I agree and would be more inclined to trade Seabrook before Crawford. If people think it's a cake walk to find a Matt Murray they are nuts. Without Crawford this year the Hawks miss the playoffs.
- Colbyboy

Seabrook carried the mail when Keith was out

This team last year only had 4 competent D men (Keith, Seabrook, Hjarll, and TVR). Lose Seabrook and they're 10x worse. Darling may be able to take the reigns but there is no one remotely ready to step in for Seabrook...let alone another top 4 which they need

I think this is very well said here. CC was arguably this team's MVP this year (no disrespect to Kane) but as a GM you have make some tough decisions.

To me this is more a question of trying to keep the Cup window open for as long as they can by using the $ to bolster the F and D (and downgrading in net, to what degree is undetermined) vs. having a better goalie for next season at the expense of continued cap issues for the other 20 slots on the roster in 2017-18 and onwards.

Are the Hawks better off slightly downgrading in net and using that $ saved to bolster the F and D? Or are they better off with an all-star level goaltender but a lot of ELC and spare parts filling out the F and D? That's the million dollar question. The more and more I think about it, the more I'm starting to believe that the best course of action is to sell high on CC and use that money elsewhere in the lineup. It might hurt next season and the Hawks may be hunting for a G if Darling can't handle the pressure, but that $6M could definitely help bolster this squad up front and on the blue line.
- Hawksfan37

- Who is your "slight downgrade" to replace CC? There is not one guy that I see as available out there for $4MM or less that is not a HUGE downgrade.

- How much net cap space do you really create by moving him and signing the "slight downgrade"?

- Can only protect one goalie during expansion. Who stays - Darling or "slight downgrade"? Darling will be a UFA, and if he is the only one left standing, he will demand #1 dollars and have all of the leverage. None of the Rockford goalies have any proven resume, so you are back to free agency to find another #2, resulting in....no net cap savings.

Use DAL as the template for what not to do. They bolstered their forward and D corps, AND had $10MM worth of goal tending in Lehtonen and Niemi (two guys who might be available "slight downgrade" material for not much savings), and crapped the bed in the playoffs.

Stan is almost done. Just waiting for the cap number, which will determine the number to Shaw (who will stay for what ever that number is I am confident in), and the balance goes to fill the two remaining forward spots.

One thing is for sure though - probably not going to see any big name 1LWs added. The crop out there is terrible, and the one or two who aren't are going to be too expensive.

Worry about this year this year, and next year next year. Never more true than now with the cap being stagnant.

If Panarin puts up 70ish points again then he commands Tarasenko money IMO.

Maybe if they get a mid season deal done they can get for less but I think 7 million for 5 years minimum is what you got there.

One of Crow or Seabrook is probably outzo in the next year. Ummmm since they don't have a replacement in the pipe anymore it is probably Crow since they chased that giant from Europe. Whatever. Only so many dollars to go around.

I think scoring goals and maintaining pressure is more important than preventing goals in today's NHL. If it is a boring summer rather than an "interesting one" i think the Hawks are going to have problems again.
- fattybeef

There is an argument, that I have set forth many times, that maintaining possession and pressure in the other team's end (with attention to back coverage) is the best defense you can have. And if you can see that, then you can also see why the team is paying Marcus Kruger $3 million a year and TT went to CAR for a couple of middling picks.

- Who is your "slight downgrade" to replace CC? There is not one guy that I see as available out there for $4MM or less that is not a HUGE downgrade.

- How much net cap space do you really create by moving him and signing the "slight downgrade"?

- Can only protect one goalie during expansion. Who stays - Darling or "slight downgrade"? Darling will be a UFA, and if he is the only one left standing, he will demand #1 dollars and have all of the leverage. None of the Rockford goalies have any proven resume, so you are back to free agency to find another #2, resulting in....no net cap savings.

Use DAL as the template for what not to do. They bolstered their forward and D corps, AND had $10MM worth of goal tending in Lehtonen and Niemi (two guys who might be available "slight downgrade" material for not much savings), and crapped the bed in the playoffs.

