I get the feeling Hossa will be bought out next summer.
- Iggysbff

Not going to happen. The Hawks used both their compliance buyouts this summer on Montador and Olesz.

What will probably happen is that Hossa will retire sometime before his contract is up, and the Hawks will take some sort of penalty cap-wise when that happens.

I seem to be a blog behind so I am reprinting these two here??

I've been a Crawford supporter for a long time. I was one who thought he deserved to break camp with the team in 09-10 instead of Niemi. I'm happy for Crow, I just don't get the timing of this deal. Too soon. Why now? Makes zero sense.
- Ogilthorpe2

As surprised as I am that this deal was consumated now, you have to wonder if it was worked out awhile before. (Many times over the course of the eyars under the new regime, we have heard online of friends of players that they were new Hawk signing or were re-upped prospects, many times weeks before the hawks felt they wanted to make the announcements.
It is like they like to choreograph their releases and space them to get more media buzz.

You have to think this might have been a happy family move.

Corey Crawford goes home to Montreal with Lord stanley's Cup, what better way to place his Cup time their in the headlines, and help celebrate him?

Too Soon?

I am telling you....taking another signing uncertainty out of the way, just makes the renevue and Cap sheets clearer.

And sure...the 2013-14 Cap is going to escalate in 2014-15, because teams are would be up in arms if they had to start choosing for between keeping and launching "better" players.
There will always be an occasional Brian Campbell necessity launch, be respondingly the GMs are in agreement that they have to try and keep the substractions to the less skilled, middle and lower level fat contarcted veterans they can push out the locker rooms.

The Hawks are always gonna have to play close in their managing of the Cap because they won when these guys for the most part were young, and they by and large want to stay, and if you think Bolland, Frolik or any of the others from the 2010 squad were looking at it as something they wanted to happen.

If a defenseman wants to go elsewhere for a bigger payday, they will have little control if they are UFA unless they want to stay. (Do we even know if hammer still has the west coast girlfriend? - or if that is a lingering issue?)

The Cap in Chicago will be managed by actually using the prospects to provide relief.
Rebuilding will provide a regular yearly turnover, and "let go's."

If any of the kid goalies (who as far as I am concerned have also taken a beating here in this blog) or Raanta slowly develop, better for all.

Most teams don't have the $ for a heavy paid back-up if the starter if in the top half of salaries and the team has real stars at the other positions.
So if Raanta comes on in the AHL, and he can play, he is gonna be handled carefully with the understanding he has careful contract, and the NHL will be the carrot, not initially the cash.

Crawford is now their poster child example a grown in the system netminder that all you others can see...and understand "we know how to do this carefully, patiently, and that is our way"...you follow and develop, we reward you.

Does the timing of the move fit with the mantra I spouted?

I do have to think that both the Bickell and Crawford deals may never yield any added bonuses in performance.
I don't thick Bickell suddenly blossoms into a super scoring power wing, or Crawford inro Terry Sawchuck. But if you were to candidly ask any NHL management team's opinion about both deals I don't think they would say they are huge errors.

The player share of HRR dropped to 50% (from 57%). But the cap for this year is a once only negotiated transition year. I hear people talking about revenues and the cap going up significantly next year. But the full impact of the 7% reduction in player share kicks in and I have seen no evidence of any new large source of revenues (other than for the expansion of the classic games).
- spatso

This!

Anyone saying otherwise is simply delusional. Both sides have admitted that if the new revenue split was in full force the cap this year would be just over 60 million. So your telling me revenue will rise 25% in one year? not a chance. The projected figures on the outdoor games is 180 million. So where dos the other 820 million extra revenue come from to get a 70 million cap?

Not going to happen. The Hawks used both their compliance buyouts this summer on Montador and Olesz.

What will probably happen is that Hossa will retire sometime before his contract is up, and the Hawks will take some sort of penalty cap-wise when that happens.
- EKolb13

I forgot about Olesz.....

Just read something posted in the earlier topic blog...and I just want to go back to Frolik and his acquistion, contract, and his "overpayment."

You have to look at the entirety of him and not try and pull a piece to form an opinion.

He was drafted tenth overall, so that you get paid for.
By a lousy desparate team that have you come in and play ready or not at twenty years of age!

By virtue of the minutes and occasions he was provided he score 21 gaols in te first two seasons.
By that third season where he only scores 8 goals he gest dinged up and the panthers are starting to find other options as frontliners and feel they don't want to play Nazen Kadri-like RFA roulette with him, so they trade him before the last year of the deal starts.

