I hope I cleared up the fantasy reference as meaning fanatsy team not you or any poster's fantasy of a goalie addition.



Not calling anyone stupid, but I do believe it is stupid to believe a successful Euro goalie from Sweden can walk in and take over as an NHL workhorse starter based on one successful year in Sweden. That was what I rea dinto the post, because was not the last coupel pages about sending away Crawford the horse who has played the bulk of the schedule?


Sorry I don't see them as being cpaable long term solutions as NHL starters...


You know I have seen people alluding to this "Don't need a top tier goalie...but hanging on Bowman? I dunno. Has he had a better goalie than Crawford? So CC would be his top teir based on what that 6 mil salary?

Certainly StanBo THOUGHT he could win with Cristobal Huet.
I think GMs, coaches they adjust their words to the personal they do have...THEY SIMPY DON'T FEED the loose ends that may help doubt spring up quicker through the media.


John has stirred this Crawford is the answer to Cap space idea for well over a year.
I think the simplest answer to your question above is you got a John Gibson in the farm, you see relief is coming and you can think about launching your started unless, he has won you some Cups, then you get torn on what to do.
The thing is and Bowman has said it, as soon as you do win, and you truly have stra players that everyone in hockey knows are really good NOW (not in that gonna be great range) you simply HAVE to REWARD them.
I think (and know I wrote less than three years ago) that there might be a CAP jump of 20 million (before the Loonie went kerplunk)...I truly believe the GMs were actually going along and rewarding based on that template and then the track slowed to the present halt and they basically see it now but NEVER saw it coming earlier...because there are more than the Hawks feeling it.


Yes a goalie is a crucial piece of that core.
And I totally agree that core gets assessed season by season, but when you are a team in the hunt, identified as a Cup contender, you aren't messing with go you there...but you are assessing with what you want to continue building upon as they just made the decison to do with TT as a boot (so he doesn't Cap you for more on the job training) and a yes to keep Shaw. I would assume this move also helps facilitate attempting a reasonable Panarin signing...but make no bones about the fact if Artemi & his aget over-value him, he will also be sent packing...over Crawford.

I think this question is one that gets asked in
Dallas and St.Louis and even Tampa now.
I think Detroit has to answer it as well.
But you do see the difference in those situations, right?
Scott Darling has not played as much or as well as the second guy in most of those situations.


Ok, and now we have gotten to the crux of your post to me...that I have hung somebody out to dry on the board, because they suggested since they are nobody, they no nothing, and I do.
I don't think I did that. If I did please take the time and PM it to me and I will go back to that person and apologize.
and the bottom line on all players and all positions when it comes to newbies and there being able to play:
My answer to friends who ask, Do you think Forsling, or Carlsson, or Michal Kempy are gonna be any good?
I always say, ask me after we see them against NHL players surrounded by NHL players...not now, because more likely the answer is a trite NO.


On Murray, do we really know he is an elite goalie? I thought he gifted that last San Jose win to them...
Wait until the other teams video guys pass the footage on and they devise game plans and find the weak parts of hs game even more so.
- wiz1901

Quote button works!!! This is the most quotes I have seen at once!!!!

Take this for what it's worth, but I am listening to ESPN1000 and Pat Boyle is on with David Kaplan. He was talking about how Malkin wants out of Pittsburgh because of some "issues" he has had with the current management staff and Mario Lemieux, although he did not elaborate any further on that. He mentioned that the Pens are over the cap at this point (not sure if that's true or not) and are willing to deal Malkin but he will only go to a handful of teams. The Hawks are at the top of that list because of his desire to play with Panarin. He was asked what would be going back to Pittsburgh and he mentioned Anisimov and Kruger as the main players in what would obviously be a very complicated deal. I've always liked Boyle as he's one of the few beat guys to call the Hawks out for poor play or for making a bad decision when warranted. That doesn't mean he's right about Malkin, but I still found it interesting he'd even bring this up as a possibility.
- RetiredGoalie

I have a hard time buying that, but holy crap, if the Hawks got Malkin I'd have to buy new pants every game.

anybody that says we should not trade Craw, That means you give up either kruger and shaw, or Seabs, or Panarin. OF those 4 scenarios what would you do. Probably not this year but next summer FYI. You need to factor where there value will go and how long will they play at a certain level. what you would get in return and who and how close you can replace them.