Stan is almost done. Just waiting for the cap number, which will determine the number to Shaw (who will stay for what ever that number is I am confident in), and the balance goes to fill the two remaining forward spots.

One thing is for sure though - probably not going to see any big name 1LWs added. The crop out there is terrible, and the one or two who aren't are going to be too expensive.

Worry about this year this year, and next year next year. Never more true than now with the cap being stagnant.
- Return of the Roar

As of last night, they were hoping to possibly sign one. Guy named Ladd.

As I said before, if they feel they need the money, then yeah, they have to do it. But until the cap settles, they can't know the full gravity of their position.

Some continue, IMO, to underestimate the severity of the Hawks' cap situation. Yesterday's move helped on a couple of fronts. But they still have to (eventually) sign Panarin AND also ice a team and one would hope is a better team than last year's (that's the other thing some still refuse to get, last year's team was not a Cup-caliber team, not even close).

Let me spell it out, regardless of how you feel about Teuvo, if you lost him in order to re-sign Shaw for more money, you are a marginally worse team, not ANY better, unless Shaw takes his game to some other, highly unlikely level.

It's math. And the same math problem that's been here all summer. How do you re-sign Panarin for big bucks and still improve the team under a stagnant cap?
- John Jaeckel

JJ I've said it's not how much better the Hawks can get, due to the impossible/inflexible cap, but how they can not get worse!! To me that is the reality of this, how much less worse they can get with a 5-6-7 core guy structure. How much better can a team with 60% of salary into the core realistically get year to year? My answer is with that structure you look to only get a tad worse (unless you unearth a Panarin every 4th-5th year), as you lose guys when they need paid, and replace them through the system of through Euro/NCAA FA and that has to be enough to make cup runs.

If not the structure of having 60% of salary in a core of 5-6-7 guys needs to change, and that is what I'm watching for from the Hawks this summer. Has their master plan changed and if they move Crawford, or any of the core really, it has.

But count me as one who thinks, and I realize you think otherwise, that the team they have today is better than the one they lost to STL with. Kempny added to the battle for the 4th spot gives the group depth, a year of experience for Sved/Gus/TVR and simply one year of rest (and to regain some hunger) makes this group today better than last year's.

Add that I hope Q has learned a new trick or two in how to manage a roster that will no longer overwhelm with talent.

I'm no expert, but is say a 2C...like a Toews-lite.
- DarthKane

I like Bo Horvat. A lot.

Last I heard on that (last week I believe). "Not happening."
- John Jaeckel

If the Hawks are up too tight against the cap with Crawford and the Canes DO re-sign Cam Ward as rumoured, thoughts on a CC for Eddie Lack+ swap happening?

As of last night, they were hoping to possibly sign one. Guy named Ladd.
- John Jaeckel

I would be good with that. Beyond Lucic (who is gonna get paid), what else is out there at LW? Safe to say the numbers are in from the agents representing Shaw and Ladd and it is all about where the cap lands.

- Who is your "slight downgrade" to replace CC? There is not one guy that I see as available out there for $4MM or less that is not a HUGE downgrade.

- How much net cap space do you really create by moving him and signing the "slight downgrade"?

- Can only protect one goalie during expansion. Who stays - Darling or "slight downgrade"? Darling will be a UFA, and if he is the only one left standing, he will demand #1 dollars and have all of the leverage. None of the Rockford goalies have any proven resume, so you are back to free agency to find another #2, resulting in....no net cap savings.

Use DAL as the template for what not to do. They bolstered their forward and D corps, AND had $10MM worth of goal tending in Lehtonen and Niemi (two guys who might be available "slight downgrade" material for not much savings), and crapped the bed in the playoffs.

Stan is almost done. Just waiting for the cap number, which will determine the number to Shaw (who will stay for what ever that number is I am confident in), and the balance goes to fill the two remaining forward spots.

