I go out to lunch and JJ's got a new blog up with 99 comments already.. wow, imagine if our team was still playing!

And people thought my Bolland bashing was bad....just wait.....the Hawks are BETTER with Shaw+Rasmussen then Kruger and whoever. I'm still waiting for somebody to justify this Kruger deal. The guy has gone something like 48 or 49 games without a goal. That's John Scott like.....in today's NHL...and the scary part is you rarely notice Kruger having real life scoring chances....not some whacked out sabremetrics that at one time was heralding Rundblad as some viable asset.

I'll get lit up and left for dead after this but I truly feel this Kruger deal is WORSE then what they paid Bickell. At least 29 produced and was seen, wrongly, as a power forward. I don't know what the hell they seen in Kruger.....at that price.
- SteveRain

Another past performance back pat deal from SB (you would have thought he would have learned his lesson from Bickell's contract) and before he was fully healed no less - what was the rush? If he does many more of these reward contracts, it's game over for him and the Hawks window. I am really beginning to believe that the arrogance of both him and Q think they don't need to adapt and change. If SB doesn't make a deal at the draft, it will cement the fact that he didn't learn anything from the debacle last year and he will get pantsed again.

As far as his shot, it is really weak after the injury and his prospects for contributing offensively are very limited. This is a luxury deal when we can't afford that luxury for a one dimensional PK player.

You know and the other thing about Kruger is here is a guy that broke and possibly dislocated his wrist so badly he needed surgery. Probably had some sort of ligament issue as well. Takes him forever, and rightfully so, to get back, and admits post blues series he isn't sure he'll ever be right again. So that's a pretty significant hand injury....and yet, lets extend him in a very modest cap year, to a deal that probably made every GM in the NHL drop multiple F bombs when it came across....why because a deal like that raises the comparables for depth players who are BETTER.

3 people won in the Kruger deal....kruger, his agent, and Donald Fehr.
- SteveRain

You fail to acknowledge his new deal is essentially an extension of the bridge deal signed last offseason. He took a cap friendly deal and was promised to be compensated later. I look at it as a 4yr/10.75m deal. Wrist injuries are notorious for sapping power for quite some time after (see baseball players), so it's understandable he is not near 100%.

Kruger checks off more Hawk needs than Shaw. 19 is the only other C that can win a faceoff. Kruger also excels on the PK. Kruger is not asked to score. Sure, Shaw can fill in at C in a pinch, but he is more suited to play wing. He does not play the PK either. A physical bottom 6 winger is a lot easier to replace than a bottom 6 C who can win faceoffs and kill penalties. We see how valuable center depth is year after year in the playoffs.

0G 4A -5 in 41 GP....
- EnzoD

and don't forget 0 goals in the playoffs....so 48 games without a goal.

But he's KROOOOOOOG-Man...............

and don't forget 0 goals in the playoffs....so 48 games without a goal.

But he's KROOOOOOOG-Man...............


- SteveRain

They keep him because he's a penalty killing/shot blocking machine, and he's decent on the FO...not to put the puck in the net (that's never been his bag).

No chance.

He's consensus #1
- Tumbleweed

Agreed... Matthews consensus #1 in my opinion... His pro "comp" is largely viewed as Toews. A top-level center and future leader of the team w/ pro-experience ready to step in day 1 is exactly what the Leafs need to start their rebuild. With that said, very solid top-3 talents this year, but agree that "generational talent" may be a bit of a stretch (though I do feel that Matthews will be Toronto's Toews for many years, and if that's an accurate comparison then I suppose one could argue he's generational talent)

cant see the flyers being interested in Crawford. your thoughts John?
- rinaldo

That was conjecture on my part. The Flyers might see him as an upgrade to the position with with Mason coming back to Chicago for one year at $4.1 million.
Crawford >>Mason in most opinions, if not all.

A) A lot of teams could use an upgrade in net. Crawford is an upgrade over a lot of starting goalies in the NHL.
B) Who says Chicago wouldn't be taking back anything? There would be players coming back for sure and the salary along with them
C) I believe Crawford has a Modified NTC, so likely he can't completely block being traded.
D) That doesn't really impact his trade value one bit.
- breadbag

Sure.

if you ignore the entire history of players with similar restrictions being moved.

