Follow @jaeckel


Sometimes, you have to take a step back to take a step forward.

The Blackhawks definitely accomplished the first yesterday, sending the rights to their backup goalie, Scott Darling, to the Carolina Hurricanes for a third round pick.

Just doing the math, the Hawks are weaker at the goalie position today, and no closer to working toward clearing the cap space or acquiring other assets to improve the team.

Now, that said, whether the Hawks extended Darling and found a way to move Corey Crawford's contract—or lost Darling as they did yesterday—they were likely going to be weaker at the goalie position, at least temporarily anyway. So be it.

And you can give a nod to Stan Bowman for getting a third round pick for Darling's rights when he wasn't playing the strongest hand to begin with.

Here verbatim is the communication I got from a source close to the situation:

"Crawford and his agent made it abundantly clear they didn't want to move and could possibly make it extremely difficult to move him (limited NTC). Darling and his agent are fully prepared to test the market. This was not the direction Chicago wanted, but Stan backed himself in a corner."

My belief, because this was what I'd been hearing for a few months, is the Hawks had hoped to extend Darling at a yearly cap hit likely at least a million dollars less than what he would receive on the open market (and well below Crawford's annual hit). When that appeared to be out of reach, and Crawford's camp simultaneously made clear they would leverage using the player's rights to make a trade difficult, Bowman had no choice.

The problem is, Crawford's was arguably the easiest big salary for the Hawks to move with the most reasonable in-house replacement (Darling).

Any player can be traded, even those with "iron-clad" no-movement clauses—if the player agrees to waive the clause. It does happen from time to time as well. It's just not terribly likely and potentially problematic if the team approaches the player and his agent about waiving—and they refuse to do so.

However, according to Scott Powers of the Athletic and other sources, the contracts of Marcus Kruger (limited NTC), Artemi Panarin and Niklas Hjalmarsson (limited NTC) are structured where they can be moved this offseason.

So let's break that down.

First, stop reading if you're still clinging to the belief that all is basically well with the Hawks—they're still a Cup contending team essentially as is—just add in say Tyler Motte and give Gustav Forsling more ice time next year. Or that a junior player named Alex DeBrincat will be the big difference maker next year (which likely is not happening)

This blog is based on a different premise. That the Hawks need a shake-up of sorts—to move a core contract (or two), while adding some new NHL or NHL-ready pro assets in return or with freed up cap space—and some reliable information that a shake-up of some kind is coming.

And let me digress briefly. Keeping Corey Crawford over Darling is still the better option—on the ice. Crawford, although getting on a bit in years, is still a very, very good and proven NHL #1 netminder. It just doesn't improve the team.

So the most likely contract to move now that Crawford is staying in Chicago is Kruger. The problem is, Kruger doesn't bring much back that really helps the Hawks. Maybe a younger depth defenseman with some upside, or a bottom six winger who is tough to play against—but only from a team looking to add Kruger's unique skill set (which is basically shutdown center and killing penalties).

Or the Hawks can just expose Kruger and hope Vegas GM George McPhee—who I was told inquired with the Hawks about Kruger once when he was GM in Washington—takes his $3.33 million a year off the cap.

And let's be clear, Tanner Kero is a hard-working and not untalented center. But he isn't Kruger's equal in the face-off dot or just being hard to play against along the wall and shadowing opponent's scoring centers. He's not, at least not right now, and maybe not ever. All that said, to save the cap hit, that's a trade-off Bowman likely takes.

So that makes the dollars work better over the next 12 months, but doesn't add much (if anything) in terms of talent. Fine.

So next you look at Hjalmarsson. Hjalmarsson is a huge bargain at $4.1 million a season. He's versatile, tough as nails, loved by coaches and teammates, and he's arguably a #2-3 defenseman on any team in the league—there is no in-house replacement. You trade him, you are a worse team on defense. I highly doubt the Hawks move him. Nor should they. But you never know.

Because the other option is the recently extended Panarin.

Either Hjalmarsson or Panarin brings back the greatest return: likely a player and a prospect, and/or a pick. And I suspect there might be a team out there that sees Panarin as having perhaps some untapped upside and would be willing to chump up more to add his talents. If the Hawks trade Panarin, they lose the chemistry between Patrick Kane and Panarin, and the Hawks are not exactly loaded on the left flank. All that said, quality wingers are generally easier to come by than quality centers, goalies or defensemen.

Could the Hawks go the aforementioned route and approach an Artem Anisimov or even Brent Seabrook about waiving their NMC's? They could, but that is just logistically harder and more fraught with problems should the player resist.

The other option is essentially maintaining the status quo—a few nips and tucks here and there, and more "youth movement" hype coming from the front office. But that basically changes little with a team that seems to be in need of a meaningful jolt and a reload in terms of proven NHL/pro talent.

I would not expect anything of significance to happen before the end of the playoffs. You never know what might unfold were a team to approach Bowman with a plausible deal before then.

I'll be back with playoff commentary and any rumors or scenarios that emerge before then.


JJ

Join the Discussion: » 738 Comments » Post New Comment

» Thanks and Farewell

» Where do we go from here?

» Preds at Hawks Breakdown

» "All Teams Have Flaws"

» The Games You Should Win