Ice Man

By Robby

August 11, 2008 12:49 PM | Link to this

I am more concerned with annual corn crop yields in Iowa that I am with hockey and the Atlanta Thrashers. Hockey is about as riveting listening to an Al Gore dissertation on global warming.

By Alan

August 11, 2008 12:55 PM | Link to this

Trudging Through Augh-ust

This blog title is quite apt for me, as the blower motor in my furnace died at 3am Saturday morning.

(If anyone of you knows where I can purchase the blower motor myself, that would be awesome. I can do the work, but I’m not a contractor.)

As far as summer plans are concerned, I have 10 Oct 2008 circled on my calendar. Everything in between now and then is a void of nothingness to be filled only by the yearning for hockey season to start.

Personally speaking, I feel the Thrashers should address our lack of depth at RW. Center can come later, if it appears Christensen and Little don’t fit the bill of #1.

At least the AC at work is functional… and it’s about 20 degrees cooler this year than it was last year… and our low temps at night are in the mid to upper 60s. Thank the Gods for small favors, eh?

By Jim

August 11, 2008 12:55 PM | Link to this

Jay Boumeester is one of the 5 best D-men in the NHL. He has been outspoken that he wants to play on a team that is a Cup contender (sound familiar). He ain’t comin here- certainly not for Little, X and a high draft choice. Definetly a slow hockey news season. Move most likely- Kari to Red Wings. Who do we get?

By Alan

August 11, 2008 1:11 PM | Link to this

Hockey is about as riveting listening to an Al Gore dissertation on global warming.

What was the point of this false line of garbage? I’m willing to bet you’ve never watched a game of hockey before in your life. Go pay attention to your corn yields and Al Gore speeches, and leave the hockey discussion to us.

Move most likely- Kari to Red Wings

With Chris Osgood as their starter and Ty Conkle as their backup, what would Detroit need with Kari? That would be one of the least likely moves. Ever.

By Alan

August 11, 2008 1:23 PM | Link to this

(Oops, I meant Ty Conklin. Not sure who the hell Ty Conkle is, or why that name was even in my head)

By Jenny

August 11, 2008 1:28 PM | Link to this

Rawhide - Your idea of building from the back forward is what I’ve been preaching since the final days of Bob Hartly. A great offense is dead in the water without a great defense. We talk regularly about what promise the frontlines have at the start of every season, and every season we see the team on the defense game in and game out. The forwards don’t have time to shine because we’re always on our end of the rink.

While I maintain that getting a top center for Kovy is high on the priority list, fixing our defense is just as important. And who knows? If we could give some of the forwards we already have a chance to relax and play offensively, leave the defense up to…defense…they might show us they have some more gusto than we give them credit for.

By Tony

August 11, 2008 1:33 PM | Link to this

The only way you get Boumester is to overpay for him with our own young guys. Martin he’s gonna want Bogosian in return and what’s the point?

Jim, you are overating him also. Are you going to take him on your team for one year instead of a Lidstrom, Campbell, Pronger, Phaneuf, Boyle, Chara, Neidermayer? I would even take 1 year of Rafalski or Redden. I’d even throw in a offensive guy like Markov or Gonchar just to say he’s not even in the top 10. His biggest upside is his age and what you might get out of him for many years. But a one year contract just took that away. Pass. Let’s develop our own guys like Bogosian and Valabik who might be here for many years.

By Jenny

August 11, 2008 1:37 PM | Link to this

Also, I’d hate to lose Little so early in his career. That’s another problem we have. Getting rid of our your talent (cough::Coburn::cough).

I’d hate to lose XLB too, but that just may be because I love his hat collection.

By five_hole

August 11, 2008 1:56 PM | Link to this

While I think our priority should be top-6 forwards, truely, we have so many holes that we should fill them whenever we can made a deal which improves us. However, I would not include trading Little or our 1st round pick next year. If it was X, Sterling and a 2nd or 3rd, I’d make the deal today.

X has a hat collection? Certainly not from his scoring 3 in a game.

By Jenny

August 11, 2008 2:05 PM | Link to this

No, no! Certainly not that kind of hat collection.

No, he was interviewed by Comcast Spotlight at his home, where he showed off his guitar and um…hat collection.

