every call that goes to Toronto, goes against the Hawks including earlier in the season when Kruger was tackled going to the net and scored off a carum. they called a distinct kicking motion and waved off the goal.

    I do believe that a clear “jealously” has formed toward the Hawks throughout the league. Other organizations are not only envious that the Hawks have won 3 Stanley cups in 6 years but that free agents want to play “here”. That college free agents such as TVR and Kero choose Chicago. That European players like Panerin and Rasmussen “choose” Chicago.

    Our Beloved Hawks are the King of the Hill and everybody is trying to topple them.
    Just my 2 cents

  • February 10, 2016 at 5:39 am

    I think the refs on the ice made the call not Toronto? In any event the Hawks passing was terrible. I was also surprised to see that TT not really working on the 2nd line. Shaw didn’t have a good night either.
    Sekac was noticeable in the little time he had out there. Hopefully he gets another shot on Thursday. He might do well with Shaw on the 4th line. Then Panik can be tried out on the 1st line…

  • February 10, 2016 at 6:14 am

    Coache’s challenges are ruled on by the on ice referees. A quick Google search will show that the Blackhawks are not the only team frustrated by apparent bad calls made by the refs this year. Maybe next year they will ship the call to Toronto.

  • February 10, 2016 at 6:51 am

    It is one thing to disallow a goal when an offensive player makes contact with the opposing keeper, and something else to allow a team to guide an opposing player into their own goalie. What we have now in the NHL is almost a coin flip arbitrary situation where a rule is open to interpretation by referees on the ice looking at poor quality replays, and then making a decision. Games should not be decided in this manner, and unless something is done soon, referees will be deciding who wins and loses in the playoffs. Who plays and who goes home.

    The NFL has taken clear cut rules and bent them in recent years in an even more bizarre fashion with video replays. What is a catch in the NFL these days? Depends who is the referee. Replays are not supposed to lie and most of the time they don’t. If a replay is unclear then the initial referee decision should stand right or wrong. How hard is this??

    If an NHL coach questions a call, that replay should go to Toronto where multiple angles and viewpoints can be utilized. Let those guys make the call. Either way, can this get done a little bit faster? The flow of the game is adversely affected too. Good on Q for bolting the presser last night. Hawks have seemingly been hurt plenty this year with these nebulous goalie interference rulings.

    Hawks got beat last night by a team that slowed the game down by stacking the neutral zone and standing up at their own blue line. Sharks got great goal tending, and gave the Hawks very little room to operate offensively. Hats off to the Sharks, but one can only imagine that perhaps this game might have played out differently if an all important legit first goal had been left on the board.

    Stars will come in hungry and looking for some payback Thursday for sure. Hawks better be ready and hopefully Panarin will be back strong. He was sorely missed last night.

    Lets Go Hawks!

  • February 10, 2016 at 7:14 am

    Folks, I’m as big as a Blackhawk fan as anyone but take off the Hawk colored glasses. True, Rasmussen was pushed in the crease but if you watch the tape, he makes little effort to get out of it. Just because your pushed into the area doesn’t allow you to camp there for the rest of the play. The call against Hossa was terrible in Phoenix, but this was the right call.

  • February 10, 2016 at 7:22 am

    From what I remember of Jones, he’s kind of taken a page out of Quick’s book.

    Quick has done the mask thing, he’s also known for intentionally dislodging the net. Louis Domingue took off his mask and then whined after a goal was allowed. All these infractions should be penalty just like embellishment is. Goalie gets bumped then tries to make it look more serious. Classless.

  • February 10, 2016 at 7:29 am

    ER- I had the same thought… if Goalies are smart… ANY time a guy is in crease…
    Goalie should just “initiate” contact- thereby eliminating any goal scored… pretty simple- and sad.

    In this case- 70 did nothing to impede goalie… from playing puck- Jones reaches his arm out for the little contact…. NHL- should simply change rule- Zero offense in crease- cuz this “contact” stuff is a joke- then again- D men would just Push the O into the crease- and get same result- No Goal!!!

    NHL- needs to look at the rule… and re-define

  • February 10, 2016 at 7:44 am

    Yes Wall, the rule needs to be re-defined so the players actually know what the rule is.

    Sorry Big Al, Jones had ample opportunity to move and play the puck. Plus Rasmussen was pushed into crease. To say a player has to attempt to move out of the crease away a goalie is cloudy since it occurs very quickly when that player is guided towards the goalie.

    I agree Ernie. I believe your points are well taken.

