Yeah, I don't think either of them is gonna happen honestly.
- John Jaeckel

I agree. I was just saying what he said and how it would leave us kind of decimated at C. Doesn't make a lot of sense.

Im cautious about Shaws style and poteential injury.

Sign me up for Ladd, let Shaw walk sign Matt Martin
- mrpaulish

Any player can get injured....Shaw has been proven to be quite durable.

12/13 - 48 games (plus 28 in Rockford)
13/18 - 80 games
14/15 - 79 games
15/16 - 78 games

Any player can get injured....Shaw has been proven to be quite durable.

12/13 - 48 games (plus 28 in Rockford)
13/18 - 80 games
14/15 - 79 games
15/16 - 78 games
- DarthKane

His back hurts.

What show was saying? I wouldn't watch that show any more.
- John Jaeckel

The only part of any of this that is worth the keystrokes is the part about trading AA or Krueger.... because for any chance to get a Ladd or Brouwer type one of the two would need to go.

Im cautious about Shaws style and poteential injury.

Sign me up for Ladd, let Shaw walk sign Matt Martin
- mrpaulish

I too like Shaw, but between the two Ladd checks more boxes. We simply do not have a player with the physical make up that Ladd has. Wish we could keep both. I would think they only way to do that would be to move CC.

- DarthKane

Very good sir. One of the best.

Teachable moment:

I don't deliberately "stir."
- John Jaeckel

Ok.

John has been mentioning CC bye bye it for a year.

...and it still doesn't work on a Cup contender until John Gibson is sitting in the minors waiting and you are confident that replacement is the guy...

- DarthKane

Yeah, I'd be leery of taking on 3 years of Hartnell - especially just after saying sayonara to Bickell yesterday.

Matt Martin in a heart beat

ansd whether it was versteeg or Shaw, it is an important asect that despite the training fitness the smaller guys who hit/get hit, because they play heavy are always going to start getting nicked up when they get older.
BUT...this deal for Shaw well it would be a factor quite yet.
- wiz1901

Any idea what Martin would be looking for as a free agent? He was at only 1.3 M this last year. If they would be able to resign Shaw and get Martin at what Ladd would cost, I would be all for that.

I am kind of surprised with the deal. I understand it, getting rid of Bickell.

But why not buy him out and trade TT on his own? I would have thought you could have gotten more than a couple of draft picks for him, and the buyout cap hit would have likely been worth the difference in what you were getting.

Ok.

John has been mentioning CC bye bye it for a year.

...and it still doesn't work on a Cup contender until John Gibson is sitting in the minors waiting and you are confident that replacement is the guy...
- wiz1901

Ok.

What will "work" is relative to a lot of other factors.

Your logic seems to assume there is no other means of back-filling the goalie position beyond the prospect pipeline. Mine doesn't. And honeslty I have NOT heard how they would backfill. I just think there are 2-3 possible "methods." Trade being the most likely, and not necessarily a goalie for goalie trade.

And again, you persist in making it a theoretical discussion. My opinion versus yours. It's not to me. It's what I hear, from at least two individuals actually paid by an NHL team, could happen based on numerous real factors.

I'm not sure at all it will, also based on factors.

Any chance the Hawks could get Crosby too? Or how about Ovechkin? Or maybe even all 3???

Ovi-Toews-Kane
Panarin-Crosby-Malkin

Any chance the Hawks could get Crosby too? Or how about Ovechkin? Or maybe even all 3???

Ovi-Toews-Kane
Panarin-Crosby-Malkin
- SimpleJack

Any chance the Hawks could get Crosby too? Or how about Ovechkin? Or maybe even all 3???

Ovi-Toews-Kane
Panarin-Crosby-Malkin
- SimpleJack

You have to switch Crosby with Ovi so that you have a Russian line.

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.
- RedFeather

Ladd being here wouldn't stop Q from plugging Mashinter into the lineup. They only way to keep him out is if they release/trade him. Q seems to like him for whatever reason none of us can figure out.

The only part of any of this that is worth the keystrokes is the part about trading AA or Krueger.... because for any chance to get a Ladd or Brouwer type one of the two would need to go.
- Al

Al,

All due respect, seems kinda dumb to cannibalize the center position that you've stabilized for the first time in 20 years in order to acquire a wing. But, I have always placed a higher value on the pivots than the flanks.

And then there's the whole issue that both guys are just entering the first year of new deals. And there's ZERO replacement for either on the roster or in the system.

Regardless of what you think of Darling, he replaces Crawford better than anyone replaces AA or even Kruger. McNeill? Kero?

They just dealt TT and Danault.

Also, the same source who tipped me on them taking offers on TT, also included Shaw . . . and Crawford. Different source told me last night they're listening on CC and "far from a deal" on Shaw.

I guess anything's possible, especially when lots of conversations are going on. I just don't think AA or Kruger are going anywhere for the foreseeable future. Opinion based on what I hear and see.

I don't think they want to mess with the Kane/AA/Panarin line anywhere in the near future. AA may not have filled up the stat sheet the same way as Kane and Panarin did, but he did a lot of the dirty work to keep the pucks in the zone so the other two could work their magic.