The Blackhawks get something for Skille who was gonna need a deal, and get to kick the tires on a goalie, Salak. (Isn't he the Green Lantern in charge of the Book of Oa?)

Obviously the Hawks saw something with Frolik and the RFA signing was 2.333 million, and I don't understand how anyone here can see that as outrageous pivitol error and one worth using in the middle of their dislike for Crawford's deal.

They thought that Frolik had use, and paid to continue their look-see, but knew that the number was reasonable enough Cap number to be able to deal later.
So what if they had hard lined frolik and he pulled a Kyle Turris?

You never know how that would have affected the past psot season.

Frolik's last contract didn't hurt the team's Cap.

I am not crying about player losses, player payouts, as long as they pave the way to further re-signs, upgrades, and movement.

Flexibility is what I think the want.

...and I really and truly understand how that is the fan concern on the Crawford deal.

I just think the job of GM gets more difficult as you get more vets, especailly when you win.

For $2-3M more Than CC, the Hawks could have signed Lundqvist, who is the best goalie in the world.

I get the feeling Hossa will be bought out next summer. And there will still need to be more dealing. The Hawks are screwed on the cap for next year. Anyone thinking the cap will be near 70 are delusional. Revenues would need to be near 4 billion for that to happen. Even with the vaunted 6 outdoor game that some are touting that will only add roughly 180 million to Revenue. This years cap is artificially higher than it should be under the new split. I would bet that we'll see a cap next year in the 65-66 million range. Stan once again messed up. He has so much talent to work with on the team and he will now need to "sell" some of it once again IMO.

This deal just simply does not make sense. I said it when Raanta signed that it made zero sense for him to sign with the Hawks. Now he's definitely screwed. Not sure what he was thinking choosing Chicago. He'll have no opportunity there.
- Iggysbff

The Hawks using a regular buyout on Hossa?

For $2-3M more Than CC, the Hawks could have signed Lundqvist, who is the best goalie in the world.
- scottak

And likely kiss Kane goodbye, and possible another player

JJ, I just don't see how Hjalmarsson deals is contingent upon Crawford taking less than Jimmy Howard.

Does hammer want to go to the West Coast as he and his agent stated when he "signed" with San Jose?

I think you are absolutely correct that he played well enough for us to think of him as a notch below Seabrook and Keith.

and if the open market was gonna put almost 5 mil in Bickell's pocket I have to think that Hammer gets more than 5 mil.

You may see Stanton Peckham Kostka and Johns mixed in your pairings for Cap relief in the next couple, but pretty sure they try hard to get him to stay...they may have NO control over that.

Before they start trading Oduya, or Leddy or others, they pretty much have know what Hammer's intentions are, and price.

Then they make adjustments around those facts.

John Jaeckel: The Corey Conundrum
- John Jaeckel

Great summation, JJ.

I'm willing to bet, as you are, that the FO has a better sense of where the cap is going than most prognosticators here or elsewhere. If the league shows better than 6-7% growth and the cap makes a jump well through $70m then this contact will look very solid if Crow maintains his level of play.

The only question marks here (as Ogie pointed out yesterday) FIRST is why the FO did not wait until the regular season. The math favors some kind of drop off or cup hangover. If Crow's numbers dropped in the first 3rd of the season this deal could have been $2m less. This appears to be what they are doing with Hammer.

Why Crow before Hammer? Has Hammer's management indicated they want to hit the market? Is this why they inked Crow? Keeping Hammer is far more important than Crow - he is quickly becoming their number 2 D man (maybe already was in the RS). He is young, durable but he will also see a major pay day next summer if he goes UFA.

If the FO is holding a grudge over his signing that offer sheet then they are making a huge mistake. That would be SOP for the previous Wirtz FOs but not this group. I just hope we see a deal for Hammer very soon or by mid season.

I can't say that investing that much money and term in a goaltender has ever been a good idea, except maybe Lundqvist or Brodeur. Noone else who got paid in goal has ever really lived up to the deal's expectations.

That, and now the hawks have 70% of next year's cap number invest in 8 players, leaving about 1.2 million bucks to sign 2 guys for a 23 man roster.

I have to think that there is a trade in the works, for somebody who actually earns salary.
- TommyDeVito

Spoken by a guys whose team who jumped on the chance of scooping up a goalie with an old contract...good luck on the re-up bro, in 2015.

Think Anderson gets JUST 6 million???????

I'm not worried about Hjalmarsson leaving if the Blackhawks act quickly.