Ryan Wilson's blog has a summary of goalie trades from the last several years. He thinks Frolik for Fleury is a fair deal. I think that sounds about right in this market.
- tredbrta

Which is why I think that Crawford can get a haul, even if teams know that the Hawks are crunched against the cap.

Craw is obviously the best goalie of the bunch, with a proven track record and contract that is pretty friendly in the goalie market today.

Not too long ago I outlined the parameter of a deal similar to that of the one the Nucks got for Schneider. The 'Hawks have every right to demand a high first round pick and perhaps more in exchange for Crow.

I think one thing might be certain:

If Artemi Panarin. or Andrew Shaw tries to "Saad" the hawks, they will be sent packing...there is no room for Bowmanian overpays any more.

Which is why I think that Crawford can get a haul, even if teams know that the Hawks are crunched against the cap.

Craw is obviously the best goalie of the bunch, with a proven track record and contract that is pretty friendly in the goalie market today.

Not too long ago I outlined the parameter of a deal similar to that of the one the Nucks got for Schneider. The 'Hawks have every right to demand a high first round pick and perhaps more in exchange for Crow.
- TommyHawk

The Hawks can demand whatever they want, but with the amount of established goalies that could be on the market, no one has to pay.

Quote button works!!! This is the most quotes I have seen at once!!!!

- bhawks2241

if you want to separate and address someone quote(s)/thoughts

you can

part of their thought/quote and the
- their screen name

you can

the NEXT part of their thought/quote and the
- their screen name

and the do it again and again and again.

I was trying to address the man with as much thorough and concise response as possible...

In a world where Stamkos is back even at $8MM, that leaves them with less than $10MM to resign the rest of their crew. Killorn is on track for $4-5MM by himself. Now they have $5MM to sign the other five guys....

Just dreaming
- Return of the Roar

Hedman is going to get paid. $8+ easily.
Better off letting Stamkos go. Not easily replaced, but Super-Swede Hedman is their guy now.

Malkin.....

Just announced he may need elbow surgery

http://www.post-gazette.c...gery/stories/201606160150

I hope I cleared up the fantasy reference as meaning fanatsy team not you or any poster's fantasy of a goalie addition.



Not calling anyone stupid, but I do believe it is stupid to believe a successful Euro goalie from Sweden can walk in and take over as an NHL workhorse starter based on one successful year in Sweden. That was what I rea dinto the post, because was not the last coupel pages about sending away Crawford the horse who has played the bulk of the schedule?


Sorry I don't see them as being cpaable long term solutions as NHL starters...


You know I have seen people alluding to this "Don't need a top tier goalie...but hanging on Bowman? I dunno. Has he had a better goalie than Crawford? So CC would be his top teir based on what that 6 mil salary?

Certainly StanBo THOUGHT he could win with Cristobal Huet.
I think GMs, coaches they adjust their words to the personal they do have...THEY SIMPY DON'T FEED the loose ends that may help doubt spring up quicker through the media.


John has stirred this Crawford is the answer to Cap space idea for well over a year.
I think the simplest answer to your question above is you got a John Gibson in the farm, you see relief is coming and you can think about launching your started unless, he has won you some Cups, then you get torn on what to do.
The thing is and Bowman has said it, as soon as you do win, and you truly have stra players that everyone in hockey knows are really good NOW (not in that gonna be great range) you simply HAVE to REWARD them.
I think (and know I wrote less than three years ago) that there might be a CAP jump of 20 million (before the Loonie went kerplunk)...I truly believe the GMs were actually going along and rewarding based on that template and then the track slowed to the present halt and they basically see it now but NEVER saw it coming earlier...because there are more than the Hawks feeling it.


Yes a goalie is a crucial piece of that core.
And I totally agree that core gets assessed season by season, but when you are a team in the hunt, identified as a Cup contender, you aren't messing with go you there...but you are assessing with what you want to continue building upon as they just made the decison to do with TT as a boot (so he doesn't Cap you for more on the job training) and a yes to keep Shaw. I would assume this move also helps facilitate attempting a reasonable Panarin signing...but make no bones about the fact if Artemi & his aget over-value him, he will also be sent packing...over Crawford.

I think this question is one that gets asked in
Dallas and St.Louis and even Tampa now.
I think Detroit has to answer it as well.
But you do see the difference in those situations, right?
Scott Darling has not played as much or as well as the second guy in most of those situations.