Look, the man just likes hats, okay?

By Tony C.

August 11, 2008 2:38 PM | Link to this

IF Bouwemeester(spl?) agreed to an extension here, then I say pass. I agree that if we’re going for a one-year deal then get a monster I’m talking Pronger. Maaaaaaybe Phaneuf (he’s such a punk, but he does have game), Zubov-somebody who’s been in the league for a little while and who’s shown that he can take over a game. But a guy that’s on the upswing and almost at that level-for one se3ason?

no thanks.

By ThrasherNY

August 11, 2008 3:12 PM | Link to this

First, Florida would never move Bouwmeester to a division rival just like we wont move Kovy to one either.

Second, if Bouwmeester wants out of Florida (a la Hossa) then why on earth would we give up anything of value to have him on our team for a “build year”. It is not as if he is the missing piece to make us a contender this season and just like Florida we dont fit the bill for a guy who wants to compete in the playoffs for the all mighty Cup.

Third, as Tony points out above he is not even a top ten blueliner. While his potential is greater than some on the list I would refer you to bullet #2. In the short run this team could use a tier one guy to show our youth the ropes and speed up there NHL developement. I look to the Hatcher-Coburn relationship for what would be optimal. With Enstrom, Bogo & Valibik we have the young talent it just needs to be developed into a formidable unit. Havelid (post tragedy hangover) seems to have been a positive influence on Enstrom…can he take two others under his wing???

Oh and I must give Bob due credit for the “build year” that I have grown fond of.

By Jessica Cera

August 11, 2008 4:00 PM | Link to this

• Malignant tumors,

• Poetry about slavery by Maya Angelou,

• Lug nuts,

• The Beijing Summer Olympics,

• Potting Soil

Name things more exciting that Hockey.

By Bob

August 11, 2008 4:03 PM | Link to this

and Thrashers fans are left looking for some more moves to finally bring into shape the roster that will take to the ice this fall

I have a feeling that the roster you see today, is the roster they go to camp with. Why? It’s a build year right, ThrasherNY?

Bowmeester would be our #1 dman if he came here, but there’s not sense in trading for the guy for 1 year, Florida would never trade him here anyway, and Bowmeester wants to go to a contender, he’s already sick of playing for Atlanta South.

By R. Stroz

August 11, 2008 4:16 PM | Link to this

Just what we needed, another f-tard blogger.

By Tony

August 11, 2008 4:16 PM | Link to this

ThrasherNY, I see whatcha saying when you and Bob are making the “build year” comment. Since it’s August and we are looking to kill time, I was gonna come back and say our playoff year was our build year, but we just built a house of cards that fell apart. But then it got me thinking

What if we resigned Tkachuk. We continue building on the playoff flop. Now there’s no reason or need to go out and get White. It’s only about a million dollars difference and a 1st round pick (I’ll talk about pick later). Hossa sees true number one center and actually signs extension. Then he plays hard to full ability. Kozlov keeps the chemistry going and has a much better year. You keep the Holik line together that did good in playoffs. Kovalchuk still gets his 50 but gets more with Tkachuk who pots about 25. Enstrom still has good year. Little can stay in Chicago but it’s not a flop year. Hartley keeps going but builds on previous years flop and uses it to motivate. No need for Waddell behind bench. With all that, could it be worth enough wins to at least get us back to the 8 seed? Yeah we give up pick, but since we do better it’s number 16 overall, nowhere near the number 3 that gets Bogosian. You tell Tkachuk he can lose in St. Louis or win with Kovalchuk. Tkachuk becomes short term cog until Little is ready. Do you make the offer ThrasherNY? Bob?

By Ben

August 11, 2008 4:28 PM | Link to this

Article I Section 1. All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

Section 2. The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states, and the electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislature.

No person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the age of twenty five years, and been seven years a citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of that state in which he shall be chosen.

Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three years after the first meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent term of ten years, in such manner as they shall by law direct. The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand, but each state shall have at least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the state of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three.

When vacancies happen in the Representation from any state, the executive authority thereof shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies.

The House of Representatives shall choose their speaker and other officers; and shall have the sole power of impeachment.

Section 3. The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, chosen by the legislature thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote.