If they let it pass till the end of the season and Hammer's agent starts feeling the love from...... a desperate Flyer team, a needy Red Wing team..... A San Jose Sharks team that wants to finish what it started..... then Stan & Co will be in for some sticker shock. But if they get him wrapped up soon they can keep him around5.5.-6.0 and phase out Oduya with a rookie ( Clendenning, Olsen, Johns...).

This!

Anyone saying otherwise is simply delusional. Both sides have admitted that if the new revenue split was in full force the cap this year would be just over 60 million. So your telling me revenue will rise 25% in one year? not a chance. The projected figures on the outdoor games is 180 million. So where dos the other 820 million extra revenue come from to get a 70 million cap?
- Iggysbff

I'm not sure about the math here... There is a 50/50 split of HHR and there are 30 teams. To get $10M more in cap space, there need to be a $20M per team increase in HHR (20 x 50% = 10). Since there are 30 teams, the HHR needs to go up $600M (300 for the players and 300 for the teams) for the cap space to go up $10M per team. If HHR goes up $1B, the players would get $500M or $16.67M per team ($76M cap if we start from $60). Right?

I have no idea what it will be, but I would bet the league has a darn good guess. Also, it seems that the teams that spend to the cap are assuming a nice rise in the cap. I will make the assumption that they know something we don't...

This!

Anyone saying otherwise is simply delusional. Both sides have admitted that if the new revenue split was in full force the cap this year would be just over 60 million. So your telling me revenue will rise 25% in one year? not a chance. The projected figures on the outdoor games is 180 million. So where dos the other 820 million extra revenue come from to get a 70 million cap?
- Iggysbff

Using your figures:

Cap should be $60MM: that means 2013-2014 HRR = 60*30*2 = $3,600MM (the last year before the lock-out, HRR was $3,700MM, IIRC).

Cap at $70MM: that means 2014-2015 HRR = 70*30*2 = $4,200MM

Need $600MM additional HRR coming from (and I don't know the individual HRR amounts):

Outdoor games
New Canadian TV contracts
General local franchise revenue increases

I would think the league has very good projections on each of these, which are certainly shared with individual teams.

Please let me know if my calculations are incorrect.

It's a surprising deal for a variety of reasons---timing, length, dollars. But this FO isn't usually caught off guard. They aren't infalliable, but this is the sort of move that strikes me as preemptive and part of a bigger plan.
- QStache

I have to say it feels that way to me. That said, dunno.

And likely kiss Kane goodbye, and possible another player
- FourFeathers773

Depends on where the CAP goes. But if you add Brookbank's 1.5 to CCs 6, you're already at 7.5. Another 1.5 gets you to 9, you can do that buy using a IceHog on the 4th line instead of a vet.

Not saying it would have happened, or that it should have, but it was not outside the possible.

Personally, I think Lundqvist realizes NYR will not get to the SCF in his lifetime, and he will be looking for stronger teams to move to.

JJ, I just don't see how Hjalmarsson deals is contingent upon Crawford taking less than Jimmy Howard.

Does hammer want to go to the west Caost as he and his agent stated when he "signed" with San Jose?

I think you are absolutely correct that he played well enough for us to think of him as a notch below Seabrook and Keith.

and if the open market was gonna put almost 5 mil in Bickell's pocket I have to think that Hammer gets more than 5 mil.

You may see Stanton Peckham Kostka and Johns mixed in your pairings for Cap releif in the next couple, but pretty sure they try ahrd to get him to stay...they may have NO control over that.

Before they start trading Oduya, or Leddy or others, they pretty much have know what Hammer's intention are, and price.

Then they make adjustments around those facts.
- wiz1901

This

I have to say it feels that way to me. That said, dunno.
- John Jaeckel

Adding a bit more to my original comment, while this FO certainly has made (and will continue to make) mistakes, those mistakes aren't typically associated with cap calculations. And to sign Crawford to this deal a year plus in advance seems like the sort of thing you do when you want to know what your bottom line looks like for future moves.

This!

Anyone saying otherwise is simply delusional. Both sides have admitted that if the new revenue split was in full force the cap this year would be just over 60 million. So your telling me revenue will rise 25% in one year? not a chance. The projected figures on the outdoor games is 180 million. So where dos the other 820 million extra revenue come from to get a 70 million cap?
- Iggysbff

This is a great point and would mean trouble for the Hawks. However, the league was obviously anticipating a difficult labor negotiation for years. Were the big 3 "conserving" some of their numbers the last 4-5 years. If we see a major jump next year that cannot be attributed to new outdoor games etc... then the fix was on.

