yes, question is how soon.
- John Jaeckel

That was more my question and I should have specified. Does either one have a realistic shot at doing it next year and making TT more expendable?

Exactly...I'm going to need help swallowing that one.......Kruger is what he is, a nice player but he's more readily replaceable then Shaw.

The Hawks as it is have very few guys will to get dirty and score the necessary "net presence" goals. I'm very hopeful JJ is wrong on this one.

Shaw to me is what Leddy is to Savvy and Q even LIKES Shaw......
- SteveRain

Kruger is not being dealt this summer, guys. Not happening. Not because I say so. But because of the deal they just did with him—and they highly value him.

As hard as this may be for some to wrap their heads around, I have heard Shaw being offered by the Hawks in MANY deals.

Kruger? NEVER.

They are different kinds of players, and I will by no means dis Shaw and what he brings (98% of the time) on the ice.

But I will say, based on what I've heard, I would be a LOT more worried about Shaw's future injury risk than Kruger's. And I hear the Hawks are.

The whole Kruger as Pat LaFontaine Concussion Veggie about to happen narrative is not based in reality. He's had a couple of brief absences due to concussion.

You win hockey games with Andrew Shaw or Marcus Kruger, albeit somewhat for different reasons. And Kruger's teammates think very highly of him. He is not a little ball of hate like Shaw but he has a titanic heart. They just can't afford both.

I also think they believe Kruger has some more upside.

And the crazy thing is, they had a potential Kruger replacement in Danault and traded him away. Also, have Rasmussen who I think could be a solid 4C or maybe even a 3C in time.
- Dannyboy

No, Danault is a useful and similar player, but Kruger is better.

JJ,

Wouldn't mid moving Crawford and getting Anderson as a mentor for Darling. He's a veteran who can also still play at a high level.

I'm down with moving TT anywhere. I've said for a long time that I don't believe he's the player that everyone thinks (or wants him) to be here in Chicago. I think a different system like Arizona, Edmonton, etc. would fit him better--somewhere he can go and focus on all offense and not be defensively responsible. Maybe he'll find is stride in that kind of environment. But, he won't go anywhere unless he becomes tougher, both mentally and physically.

Don't want to lose Shaw. Not too many guys like him in the league.
- Hank3Henshaw

Me too. Craig is a student of the position and I think he and Darling would be great together. I also think Craig is a warrior and a very underrated goalie.

No one is saying it is just that.

A) Very few teams need a starting goalie.
B) Teams cant afford to take a 6MM cap hit without sending anything back to Chicago
C) Crawford can block any trade. Do you think he waives to go to bottom feeders?
D) Goalie pad size is shrinking next year, no person knows how that will effect the goalies going into next year.
- ImThatGuy

I don't think he can. How do you know this.

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.
- bhawks2241

I'm aware what he brings, and I do know how important it is to this team. Kruger is also a shutdown C. We know how Q likes his "4th" line to lineup against the opposition's first. Freeing up one of the top 2 lines is Q's goal every game. Shaw has averaged ~16g the past 3 years (hit 20 once in'13-'14). I think of his ability as a top 6 W as I do his ability at C, he would be fine in a pinch. I think Kruger is a better fit for this team going forward, and depending on how much $ Shaw is looking for.

Isn't a 8-10 teams I"d accept a trade to clause essentially a NTC unless I give you my permission.

Basically he can just pick the 8-10 teams that would never trade for him. NYC, Pitt, Kings, Tampa, Nashville, Capitals, etc.
- sditulli

He can, but that rarely happens. In his case, all things considered, i doubt he would.

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

Shaw is an RFA, so if you are going to trade his rights you need to get back more than he would bring by signing somewhere else:

$1,826,328-to-$3,652,659 Second-round pick
$3,652,659-to-$5,478,986 First and third-round picks
$5,478,986-to-$7,305,316 First, second and third-round picks

It's all a matter of what type of contract you think he will demand. If I'm the Hawks I am assuming that his ask will be in the second tier above, so return needs to be at least a first round Pick+

Full NMC. He can block anything and everything if he wanted.
- ImThatGuy

I have heard from a Hawk source that is not the case. That he was nearly asked to submit a list last summer. Source COULD be wrong. But I don't know that you're right.

And here's the thing, even if he has an iron-clad NTC, he can waive. And there's a lot that can be done to make that happen.

What I heard last summer was that if it was absolutely necessary for cap reasons, he would not have been a jerk about it, at least in terms of talking to the team about a list. FWIW.

Kruger is not being dealt this summer, guys. Not happening. Not because I say so. But because of the deal they just did with him—and they highly value him.

As hard as this may be for some to wrap their heads around, I have heard Shaw being offered by the Hawks in MANY deals.

Kruger? NEVER.

They are different kinds of players, and I will by no means dis Shaw and what he brings (98% of the time) on the ice.

But I will say, based on what I've heard, I would be a LOT more worried about Shaw's future injury risk than Kruger's. And I hear the Hawks are.

The whole Kruger as Pat LaFontaine Concussion Veggie about to happen narrative is not based in reality. He's had a couple of brief absences due to concussion.

