I think Leddy's still a bit of a mystery- he's a dynamic skater with some serious offensive upside - but his defensive zone gaffes and playoff benchings have to have put his value somewhat in flux.

Overall, I don't think the team made a bad move here, given the circumstances. I don't know exactly how many teams were clamoring for him this late in the game, and everyone new the 'Hawks were up against it. From what I've read about Pokka the past few days, I don't think that this was a worst case scenario. I would have liked to see a higher-round draft pick in there though.

JJ is right in the sense that they moved the correct d-man between Leddy and Oduya (and Roszival, whose trade some have lobbied for). Oduya's proven he can go toe-to-toe against top-six talent in critical situation. He's also (at least) rumored to have agreed to a discounted extension in principle, moving forward into a year where cap compliance is going to be a bear. Leddy and his agent apparently think that his raw abilities translate into top-4 or even top-2 money. Given the team's make-up for the next several seasons, it just wasn't a fit.

Roszival is gone next year anyway, and moving him would have probably required attaching prospect talent (McNeill, Morin , etc.). Going into next year, they're going to need these low-salary guys to round out the roster, and hope to god they develop into effective NHL players.
- FredoXV

I agree with all this. Good post, imo.

For those who miss Leddy already, we can bring back Cam Barker for a third time.

TG, buddy, thanks for the input. You are making things up - I never said they could get a roster player. I said they got market value for Leddy. Is that really difficult to get? Many here think they could have received better prospects/picks because the Hawks were over a barrel. I think they are wrong and explained why - because a real market existed.
- mohel

I did not mean to suggest that you did, but it is implied by those saying they did not get an adaquate return. They received the type of return they could. Well maybe we are on the same page....this is what I get for peaking in while working...not enough time to get the whole back story at times. I did not mean to be consesending...I am working hard on my people skills this year....

And quite obviously that is what every other team did. You figured it out on your own. Many/most teams would have needed to trade an NHL contract back. It is safe to say that the price that West teams would have to pay vs and East team would be higher as well. There is not trade clearinghouse that makes teams trade with each other.

Whether you believe it or not, the Hawks had a clear idea on what players/prospects they wanted from each team. IF those teams were not willing to deal those guys, then adding free floor mats, undercoating and the leather interior would not matter.
- TrueGrit

I had it figured out all along. Glad you caught up. The Hawks got market value for Leddy, and it is the same market that existed in June.

I did not mean to suggest that you did, but it is implied by those saying they did not get an adaquate return. They received the type of return they could. Well maybe we are on the same page....this is what I get for peaking in while working...not enough time to get the whole back story at times. I did not mean to be consesending...I am working hard on my people skills this year....
- TrueGrit

No problem. Glad to have your input.

Maybe it's the masochist in me, but I'm actually looking forward to seeing who develops in to that #5/6 D-man with Roszival.

Nothing like a little unknown to keep things interesting...

So, wait...... haven't you been saying the Hawks were over a barrel because of spot they were in? Now you're saying they got a good return? Seems tough for both to be true.
- mohel

The point was/is that the Hawks were over a barrel due to the current cap situation as well as the expectation that Leddy and Sheehy would be demanding maximum dollars next year - meaning likely UFA and no return.

For being over the barrel in those ways they maximized the return. Obviously, yet to be seen but Pokka will now be the #2 prospect in the BH system. If he pans out to be a solid 2-4 type for years they have done well. Also, if SB was focused on a D prospect back then FL and Buffalo may not have been able to match Pokka. They weren't giving up Ristolainen or Ekblad and either their next d prospects may not have been at Pokka's level or they didn't have the d prospect depth without them. The Sabres have a lot riding on McCabe and Pysyk along with Risto.

I have to think that - barring a trade - Mashinter is the odd man out here, and the team keeps 8 D-men until someone shows they can earn that bottom-pair job.

This probably means a game or two of Rundblad/Cumisky playing 4th line forward (ugh)

Anyone else have thoughts?

The point was/is that the Hawks were over a barrel due to the current cap situation as well as the expectation that Leddy and Sheehy would be demanding maximum dollars next year - meaning likely UFA and no return.

For being over the barrel in those ways they maximized the return. Obviously, yet to be seen but Pokka will now be the #2 prospect in the BH system. If he pans out to be a solid 2-4 type for years they have done well. Also, if SB was focused on a D prospect back then FL and Buffalo may not have been able to match Pokka. They weren't giving up Ristolainen or Ekblad and either their next d prospects may not have been at Pokka's level or they didn't have the d prospect depth without them. The Sabres have a lot riding on McCabe and Pysyk along with Risto.
- tredbrta

This is why the Hawks chose Leddy as the one to go (and maybe they don't think he'll be very good). But it had nothing to do with the return.

and it is the same market that existed in June.
- mohel

No, teams would have had more time to adjust their rosters so adding a roster player in an offer would have been easier at the draft or before it. The same could be said for Stan.