Ok, and now we have gotten to the crux of your post to me...that I have hung somebody out to dry on the board, because they suggested since they are nobody, they no nothing, and I do.
I don't think I did that. If I did please take the time and PM it to me and I will go back to that person and apologize.
and the bottom line on all players and all positions when it comes to newbies and there being able to play:
My answer to friends who ask, Do you think Forsling, or Carlsson, or Michal Kempy are gonna be any good?
I always say, ask me after we see them against NHL players surrounded by NHL players...not now, because more likely the answer is a trite NO.


On Murray, do we really know he is an elite goalie? I thought he gifted that last San Jose win to them...
Wait until the other teams video guys pass the footage on and they devise game plans and find the weak parts of hs game even more so.
- wiz1901

Even elite goalies have off days. Not saying Murray is elite, but even the best have bad games.

The Hawks can demand whatever they want, but with the amount of established goalies that could be on the market, no one has to pay.
- CanOCorn

Fleury and Bishop?

I think that the Pens will have to settle for LESS in a Fleury deal, as evidenced by the fact that Murray will be their #1 moving forward and teams can leverage that in negotiations. I don't think he fetches much in return.

In regards to Bishop, I think that he only gets moved if Stamkos is re-signed. If Stammer chases greener pastures elsewhere, I think that the Bolts wouldn't feel the need to move Bishop. Besides, he doesn't have the playoff record/dependability that Crawford does.

IMO, Crawford remains the best goalie "on the market", and as such, SHOULD the 'Hawks decide to move him, he would get the biggest haul of any available goalie this off-season.

what's the better deal?

ladd at 5 million for 5-6 years
OR
Shaw at 4 million for 3-4 years
- SteveRain

Or I'll throw this out there. Shaw at $3.5M and player on ELC at $1M, or spending the $4.5M on two veterans (maybe one D and one bottom 6F forward) and getting an asset in return for trading Shaw's rights?

Which is why I think that Crawford can get a haul, even if teams know that the Hawks are crunched against the cap.

Craw is obviously the best goalie of the bunch, with a proven track record and contract that is pretty friendly in the goalie market today.

Not too long ago I outlined the parameter of a deal similar to that of the one the Nucks got for Schneider. The 'Hawks have every right to demand a high first round pick and perhaps more in exchange for Crow.
- TommyHawk

They are only crunched this year since they just unloaded Bicks. Last couple of years they were over the cap and were forced to do something drastic. They have some wiggle room, not much, but at least it's there. Bowman has some leverage now.

They are only crunched this year since they just unloaded Bicks. Last couple of years they were over the cap and were forced to do something drastic. They have some wiggle room, not much, but at least it's there. Bowman has some leverage now.
- stan-ley-cups

But if they unload AA and Krugs as the show was saying, they are dow 2 Cs for one, Malkin makes 9.5, and Pitt is over the cap right now so they can't exactly hold on to any salary. barring they move Fluery first or something, it's likely a pipe dream

Take this for what it's worth, but I am listening to ESPN1000 and Pat Boyle is on with David Kaplan. He was talking about how Malkin wants out of Pittsburgh because of some "issues" he has had with the current management staff and Mario Lemieux, although he did not elaborate any further on that. He mentioned that the Pens are over the cap at this point (not sure if that's true or not) and are willing to deal Malkin but he will only go to a handful of teams. The Hawks are at the top of that list because of his desire to play with Panarin. He was asked what would be going back to Pittsburgh and he mentioned Anisimov and Kruger as the main players in what would obviously be a very complicated deal. I've always liked Boyle as he's one of the few beat guys to call the Hawks out for poor play or for making a bad decision when warranted. That doesn't mean he's right about Malkin, but I still found it interesting he'd even bring this up as a possibility.
- RetiredGoalie

He must have accidentally bumped into Mario in the hallway, and Lemieux started complaining about obstruction and interference ....

I hope I cleared up the fantasy reference as meaning fanatsy team not you or any poster's fantasy of a goalie addition.



Not calling anyone stupid, but I do believe it is stupid to believe a successful Euro goalie from Sweden can walk in and take over as an NHL workhorse starter based on one successful year in Sweden. That was what I rea dinto the post, because was not the last coupel pages about sending away Crawford the horse who has played the bulk of the schedule?


Sorry I don't see them as being cpaable long term solutions as NHL starters...


You know I have seen people alluding to this "Don't need a top tier goalie...but hanging on Bowman? I dunno. Has he had a better goalie than Crawford? So CC would be his top teir based on what that 6 mil salary?