If that cap doesn't make it through $70m the Hawks will be subtracting a core salary or a combination of non core salaries to accommodate this Crawford deal.

Adding a bit more to my original comment, while this FO certainly has made (and will continue to make) mistakes, those mistakes aren't typically associated with cap calculations. And to sign Crawford to this deal a year plus in advance seems like the sort of thing you do when you want to know what your bottom line looks like for future moves.
- QStache

This is an excellent point, Stache. Along those lines, doing it early locks in a rate and removes the risk of an increasing market that could affect their plan. They want to know their bottom line and this helped them lock it in place for the next several years. Numbers types don't like too many moving parts.

I seem to be a blog behuind so I am reprinting these two here??



As surprised as I am that this deal was consumated now, you have to wonder if it was worked out awhile before. (Many times over the course of the eyars under the new regime, we have heard online of friends of players that they were new Hawk signing or were re-upped prospects, many times weeks before the hawks felt they wanted to make the announcements.
It is like they like to choreograph their releases and space them to get more media buzz.

You have to think this might have been a happy family move.

Corey Crawford goes home to Montreal with Lord stanley's Cup, what better way to place his Cup time their in the headlines, and help celebrate him?

Too Soon?

I am telling you....taking another signing uncertainty out of the way, just makes the renevue and Cap sheets clearer.

And sure...the 2013-14 Cap is going to escalate in 2014-15, because teams are would be up in arms if they had to start choosing for between keeping and launching "better" players.
There will always be an occasional Brian Campbell necessity launch, be respondingly the GMs are in agreement that they have to try and keep the substractions to the less skilled, middle and lower level fat contarcted veterans they can push out the locker rooms.

The Hawks are always gonna have to play close in their managing of the Cap because they won when these guys for the most part were young, and they by and large want to stay, and if you think Bolland, Frolik or any of the others from the 2010 squad were looking at it as something they wanted to happen.

If a defenseman wants to go elsewhere for a bigger payday, they will have little control if they are UFA unless they want to stay. (Do we even know if hammer still has the west coast girlfriend? - or if that is a lingering issue?)

The Cap in Chicago will be managed by actually using the prospects to provide relief.
Rebuilding will provide a regular yearly turnover, and "let go's."

If any of the kid goalies (who as far as I am concerned have also taken a beating here in this blog) or Raanta slowly develop, better for all.

Most teams don't have the $ for a heavy paid back-up if the starter if in the top half of salaries and the team has real stars at the other positions.
So if Raanta comes on in the AHL, and he can play, he is gonna be handled carefully with the understanding he has careful contract, and the NHL will be the carrot, not initially the cash.

Crawford is now their poster child example a grown in the system netminder that all you others can see...and understand "we know how to do this carefully, patiently, and that is our way"...you follow and develop, we reward you.

Does the timing of the move fit with the mantra I spouted?

I do have to think that both the Bickell and Crawford deals may never yield any added bonuses in performance.
I don't thick Bickell suddenly blossoms into a super scoring power wing, or Crawford inro Terry Sawchuck. But if you were to candidly ask any NHL management team's opinion about both deals I don't think they would say they are huge errors.
- wiz1901

Here's what's funny about this.

Raanta might be easily the most projectable Hawk prospect—aside from Teravainen—playing the same position as the guy they just made a six-year commitment to.

The problem is, right now, you don't have anyone rocketing up through the ranks (except Teravainen). You have a lot of guys with "blemishes," and/or good, but not great upsides.

I go back even to 2008, when you had, in addition to Kane and Toews, a guy like Hjalmarsson who kind of came out of nowhere at the 2007 WJCs and then the next year in the AHL, or Brouwer, who ripped it up in the AHL that year—who were guys that were clearly more easily projectable in the NHL than maybe anyone in this current prospect group (outside TT).

Johns looks like he's going to be something: a #5-6? Maybe— maybe—a #4 someday? Clendening has all the tools you want going one way, but really struggles right now the other way. Not unlike the late great and oft-traded (on this board) Shawn Lalonde. Stanton is a 6-7 guy at best.

So the theory is great but the goods are odd more so than the odds being good when it comes to prospect development.

Adding a bit more to my original comment, while this FO certainly has made (and will continue to make) mistakes, those mistakes aren't typically associated with cap calculations. And to sign Crawford to this deal a year plus in advance seems like the sort of thing you do when you want to know what your bottom line looks like for future moves.
- QStache

Agreed, the cap management since 2010 has been as good as you can hope for.

Here's what's funny about this.

