|Print article||This entry was posted by Tim Currell on May 9, 2012 at 12:28 pm, and is filed under 2011-12 Player Evaluations, 2012 Off-Season, Blackhawks, Chicago Blackhawks. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.|
Only Sharp and Bolland were on the ice for fewer goals against per 60 minutes on the PK, and Fro was 4th (Mayers, Kruger, Hayes) among forwards 5 on 5, and he had the highest quality of comp and relative quality of comp among those 4 (highest and 2nd highest in among the top 10 forwards in GA/60). So he's been a very good defender. He's a great 4th line guy (hard worker, smart defensively) and he has enough scoring ability for that role; too bad he's making over $2 million a year. I'd still take him on the 4th with that contract, so long as the 'hawks have the cap room for him.
I don't know. I'm not so ready to give up on the kid because he is an enigma. The picture is perfect. What is he? I think he's been mis-managed and his performances in the playoffs make me want to see the kid get a real consistent chance at learning how to finish without his confidence being bounced around. He gets opportunities to score, he generally works hard and is defensively responsible for the most part. He just can't finish. But we said the same thing about Stalberg last year, did we not? And yes, he meets the eye test on the PK. Sometimes we quickly forget that most kids aren't going to step on the ice and be Toews or Crosby. They actually need to be developed. Q's doghouse works in weird ways and I never thought this kid deserved to be relegated to it yet somehow John Scott was OK to put on the ice.
He has no shot. That sums up Fro. He scored a shootout on Corey shnieder because schnieder pulled his groin. Tow of his late goals against mike smith where poke in's I could have done. Good skater and puck getter though. Should be an official not a hockey player.