    Lets Go Hawks!

  • February 10, 2016 at 8:22 am

    You hate to sit here and say a bad call cost them the game, but no doubt it had a huge effect on it. Is this going to be a regular call now? So if it wasn’t challenged Toronto just reviews the kick? If it is challenged only the ref reviews it on his IPAD mini? Bad call, not as bad as Phx but still a horse shit call.

    That being said the Hawks need to over come these BS calls and persevere.

  • February 10, 2016 at 8:28 am

    @ Ernie,

    Great link thanks! and clearly Pete DeBoer is just a little bitch since he has a track record of this.

  • February 10, 2016 at 8:32 am

    They made the right call on the disallowed goal. If you watch the replay, Rasmussen was in the blue paint, made contact with the goal tender and impeded his ability to play the puck.

  • February 10, 2016 at 8:52 am

    I for one do not want the bad old days back. The days of if your toe was just touching the blue paint & had no effect on the play- no goal.

    Is this procedure perfect? No, none are.

    That being said, the on ice officials need a bigger device to view the play, I understand Toronto is helping them, but sheesh at least give them a larger tablet to help them view the whole picture.

  • February 10, 2016 at 9:00 am

    Yes he was in the paint

    But WHY was he in the paint??


  • February 10, 2016 at 9:06 am

    No power play goals. And some credit is due to San Jose for mucking up the middle of the ice and keeping the Hawks from getting a whole lot of anything going.

    Its approaching coast time anyway. Thursday should be interesting at a minimum.

  • February 10, 2016 at 9:16 am

    It’s funny, the league wants more scoring. Yet this removes more goals than it awards. Regardless of if he touches Jones. Jones had no idea where the puck was. Until it was past him.

  • February 10, 2016 at 9:23 am

    I didn’t finish reading the link I referenced. But in that instance too caps fans and media say this encourages goalies to embellish when they’re screened.

    I agree this wasn’t as bad as the Phoenix call.

  • February 10, 2016 at 9:28 am

    Even though we needed to this or that better, it doesn’t change the fact that that horse shit call, again, was the only reason that wasn’t a 1-1 tie with the way we played and the way they played.

    There’s no way to know how game goes after good goal is not waived off. Except that it was a 1-1 game. We did what we needed to do, even though we did t do some things good/better, to get at least a tie.

    These are the types of games where we donot get a tie when we deserve to based on play of teams that, can, make a diff in the seeds. Otherwise this was a meaningful game that that horse shit call better not effect is in playing good/winning games in the next few games or I am really going to be pissed. These types of things can disrupt the flow of the team game, momentum wise.

    Fucking horse shit, is all you have to say. And fix it right fucking now and hang up.

  • February 10, 2016 at 9:33 am

    Nigrelli & Davehawk spot on correct.

  • February 10, 2016 at 9:39 am

    Jammer made a good point on the post game show last night, saying (paraphrasing) that because the replays are in slow motion it is more technicality and less hockey play. I think what he meant, and I agree with him, is that in the slow motion replay it appears Rasmussen didn’t make an adequate attempt to disengage with the goalie quickly enough because it SlowMo it appears he’s in there for a couple seconds. But in actual time it is reasonable to assume Rasmussen was attempting to disengage as he was turning to his left and moving out of the crease area. The point being that Rasmussen may have made a best effort to get out of the goalie’s space but in SlowMo it masks that because it makes it appear he was in there longer than it was in real time.

    On the other hand the SlowMo more clearly showed Jones really was the one who made the contact when he put his arm up to stop Rasmussen from bumping into him.

  • February 10, 2016 at 9:41 am

    (Wall) ” if Goalies are smart… ANY time a guy is in crease…
    Goalie should just “initiate” contact- thereby eliminating any goal scored… pretty simple- and sad.” — maybe there should be embellishment penalties called?

    Besides that bad call, I think Panarin out was a major factor – it not only impacted Kane and Anisimov, it shuffled two other lines. Also, S.J. checked/defended really effectively and won most of the board battles.

  • February 10, 2016 at 9:44 am

    Maybe all reviews/calls should be made in Toronto? The on ice officials have enough to handle on the ice (in the moment)

  • February 10, 2016 at 10:05 am

    Every instant replay should be in TOR. They should do instant replay on slow motion for certain things and be mandatory to watch in real time as well.

    Another thing is why do they not have people in TOR watching every play that’s a goal so they already have a head start on the instant replay. Then it wouldn’t take as long as it does. Then get some men on the assembly line.