Immediately after they shall be assembled in consequence of the first election, they shall be divided as equally as may be into three classes. The seats of the Senators of the first class shall be vacated at the expiration of the second year, of the second class at the expiration of the fourth year, and the third class at the expiration of the sixth year, so that one third may be chosen every second year; and if vacancies happen by resignation, or otherwise, during the recess of the legislature of any state, the executive thereof may make temporary appointments until the next meeting of the legislature, which shall then fill such vacancies.

No person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the age of thirty years, and been nine years a citizen of the United States and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of that state for which he shall be chosen.

The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no vote, unless they be equally divided.

The Senate shall choose their other officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the office of President of the United States.

The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments. When sitting for that purpose, they shall be on oath or affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two thirds of the members present.

Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States: but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment and punishment, according to law.

Section 4. The times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators.

The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

Section 5. Each House shall be the judge of the elections, returns and qualifications of its own members, and a majority of each shall constitute a quorum to do business; but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the attendance of absent members, in such manner, and under such penalties as each House may provide.

Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two thirds, expel a member.

Each House shall keep a journal of its proceedings, and from time to time publish the same, excepting such parts as may in their judgment require secrecy; and the yeas and nays of the members of either House on any question shall, at the desire of one fifth of those present, be entered on the journal.

Neither House, during the session of Congress, shall, without the consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.

Section 6. The Senators and Representatives shall receive a compensation for their services, to be ascertained by law, and paid out of the treasury of the United States. They shall in all cases, except treason, felony and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest during their attendance at the session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any speech or debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other place.

No Senator or Representative shall, during the time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil office under the authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time: and no person holding any office under the United States, shall be a member of either House during his continuance in office.

Section 7. All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other Bills.

Every bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a law, be presented to the President of the United States; if he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the objections at large on their journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, together with the objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a law. But in all such cases the votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and nays, and the names of the persons voting for and against the bill shall be entered on the journal of each House respectively. If any bill shall not be returned by the President within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the same shall be a law, in like manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their adjournment prevent its return, in which case it shall not be a law.

Every order, resolution, or vote to which the concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the same shall take effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the rules and limitations prescribed in the case of a bill.

Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;—And

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

Section 9. The migration or importation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person.

The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.

No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

No capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.

No tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any state.

No preference shall be given by any regulation of commerce or revenue to the ports of one state over those of another: nor shall vessels bound to, or from, one state, be obliged to enter, clear or pay duties in another.

No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law; and a regular statement and account of receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time.

No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.

Section 10. No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility.

No state shall, without the consent of the Congress, lay any imposts or duties on imports or exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it’s inspection laws: and the net produce of all duties and imposts, laid by any state on imports or exports, shall be for the use of the treasury of the United States; and all such laws shall be subject to the revision and control of the Congress.

No state shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage, keep troops, or ships of war in time of peace, enter into any agreement or compact with another state, or with a foreign power, or engage in war, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay.

By R. Stroz

August 11, 2008 4:47 PM | Link to this

Ben - Now if you could write something of your own of such length, we might be impressed.

Brendan can show you how it is done correctly.

By quite upset

August 11, 2008 4:52 PM | Link to this

Like, OMG, who would post such silly things on a blog about hockey?!?! Oh, wait, it’s a blog about hockey. I can’t tell if this is more interesting than watching the tissue in my tissue box move slightly because of the air conditioner vent nearby.

By Tony

August 11, 2008 5:00 PM | Link to this

Hey Stros, I don’t want to get into no p!ssing match with who is signing on with whose names or whatever, but I will say this much to you. Just stop talking to people if they are like that. If you keep calling names back and then you give them something to reply to.

This goes for everyone else here. Just keep continuing the talk we were having. It will take patience and suck sometimes but if your will power is tougher then theirs we will win.

Hey Bob and ThrasherNY, would you make the offer to Tkachuk or no. Let me know, I will check back later.

By Waffleboy

August 11, 2008 5:01 PM | Link to this

Ya know Ben I always preferred the preamble. “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

By ThrasherNY

August 11, 2008 5:12 PM | Link to this

Tony, In answering your question I have the benefit of hinesight so I dont know what value my answer has.

