It was announced early this morning that Dan Carcillo had resigned for 2 more years. At first I was excited, because it had to be to play in Siberia, right? Then I realized that Stan Bowman actually signed Carcillo. I then proceeded to kick puppies, take candy from small children, and burn down churches. Well, maybe only one of those, and I'm not admitting to which.
In the grand scheme of the Blackhawks, this is not a huge transaction, if they threw very little money his way and he's going to be limited to fourth line duty. He's CERTAINLY no worse than John Scott was there. The problem is that someone fooled Quenneville into thinking he was worthy for top 6 minutes. Dan Carcillo, Folks.
The "suspended or fined 10 times in seven seasons" Dan Carcillo.
The "my season ended on a dirty hit" Dan Carcillo.
The "was issued suspensions twice in 28 games" Dan Carcillo.
THAT GUY! I gave him the benefit of the doubt, and he did nothing but prove he was the same guy that was advertised, in July. He served 3 suspensions (1 previous, and 2 while a Hawk), played only 28 games, and gathered 82 penalty minutes (5 fighting majors). You'd think he was the second coming of Tiger Williams, the way some people are going on about him. He had 2 goals in 28 games, and the Hawks were 4 games over .500 with him in the lineup. If he played 82 games, which he will NEVER do, Carcillo was on pace for roughly 6 goals and 246 penalty minutes (15 fights). He actually earned a RAISE here? Two years for $825K per year.
Some of the comments I've seen:
"Bob Probert had troubles but the Hawks took a chance on him."
How DARE you even mention Dan Carcillo and Bob Probert in the same breath? Before we look at anything else, Probert's troubles were off the ice. He was never considered a dirty player. Tough, certainly, but nothing about his game was considered dirty. Probert was not fined/suspended 10 times in his first 7 seasons. Carcillo will NEVER have a 20 goal season in the NHL, while Probert had 2, as well as a 19 goal season with the Hawks. Carcillo is known, league wide, as a dirty player that has to have a close eye kept on him. The league's disciplinary office has him on speed dial, and will continue to use him as an example.
"The Hawks were 16-8-4 with him in the lineup"
So, the Hawks were essentially 4 games over .500? That doesn't prove a thing, other than you're bad with stats.
"He had 11 points in 28 games"
Correction, he had TWO goals, none of which were game winning or tying, and one of which was an EMPTY NETTER! He had 9 even strength assists, which were scraps, as a result of playing with more talented players. Simply residuals. Leftovers.
"He wasn't signed to score goals, he was signed to add 'grit' and 'sandpaper' to the team."
It's pretty hard to add any of that when you're suspended or in the penalty box most of your time with the team. Physical play doesn't mean cheap and dangerous plays that injure opponents. Cal Cutterbuck has managed to play physical and lead the league in hits without ever breaking the 100 penalty minute mark, so I don't read me that line of bullshit.
The bottom line is that if they play him on the forth line, with under 10 minutes of ice time a game, have at it. But they wont. They will continue to tell us that he's capable of taking ice time away from people that can really put the puck in the net, while he's pulling his dirty shenanigans. Two years of it. Thanks Stan!