    The refs have too much control already on penaltys etc they cannot have this or handle this, especially with small screens/standard definition.

    Has to be in TOR, this is not rocket science.

  • February 10, 2016 at 10:08 am

    Sharks where well, like sharks smelling blood all night. And they got some chum our hawks. Sharks defense took away all the shooting lanes like ALL NIGHT. ( sorry for caps) Great Back Checking and a damn good road record. Not clean, good chances all night. Everything contested sort of the BlackHawks mo.

    When ROZY is your standout player like last night you know your in for a long night.

    These goalie interference calls are getting old, really on ice challenges need a HD monitor of size, as ranted before , now they look at a small i-pad on ice, weak at best. As was the call . . . if the NHL and fans want more goals this needs to stop, the stoppage of play is killing me and the calls are just silly. This is the problem with the NHL, just stupidity. Rasmussen is getting a nose for the crease and like how much time does he “get” to get out of the way after being pushed.

    Sekac showed some speed (obviously) and some balls to at least get to the net. Panik to me still looks pretty good and has the upper body strength that Shaw lacks and I like to see Panik on the top line. Shaw is having a very good year but his lack of stick handling skills is killing the offensive threat of that first line. The good news is Shaw makes that top line the best defensive top line in the nhl by a long shot. Come playoffs we’ll need goals, I think Panik should get a shot. imo

    Hit me like a Mike Tyson head butt last night, but Artem Anisimov can /should teach, grow and coach the “Moose “ Rasmussen, some skills, stick reach, and closing out. Moose must improve he is playing good, and the 3rd 4th lines are at least getting to the net. In fact the 3rd and 4th line carried the night and kept it close, when it shouldn’t have been. Those bottom two lines also a heavy to the puck and getting a little physical so that good, but not good enough come playoff time.

    Crow Show still on, kept us in it all night . . . not to be over looked.

    Go hawks

  • February 10, 2016 at 10:21 am

    Lots of whinnnnning today? Yes, if a goaltender gets a player to lean in, or get checked into him, or brushed, he can if he wants “lean in and fake / force a possible interference call” then . . . the call can not be made and the goal can count.

    Sadly a pattern will emerge, Goalies will learn to lean and Goalies will begin to FLOP? not good for the NHL. it is hard to score goals already.

    Our Hawks Defensemen are not as physical as most in the NHL when it comes to the blue crease and protecting Crow’s body, shots yes, body no!.Our defense technically is amazing but ya seldom see our guys check / push an opposing player into the crease so We Wont Get those calls because they rarely happen.

    This is a shit hole to dive into , . . this will slow the game down as this “faux interference” happens a lot. i am surprised coached challenge is not used more
    often.I can not find stats to how many “coach challenges” have been made and or reversed on ice calls.

  • February 10, 2016 at 10:25 am

    Yes all calls made in Toronto but again too simple, too common sense for “Stupid” NHL . . love hockey but damn this getting old. Slowing down the fasted game on the planet . . . to try to identify the contact, the force, the angle the intensity and the abilities of two players in the crease is impossible.

    Maybe do away with the CROSS CHECK in the back that the NHL is built on for the last 50 years. where a defensemen can just level a player without the puck and get away with it, that always bothered me. maybe just me, but if the “play” was fair in front of the crease this might not happen, a defensemen would have to have a skill and body to move ya, not cross check you in the back, over and over and over?

  • February 10, 2016 at 10:28 am

    As long as there is human judgement involved, these calls will never be correct all the time. Until robots are inserted in place of humans, everyone is going to feel their team was shafted by the call on the ice.

    I am all for machines replacing home plate umpires in MLB games, as there should be no judgement involved when calling balls and strikes.

  • February 10, 2016 at 10:28 am

    Should the call have been overturned-no, it was too close to do that-but the conspiracy theories?? Really-(this is a hot button topic that will be worked on by the NHL)
    This team is too good to worry about disallowed goals-
    Big Al has it right.

  • February 10, 2016 at 10:48 am

    Anybody read what they speculated at Second city hockey. Said the Hawks should bring in Andrew Ladd for a package centered around Andrew Shaw. Ive made comments before on trading Shaw. However, my view has since changed. I’ll admit Rufus may have been right when talking about Shaw’s season being his best yet.

  • February 10, 2016 at 11:06 am

    shaw and other for LADD . . . take it and run. LADD is such a good fit and will instantly pay off, no learning curve . . . not sure i would go more than the year keep it short term. LADD is a safe bet and if Shaw and a minor player brings LADD then this is a steal. SHAW has peaked , he’s very good but this is his peak.