I like your logic in the above what-if scenario but what sticks out to me is that no where does it address the blueline that gave up the most SOG and GA in the league so I dont think Tkachuk would have got us much more than another 1st round romp if any playoffs at all by bolstering the offense.

I see the value in signing Tkachuk not for our ability to make the playoffs last season but for our ability to resign Hossa and eventually Kovalchuk by saying we got you a top center. We made an effort to surround you with talent. No ‘Charmin’ is not an effort.

Honestly I dont think Tkachuk wanted to stay here, so I dont see that we would have had much success in resigning him. Also, based on Hossa’s offseason descision I dont know that signing him would have been enough for Hossa. Hossa left the ranks of some pretty good offensive talent to go to the pinnacle of success and a more well rounded squad.

As for the resigning of Kovy I do think Tkachuk would have bought us that reality. I think Kovy is the easier sell and does want to win in Atlanta far more than Hossa did. That being said I cant see us retaining Kovy by spending the league minimum.

My hopes are that we are calling this season a “build year” and bank rolling the couple extra million we would have spent in a traditional season to be spent next off season in acquiring Kovalchuk’s big name center. I also hope this has been communicated to him just before we told him he would wear the “C” this season. Next offseason we would be in excellent position to spend big time money signing the top FA center, extending Kovy for 5-8 yrs with big money and putting Kari into a modest 4yr deal that gives him a raise to go with his ability but doesnt leave him untradeable if Pavs is our better option two years out. We will actually have home grown talent to fill out the blueline in that time frame with Enstrom, Bogo and Valibik.

Of course all this assumes that we will spend above the floor in an interest to keep our flagship player. If our stategy is forever to operate at ~$40mil until we can bubble into the playoffs with trade deadline deals we can only wonder what sweater Kovy will wear in 2010.

By ThrasherNY

August 11, 2008 5:22 PM | Link to this

Just realized I left out XLB from the home grown talent department and I should not have. Last year was not his best season, but much like I dont feel you can can judge Kari accurately I dont think you can judge XLB fairly either in such a debocle. I see XLB as a quality 3rd pairing guy who is feared and puts the hurt on opposing teams in our future. A roll he is perfect for.

By HookyBob

August 11, 2008 6:22 PM | Link to this

Rawhide: What is your secret? Looks as if a few more “lost bloggers” have ended up here. How do you do it?

Bob: Even if your right leg is shorter than your left..I think you are dead-on with where this team is.

One challenge this team faces is to become an acceptable destination for established players. I don’t know what good free-agent centers may be available next summer,….but getting one of them would go a long,..long ways in getting Kovy to remain here. Mr Stroz was toasted for asking who was available next year,…me thinks he has more insight than most bloggers realize.

Alan: I have a couple of squirrel cage motors. They are yours if you promise to wear a Thrashers jersey at any game the Wings play here in the next year. (I’ll lend you my Steffan #13 Jersey if you don’t have one). Rawhide can give you my contact email if you want to know more about the motors.

Tony: Your brief for resigning Tkachuk is interesting. I thought Kovy matured immensely playing w Tkachuk. We witnessed it this year prior to Rutu’s it. He would definitely have given us the lockeroom, and on ice, leadership this team sorely needed.

Boumeester would help us a bunch. I just don’t see it happening. It makes me revisit how much Nikulin would have helped. I wonder if DW could keep working right now (since it is another league) to get a signed contract for next season?

As Rawhide noted 61 “void filled days” until the puck drops on the next run for Lord Stanley’s cup.

By Jenny

August 11, 2008 7:04 PM | Link to this

In resigning Tkachuk wouldn’t we have stayed a one-line team? Tkachuk may have added 25 goals or so this season, but don’t you think that would have taken away from Kovy’s 50+ a little? I mean, Kovy carried this team on his shoulders alone this year and with someone like Tkachuk he might have settled into the line, still the top scorer of course, but letting Tkachuk and Hossa do some work too. I think scoring might have just evened out.

And as for adding leadership to the locker room: I think the problem was not the lack of actual leadership. You had Kovy and Moose show real integrity on the ice and off (from what I hear). The problem was defense and lack of confidence, specifically in the coaching area. The problem was knowing that one of your best players didn’t want to be there and was looking for a way out, and as was stated before, that probably wouldn’t have changed in keeping Tkachuk.