I can't imagine interest in Crawford from Buffalo, having just traded a 1st last year for one who played well while he was healthy, not to mention a surprising Johnson who put up numbers close to Crawford himself:

Johnson: 2.36, .920
Lehner: 2.47, .924

Crawford: 2.37, .924
- stashu

Again, Crawford is, in most opinions, a better goalie than either. I think it depends on how close BUF thinks they are to legit contention. Just my opinion and I know they talked over a year ago.

They keep him because he's a penalty killing/shot blocking machine, and he's decent on the FO...not to put the puck in the net (that's never been his bag).
- Murph76

Similarly to the "earn your money" conversation regarding Toews this season....at $3mil/year, Marcus needs to put up more points. Plain and simple. You don't pay guys with 10 points/year $3mil. Especially with the salary commitments StanBo has with the core.

I don't think he does.

What teams
A) Need a starting Goalie
B) Have 6MM in cap space to take on without sending anything back to Chicago.


Also, teams know Chicago is in a cap crunch.

Edit - And Crawford can block any trade.
- ImThatGuy

Not sure that's true. I believe he submits a list first.

That was conjecture on my part. The Flyers might see him as an upgrade to the position with with Mason coming back to Chicago for one year at $4.1 million.
Crawford >>Mason in most opinions, if not all.
- John Jaeckel

Mason was an absolute sieve in Round 1. Arguably cost the Flyers a chance at the upset over Washington. Handful of PeeWee level goals against on Mason in that series....like the shot from center ice

JJ on this point to Calgary, also consider that Calgary will get Dallas' first round pick if the Stars win game 7 and D Kris Russell plays 50% of Dallas' playoff games which looks like it may happen.

With CGY with two possible 1st round picks, getting one of those in some sort of package with Crawford could be key.

What say you JJ? Great blog.
- acmidd28

The Flames make more sense than a couple of teams I placed conjecture on.

Let me be specific, the only teams I have heard the Hawks DISCUSSED Crawford with were BUF and EDM last Sprng and WPEG last summer, although I believe there were more last summer. So take that for what it's worth.

Mason was an absolute sieve in Round 1. Arguably cost the Flyers a chance at the upset over Washington. Handful of PeeWee level goals against on Mason in that series....like the shot from center ice
- EnzoD

I'm not a Mason fan, but I think he would be a one-year backup to Darling, where the combined salary at the position would be under $5 million per, and a net savings of $1.9 million per next year and $6 million a few years after to the Hawks.

You can't have it both ways. You won't deal Crawford for an equal #1 and get all that cap relief.

But no one should assume that tules out dealing him. It's being driven by dollars. and trade-offs.

agreed. for the leafs, if it cost more than something like below, i hope they pass:

Pitts 1st, stuart percy and bernier ($2M retained 1 year) for Crawford ($500k retained 4 years) and a 2017 2nd
- Tumbleweed

That deal makes a ton of sense for a variety of reasons, not least the Hawks need the pic and they like Percy

Here we go again with the CC trade talk

1. Has a FULL NMC - he is NOT going waive to a toilet bowl team or market
2. His loss from the roster would have the greatest adverse impact to W/L
3. Cheaper goalies are either worse, or too favorable a cap hit to their current team
4. Pavelec - head case, Anderson - past his prime, Halak - perennial DL resident
5. His contract is too pricey for most other teams
6. I am convinced any Hawk players with NMCs have been anointed as "the core"
7. NO TEAM WILL DO THE HAWKS ANY FAVORS. See: Sharp, Patrick

I think Kruger, TT and Shaw are the truly marketable chips, and one or more of those three will be gone. Important to note that Kruger's deal has no NTC/NMC.

IMO, I'd rather trade Kruger and keep Shaw for the same $$$. Don't know if the Hawks could even trade Kruger since he signed an extension. Does anyone if they could or couldn't?
- Dannyboy

Tecfhnically, they could(I think the NMC does not kick in til 2017). In reality, they won't. Not happening for a variety of reasons.

Agreed... Matthews consensus #1 in my opinion... His pro "comp" is largely viewed as Toews. A top-level center and future leader of the team w/ pro-experience ready to step in day 1 is exactly what the Leafs need to start their rebuild. With that said, very solid top-3 talents this year, but agree that "generational talent" may be a bit of a stretch (though I do feel that Matthews will be Toronto's Toews for many years, and if that's an accurate comparison then I suppose one could argue he's generational talent)
- Frenchy4488

Who knows how good he’ll be / who turns out to be the best player from the draft class.