  • February 10, 2016 at 11:42 am

    I am sorry, but I can’t see giving up Shaw and another prospect for Ladd as a rental player. That’s overpaying. There is no way we can sign Ladd next year. I love Ladd and thought his departure in 2010 was the most detrimental of the losses we’ve had to the team since then, however, I think including Shaw in that trade would be an over payment. If you do the trade, it has to be draft picks and other prospects; 1st rounder and others plus prospects-Pokka, Moose, Svedberg, Hinostroza, or other icehogs…. If you include Shaw in any trades, it has to be one for more than a rental player. I believe some are undervaluing Shaw’s value to this team. I think he is more a part of a winning core than people here seem to believe. He is a gamer with a championship heart that does what it takes to win. That’s hard to find. Ladd is the same with more skill. Would love to see him here, but not at the expense of giving Shaw away.

  • February 10, 2016 at 11:51 am

    “shaw and other for LADD . . . ” — is ridiculous!! Keep him. Shaw brings something unique and valuable (almost every game)…he has become *almost* a “core player”, in my opinion. Unfortunately the Jets ill not give Ladd away, and I wouldn’t pay much more than that (nothing) to get him as “a rental” (- also don’t see him fitting into any long range plans for this team…if I were betting I’d say Stan B. agrees).

  • February 10, 2016 at 11:56 am

    ” If you do the trade (Ladd), it has to be draft picks and other prospects; 1st rounder and others plus prospects-Pokka, Moose, Svedberg, Hinostroza, or other icehogs….” — absolutely NOT!!! “1st rounder and others plus” << this is an excellent example of OVERpaying for *a rental*. After moving picks last season it would best serve the team's future to use prime picks at the draft.

  • February 10, 2016 at 12:01 pm

    …further, I like Ladd, and agree with Booman “a part of a winning core… is a gamer with a championship heart – does what it takes to win. That’s hard to find.”, but we are discussing the price for “a rental” and not losing sight of the cap and seasons beyond this year (Panarin’s bonus and probable extension, other players we’d like to keep, etc.)

  • February 10, 2016 at 12:29 pm

    MTM ‘; I don’t think Shaw has peaked at all. This has been his best season, at the ripe old age of 24. Can not overlook his value in the room/team chemistry. How old is Ladd? Shaw for a rental with bad numbers…….no.

  • February 10, 2016 at 1:03 pm

    Shaw is at his peak . . . playing on the top line, gets the minutes and yes is playing very well. I know his “numbers” at the end of this season will be his water mark, ya heard it here first. Shaw will have a good year, he will hit s level that won’t increase next year in goals, hits or assist or corsi. All I’m saying is I like LADD and his impact would be instant no guess work, gets the system and would pick up the team big time Ladd is Vermette x 6! Sadly i know Jets don’t want our second hand love nor players, I think to get a “player” like Ladd ya gotta give it up. If Bickel could actually play maybe ya package him, Moose and a defensemen but i doubt it.

    i could be wrong, but Ladd is a solid fit and that fit, hit the ice running is critical and this is a Stanley Cup run . . . roll some dice?

  • February 10, 2016 at 1:54 pm

    Add Ladd if you want. I’d rather not. But the gain you have adding Ladd would be negated almost 1 for 1 by removing Shaw. Ladd isn’t that much of an upgrade if any compared to what Shaw has done so far. And lets remember he did nothing playing with Bickell for 6 weeks. Ladd is a rental. Shaw is younger and is still under team control (read cheaper) this coming summer. I would not be Shocked to see Shaw get an offer sheet if he’s not locked up. He may not be on the roster next year, but he damn well should be for the playoffs. Absolutely no reason at this point to trade Andrew Shaw. Especially not for Ladd.

  • February 10, 2016 at 2:07 pm

    Shaw is too big to this team in the playoffs- his presence is felt everywhere whether it is in the locker room or on the ice. If the Hawks trade him right before the playoffs I truly believe the Hawks won’t get very far. I think his absence for a time in 2014 because of injury was felt by the team and they struggled. He’s a loud mouth and he’s confident/fearless. They need him for the playoffs.

  • February 10, 2016 at 2:52 pm

    I agree with most, keep Shaw for the playoffs, he is one of the few guys that plays a physical game. I am all for adding Ladd or another LW but not at the expense of Shaw. However, I wouldn’t pay Shaw much more then he is getting paid right now.