I think last season bombed because you had a captain who pointed fingers, should have kept team drama to the locker room and not the press, and in general should have shown more class. Accountability is one thing, but damn, Holik had no tact. By the end of the season, he was not what I would call a gentleman.

And then you the fact that after 4 awful losses in your only playoff run to date, you lose another 6 God-awful games and then a coach.

Last season was just a series of mistakes after mistakes after mistakes from management decisions down, with the few shining lights in Kovy, Toby, and Opie. These are the guys that played their hearts out game in and game out, and they are who we need to concentrate on. Not players who very clearly had no intention of staying past May.

I think it was an interesting question, but I also think that if we continue to look back at the what ifs, we’re not supporting the team we have now.

And I’ll tell you something else. That’s about all the time I’m gonna spend considering players who have no regard for this team. Hossa’s production didn’t begin to fail soley because of the team around him. You don’t go from the 2006-07 season that he had, to the 2007-08 season he had by accident. He made himself a moveable player at the cost of the season, and that’s just wrong.

I don’t miss him, I’m not sorry Tkachuk didn’t resign, and I’m pretty darn excited to see what Kovy, Toby, Bogs, and Little have in store for us.

By Tony C.

August 11, 2008 7:22 PM | Link to this

I dunno about X. He just hasn’t been the same since that Hollweg hit. I don’t know if the concussion issues that it raised were the motivating factor behind his emphasis on being “more involved O-fensively” last season… buuut, the guy was way out of position most of the time it seemed.

I’ll give KL a pass due to defenders being out of position (or playing !Ole’! style defense), but I’m not going to give X such a pass.

Granted, dealing with Zhitnik’s tepid-at-best play last year must’ve been crappy, but you must know that not even Bobby Orr could play both Left and Right Defense simultaneously for a whole game. Maybe X was trying to compensate for the Incredible Ice Matador known as Alexi Zhitnik 2K7-2K8?, maybe the concussions have affected neurological function? Who knows for certain?

This I do know: outside of a couple of shifts, X was out of position, looking for that one big open-ice hit more often than not. Say what you will about Ken Klee, but the guy knows where he’s supposed to be on the ice. Watch some tape, X is way up ice, with his mark behind him on a lot of the goals against as well as KL’s highlight reel for saves.

That has to improve. Fan favorite for aspects of his game that were largely absent last season-X has the chance to become a beloved hero of this franchise but if he’s overly concerned about concussion to let the left fly anymore, and too anxious to deliver a big hit, then I’m sure we’ve got somebody down in Chicago that can be out of position most of the time for cheaper. Then he and his many hats can find employment elsewhere.

Don’t take this to mean I dislike X. I love the guy, very friendly dude the kind of guy you can see yourself having a beer or two with, but (and I’m sure he’s actuely aware of this as well) he MUST improve his play from last year.

Maybe it was pressure he felt to contribute O-fensively? He shouldn’t feel that as acutely now with Hainsey & Enstrom set to handle PP duties and looked-to for much of our blueline “O”. Maybe that’s all it was, and X can concentrate on being the nasty guy who has shifts like this! Even though that goober Mcgeough (or however you spell the jackalope’s name) called him for a penalty-I think it was for elbowing, crap call (unless you were one of the Avs that had just gotten pwned).

By Alan

August 11, 2008 9:58 PM | Link to this

Hooky - Would the Kovalchuk Ak Bars sweater I have count? I don’t presently own a Thrashers sweater, though I am hoping to purchase one this season.

(I’ve never worn a Wings sweater to a Thrashers game, and this season would be no exception)

More info about the motors would be wonderful, just so I can make sure we’re not going to blow something up ;) A new motor might be expensive, but a new furnace would cost so much more.

By Bob

August 11, 2008 10:50 PM | Link to this

Tkachuk had 0 chance of signing here, that was a straight rental the whole way, so it’s a moot point. He was always going back to St. Louis.

Even if your right leg is shorter than your left

good one!

One challenge this team faces is to become an acceptable destination for established players. I don’t know what good free-agent centers may be available next summer,….but getting one of them would go a long,..long ways in getting Kovy to remain here

Yep, I see a little light at the end of the tunnel again, the youth gets some game experience this year, we garner another top 2 or 3 pick, they finally settle things with Belkin, get us a GM, sign a center, bada bing.