But right now, I suspect 30 out 30 teams take Mathews.

the leafs will get the bpa who happens to fill a glaring need.

I'm not a Mason fan, but I think he would be a one-year backup to Darling, where the combined salary at the position would be under $5 million per, and a net savings of $1.9 million per next year and $6 million a few years after to the Hawks.

You can't have it both ways. You won't deal Crawford for an equal #1 and get all that cap relief.

But no one should assume that tules out dealing him. It's being driven by dollars. and trade-offs.
- John Jaeckel

Thanks for the new Blog JJ! Hopefully Stan can get a Dman in return for Tuevo+. My comment on Mason was primarily directed at some lurking Flyers' fans that think they have no need for Crawford...

Here we go again with the CC trade talk

1. Has a FULL NMC - he is NOT going waive to a toilet bowl team or market
2. His loss from the roster would have the greatest adverse impact to W/L
3. Cheaper goalies are either worse, or too favorable a cap hit to their current team
4. Pavelec - head case, Anderson - past his prime, Halak - perennial DL resident
5. His contract is too pricey for most other teams
6. I am convinced any Hawk players with NMCs have been anointed as "the core"
7. NO TEAM WILL DO THE HAWKS ANY FAVORS. See: Sharp, Patrick

I think Kruger, TT and Shaw are the truly marketable chips, and one or more of those three will be gone. Important to note that Kruger's deal has no NTC/NMC.
- Return of the Roar

Probably not, but it isn't just about sushi restaurants. Coaching, teammates, etc has a LOT to do with it. and he has to submit a list of 8-10 (I am pretty sure).

They will not deal Kruger. That is even less likely.

Here we go again with the CC trade talk

1. Has a FULL NMC - he is NOT going waive to a toilet bowl team or market
2. His loss from the roster would have the greatest adverse impact to W/L
3. Cheaper goalies are either worse, or too favorable a cap hit to their current team
4. Pavelec - head case, Anderson - past his prime, Halak - perennial DL resident
5. His contract is too pricey for most other teams
6. I am convinced any Hawk players with NMCs have been anointed as "the core"
7. NO TEAM WILL DO THE HAWKS ANY FAVORS. See: Sharp, Patrick

I think Kruger, TT and Shaw are the truly marketable chips, and one or more of those three will be gone. Important to note that Kruger's deal has no NTC/NMC.
- Return of the Roar

That is speculation and Goalie is the only position on the roster where the Hawks have an NHL ready replacement in-house. Kruger, Shaw and even TT don't have an NHL ready body to step in and take those minutes at a relatively comparable level of production.

Anyone with more insight on Hawks prospects think Motte or Schmaltz could come in and produce similar pt totals to TT in a bottom 6 roll and play a responsible 2 way game? I could see TT being moved for D help if the front office thinks this is a real possibility.
- bhawks2241

yes, question is how soon.

You fail to acknowledge his new deal is essentially an extension of the bridge deal signed last offseason. He took a cap friendly deal and was promised to be compensated later. I look at it as a 4yr/10.75m deal. Wrist injuries are notorious for sapping power for quite some time after (see baseball players), so it's understandable he is not near 100%.

Kruger checks off more Hawk needs than Shaw. 19 is the only other C that can win a faceoff. Kruger also excels on the PK. Kruger is not asked to score. Sure, Shaw can fill in at C in a pinch, but he is more suited to play wing. He does not play the PK either. A physical bottom 6 winger is a lot easier to replace than a bottom 6 C who can win faceoffs and kill penalties. We see how valuable center depth is year after year in the playoffs.
- Antz96

Completely disagree with you. Really under sell what Shaw brings. He can play anywhere in the lineup and can play C when needed. He is solid at the dot, provides net front presence on the PK, and produces almost 20g a year. That is a lot harder to replace than a PK/faceoff specialist.

or maybe we just try and get the coaching staff to you know, actually coach these young rookies into the players they need to be. the team isn't that far away, and player development may be the better strategy than cap relief+ player acquisition.

That deal makes a ton of sense for a variety of reasons, not least the Hawks need the pic and they like Percy
- John Jaeckel

What are you guys looking for in return for shaw? I am having hard time thinking of a comparable player being traded recently.