Follow JJ on Twitter @jaeckel
(Taking a break from the Central Division Breakdowns for a little "Wake Of The News" on the Corey Crawford extension.)
For the first time really since Chicago won the Stanley Cup a couple of months ago, the Blackhawks internet message boards were abuzz yesterday.
The Hawks announced not just a 6-year contract extension for #1 goalie Corey Crawford, but raised more than a few eyebrows with the size of the deal: $6 million a season, placing Crawford for now among the elite in NHL goaltending, if not in ability, at least in salary.
Now, let me be fair. Crawford made a strong case for the Conn Smythe Trophy in the 2013 playoffs. I personally don't think he deserved the award, but he certainly put himself in the running with an overall very strong playoff run. We never saw Ray Emery because we simply never had to.
Crawford earned a significant raise of some kind over his current $2.66 million per year, that is without question. The question is this: is he worth $6 million a year on the Hawks or any club—and with the Hawks' upcoming obligations (new deals for Niklas Hjalmarsson in 2014 and Jonathan Toews and Patrick Kane in 2015), could they afford to "splurge" like this on Crawford—a goalie who most observers across the NHL feel is a good to very good goalie, but really not among the true best in the league?
From my point of view, in the Spring of 2011, Corey Crawford played like a $6 million a year goaltender, really outduelling a very strong Roberto Luongo in the Hawks' 7-game first round playoff loss to the Canucks. He has it in him. However, in the following Spring's 6-game first round loss to the Coyotes, he really did not play well. He has had those games in him as well.
Setting aside the context of the Hawks' cap situation, let's just look at the player and the money. Some players play up to big contracts, and some don't. One recent example is Brent Seabrook, who, after signing a big extension a couple of years ago, stepped up and became for long stretches the Hawks' best defenseman, which is saying quite a bit.
How will Crawford respond?
Well, his team has shown maximum confidence in him. I would also believe that his playoff performance, overcoming really only one bad game in the finals, has also gotten a monkey off his back. Corey Crawford—not Antti Raanta, or Ray Emery or Antti Niemi or Craig Anderson—is going to be the #1 goalie of the Chicago Blackhawks going forward for at least a few seasons. That much is evident. The Hawks didn't give him this kind of deal so they could turn around and trade him if he regresses. I mean, good luck with that.
The other issue then becomes the larger context of the Hawks' cap. My sources (and my spidey sense) told me that the Hawks were not going to use a compliance buyout on Marian Hossa. They didn't, and they can't, having used both on Steve Montador and Rusty Olesz this summer. So Hossa is a Hawk for as long as he wants to be.
There has been a largely internet-fueled "rumor" out there for 3-4 years about the Hawks dealing Patrick Kane to Buffalo. Which makes sense for about 10 seconds and especially if you are a Sabre season ticketholder. After that, not so much.
Kane and Toews are both represented by the same agent, Pat Brisson from CAA, arguably the largest and most important talent agency in the world. This isn't some ex-player working out of his spare bedroom in Scarborough. There is a lot of money at stake for the Hawks, Kane, Toews, the NHL, endorsers, CAA, etc with regard to these two players remaining in Chicago on a competitive Blackhawk team.
So, whether the annual cap hits for each are $8 million or $9 million or much more, book it. They wil be in the Indianhead—unless one of them (let's face it, more likely Kane) has some off-ice issue that damages his marketability.
Which then leaves Hjalmarsson. He's not the Hawks' best defenseman, but he might be—might be— their second best defenseman. He's become that good. He hasn't lived up to the Nik Lidstrom comparison Scotty Bowman made a few years ago. But there are valid reasons Bowman made that comparison and as a positional defender in the NHL today, there are few as good or better. Add to that some two-way ability, physicality and a smooth, seamless game that allows the coaching staff to effectively partner him with anyone, and you have a very valuable blueliner indeed.
Hjalmarsson quietly takes pressure off the rest of the defense. When #1 d-man Duncan Keith was suspended in Game 5 of the Western Conference Finals, Hjalmarsson stepped up and led the Hawks to an unlikely road victory, effectively putting the series in the bag for the Hawks. Hjalmarsson and countryman Johnny Oduya chewed up big minutes throughout the playoffs and were often sent out against opponents' top lines.
So what's he worth? I think we're looking at $5 million a year as a baseline. If say, Anton Volchenkov was worth that in the dollars of 2-3 years ago, Hjalmarsson is well worth that today.
So then, the question becomes, with big dollars committed to Kane, Toews, Seabrook, Keith, Patrick Sharp, Hossa and now Crawford, where do the dollars come from for Hjalmarsson?
I don't believe the Hawks blithely think they can get by without Hjalmarsson. I really don't. They shouldn't. And there is no likely replacement—not even close—in the Hawks' system or easily obtainable off NHL talent shelves.
So the Hawks, evidently, are counting on big growth in the salary cap. Don't doubt for a minute that talks have already begun on the 2015 re-ups of Kane and Toews. And few people have a more clear picture of the financial future of the league than Rocky Wirtz.
Which then brings us back to Crawford and the term of his deal, like to a degree, Keith's. Longer term deals that over time begin to look very favorable in the light of a higher salary cap.
So re-upping Corey Crawford for $36 million might just have been crazy. Like a fox.
All for now,
JJ
Chicago Blackhawks Blogger • 
Join the Discussion:
»