It isn't every day that a Chicago team has a great shot to land an elite player and I'm not on board with it. When the Bears landed Jay Cutler, I jumped for joy. When the Blackhawks signed Marian Hossa, I could barely contain myself. When the White Sox landed Jake Peavy, I was thrilled.
There's a Chicago team in the middle of some hot rumors right now, and, while I wouldn't be against the move, there's cause for concern if part of the rumors are true.
A lot was said yesterday about the Atlanta Thrashers looking to move superstar forward Ilya Kovalchuk, and the Blackhawks have been penciled in as a darkhorse, "logical" trade partner for Atlanta. I'm going to now defer to Bob McKenzie's latest blog from TSN:
Chicago: There is some real question as to whether Chicago should even be included in the group of interested teams.
There is every reason to believe that general manager Stan Bowman has no interest whatsoever in disrupting the chemistry of his high-flying Cup contending Blackhawks for Kovalchuk and they're totally out of these sweepstakes. That's the word on the street.
But there are two reasons to at least still mention Chicago as an outside possibility.
One, team president John McDonough is the type of hands-on executive who lives to make a splash and has the "wants" every time a big-name player comes available. There are few bigger than Kovalchuk. McDonough is involved enough that he may try to influence proceedings, even though from a hockey perspective, the interest in Kovalchuk is limited at best.
Two, the Blackhawks know they are going to have to divest some players in the off-season for cap reasons next season. The names most often mentioned are defenceman Cam Barker and forwards Kris Versteeg and Patrick Sharp. An offer of Barker and Versteeg would be entirely in the strata of what Waddell would love to get for Kovalchuk, but given the cap situation in Chicago, Kovalchuk would be virtually impossible to sign long term. The Hawks could stock their cupboard in the off season trading those players for prospects or picks, so when you add it all up, it doesn't compute that Chicago is in hard on Kovalchuk.
What has kept the Blackhawks on the outside of the discussion for most of the past month is what McKenzie talks about early in his notes on the Blackhawks. Stan Bowman isn't ready to compromise the depth of the roster as it presently stands for the sake of the "big splash" move. The team is near the top of the NHL in scoring, and has been effective enough scoring the puck so far this year to be in the hunt for the President's Trophy.
McKenzie posted on Twitter during the game tonight that there was a perceived disagreement brewing between "upper management" and the "hockey heads" for the Blackhawks. If John McDonough steps into the mix, with his admittedly-limited hockey knowledge, and influences Stan Bowman to make a deal here, the future of the Blackhawks could have a dark shadow cast over it quickly.
The unfortunate reality of McDonough's resume is that, while he is arguably the best at selling a professional sports product in the United States, his tenure at Wrigley Field raised jersey and ticket sales, not championship banners. A lot of that has to do with the marketing department being located too close to the talent evaluation department.
We are sitting at the heart of one of the great times in the history of the Blackhawks. I know that's an incredibly bold statement, but I'm confident that the numbers bear witness to the great team we're watching this year. This team is not perfect; Wednesday night certainly pointed out a few flaws. But two areas where this Hawks team does not have problems are depth and scoring.
Would Kovalchuk be a great player for the Blackhawks? Possibly. Could he be the guy to get the franchise over the hump and bring the Cup to Chicago? Not alone he can't. He might bring an added dimension to the roster and solve a few financial headaches in the process, but one man doesn't win the Stanley Cup for a city. A team does. The fact that McKenzie, a much more respected source than Ecklund or Spector, would bring this issue up is cause for concern because of McDonough's history on Chicago's North Side.
There hasn't been an empty seat at the United Center in two years, so the marketing department isn't hurting for commission these days. If the Blackhawks make any trades during the season, it needs to happen because it makes good hockey sense first, sound salary cap sense second, and good business sense third.
Filed under: Chicago Blackhawks
Kovalchuk is going to the Los Angeles Kings.
Yes, that's one rumor...
Point well taken.... HOWEVER nothing ventured nothing gained.... and the depth of our team might be our biggest asset... yet it is tantalizing to consider a Hawks team with scoring beyond comparision in the NHL... Hossa, Kane, Toews, Kovalchuck, Sharp, Brower... what team in the league has the depth to cover 3-4 lines that will score? Nobody can... thats what we have to consider... And if we are not upgrading our goaltending.. we will be looking to outscore our opponents.. that means bring in the Russian
I completely agree with you Beer Nut, and my hope is that this piece doesn't convey that I'm against a Blackhawks trade for Kovalchuk. My concern lies in the reason for the deal. You and I are amateur, ticket-grasping, warm Budweister-product-consuming talent evaluators; Scoty Bowman's arguably the best of all time and his son's pretty darn good himself. If the Hawks strike a deal for Kovalchuk, my hope is that they're going for broke and pushing their chips into the table; I wrote as much and there's a link to that article buried in this story. If the Hawks make the deal for marketing reasons at the expense of both chemistry and future return from assets we already have, and the Bowmans aren't on board, I would struggle a LOT with it.
This is going to be a terrible fence for the Hawks to sit on. They're positioned SO well to win as-is, they're positioned SO well to make a blockbuster deal happen like this... but they're also in a position where a minor tweak here and there could mean as much/more than adding a superstar like Kovalchuk. Remember, last year we weren't nearly this good and only made one trade at the deadline (Wisniewski for Pahlsson) and we ended up in the Conference Finals. There are 40 ways to look at this argument. My concern is that the wrong people make a big decision.
Thanks for the comment!
No question I would rely on Scotty Bowman over anyone else in the organization..or the entire league for that matter .and I agree that McDonough is an opportunist at best... and yes the Hawks are positioned well for another deep run... however the last week or two have exposed the Hawks a bit and a little bump might help...maybe its Bollands return... or adding a solid stay at home physical defenseman... My concern is that our save percentage is weak as we give up 3 goals on 16 - 20 shots.. and we get 40 shots a game but havent been finishing... So either we tighten up the D or get ready to outscore everyone REemember that Hossa and Kovalchuk were deadly together in Atlanta... and how much space would this create for Toews and Kane not up against the other teams shutdown line.. it is a domino effect of sorts..
Again, great points. And this is the great Catch-22 that Bowman has to deal with right now. There are some holes that need patching on this team, and the Hawks have the pieces to do it and do it big. But the question of whether or not you buy into the school of thought that A) defense wins championships, of B) outscore everyone and it'll be ok, both could get the Cup.
I'm glad I don't have to make these decisions!
Personally I buy option A) defense does win championships.... which is why I am suspect at the moment... I am not really big on Kovalchuck as I would prefer a top line goalie or physical defenseman for the team we have now... but again... Bowman and Q will make the right call and I really hope it is their call...
And as far as McKenzies 'twitter' comment about a disagreement brewing within our management.... just remember that twitter starts with TWIT
well put...