One thing is for sure though - probably not going to see any big name 1LWs added. The crop out there is terrible, and the one or two who aren't are going to be too expensive.

Worry about this year this year, and next year next year. Never more true than now with the cap being stagnant.
- Return of the Roar

We'll agree to disagree on the last paragraph. I think you have to have one eye on how things are going to look in 2017-18, especially with an expansion draft coming up that year. Plus the Panarin extension also will impact that year.

As for the "slight downgrade" you're right, there's not a lot out there in FA right now. Maybe the organization believes it's Darling and they are going to roll with him. They obviously have seen him a lot more than you or I have and can make that evaluation. If that's the conclusion that the organization has come to and they *truly* believe Darling can be that guy, you lock up Darling now for a couple more years at cheaper money and protect him in the expansion draft, not the backup they'd be signing in FA.

Make no mistake, I agree that they aren't trading CC unless they believe they have another option elsewhere (Darling or whomever) that can come somewhat close to Crawford's level of production.

As for the bolded, that's the most likely course of action without question. Going to be an interesting couple of weeks regardless.

JJ I've said it's not how much better the Hawks can get, due to the impossible/inflexible cap, but how they can not get worse!! To me that is the reality of this, how much less worse they can get with a 5-6-7 core guy structure. How much better can a team with 60% of salary into the core realistically get year to year? My answer is with that structure you look to only get a tad worse (unless you unearth a Panarin every 4th-5th year), as you lose guys when they need paid, and replace them through the system of through Euro/NCAA FA and that has to be enough to make cup runs.

If not the structure of having 60% of salary in a core of 5-6-7 guys needs to change, and that is what I'm watching for from the Hawks this summer. Has their master plan changed and if they move Crawford, or any of the core really, it has.

But count me as one who thinks, and I realize you think otherwise, that the team they have today is better than the one they lost to STL with. Kempny added to the battle for the 4th spot gives the group depth, a year of experience for Sved/Gus/TVR and simply one year of rest (and to regain some hunger) makes this group today better than last year's.

Add that I hope Q has learned a new trick or two in how to manage a roster that will no longer overwhelm with talent.
- Mr Ricochet

I disagree, and pretty strongly.

That team had two top 6 LWs: Panarin and Ladd. Ladd is probably gone, though I hear the door has been reopened a crack.

I am "intrigued" by the scouting on Kempny, but he is far from guaranteed as Oduya 2.0.

No Teuvo anymore as far as what he contributed.

I think what you have with TVR is about all you're ever gonna have. He already thinks the game at a high level and minimizes mental errors. he is limited by average athletic ability/mobility and that probably is not going to change. He MAY improve incrementally over time in terms of his decision-making to compensate efor his lack of mobility, but that's about it—he is gonna be what he is. A nice enough role player but not much more.

Svedberg? Ugh. Maybe? Boom if he gains some confidence and some snarl to go with it—and he also thinks the game better to overcome his mobility issues. But thinking the game is a big problem for him right now. Bust is just as likely.

Gustafsson is a kid who can skate and has some offensive flair, but so was Nathan Dempsey.

So, with all due respect, Rico, this team has taken a bit of a step back from last year's. Question is open, where is the improvement coming from?

Maybe Kepmny. Maybe they hit the lotto and land Vesey. Other than that?

The trades I think that can be made of CC...and I'm sure not many will like -

to WINN -
For Pavelec 1yr left @3.9mil
+ high level prospect (Lemieux - LW)

Shaves out 2.1mil off the cap this year...but then frees up the additional 3.9mil the following year when Panarin's contract kicks in.

That 2.1mil can be uses to add depth.

to TOR -
For Bernier 1yr left @ 4.15mil
+pick & prospect

Again, saves only about 1.85mil off the cap this year, then the remaining falls off the next

Both these trades takes back a goalie that should be able to split time with Darling until one takes the reigns. With hopes the improvements with the cap savings makes the team better this year (hence less pressure on the net) while freeing up more money for the 17-18 season when Panarin's extention will kick in.