No one can know with absolute certainty if it was the same or better. We can be fairly certain it was not worse - particularly before the cap was announce and later when the k/t contracts were announced.

I am relieved it did not turn into a Campbell type trade. Something which may just happen with Sharp or Bickell next OS - particularly if Saad has a huge year. If he does they need to look at offers at the TDL this year. Losing key pieces for nothing is going to make it difficult to stay on top.

Maybe it's the masochist in me, but I'm actually looking forward to seeing who develops in to that #5/6 D-man with Roszival.

Nothing like a little unknown to keep things interesting...
- FredoXV

Me too. We all know how the model works, keep the core intact as long as possible and backfill the depth players with young (cheap) prospects. This is exactly what is happening. Let's move on and focus on the playes we have.

I had it figured out all along. Glad you caught up. The Hawks got market value for Leddy, and it is the same market that existed in June.
- mohel

Just my $.02. Leddy was on the market the minute the Cup was raised by LA. It is absurd to think SB did not have talks/offers prior to Saturday. Only the FO knows what was left on the table. Was it an extra pick? Prospect? How many teams were rumored to have interest in Leddy? Just look at the last couple blogs FL,Buf, Cal, Det. We also saw Ot, Mon, Van and Tor during the offseason as I recall. So roughly 25% of the league. We were never going to get much more than a prospect or two or possibly a 2nd pick. just the financials of the cap era. So what is fair return for a Leddy? Please recall the return for Campbell, a faaaaar better d-man. (Olesz-sheese!!)

This is why the Hawks chose Leddy as the one to go (and maybe they don't think he'll be very good). But it had nothing to do with the return.
- mohel

Agreed that this is why they chose Leddy... and JJ had this pegged since the draft. Maybe before.

We cannot know if the return had nothing to do with it without having a statement from Stan. Maybe Pokka was a player they wanted in 10? Obviously, they have been following TT closely in Finland. Maybe Pokka is a scout's favorite as well. Probably never know.

No, teams would have had more time to adjust their rosters so adding a roster player in an offer would have been easier at the draft or before it. The same could be said for Stan.

No one can know with absolute certainty if it was the same or better. We can be fairly certain it was not worse - particularly before the cap was announce and later when the k/t contracts were announced.

I am relieved it did not turn into a Campbell type trade. Something which may just happen with Sharp or Bickell next OS - particularly if Saad has a huge year. If he does they need to look at offers at the TDL this year. Losing key pieces for nothing is going to make it difficult to stay on top.
- tredbrta

Campbell was a good example of this issue - his contract was awful and that was the reason the market didn't pay more for him. Had nothing to do with the cap issue. If his contract was $2M instead of $7M more teams would have been interested, which would have drive up the return (because of the basic laws of supply and demand). Few teams were interested in him because of the contract - the smaller the market, the smaller the return.

The return on Leddy could have been impacted by his upcoming price, but that was present in June as well as October and could not have caused a change in the market in that period. Reports had seven teams in on Leddy - more than enough to form a real market.

Just my $.02. Leddy was on the market the minute the Cup was raised by LA. It is absurd to think SB did not have talks/offers prior to Saturday. Only the FO knows what was left on the table. Was it an extra pick? Prospect? How many teams were rumored to have interest in Leddy? Just look at the last couple blogs FL,Buf, Cal, Det. We also saw Ot, Mon, Van and Tor during the offseason as I recall. So roughly 25% of the league. We were never going to get much more than a prospect or two or possibly a 2nd pick. just the financials of the cap era. So what is fair return for a Leddy? Please recall the return for Campbell, a faaaaar better d-man. (Olesz-sheese!!)
- Cup-Bearer

I agree with all this, but Campbell's contract was sooooo bad that it limited the return quite a bit.

Me too. We all know how the model works, keep the core intact as long as possible and backfill the depth players with young (cheap) prospects. This is exactly what is happening. Let's move on and focus on the playes we have.
- DarthKane

I am hoping cutting Barker was a sign Pokka stays in Rockford. They have a pretty decent list of young d men there this year.

I really hope Q's new pet Cumiskey does not stand in the way of Klas or TVR getting real time here. If Cumiskey shows more than they need to dump Rosi so these kids can get NHL mins.

I guess the same can be said of Rundblad but his flashes in the last PS game weren't enough for me. Agree now he has mobility problems.

Agreed that this is why they chose Leddy... and JJ had this pegged since the draft. Maybe before.

We cannot know if the return had nothing to do with it without having a statement from Stan. Maybe Pokka was a player they wanted in 10? Obviously, they have been following TT closely in Finland. Maybe Pokka is a scout's favorite as well. Probably never know.
- tredbrta

Many people had Leddy on the short list to go - not too hard to figure out. The only reason he wouldn't be is if Stan didn't want to let go of the prize he got for Barker. Fortunately Stan didn't let that affect his decision-making here.