Raanta might be easily the most projectable Hawk prospect—aside from Teravainen—playing the same position as the guy they just made a six-year commitment to.

The problem is, right now, you don't have anyone rocketing up through the ranks (except Teravainen). You have a lot of guys with "blemishes," and/or good, but not great upsides.

I go back even to 2008, when you had, in addition to Kane and Toews, a guy like Hjalmarsson who kind of came out of nowhere at the 2007 WJCs and then the next year in the AHL, or Brouwer, who ripped it up in the AHL that year—who were guys that were clearly more easily projectable in the NHL than maybe anyone in this current prospect group (outside TT).

Johns looks like he's going to be something: a #5-6? Maybe— maybe—a #4 someday? Clendening has all the tools you want going one way, but really struggles right now the other way. Not unlike the late great and oft-traded (on this board) Shawn Lalonde. Stanton is a 6-7 guy at best.

So the theory is great but the goods are odd more so than the odds being good when it comes to prospect development.
- John Jaeckel

There certainly is a luck factor involved in a lot of this. Who would have expected Saad to be available in the second round or Shaw emerging out of a 5th round selection. The Hawks have lucked out in some of its player development and will have to hope for similar luck moving forward (as well as some pretty decent scouting of the international ranks).

I seem to be a blog behuind so I am reprinting these two here??



As surprised as I am that this deal was consumated now, you have to wonder if it was worked out awhile before. (Many times over the course of the eyars under the new regime, we have heard online of friends of players that they were new Hawk signing or were re-upped prospects, many times weeks before the hawks felt they wanted to make the announcements.
It is like they like to choreograph their releases and space them to get more media buzz.

You have to think this might have been a happy family move.

Corey Crawford goes home to Montreal with Lord stanley's Cup, what better way to place his Cup time their in the headlines, and help celebrate him?

Too Soon?

I am telling you....taking another signing uncertainty out of the way, just makes the renevue and Cap sheets clearer.

And sure...the 2013-14 Cap is going to escalate in 2014-15, because teams are would be up in arms if they had to start choosing for between keeping and launching "better" players.
There will always be an occasional Brian Campbell necessity launch, be respondingly the GMs are in agreement that they have to try and keep the substractions to the less skilled, middle and lower level fat contarcted veterans they can push out the locker rooms.

The Hawks are always gonna have to play close in their managing of the Cap because they won when these guys for the most part were young, and they by and large want to stay, and if you think Bolland, Frolik or any of the others from the 2010 squad were looking at it as something they wanted to happen.

If a defenseman wants to go elsewhere for a bigger payday, they will have little control if they are UFA unless they want to stay. (Do we even know if hammer still has the west coast girlfriend? - or if that is a lingering issue?)

The Cap in Chicago will be managed by actually using the prospects to provide relief.
Rebuilding will provide a regular yearly turnover, and "let go's."

If any of the kid goalies (who as far as I am concerned have also taken a beating here in this blog) or Raanta slowly develop, better for all.

Most teams don't have the $ for a heavy paid back-up if the starter if in the top half of salaries and the team has real stars at the other positions.
So if Raanta comes on in the AHL, and he can play, he is gonna be handled carefully with the understanding he has careful contract, and the NHL will be the carrot, not initially the cash.

Crawford is now their poster child example a grown in the system netminder that all you others can see...and understand "we know how to do this carefully, patiently, and that is our way"...you follow and develop, we reward you.

Does the timing of the move fit with the mantra I spouted?

I do have to think that both the Bickell and Crawford deals may never yield any added bonuses in performance.
I don't thick Bickell suddenly blossoms into a super scoring power wing, or Crawford inro Terry Sawchuck. But if you were to candidly ask any NHL management team's opinion about both deals I don't think they would say they are huge errors.
- wiz1901

If the Hammer has a girlfriend on the coast, his bride is going to be pissed. They were married in June back home in Sweden. Also she lived in Chicago last season.

This is a great point and would mean trouble for the Hawks. However, the league was obviously anticipating a difficult labor negotiation for years. Were the big 3 "conserving" some of their numbers the last 4-5 years. If we see a major jump next year that cannot be attributed to new outdoor games etc... then the fix was on.

If that cap doesn't make it through $70m the Hawks will be subtracting a core salary or a combination of non core salaries to accommodate this Crawford deal.
- tredbrta

I have no hard figures to use. Its all speculation.

Here is some info:

http://www.theglobeandmai...0-million/article7029575/

I think anyone expecting a big increase could be in for a disappointment. All we can really do is wait and see.