For everyone saying "just buy Bickell out" / "why didn't they buy him out last year?"...Bowman HAS to try everything reasonably possible to trade him so that his contract is off the books after this season. Especially with Panarin, Teravainen, Gustafsson, Kempny, all due for new contracts next summer. That zombie $1.5mil in 2017-18 could cost the Hawks a really useful/important player. Buyout has to be an option of last resort.

Schmaltz and Forsling are the only prospects I wouldn't include in any deal to get Bickell cleanly off of the books this year. Even if you have to retain some salary, that's fine because it is only this year.
- BreakoutHockey

Read above ,2 years is better then 4 years . And Schmaltz and Forsling WOW !! . I still think they will hang onto Parrian this year well he is a bargain and see how they do with out much other then buying out Bicks and signing Shaw if possible .If Parrian cannot be signed next off season and signs for a big number 6 or 7 mil , then the HAWKS may get a boat load of 1st picks and more . And that for a player we can't sign and paid nothing for . Take the picks and move on .....

Does anybody know why Stan did NOT buy out Bickell last year??
- Lido_Shuffle

I don't, although I do know buying out a player is the last resort. A GM then has to look at a mistake on the books for what could be years. My guess is they were hoping Bickell could play well enough to have some trade value.

God wiling tomorrow Bickell's name will have been submitted to be bought out by the Hawks.

I know every $0.01 counts but I dont' see any logical reason to save an additional 1.896 million if that includes a player who could be some what useful this upcoming year in 86. Now if iit's Svedberg, that's a different story..........

Also curious to see a team out East go hard after Shaw in a possible offer sheet scenario or trading for his rights. Somebody who is close but just doesn't have enough jam upfront.

My worry is ,losing that in Shaw will hurt the Hawks as well.
- SteveRain

My worry is ,losing that in Shaw will hurt the Hawks as well.

No doubt, just a matter of how badly.
I think they will try very hard to keep him.

He's been trying for over 18 months to move him. he's damaged goods. The Hawks know it. The league knows it. Plus, why would any team take Bickell at 4 million this year when they can get him at a LOT less via a buyout.

Plus Bickell has a modified NTC in which he can only go 8 places unless he waves.

See what happens, but even after being recalled and having an OK game vvs WPG he was quickly exposed as being too slow for the NHL game.
- SteveRain

The reason a team would trade for him, in theory, would be to extract a prospect from the Blackhawks in exchange for taking his contract on (obviously, other teams' prospect ask has been too high for the Hawks) and/or to reach the cap floor. Of course no one would trade for him alone as a hockey trade - no one is even attempting to argue that.

As for the modified NTC, one would think he'd be willing to waive that if the only other option the Blackhawks presented him with was spending another long winter in Winnebago County.

I agree that it is unlikely, but Bowman would be doing the team and the fans if he didn't exhaust every realistically-possible trade avenue before biting the bullet on a buyout.

What do you mean?

I thought this clearly means the Blackhawks are trading both Crawford & Darling and going with Carruth & Johansson as the team is entering the "Scotty Bowman says goaltending doesn't matter" era.

I apologize in advance for the sarcasm...it's been one of those days.
- DarthKane

Just stopped laughing. Sarcasm appreciated.

Read above ,2 years is better then 4 years . And Schmaltz and Forsling WOW !! . I still think they will hang onto Parrian this year well he is a bargain and see how they do with out much other then buying out Bicks and signing Shaw if possible .If Parrian cannot be signed next off season and signs for a big number 6 or 7 mil , then the HAWKS may get a boat load of 1st picks and more . And that for a player we can't sign and paid nothing for . Take the picks and move on .....
- oldduffman

Ding ding ding.

We have a winner.

I don't, although I do know buying out a player is the last resort. A GM then has to look at a mistake on the books for what could be years. My guess is they were hoping Bickell could play well enough to have some trade value.
- Al

It's simple. He would have been on the books until through 2018-19 if they had bought him out last year. If you buy him out this year it's only through 2017-18. And I'm sure the goal, unlikely as it may be to pull off, is to trade him with a prospect sweetener to get him off the books this year.

Read above ,2 years is better then 4 years . And Schmaltz and Forsling WOW !! . I still think they will hang onto Parrian this year well he is a bargain and see how they do with out much other then buying out Bicks and signing Shaw if possible .If Parrian cannot be signed next off season and signs for a big number 6 or 7 mil , then the HAWKS may get a boat load of 1st picks and more . And that for a player we can't sign and paid nothing for . Take the picks and move on .....
- oldduffman

I'm not sure what your point is. I'm the one who explained the 2 years vs 4 years in the first place, and I said that Schmaltz and Forsling are the two prospects that you DON'T include with Bickell to move him.

