with rest this offseason hossa will be much better off year better than most

Interesting....between the Hawks "big 3 on D" since 2009-10

Seab - 530gms - 1166hits - 1008blks - 430 giveaways - 181 takeaways 23:08gm
Hjarl - 516gms - 283hits - 974blks - 417 giveaways - 213 takeaways 20:41gm
Keith - 511gms - 223hits - 797blks - 411 giveaways - 288 takeaways 25:48gm

And even strength points...
Keith - 32g - 170a - 202pts
Seab - 35g - 125a - 160pts
Hjarl - 16g - 94a - 110pts

Not sure Seabrook is as expendable as some like to think

Beer is proof that God loves us!


- Lido_Shuffle

Alcohol is a solution, after all.

What's hurt the Hawks most is lack of cap growth over the past 2 seasons. Before that the cap was growing at least 7% - 8% per year. Over the past 2 summer's the cap has increased around 2.5% each year. Has the cap kept growing at around 8% the ceiling this season would have been around $80 million, not $73 and Kane and Toews' contracts would have less impact.
- DarthKane

Correct and that so many players got really good in a short period of time and needed to get paid.

It is possible that Stan is positioning the team for when the expansion draft comes?

Teams can only protect either:
7 forwards, 3 defensemen and a goalie

or

8 total skaters and a goalie

I'm guessing the Hawks would protect 19, 81, 88, 72, 15 and 7, 2, 4 and 50.
That would leave two forwards they could protect.

AA is in this list because players with NMCs are automatically protected. This also may be why they want to move him.

This might point to what the rumor about Malkin has some legs. Clear out the bottom six, go heavy on the top two lines of protected players.

This also means that if Kempny is any damn good, the Hawks may lose him. There might be another way to protect him, such as a limited number of games played.

In all of this cap confusion, GMs now have to position their team for the expansion draft. This could lead to teams trading bigger name players this off-season, because they have NMCs and the teams can't or doesn't want to protect them.
- Tanuki

Yes and not enough is being reported about this aspect of moves that have been and will be made and rumors that make little sense. Another reason on top of cap compliance we'll see fewer and fewer hockey trades.

I think we'll read more about this going forward.

Thanks J.

I just got my diploma in the mail over the weekend. Finished with a 3.9 GPA, and my senior thesis is up for consideration for an award from the History Dept. later in the year.

The missus and I have moved into the new house. Finished installing the hardwood floors in 3 rooms yesterday. Things are moving along...

I hope all is well on your end.
- EKB13

Congrats on the degree, awesome GPA, and new house Eli!

Fair enough. But just because we feel Toews and Kane should be paid $9 million doesn't mean that's their market price.

If you hard lined Toews and Kane at $9 million they would both be playing for different teams right now.
- DarthKane

I agree we wouldn't let them walk. But people salary is just a part of there salary. Think about the endorsements just being the face of the franchise. That means$$$ alone.
I can live with them but we constantly overpay other players
Markus Krueger
seabrook
Every 500000 matters. Look at Detroit from scottys days they are weaker and taking years to recover.
Fan favorites have to change and fans open to change. I care about us winning not losing. Team first.

Thanks J.

I just got my diploma in the mail over the weekend. Finished with a 3.9 GPA, and my senior thesis is up for consideration for an award from the History Dept. later in the year.

The missus and I have moved into the new house. Finished installing the hardwood floors in 3 rooms yesterday. Things are moving along...

I hope all is well on your end.
- EKB13

Congrats!

Are the Hawks/Flames still talking? Shaw, Kruger, CC???? One would think it involves CC. Flames need a goalie. We need cap space.
- z1990z

Flames ain't that far off. Missed the playoffs last year after making it in 2014/15. Lotta money in an above average defense and Monahan and Gaudreau both RFA's this year and Bennet next year, so their cap situation will get sketchy too.

New coach and IIRC GM too. Only team left standing without a #1 in goal. Logic seems that MAF, Bishop or Crow would be a target or UFA Riemer. They have the #6 pick and are said they ain't moving it for a goalie, and rightly so.

NBA Draft tonight....awesome....


EDIT: I've been doing a bit of reading up on the Derrick Rose trade (yes I know its a hockey blog but its still a Chicago Sports blog) and the consensus is a pretty poor return for the former MVP. Anyone with more basketball knowledge care to weigh in on the D-Rose trade return?