By ranallo10 (in AT)

August 11, 2008 11:23 PM | Link to this

the youth gets some game experience this year, we garner another top 2 or 3 pick, they finally settle things with Belkin, get us a GM, sign a center, bada bing

Now that’s some optimistic (sorta) thinking.

I expect one of those things to happen…go ahead and guess which one.

By Brendan

August 11, 2008 11:49 PM | Link to this

I see the Hawks matched the Grizzlies offer for Smith. Smith basically said, “All I wanted was some appreciation and recognition for the hard work I’ve done for the past 4 years. I wasn’t trying to hold the Hawks hostage, demanding more than I’m worth. I think the Childress matter could have been resolved, too, if they’d just shown him the love. They basically told me, ‘Here’s our offer. If you think you can do better, we’ll match it.’”

Okay. Where to start?

I guess I return to my earlier points, (1) “Why don’t the Spirit Group know what the value of their players are?” Hire outside help, if need be, to prevent this sort of thing in the future. (2) “Why don’t the Spirit Group re-sign players early, and save some money in the process?” Is there some reason they cannot do this? (3) Why do they seemingly procrastinate for no ostensible reason? (4) Why don’t they be more proactive, thinking 2-3 years in advance, when they make plans and decisions? I’m sorry, but it looks like they fly by the seat of the pants, most of the time.

I know. I know. Just buy tickets and try to enjoy the game, right? Have a beer, if that helps, right?? It’ll all be okay. If you still have questions, have another beer! Have as many as it takes, I suppose. Fork over your credit card, then let your brain release the endorphins. Ahhhh. Much better now.

I guess I’m a complicated fan, in that I need more than that from my team. I’d like to hear explanations. But I more than suspect the answer is, “We don’t owe you anything, much less explanations. Now take your seat.”

By Jethro

August 12, 2008 1:01 AM | Link to this

Are dem Chinese peepel stupid? Evury time I hurd the U.S. National Anthem, not a single one of um screamed KNIGHTS at the rite time.

Ain’t dem peepel no nuthin over thare?

By Toby

August 12, 2008 8:06 AM | Link to this

RH Disagree with the trade proposal. Trading away our future for a guy with 1 year left is wrong. J Bo will be a top 5 UFA next year and won’t stay in the SE. We are not winning the cup this year, so why would we do that?

By Tony

August 12, 2008 9:25 AM | Link to this

yeah Bob, the whole deal was sort of set up like a rental. But I was just kinda playing what if on an August afternoon. As for being a moot point, I think the fact that we are talking about this in August of 2008 instead of June of 2007 makes it an even more moot point.

Jenny, I will disagree that we were a one line team. We had the top line of Kovalchuk and Tkachuk with a winger and the second line of Kozlov and Hossa and I forget who the center was.

By Tony

August 12, 2008 9:29 AM | Link to this

Why don’t they be more proactive, thinking 2-3 years in advance

Brendan, probably because they don’t know if they will be here in 2-3 years so it might not be worth the effort in their eyes. Not sure if the gm, who should always think 2-3 years in advance, can pull it off alone without their signing off on it. Is everyone happy with the Hawks again or what. It seems like they got what they want.

By Jenny

August 12, 2008 11:43 AM | Link to this

Tony - You’re probably right about that. I got stuck on the midseason decision to put Kovy and Hossa on the same line, and just assumed that would have stayed the case.

By Rawhide

August 12, 2008 1:54 PM | Link to this

Check out this NHL.com article about Zach Bogosian?

By Brendan

August 12, 2008 4:39 PM | Link to this

Who will mentor Bogosian? Klee? Havelid?

By Mark

August 12, 2008 6:30 PM | Link to this

I don’t know why people want to give XLB a pass but he was horrible last season and most of the time it was from his own doings. Not someone else’s. He was constantly out of position, going for the big hit, chasing when he shoud stay home, etc, etc. He was flat out horrible. I don’t care if he is a feared open ice hitter, if we are getting the XLB from last season this year, we are better off with Klee in the line-up and that’s sad.