  • February 10, 2016 at 6:07 pm

    Trading Shaw now, to me, would fall somewhere north of foolish and just south of stupid, which would put it right around idiotic. Especially if what we get in return is only a rental that we have no chance of retaining into next year. I totally agree with JT and others who have said the same. He is just too valuable to this team. As far as Ladd goes – love the guy, hated losing him after 2010. His real value I believe is at center and not left wing.
    In my perfect world he’d be our 3rd line center with Danault anchoring the 4th line. Never going to happen but I can dream, can’t I?

  • February 10, 2016 at 9:43 pm

    Trade Shaw – No
    Bad call on the disallowed goal – Yes

  • February 10, 2016 at 10:34 pm

    Shaw going-no way. He has been undervalued since he was a 150 pound, hyperactive pest in the OHL. He has earned respect with his hard work, persistence and improved play to be an important part of the core for this years playoffs.

    Now he’s a 175 lb. pest. Really glad he’s a Hawk!

  • February 10, 2016 at 10:35 pm

    Shaw vs. Ladd??? Well I guess it really depends on if hawks are going to be able to sign 65 next year??? If 65 wants too much… Then 65 is basically the same as a rental and Ladd is better rental…

    Remember Saad was a lock/guarantee to give home town discount… Right!!!
    and stay a Hawk…

    Most people say Boedker or Canes player… I could see SB going off the grid and getting someone no one has on Radar… would love some Janik Hansen (Hawk killer) … but don’t know his cap/contract…

  • February 10, 2016 at 10:43 pm

    I think I read in that 65 and 3rd for 16 or a 1st and prospect for 16.

  • February 11, 2016 at 5:55 am

    As some have said already-I have no problem looking at it as a rental for rental-Ladd is good but I like 65 just as much-
    and try looking the core of that group (let alone 65) in the face when they do that-chemistry is important and i would guess they like that little pest who keeps battling for them-
    so if it just this year-I like Shaw

  • February 11, 2016 at 7:31 am

    Wall, I think the Hawks get compensation if they lose Shaw because he is a restricted free agent. I also believe that Hawks compensation depends on the $$$ Shaw receives. The more $$$ the better the comp.

    Bottom line: Shaw is a bit more than just a rental

  • February 11, 2016 at 9:31 am

    MIke, Shaw is restricted in that his rights are still controlled by the Hawks after July 1. The only way the Hawks get compensation is if he signs an offer sheet. In 2015 if a player was signed between 1.826 and 3.652 the compensation was a second round pick. If the player was signed for more than 3.652 and up to 5.478 the compensation was a 1st and 3rd. I doubt a team would send a sheet his way for the 1st and 3rd compensation. Would the Hawks let Shaw walk for a 2017 second round pick? Doubt it. But if they fear an offer sheet they could trade him. I think a fair deal would be 3 @ 3.25 per

  • February 11, 2016 at 12:07 pm

    Ernie, right and I agree with the $3 – $3.5 range. The conversation above wonders if the Hawks can handle that Cap hit. My point is that Shaw represents more than a rental if the Hawks do not trade him at deadline.

  • February 11, 2016 at 12:14 pm

    Mike, I think any trade negotiation that starts with Shaw is a non starter. Also, if the Hawks are able to trade or dump Bickell that should cover Shaw,Seabrook, and Anisimov.

  • February 11, 2016 at 3:01 pm

    this may be repeating but

    if Shaw has ‘peaked’, then what is Ladd?

    no deal if it’s me. no way

  • February 11, 2016 at 4:40 pm

    Shaw is a huge part of this team and will likely be re-signed. Not sure what they pay him, but he deserves a raise. How much is the question. As much as I loved Ladd, and it’s a pity we lost him after the 2010 Cup, he is way to high on the pay scale now to get back in the fold. At best Ladd would be an overpriced rental given assets that would be needed to acquire him. If they would have to give up Shaw to get that done I don’t like that deal at all. Shaw remains one of my favorite guys on this team despite his occasional brain cramps. Heart of a lion. Right now the Hawks are strong up the middle assuming our centers don’t get beat up badly and are injured into playoffs.

    Big one tonight! Heading that way soon.

    Lets Go Hawks!

  • February 11, 2016 at 5:57 pm

    Enjoy Phil. We expect a full in person breakdown.

  • February 11, 2016 at 6:49 pm

    i never like to get a negative number in a trade when you compare playoff game experience, especially the last 2 rounds. Shaw is the man to have

Leave a Reply

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