I agree we wouldn't let them walk. But people salary is just a part of there salary. Think about the endorsements just being the face of the franchise. That means$$$ alone.
I can live with them but we constantly overpay other players
Markus Krueger
seabrook
Every 500000 matters. Look at Detroit from scottys days they are weaker and taking years to recover.
Fan favorites have to change and fans open to change. I care about us winning not losing. Team first.
- francisryan

I think before you beat the drum on overpayment it is best to criticize in real time.
For example Seabrook...He could be on the first pairing on about 75% of the clubs...
In context he deserved what he got and if he signed a shorter deal would have gotten more per year on the open market.

Considering their yearly cap hits...Keith is a bargain, Hammer is a bargain, Crawford certainly isn't overpaid.

Toews/Kane best comp was Getzlaf and Perry and when you factor in the age comparison and how much more they have accomplished they are not overpaid.

Hossa is overpaid now but not for much of his stay here...

The saying you pay players for what they will do in the future rather than what they accomplished in the past...Doesn't really hold water when those players have won 2/3 Cups and are just now entering their prime.

As far as the Detroit example...Their best player got old as did a handful of others at the same time-That could happen here but hasn't happened yet.

I think before you beat the drum on overpayment it is best to criticize in real time.
For example Seabrook...He could be on the first pairing on about 75% of the clubs...
In context he deserved what he got and if he signed a shorter deal would have gotten more per year on the open market.

Considering their yearly cap hits...Keith is a bargain, Hammer is a bargain, Crawford certainly isn't overpaid.

Toews/Kane best comp was Getzlaf and Perry and when you factor in the age comparison and how much more they have accomplished they are not overpaid.

Hossa is overpaid now but not for much of his stay here...

The saying you pay players for what they will do in the future rather than what they accomplished in the past...Doesn't really hold water when those players have won 2/3 Cups and are just now entering their prime.

As far as the Detroit example...Their best player got old as did a handful of others at the same time-That could happen here but hasn't happened yet.
- Al

People not open to change. Look at the big picture. Remember in 92 I believe we were in the cup finals. It took us to rebuild from 1992 almost 20 years to get back. I don't want to be an aged team and a 20 year rebuild. No draft pics as we continue to trade assets away.

CBS Sports projecting the Las Vegas roster.....

I didn't realize that CBS had a hockey department?

http://www.cbssports.com/...las-vegas-expansion-team/

Headlined by Rick Nash

NBA Draft tonight....awesome....


EDIT: I've been doing a bit of reading up on the Derrick Rose trade (yes I know its a hockey blog but its still a Chicago Sports blog) and the consensus is a pretty poor return for the former MVP. Anyone with more basketball knowledge care to weigh in on the D-Rose trade return?
- EnzoD

My father, a 40-year STH for the Trail Blazers, said we would love Robin Lopez. Saw him play a couple times when he was in Portland, and he was effective. MVP replacement, no, but. . .

JJ - First, I don't post often but love the site, ours and a lot of the other posted insight and discussion.

Second, I really feel for you with your back issue. I had back problem recently and if you haven't tried it yet an epidural cortisone worked wonders for me. My back issue was a result of a herniated disk. I couldn't sleep, was in constant pain, could only make it through the day with regular Hydrocodone and would have done anything to get relief. The cortisone was like a magic bullet. Went in three weeks ago and they gave me a local which immediately gave me relief, got the shot which took less than 15 minutes.

Presto Chango, I was a new man!

Good luck, I hope you heal quickly and no surgery.
- PuckMaster

Yes, those shots can work wonders. But they don't work the same for everyone and they ALWAYS wear off and one probably builds up an immunity to them as they get more shots.

Take advantage of the relief you get from the shot, it doesn't address the root cause, to rehab yourself out of the herniation without the horrible pain that comes with it and see your chiropractor. One thing is sure a back will never improve/recover without an exercise program.

With 4-5 weeks of the most simple targeted exercises without weights (easily found on the internet) at home and at 40 yrs old I rehabed myself out of drop foot in 5-6 weeks, without a chiropractor. It works.....If it doesn't you need the very, very, very, very last resort, back/neck surgery.