As for Panarin, if you aren't willing to pay a 24 year old elite offensive player with PPG production, there are bigger problems here.

The reason a team would trade for him, in theory, would be to extract a prospect from the Blackhawks in exchange for taking his contract on (obviously, other teams' prospect ask has been too high for the Hawks) and/or to reach the cap floor. Of course no one would trade for him alone as a hockey trade - no one is even attempting to argue that.

As for the modified NTC, one would think he'd be willing to waive that if the only other option the Blackhawks presented him with was spending another long winter in Winnebago County.

I agree that it is unlikely, but Bowman would be doing the team and the fans if he didn't exhaust every realistically-possible trade avenue before biting the bullet on a buyout.
- BreakoutHockey

And I think he has done just that....exhausted every aspect.

I would rather see them buy out Bickell then trade Bickell and say Teuvo to Arizona for a mid round pick. God knows I am not a huge 86 fan, but that was a trade you should have made a few years ago.....not now.

I think the fan base understands what's at stake and Bowman even allowed Bickells agent to seek out a trade and nothing came of it. Just tells you the market isn't there.

My worry is ,losing that in Shaw will hurt the Hawks as well.

No doubt, just a matter of how badly.
I think they will try very hard to keep him.
- Al

Me too, Al.

I just can't get over even if he navigates the choppy cap number this year, how do you fit in a realistic attainable 72 bonus AND a higher AAV for 72 and 65 in 2017-18 without moving some big money on top of Bickell.

Hey DK...

The Detroit model simply puts more focus on a balanced/deep D core. Solid goal tending is needed without a doubt. This modern hard cap NHL is forcing very hard decisions in terms of where to spend your money.
- z1990z

I think it comes down to what you said and the value of the player to the team. Would love to keep Crawford. Keeping him makes the team a bit more stable. The Detroit model is a bit dated, but it holds weight here just because of the Hawks cap situation. And out of the core, Crawford seems like the odd man out. The balanced D core you are suggesting is needed, as evidenced by this past season. There was no stability on the back end. The forward rotation, outside of the PAK line was also in shambles for a while. If #50 can be used as a chip to improve one or both of those, then roll with it.

I hope they don't move on a buyout of Bickell until the cap is set. Then you know the cap floor. Make one last ditch effort to dump him onto a team trying to reach the floor and if that doesn't happen, THEN buy him out. Free agency won't have started yet, not that it's going to matter, but it might.

OR, if another team is presenting the FO with a fantastic deal and you need cap space NOW, then buy him out if it works.

If Parrian cannot be signed next off season and signs for a big number 6 or 7 mil , then the HAWKS may get a boat load of 1st picks and more .
- oldduffman

It's possible. There's also the possibility that a KHL team could throw money at Panarin and he could head back there - although those chances would be slim.

Chicago Blackhawks ‏@NHLBlackhawks 2h2 hours ago
#Blackhawks agree to terms with goaltender Mac Carruth on a one-year contract.
- DarthKane

I figured that was coming. Good deal for Mac. He gets another shot to show if he has the goods or not.

And I think he has done just that....exhausted every aspect.

I would rather see them buy out Bickell then trade Bickell and say Teuvo to Arizona for a mid round pick. God knows I am not a huge 86 fan, but that was a trade you should have made a few years ago.....not now.

I think the fan base understands what's at stake and Bowman even allowed Bickells agent to seek out a trade and nothing came of it. Just tells you the market isn't there.
- SteveRain

Agreed on pretty much every front. I just get frustrated when people say that Bowman should have bought him out at the first opportunity/never bothered trying to make a trade when that clearly would have been the preferred outcome if there had been a market. Definitely don't want to lose Teuvo over this.

I hope they don't move on a buyout of Bickell until the cap is set. Then you know the cap floor. Make one last ditch effort to dump him onto a team trying to reach the floor and if that doesn't happen, THEN buy him out. Free agency won't have started yet, not that it's going to matter, but it might.

OR, if another team is presenting the FO with a fantastic deal and you need cap space NOW, then buy him out if it works.
- CanOCorn

Exactly. There's literally zero benefit to them not waiting a few days after the cap is set to see if anything shakes loose.

For everyone saying "just buy Bickell out" / "why didn't they buy him out last year?"...Bowman HAS tried everything reasonably possible to trade him so that his contract is off the books after this season. Especially with Panarin, Teravainen, Gustafsson, Kempny, all due for new contracts next summer. That zombie $1.5mil in 2017-18 could cost the Hawks a really useful/important player. Buyout has to be an option of last resort.