By glovesave29

August 12, 2008 8:25 PM | Link to this

Scott Gordon got the gig on the Island

By Alan

August 12, 2008 8:47 PM | Link to this

I heard about that, glovesave. Dislike of the Island , and all poop jokes aside, I have to wish the best of luck to him. There are several new coaches in the league this year that will have an opportunity to show they can turn their new teams around. And all of them, I think, are going to have a tough time of doing so. Especially our own John Anderson, LA’s Terry Murray, and Tampa’s Barry Melrose.

Best of luck to all the new coaches, really. But I hope we still kick all of their asses.

By Tony C.

August 12, 2008 8:54 PM | Link to this

Eh. I say good luck on not getting fired. Because we will kick their asses.

Gotta believe it to be it, they say.

I’m actually all for Bogey to continue to get mentoring from Ray Borque (as has been mentioned, he was/is a teammate’s father). No offense to Havelid, but uh, I’d rather have Borque giving the kid pointers.

By Brendan

August 12, 2008 9:29 PM | Link to this

Every developing blueliner would like to have Ray Bourque as their mentor! But what if you don’t have a Ray Bourque to be the “guiding light?”

By Alan

August 12, 2008 10:29 PM | Link to this

But what if you don’t have a Ray Bourque to be the “guiding light”?

Perhaps Boruque will continue to play a role in Bogosian’s development? Sure, he won’t be on the team or anything to watch over him, but I’m sure he can continue to give Bogosian pointers after games and whatnot.

Never underestimate the power of a hall of famer.

Gotta believe it to be it, they say.

Certainly! And indeed, I do believe. However, I also want to see what we’re working with before making any sort of assumptions.

Camp can’t come soon enough.

By ranallo10 (in AT)

August 13, 2008 6:19 AM | Link to this

Alan — I’m sure it slipped your mind, but don’t forget DeBoer in Florida.

I find it interesting that 3 names rumored to be in the running for the Atlanta head coaching vacancy earlier this offseason have gotten head coaching gigs elsewhere in the NHL. If I remember correctly there were many divided people on these boards as to their potential coaching quality (unproven coaches to some, potential filled “fresh minds” to others).

Anyways, it’s nice to see Gordon, DeBoer and McClellan all get a shot somewhere. I’m happy with Anderson as the Atlanta head coach, but now I’m curious what’s going to happen to Mike Sullivan (since neither he nor Tortorella got the NYI position).

Think this staff has room for one more?

By Alan

August 13, 2008 11:10 AM | Link to this

I’m sure it slipped your mind, but don’t forget DeBoer in Florida.

Indeed, I did. Thanks. And he’s going to have a tough time in Florida too — especially with their top defender having one foot out the door, Marian Hossa style.

By Tony C.

August 13, 2008 3:15 PM | Link to this

Brendan-

Certainly I’m not suggesting that Borque is “on-call” for Bogosian, but Bogosian and (I think it’s Ray Jr.) Borque’s kid were supposedly pretty close etc. I read an article on tsn just before the draft where they were talking about all the different HOFers Bogosian’s been lucky enough to get some quality time with. It’s a pretty impressive list, including Stevens, Borque, Alfredsson, Leetch among others.

The article went on to say that Borque apparently took a real shine to the kid and has remained in contact with him over the years.

By Brendan

August 13, 2008 4:29 PM | Link to this

Tony C., that’s great news for us that Bogosian has had this kind of history. If any of those HOF’s have rubbed off on him, so much the better!

Imagine if we had permanent defensive coaching from Bourque? He’d probably improve every one of our blueliners. And, perhaps, we wouldn’t lead the league is goals against anymore.

By Tony C.

August 13, 2008 5:37 PM | Link to this

Here is a link to a pre-draft page on Boges there’s a link to a Q&A with Zach from an L.A. Kings-centric paper that has some pretty interesting info vis-a-vis his interaction with Stevens and Borque the link to the interview is under the “News Articles” tab.

By JTuck3

August 13, 2008 6:14 PM | Link to this

Does anyone know where we are at on negotiations and eventual signing of Bogosian? Doughty signed a couple of days ago.

By Alan

August 13, 2008 8:33 PM | Link to this

We have plenty of time to do the deal with him. It’s all about figuring in Bogosian’s bonuses, I think.