Certainly StanBo THOUGHT he could win with Cristobal Huet.
I think GMs, coaches they adjust their words to the personal they do have...THEY SIMPLY DON'T FEED the loose ends that may help doubt spring up quicker through the media.


John has stirred this Crawford is the answer to Cap space idea for well over a year.
I think the simplest answer to your question above is you got a John Gibson in the farm, you see relief is coming and you can think about launching your started unless, he has won you some Cups, then you get torn on what to do.
The thing is and Bowman has said it, as soon as you do win, and you truly have stra players that everyone in hockey knows are really good NOW (not in that gonna be great range) you simply HAVE to REWARD them.
I think (and know I wrote less than three years ago) that there might be a CAP jump of 20 million (before the Loonie went kerplunk)...I truly believe the GMs were actually going along and rewarding based on that template and then the track slowed to the present halt and they basically see it now but NEVER saw it coming earlier...because there are more than the Hawks feeling it.


Yes a goalie is a crucial piece of that core.
And I totally agree that core gets assessed season by season, but when you are a team in the hunt, identified as a Cup contender, you aren't messing with go you there...but you are assessing with what you want to continue building upon as they just made the decison to do with TT as a boot (so he doesn't Cap you for more on the job training) and a yes to keep Shaw. I would assume this move also helps facilitate attempting a reasonable Panarin signing...but make no bones about the fact if Artemi & his aget over-value him, he will also be sent packing...over Crawford.

I think this question is one that gets asked in
Dallas and St.Louis and even Tampa now.
I think Detroit has to answer it as well.
But you do see the difference in those situations, right?
Scott Darling has not played as much or as well as the second guy in most of those situations.


Ok, and now we have gotten to the crux of your post to me...that I have hung somebody out to dry on the board, because they suggested since they are nobody, they no nothing, and I do.
I don't think I did that. If I did please take the time and PM it to me and I will go back to that person and apologize.
and the bottom line on all players and all positions when it comes to newbies and there being able to play:
My answer to friends who ask, Do you think Forsling, or Carlsson, or Michal Kempy are gonna be any good?
I always say, ask me after we see them against NHL players surrounded by NHL players...not now, because more likely the answer is a trite NO.


On Murray, do we really know he is an elite goalie? I thought he gifted that last San Jose win to them...
Wait until the other teams video guys pass the footage on and they devise game plans and find the weak parts of hs game even more so.
- wiz1901

Wiz, maybe you can help me understand something. I have seen you allude to the bolded portion before - that Panarin would get sent packing before Crawford. I can see if he commands say $6.5 mil + for say 6-7 years. Would the Hawks really want to get rid of a great sniper instead of CC??

I'm not denying it that it could not happen, but he checks a lot of boxes on this team, as does CC. He is really the only top LW they have... Unless they trade him for a haul which includes a top end LW. For some reason I just can't see it happening.

Teams who have more than ONE golaie or are looking to trade a goalie really have to think that if they can't get what they think is good value for their discard, that they keep him a around since Las Vegas will have to take some next summer, solving their Cap crunch.
The idea that mid level golatenders who have won nothing are gonna garnish big returns at the draft...well...they will get you guys that the other team wants to trade, not what your team may THINK they can acquire.

I do expect there to be first rounders being traded but it is gonna be teams with players and multiple picks trying to move up in to the higher echelon..., to gard at the few save players in this draft class, safe in terms of size, or skill or safe as true solid defenseman "safe" prospects, or some combination of the above.

In my amateur mind I feel
Vancouver wants a defender over a big forwards and will look for a drop down a few spots if they can...and if they fell they aren't lettung a star slip through their fingers.
Montreal has to be hot to move up to slot four or five and get a big guy who plays soon. They have players and two second rounders and early first rounder 9th overall to offer. I could even see them payiong for logan brown a few slots higher than #9 to ensure getting a shot at him.
I don't know if carolina's #13 and 21 are enough to get them in the top tem or if the guys there are worth the gamble when you have to apples right now.
Boston at #14 and 29 might have that in mind, but not so wouldn't want some now help for that second one.

Winnipeg is #2 & # 22 again they might send #22 but I think they stand pat.

if you want to separate and address someone quote(s)/thoughts

you can

you can
and the do it again and again and again.

I was trying to address the man with as much thorough and concise response as possible...
- wiz1901

Did not know that! Thanks! Learned something new from Hockeybuzz today. Productive work day in my book.