Campbell was a good example of this issue - his contract was awful and that was the reason the market didn't pay more for him. Had nothing to do with the cap issue. If his contract was $2M instead of $7M more teams would have been interested, which would have drive up the return (because of the basic laws of supply and demand). Few teams were interested in him because of the contract - the smaller the market, the smaller the return.

The return on Leddy could have been impacted by his upcoming price, but that was present in June as well as October and could not have caused a change in the market in that period. Reports had seven teams in on Leddy - more than enough to form a real market.
- mohel

Yes, but a real market formed by 7 teams can still be influenced by the Hawks cap situation and the pending contract status of Leddy. The league also knows his agent's MO.

Maybe Dreger or someone will give some back story to see where other offers were....

Yes, but a real market formed by 7 teams can still be influenced by the Hawks cap situation and the pending contract status of Leddy. The league also knows his agent's MO.

Maybe Dreger or someone will give some back story to see where other offers were....
- tredbrta

Agreed on the pending contract status issue. Disagree (for all the reasons I've posted way too much about above) on the cap situation.

Oh, well. I tried. The law of supply and demand apply to the world of hockey. You say he is an up and coming player, yet no team wanted to pay more than the Isles simply because the Hawks needed to trade someone (not necessarily Leddy)? And this actually makes sense to you?

To spell it out further... Let's say the Sabres also had interest in Leddy and think he's a really good player. Do you really think they would lose the bidding to the Isles because of the Hawks situation?l will answer for you..... No. They would stop bidding when they think the incoming asset isn't worth the cost.



- mohel

Well, instead of escalating this (as you've tried to), I'll just say it again. All 30 GMs knew the situation the Hawks were in, which likely suppressed the overall market for Leddy. Not only that but FANS of all 30 NHL teams knew it, which only amped the pressure on all 30 GMs not to overpay. People closer to the situation than you or I have confirmed that for me. And I will take their word for it over your attempt at condescension.

Let me add: Pokka appears to have some NHL projection. Great on the puck, great passer, skating is suspect, smallish, not big production offensively to this point. And he's 20 and has never really played in North America. And he is the "jewel" of this deal for the Hawks.

So either Leddy (at 23, with a Cup ring and coming off a pretty good season) really sucks—or maybe the market was a bit suppressed.

Oh, well. I tried. The law of supply and demand apply to the world of hockey. You say he is an up and coming player, yet no team wanted to pay more than the Isles simply because the Hawks needed to trade someone (not necessarily Leddy)? And this actually makes sense to you?

To spell it out further... Let's say the Sabres also had interest in Leddy and think he's a really good player. Do you really think they would lose the bidding to the Isles because of the Hawks situation?l will answer for you..... No. They would stop bidding when they think the incoming asset isn't worth the cost.



- mohel

The reason for a cap is to negate the market force of supply and demand pricing

Many people had Leddy on the short list to go - not too hard to figure out. The only reason he wouldn't be is if Stan didn't want to let go of the prize he got for Barker. Fortunately Stan didn't let that affect his decision-making here.
- mohel

Most people, myself included until I heard he'd agreed to work out a cap-friendly deal to stay in Chicago, had Oduya pegged to go, followed by Versteeg, Rozsival, and then maybe Leddy.

Most people, myself included until I heard he'd agreed to work out a cap-friendly deal to stay in Chicago, had Oduya pegged to go, followed by Versteeg, Rozsival, and then maybe Leddy.
- John Jaeckel

What exactly pegs a "cap friendly deal" for someone like Oduya at this point?

Compared to his market value or based on what Chicago can spend?

Like are we talking his market value is $5 mil and he'll take 4

or

are we talking that the hawks are razor thin on space and he'll take a brad richards-esque 2 mil per deal to stay on a contender?

The reason for a cap is to negate the market force of supply and demand pricing
- nellie

Boom!

So, how could the Hawks cap situation not have influenced the market? The cap is there to not only influence contract values but encourage player movement. This is an instance where it did. Along with Buff, Ladd, Brower, Campbell.....

DAMN HARD SALARY CAPs.

Umm, no. Because part of the issue with Leddy was what he would want next year. Which is partially why he, and not Oduya, was sent packing.

You don't trade a player of that magnitude and promise to just squeeze under the cap this year.

I will concede that it wasn't just the twins. But if you really are saying that the Hawks cap situation (now, or next year, regardless of what caused it) was not a factor affecting what the Hawks could get back for Leddy, and lecturing on market dynamics at the same time, I mean, come on . . .

And ya, I made the same argument that once more than 1-2 teams were involved, the price would go up. But every GM involved also knew the Hawks were in a bind and no one wanted to do them any favors (from multiple sources). Bowman got Pokka and that was the best deal he could get.
- John Jaeckel

If he was that good, or anyone in the front office though he would become THAT good, he wouldnt have been traded. Leddy was not that good