@Blackhawks de Chicago

Jeremy Roenick : L’échange que les Blackhawks regrettent toujours



Cette analyse du hockey plonge dans un moment important de l’histoire de la LNH, en se concentrant sur Jeremy Roenick, l’un des joueurs clés du hockey, et sur sa carrière marquante avec les Blackhawks de Chicago. Nous examinons ce différend contractuel majeur, accompagné des faits saillants de la LNH, pour comprendre comment cet événement a remodelé la ligue. Cette vidéo propose un regard approfondi sur une période cruciale du hockey sur glace pour la franchise.

14 Comments

  1. I'm sorry – but you've badly missed the mark on this one.
    It's not about having a 'soul of the franchise'. or a marquee player, or any individual player…it's about winning Lord Stanley's Cup. You ask any Blackhawks fan, if they'd rather have JR on the team, or those 3 Cups…what do you think they will say?

    Ask any Maple Leafs fan – TODAY…what would you rather have: Austin Mathews or a guaranteed Stanley Cup…what do you think they would answer?

    This isn't the NBA. It isn't about the individual – it's about the team. Blackhawks fans didn't all of a sudden become Coyote's fans. Especially when they won those cups.

    Roenick, along with Steve Larmer, Chris Chelios, Michel Goulet, Igor Kravchuk, Steve Smith, Brent Sutter and Eddie Belfour/Dominik Hasek in nets…a stacked team…couldn't win the Cup.

    He didn't get the job done. Roenick subsequently played for the Phoenix Coyotes (twice), Philadelphia Flyers, Los Angeles Kings and San Jose Sharks. 7 teams. How many cups did he win?

    He was also a head case. So there is that…

  2. Who knows though? If Jeremy Roenick never got traded, then the Blackhawks probably wouldn’t be so bad that essentially landed them both future Hall-of-Famers Toews and Kane with them winning three cups for the city 🙌🏽

  3. 2:16 If we're being technical, the 1995-2004 CBA awarded compensatory picks from the league that were given to teams if they lost somebody to free agency (and didn't sign a comparable guy as a replacement*). Phoenix would end up getting the 46th pick in the 2002 Draft from the league when Roenick left. They'd use the pick on goalie David LeNeveu who played in 22 games and was involved in a later trade in case you really wanted to add a branch with a bunch of nondescript players.

    *Dallas didn't receive a compensatory pick for losing Brett Hull in 2001 because they signed Pierre Turgeon. But St. Louis did get a compensatory pick for losing Turgeon since they didn't sign anybody.

    The compensatory picks were sometimes hidden value in a trade. When New Jersey acquired Vladimir Malakhov at the 2000 deadline, they figured they'd get a 2001 compensatory pick when he'd leave as a free agent. But after Sharks GM Dean Lombardi bent the rule when he acquired Theo Fleury in 2002 just to lose him in free agency and the flood gates opened. It became normal for small market teams to trade for an impending free agent just for the bonus pick. Nashville got the Shea Weber pick for "losing" Ed Belfour.

  4. It was definitely a gut punch to hawks fans to hear Roenick was getting traded. But to be completely fair it probably ended up being the right move, though completely by accident. JR's production had already started falling his last couple years with the hawks, and he was beginning to have lingering concussion issues that were keeping him off the ice. And that downward slide continued the rest of his career. Despite the fact that he was voted into several more all star games (due entirely to his reputation) he was never the same player after he left the hawks. If you look at his career numbers while with the hawks it's clearly the stat line of generational hall of fame lock. If you look at his career numbers for the 12 years he spent with other teams after that, it's meh.

  5. Just another Bill Wirtz "masterpiece." When a player spoke out, he was gone. He traded away Phil Esposito, and Roenick. And let Bobby Hull go to the WHL. They wouldn't have won three cups in the 2010's if he was running the team.

  6. You were far too kind describing Zhamnov. He statistically benefitted from good wingers, he couldn’t generate offense on his own.

Write A Comment

Pin