Seabrook carried the mail when Keith was out

This team last year only had 4 competent D men (Keith, Seabrook, Hjarll, and TVR). Lose Seabrook and they're 10x worse. Darling may be able to take the reigns but there is no one remotely ready to step in for Seabrook...let alone another top 4 which they need
- PatShart

To be clear I don't want to trade Corey or Seabs.....

But..............

If that's the conclusion that the organization has come to and they *truly* believe Darling can be that guy, you lock up Darling now for a couple more years at cheaper money and protect him in the expansion draft, not the backup they'd be signing in FA.


- Hawksfan37

Problem here is that Darling is a UFA after this season and holds all of the cards in negotiation. It is in his best interests to wait until 11:59 of deadline day to find the highest bidder. There will be no cheaper deal sooner as an option.

I would be good with that. Beyond Lucic (who is gonna get paid), what else is out there at LW? Safe to say the numbers are in from the agents representing Shaw and Ladd and it is all about where the cap lands.
- Return of the Roar

One encouraging note about Shaw—same agent as Kane and Toews who is really cushy w the Hawks.

Re-upping Ladd, adding Kempny (assuming he is as advertised), retaining Shaw AND being positioned to extend Panarin (without any other subtractions), would be a master stroke. Right now, I don't see how they do it, even with Bickell's $4M back.

- Who is your "slight downgrade" to replace CC? There is not one guy that I see as available out there for $4MM or less that is not a HUGE downgrade.


- Return of the Roar

First question is have the Hawks changed their master plan where you can win with a middle tier goalie and be able to sign a Shaw AND Panarin. If so:

Neuvirth, Griess, Korpisalo, Pickard, Khoubodin, Cam Ward (3 mil), Chad Johnson, Louis Domingue type to battle Darling? Trade Crow AND a big piece for Hellybuyk who MIGHT play like Murray did and will be on an ELC for a couple years and an RFA for a couple more?

My concern with going with out a top tier (and paid like it) goalie is you would have to rotate that goalie out every 4 or so years when he wants paid and find another. Wash rinse repeat...... As posted 89 pages back that's hoping to roll a 7 way too often.

IF the Hawks had a Murray, Hellybuyck type in the system the choice/options of moving Crow are much more palatable.

The trades I think that can be made of CC...and I'm sure not many will like -

to WINN -
For Pavelec 1yr left @3.9mil
+ high level prospect (Lemieux - LW)

Shaves out 2.1mil off the cap this year...but then frees up the additional 3.9mil the following year when Panarin's contract kicks in.

That 2.1mil can be uses to add depth.

to TOR -
For Bernier 1yr left @ 4.15mil
+pick & prospect

Again, saves only about 1.85mil off the cap this year, then the remaining falls off the next

Both these trades takes back a goalie that should be able to split time with Darling until one takes the reigns. With hopes the improvements with the cap savings makes the team better this year (hence less pressure on the net) while freeing up more money for the 17-18 season when Panarin's extention will kick in.
- PatShart

Pavelec is terrible, and would you go to WPG? I hear the buzzer of rejection from CC and his agent loud and clear before that deal is even presented.

Bernier......also terrible. So much so that Babcock was starting Sparks over him.

One encouraging note about Shaw—same agent as Kane and Toews who is really cushy w the Hawks.

Re-upping Ladd, adding Kempny (assuming he is as advertised), retaining Shaw AND being positioned to extend Panarin (without any other subtractions), would be a master stroke. Right now, I don't see how they do it, even with Bickell's $4M back.
- John Jaeckel

Barring a jump in the cap for 2017-18, I find retaining Panarin at this juncture to be a financial impossibility. But he could bring a boatload of return in a trade next summer.

May we live in interesting times.

There is an argument, that I have set forth many times, that maintaining possession and pressure in the other team's end (with attention to back coverage) is the best defense you can have. And if you can see that, then you can also see why the team is paying Marcus Kruger $3 million a year and TT went to CAR for a couple of middling picks.
- John Jaeckel

I think they could sign one maybe two but will need a vet at a Brad Richards type deal.