They are only crunched this year since they just unloaded Bicks. Last couple of years they were over the cap and were forced to do something drastic. They have some wiggle room, not much, but at least it's there. Bowman has some leverage now.
- stan-ley-cups

I wouldn't say Bowman has a lot of leverage. They still have a lot of roster spots to set with out a ton of money to do it. Future seasons are going to be cap hell if Panarin is extended and the cap doesn't go up much.

But if they unload AA and Krugs as the show was saying, they are dow 2 Cs for one, Malkin makes 9.5, and Pitt is over the cap right now so they can't exactly hold on to any salary. barring they move Fluery first or something, it's likely a pipe dream
- JRoenick97

I agree. When Eklund first said that the Hawks were in on Malkin I totally disregarded it as nonsense, which is why I was a little surprised to hear Boyle bring it up as well. My guess is if Ansimov and Kruger were involved in a deal, you'd have Toews, Malkin as your top two centers and maybe the Hawks move Shaw to center on the 3rd or 4th line (even though I think it's obvious he is a better player on the wing) and perhaps Rasmussen or the other Swedish player (forgot his name)they just signed would center the other line or they'd have to believe Schmaltz would turn pro and could center one of those lines which would be asking a lot of him at this point. I really have no idea how they'd make it work and I simply don't see it happening, but like I said, it was just one of those things that make you go "hmmm" when you hear it.

Not jumping on the Panik Love Train—but this is a guy, if his mind is right and the effort is consistent, who can be a nice, physical role playing forward you can spot up and down the line-up. Sort of a Euro version of Shaw, without the full-on White Trash nastiness.

And yes, having the Bobby Orr of Slovakian hockey in town to mentor him ain't a bad arrangement.

So let me be the first to proclaim: #teuvotime is over. It's now #timetopanik
- John Jaeckel

Shaw vs Ladd

Shaw at 3-4 mil. PASS. don't get me wrong I love Andrew Shaw and what he brings to the team, however I think this is way too much for me. Bring Hartman up, mcneill, or sign a grinder for 1-2 mil. Give Shaw the QO and either take the pick or trade his rights for a player like Sanheim from Philly. No one can replace an Andrew Shaw on your team. However, using that three to four million can get you two or three players for added depth. Like I said Andrew Shaw is one of my favorite players on the team and I hate to write that, but in the salary cap era I can't see spending that amount of money on him.

Ladd- his replacement is also on the, oh wait, there is no PWF on the roster to fill his role. Plants in the crease, scores and hits. If Stan can sign him about 4-5 I think he has to pull the trigger. Downside is that it probably costs CC to do it and get depth.

I am petitioning for Schlemko again. Steady 4/5 dman that can log minutes. Also allows Kempney to develop and Gus to get some AHL time

Wiz, maybe you can help me understand something. I have seen you allude to the bolded portion before - that Panarin would get sent packing before Crawford. I can see if he commands say $6.5 mil + for say 6-7 years. Would the Hawks really want to get rid of a great sniper instead of CC??

I'm not denying it that it could not happen, but he checks a lot of boxes on this team, as does CC. He is really the only top LW they have... Unless they trade him for a haul which includes a top end LW. For some reason I just can't see it happening.
- 93Joe

I don't think they can or will let Panarin hold them up.
If I learned anything after the Saad incident (and that Bowman was outed in his Bickell re-up) is they are not gonna take anything but a hard line on re-signings.

In 2020, crawford won't get a dime more than now.

Shaw vs Ladd
Ladd- If Stan can sign him about 4-5 I think he has to pull the trigger.
- ikeane

Maybe Stanley is asking Shaw AND Ladd to take friendly deals so they can both be kept... they both have said in the past that they would. Also, a quick check of the roster reveals that 16 is almost the same size as Mashinter. Keeping Ladd would allow us not to see 53 anymore.

To be clear I am not bashing Toews I know what he brings. There is nothing wrong with wanting more. We saw his offensive creativity and prowess when he was younger. We don't see it as much. Maybe its time for Q to sit him down and say focus on offense a little bit more we need your line to score more 5 on 5, Kruger will do more of the heavy lifting defensively.

It is imperative that his line be a dominant 5 on 5 force next year. Can't just have Kane's line scoring 5 on 5. And sorry but Toews goal scoring was down last year. He had what 5 3 on 3 goals? Does anyone know how many 5 on 5 goals he scored? I think that is key. Toews and Co. generating 5 on 5 solves a lot of issues.
- bhawks2241

He had 11 5X5 goals last year - Hossa had 8 (I think).