Al,

All due respect, seems kinda dumb to cannibalize the center position that you've stabilized for the first time in 20 years in order to acquire a wing. But, I have always placed a higher value on the pivots than the flanks.

And then there's the whole issue that both guys are just entering the first year of new deals. And there's ZERO replacement for either on the roster or in the system.

Regardless of what you think of Darling, he replaces Crawford better than anyone replaces AA or even Kruger. McNeill? Kero?

They just dealt TT and Danault.

Also, the same source who tipped me on them taking offers on TT, also included Shaw . . . and Crawford. Different source told me last night they're listening on CC and "far from a deal" on Shaw.

I guess anything's possible, especially when lots of conversations are going on. I just don't think AA or Kruger are going anywhere for the foreseeable future. Opinion based on what I hear and see.
- John Jaeckel

Another advantage to Ladd in the "sign one of Ladd or Shaw" debate is that Shaw is RFA, controlled by the Hawks and has trade value. So the choice is:
1. Sign Shaw, Ladd walks for nothing, or
2. Sign Ladd, get something in a trade for Shawzer.
God, I would hate to have to see Shaw in something other than the Indianhead.

They don't have loyalties - they have ratings - and will point any discussion in whatever direction increases the ratings.
- StLBravesFan

But it's ridiculous because it skews the opinion of Joe the fan who everyone here knows one....the guy who spits out verbatim crap he heard that isn't even remotely true but thinks it's gospel because it was on the score. It's pathetic and sad....really is....

It's the equivalent to tabloid journalism.

But hey, Kris Versteeg cost them the entire series vs LA in 2014........

Ladd being here wouldn't stop Q from plugging Mashinter into the lineup. They only way to keep him out is if they release/trade him. Q seems to like him for whatever reason none of us can figure out.
- pjm901

Unless they just choose not to resign him. He's a UFA.

Al,

All due respect, seems kinda dumb to cannibalize the center position that you've stabilized for the first time in 20 years in order to acquire a wing. But, I have always placed a higher value on the pivots than the flanks.

And then there's the whole issue that both guys are just entering the first year of new deals. And there's ZERO replacement for either on the roster or in the system.

Regardless of what you think of Darling, he replaces Crawford better than anyone replaces AA or even Kruger. McNeill? Kero?

They just dealt TT and Danault.

Also, the same source who tipped me on them taking offers on TT, also included Shaw . . . and Crawford. Different source told me last night they're listening on CC and "far from a deal" on Shaw.

I guess anything's possible, especially when lots of conversations are going on. I just don't think AA or Kruger are going anywhere for the foreseeable future. Opinion based on what I hear and see.
- John Jaeckel

I think at this point anything is possible within reason. Calgary called Pittsburgh on Fleury so I have to bet $$ if Bowman made it know he woud lat least listen on CC, he's been getting calls as well. I would think CC> Fleury in eyes of most teams.

Any chance the Hawks could get Crosby too? Or how about Ovechkin? Or maybe even all 3???

Ovi-Toews-Kane
Panarin-Crosby-Malkin
- SimpleJack

Although I just said anything could happen.........

I have no idea what bird whispered to Eklund that the Hawks are IN on Malkin. It's all well and fine Malkin would waive to go there. I bet 99% of the league would but doesn't mean the it the feeling mutual based on cap.

I'm waiting for the 1st twitter message to a beat guy about Malkin or a call into the score so I can just giggle........

Another advantage to Ladd in the "sign one of Ladd or Shaw" debate is that Shaw is RFA, controlled by the Hawks and has trade value. So the choice is:
1. Sign Shaw, Ladd walks for nothing, or
2. Sign Ladd, get something in a trade for Shawzer.
God, I would hate to have to see Shaw in something other than the Indianhead.
- Cmonalready

It's not that simple. If Shaw is looking for $3.5 million and Ladd wants $5.5 million that becomes a huge factor.

Stan could trade Ladd's rights for a 4th or 5th....

Although I just said anything could happen.........

I have no idea what bird whispered to Eklund that the Hawks are IN on Malkin. It's all well and fine Malkin would waive to go there. I bet 99% of the league would but doesn't mean the it the feeling mutual based on cap.

I'm waiting for the 1st twitter message to a beat guy about Malkin or a call into the score so I can just giggle........
- SteveRain

Stan is already feeling the sting of the wonder twins $10.5 mil cap hits.

ZERO chance he goes even more top heavy and adds Malkin. What GM wants 3 of the 5 highest cap hits in the league on the same 23 man roster in a cap era?

Thats just bad business and cap management

How much do the Hawks (especially Q) value Ryan Hartman right now? I think there has to be a direct link to the Hawks' confidence in Hartman and the bargaining power of Shaw.

The Hawks (and Shaw's agent) have to know the relative market for Shaw. Are the Hawks willing to roll the dice with a fiesty, physical youngster that can get under opponents' skin? If so, I think they trade Shaw in the next two weeks and go hard for an "ATV" 1LW# as John describes.