You win hockey games with Andrew Shaw or Marcus Kruger, albeit somewhat for different reasons. And Kruger's teammates think very highly of him. He is not a little ball of hate like Shaw but he has a titanic heart. They just can't afford both.

I also think they believe Kruger has some more upside.
- John Jaeckel

What do you think the realistic value of Shaw's rights are considering that all other teams know the Hawks have cap issues?

I had suggested on Carol's blog something revolving around Etem and Sbisa for him and Bickell, is that way off ?

You're probably right. At the same time, it is something to (briefly) think about.

Now that I have that out of my system...
- EKB13

I think the previous management team in Toronto might have been intrigued by a Kane trade. With the current management, and having already moved out Kessel, Phaneuf et al, there's zero chance.
In the position they are currently in, there's probably only one player in the entire league that the Leafs would trade that 1st for, and Edmonton isn't trading him.

Crawford might get a lot of consideration, but would he want to waive to come to a team that has basically zero chance of making the playoffs next year, and a mediocre at best chance the year after?

Sounds like if Bolland medically clears that Florida will buy him out.

Trade Kruger, sign Bolland back cheap

Welcome to cap space
- hawkeytalkman

This also would result in a much worse team. And Kruger still isn't getting traded.

Sign Weise trade shaw...save $$
- southernhawk

Shaw is a much better player then Weise can even dream of being.

No, Danault is a useful and similar player, but Kruger is better.
- John Jaeckel

Agreed. While I thought highly of Danault, he is an RFA after next season.

I think the previous management team in Toronto might have been intrigued by a Kane trade. With the current management, and having already moved out Kessel, Phaneuf et al, there's zero chance.
In the position they are currently in, there's probably only one player in the entire league that the Leafs would trade that 1st for, and Edmonton isn't trading him.

Crawford might get a lot of consideration, but would he want to waive to come to a team that has basically zero chance of making the playoffs next year, and a mediocre at best chance the year after?
- oldstyle

Kane isn't being traded.

JJ,

Thanks for the post! Always hate seeing guys leave the team, but it's part of it. Do you have any insight on the Lars Johansen signing? Probably AHL bound?

And what about Arizona as a destination for Crow?

I would really like to get Mike Hoffman at 4yrs at 5 million per. We can send them Crawford, Shaw, and TT and Take a risk with Darling as the starter

Sure.

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

Well, I believe there is a long and robust history of guys submitting lists—and getting dealt—often to teams not even originally on their list. Happens a LOT. Rick Nash comes to mind. I believe Jeff Carter. Many others.

Has anyone else heard the rumors that Crawford went on a 2 day bender after getting eliminated by the Blues?

Also heard talk that Brian Campbell wants to come back to Chicago for under 3 million a year.

Completely disagree with you. Really under sell what Shaw brings. 1) 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. 2) That is a lot harder to replace than a PK/faceoff specialist.
- bhawks2241

1) if he's healthy
2) you get no value for him if you sign him to a big deal and he can't play anymore at some point during the deal

There is something I'm not saying here. Connect the dots.

I'm aware what he brings, and I do know how important it is to this team. Kruger is also a shutdown C. We know how Q likes his "4th" line to lineup against the opposition's first. Freeing up one of the top 2 lines is Q's goal every game. Shaw has averaged ~16g the past 3 years (hit 20 once in'13-'14). I think of his ability as a top 6 W as I do his ability at C, he would be fine in a pinch. I think Kruger is a better fit for this team going forward, and depending on how much $ Shaw is looking for.
- Antz96

Kruger is a secondary shutdown center. Toews handles most of the big boys.

Compare Kruger to a guy like Courterier. Both get crap for zone starts and Coots still puts up 35-40 points.

Kruger is where offense goes to disappear. PK guys are a dime a dozen.

That was more my question and I should have specified. Does either one have a realistic shot at doing it next year and making TT more expendable?
- bhawks2241

Both are slightly to largely different players than TT stylistically. Either could at least marginally if not completely replace TT next year.

I have heard from a Hawk source that is not the case. That he was nearly asked to submit a list last summer. Source COULD be wrong. But I don't know that you're right.

And here's the thing, even if he has an iron-clad NTC, he can waive. And there's a lot that can be done to make that happen.

What I heard last summer was that if it was absolutely necessary for cap reasons, he would not have been a jerk about it, at least in terms of talking to the team about a list. FWIW.
- John Jaeckel

Im just going off of what I see, If i look on Spotrac it shows him having a Full NMC as does General Fanager.

Shaw is a much better player then Weise can even dream of being.
- TTtime

I disagree... If looking at the small Q-influenced sample size then maybe but if looking at Weise in Montreal I'd say Weise is a better player overall. He's a larger and more technically gifted version of Shaw... The one thing I will give shaw is that he understands his role more and doesn't try to do more than he should (largely why I feel Q was so reluctant to play Weise). I'm a huge fan of Shaw, but to say Weise isn't even in the same league as Shaw is craziness

Agreed. While I thought highly of Danault, he is an RFA after next season.
- Antz96

Trading Danault sucked because it was wasted in a couple of useless players in Weise and Condiments.