Problem here is that Darling is a UFA after this season and holds all of the cards in negotiation. It is in his best interests to wait until 11:59 of deadline day to find the highest bidder. There will be no cheaper deal sooner as an option.
- Return of the Roar

Problem here is that Darling is a UFA after this season and holds all of the cards in negotiation.


My point too and the more the big guy plays and does well, the more coin he will demand.

I disagree, and pretty strongly.

That team had two top 6 LWs: Panarin and Ladd. Ladd is probably gone, though I hear the door has been reopened a crack.

I am "intrigued" by the scouting on Kempny, but he is far from guaranteed as Oduya 2.0.

No Teuvo anymore as far as what he contributed.

I think what you have with TVR is about all you're ever gonna have. He already thinks the game at a high level and minimizes mental errors. he is limited by average athletic ability/mobility and that probably is not going to change. He MAY improve incrementally over time in terms of his decision-making to compensate efor his lack of mobility, but that's about it—he is gonna be what he is. A nice enough role player but not much more.

Svedberg? Ugh. Maybe? Boom if he gains some confidence and some snarl to go with it—and he also thinks the game better to overcome his mobility issues. But thinking the game is a big problem for him right now. Bust is just as likely.

Gustafsson is a kid who can skate and has some offensive flair, but so was Nathan Dempsey.

So, with all due respect, Rico, this team has taken a bit of a step back from last year's. Question is open, where is the improvement coming from?

Maybe Kepmny. Maybe they hit the lotto and land Vesey. Other than that?
- John Jaeckel

JJ we are on the same page for the most part as far as player's abilities/limitations (although I think I am more a fan of the 7 footer than anyone else, love those feet and reach). What I think needs addressed more than player evaluation/acquisitions are can the Hawks keep the train rolling with the asset allocation/number of core players/core identification as it is today?

Have they changed their thinking in those regards and once that is known then it's on to player a is better than player b.

As of last night, they were hoping to possibly sign one. Guy named Ladd.
- John Jaeckel

Are you thinking they want Ladd over Shaw if they could pull it off?

Shaw at 3 million or more is a bad contract for a team that is going to be right up against the cap again most likely. The stupid penalties offset a lot of the value his versatility brings.

Are you thinking they want Ladd over Shaw if they could pull it off?
- z1990z

Said that earlier in the thread. The genous of dumping Bickell at full cost is to try and resign Ladd. Shaw isnt going to get a huge raise , probably 1 year longer term than he should get because of his style of play

Barring a jump in the cap for 2017-18, I find retaining Panarin at this juncture to be a financial impossibility. But he could bring a boatload of return in a trade next summer.

May we live in interesting times.
- Return of the Roar

Have the Hawks identified Panarin as a core piece and if so, the math death demands it, what existing core piece is moved to make room for Panarin to be a "new" core piece?

If not do you move him this summer (for a good/excellent player on an ELC, Reinhardt-Ristolanein-Bennet-(Strome/Anders Lee) type,) plus or wait until after this year when you're sure to get less for him?

The trades I think that can be made of CC...and I'm sure not many will like -

to WINN -
For Pavelec 1yr left @3.9mil
+ high level prospect (Lemieux - LW)

Shaves out 2.1mil off the cap this year...but then frees up the additional 3.9mil the following year when Panarin's contract kicks in.

That 2.1mil can be uses to add depth.

to TOR -
For Bernier 1yr left @ 4.15mil
+pick & prospect

Again, saves only about 1.85mil off the cap this year, then the remaining falls off the next

Both these trades takes back a goalie that should be able to split time with Darling until one takes the reigns. With hopes the improvements with the cap savings makes the team better this year (hence less pressure on the net) while freeing up more money for the 17-18 season when Panarin's extention will kick in.
- PatShart

If you are taking that much salary back at goalie it needs to be a clear cut #1. I don't think I would play either of those guys over Darling and they can't afford to spend that much on the backup goalie.