Schmaltz and Forsling are the only prospects I wouldn't include in any deal to get Bickell cleanly off of the books this year. Even if you have to retain some salary, that's fine because it is only this year.
- BreakoutHockey

Fixed. That's why you buy him out.

I hope they don't move on a buyout of Bickell until the cap is set. Then you know the cap floor. Make one last ditch effort to dump him onto a team trying to reach the floor and if that doesn't happen, THEN buy him out. Free agency won't have started yet, not that it's going to matter, but it might.

OR, if another team is presenting the FO with a fantastic deal and you need cap space NOW, then buy him out if it works.
- CanOCorn

The only problem is most teams trying to get to the cap floor would prefer to take a guy with a HIGH AAV and relative low actual salary. In the case of Bickell his salary is 4.5, but his AAV is 4.

The actual dollars looms large for those teams with tight internal budgets. That's another large factor in moving Bickell.

Agreed on pretty much every front. I just get frustrated when people say that Bowman should have bought him out at the first opportunity/never bothered trying to make a trade when that clearly would have been the preferred outcome if there had been a market. Definitely don't want to lose Teuvo over this.
- BreakoutHockey

Agreed, it's like throwing good money after bad.

Now, if there were a legit bidding war over Teuvo, then you might make taking Bickell the cherry on the derby winner's sundae, assuming the rest of the offer was nice. But I don't think the stakes are/would be as high or the bidders as many as they were for Drouin, for example.

Fixed. That's why you buy him out.
- John Jaeckel

JJ, how about a fearless projection blog....something to change the mood around here.....

Give us your guesses for:
-cap number
-most realistic Hawk move
-move nobody may see coming, if you can't tip your hand.....

I'm just excited the offseason is finally here. Been long a 6 weeks or whatever since Brouwer ended the Hawks repeat dream.........

The only problem is most teams trying to get to the cap floor would prefer to take a guy with a HIGH AAV and relative low actual salary. In the case of Bickell his salary is 4.5, but his AAV is 4.

The actual dollars looms large for those teams with tight internal budgets. That's another large factor in moving Bickell.
- SteveRain

I don't know if this is possible, but could you trade Bickell for cash considerations like in some other sports? Basically trade Bickell, but pay what he is owed for a team to take is cap salary? Probably not, but it would be great to trade bickell to remove his cap space, but still actually pay what he is owed. For a team like Chicago the money owed wouldn't be that big of deal, just getting rid of the cap hit would be. I don't think this is allowed in hockey, but it would be great if it would be!

And I think he has done just that....exhausted every aspect.

I would rather see them buy out Bickell then trade Bickell and say Teuvo to Arizona for a mid round pick. God knows I am not a huge 86 fan, but that was a trade you should have made a few years ago.....not now.

I think the fan base understands what's at stake and Bowman even allowed Bickells agent to seek out a trade and nothing came of it. Just tells you the market isn't there.
- SteveRain

But what if that deal you "proposed" and rejected allows them to keep Shaw: would you deal Bickell and TT for Shaw plus maybe some additional cap space?

Exactly. There's literally zero benefit to them not waiting a few days after the cap is set to see if anything shakes loose.
- BreakoutHockey

Buyout period ends on June 30, I think.

When will the new cap be announced?

JJ, how about a fearless projection blog....something to change the mood around here.....

Give us your guesses for:
-cap number
-most realistic Hawk move
-move nobody may see coming, if you can't tip your hand.....

I'm just excited the offseason is finally here. Been long a 6 weeks or whatever since Brouwer ended the Hawks repeat dream.........
- SteveRain

Those would all be guesses. I will venture to say the cap comes in around . . .
ehhhh . . . $72.8 million.

I think the "move" the two bigger moves most likely to happen would be moving Shaw's rights and/or moving Crawford. And buying out Bickell.

Somehow, in that, they'd get a natural left wing with some speed and skill and two-way game and a bit of cap space. Maybe they add one more serviceable depth d-man, could even default to Rozy (language buddy for the Kempny) at a league minimum deal. Maybe a depth veteran goalie with some tread led if Crawford goes.. Dunno.

Aaaaand . . . that would be the summer of work they would hope for.

So it looks like ELC will not be exempt on the EXP draft. Plus you need at least 2 forwards and 1 d that played 70 games over 2 years and 40 games last year and they also have to be signed for 1 more year. Players can waive there NMC to put on the EXP draft. I wonder if guys like Seabs might do this so we can keep a younger player like TVR. Would a EXP team want Seabs and his 10 mil salary and 7 more years at 6.875 AAV and a Full NMC. I know as a EXP I would not.