And stay away from oxycotin. Took one and within 5 minutes I knew exactly why and how people get addicted to those things. I was flyin in 10 minutes and I was a teen in the 70's, if you know what I mean.

NBA Draft tonight....awesome....


EDIT: I've been doing a bit of reading up on the Derrick Rose trade (yes I know its a hockey blog but its still a Chicago Sports blog) and the consensus is a pretty poor return for the former MVP. Anyone with more basketball knowledge care to weigh in on the D-Rose trade return?
- EnzoD

IMO, it was about as good as a deal as you could get. Nobody is going to give you much for a guy who was injury prone, HIGHLY overpaid, and on the last year of his contract. To me, this just says they weren't going to re-sign him as a UFA, so they figured they better get SOMETHING for him rather than nothing. They got one serviceable player, a young guy who may, or may not be good, and some salary filler. IMO, not a bad trade at all.

1) On "overpaying" players: yes some of it is based on past performance, but in trying to "build a brand" you need some degree of recognition and keeping high visibility guys is part of that. I don't like or agree with it, but it is part of it.

2) On major salary trades: there is no getting around this. Unfortunately for the Hawks this runs contrary to the precious point. I'm actually in favor of moving out some significant pieces. There isn't one style that wins in this league, and you need to keep opponents from clamping down on tendencies.

3) On prospects: count me as a fan of McNiell, but they kept finding others that they liked more (Saad, Shaw, TT, Hino, Kero, Baun, Hartman, Moose, even Morin got in). I'm all for playing whoever earns their way onto the team. If Q didn't like his game, maybe he needs to concentrate on why...

4) On scotch, or alcohol in general: Lagavulin 16, Belgian style ales, and after any extended yard work an ice cold Coors Light!

A greater piece of human garbage?
- Ogilthorpe2

Reeves , ott, Torres

People not open to change. Look at the big picture. Remember in 92 I believe we were in the cup finals. It took us to rebuild from 1992 almost 20 years to get back. I don't want to be an aged team and a 20 year rebuild. No draft pics as we continue to trade assets away.
- francisryan

You play the hand in front of you and the two situations aren't comparable at all.
The best players left, or were shipped out over money back then and the team didn't bottom out until Tallon got his way. The '92 team was very good but not as good as any of the recent Cup teams.

The thing that is almost impossible to get right is the time timing.
If you want to play a what if game...The Hawks loaded the gun to the extreme in 2009-2010...What if they didn't win then, do you think they win two more Cups?

It is difficult to balance the load and I would agree more so if this was an older team. Except for Hossa every key player is toward the beginning of their prime or not in their prime yet like Panarin.

I originally thought we were overpaying Seabrook but looking at what D men are getting in free agency I dont think that anymore. He is better than some of these guys the past couple years by a long shot and isnt paid THAT much more. But I think that does increase his trade value a lot, which is why I still think he would be the big name JJ was asked not to share with us.

BTW thanks for all the info Mr. Jaeckel! long time reader but havent posted a ton in the past. Love your blog and I have been reading it for a long time. Probably check 3 times a day (or more haha) in hopes of a new one being there!

1) On "overpaying" players: yes some of it is based on past performance, but in trying to "build a brand" you need some degree of recognition and keeping high visibility guys is part of that. I don't like or agree with it, but it is part of it.

2) On major salary trades: there is no getting around this. Unfortunately for the Hawks this runs contrary to the precious point. I'm actually in favor of moving out some significant pieces. There isn't one style that wins in this league, and you need to keep opponents from clamping down on tendencies.

3) On prospects: count me as a fan of McNiell, but they kept finding others that they liked more (Saad, Shaw, TT, Hino, Kero, Baun, Hartman, Moose, even Morin got in). I'm all for playing whoever earns their way onto the team. If Q didn't like his game, maybe he needs to concentrate on why...

4) On scotch, or alcohol in general: Lagavulin 16, Belgian style ales, and after any extended yard work an ice cold Coors Light!
- Chunk

To me it comes down to this, would you rather the FO try and go for it over these next couple of year, realizing after 2 to 3 years, the Hawks will probably have to go into tank/rebuild mode, OR have them try and stay ahead of the curve while maybe not icing as strong a team as they could have with a few more bold moves?

Honestly, I don't mind them going for broke over the next 2 to 3 years and then just tear the thing down afterwards. If the cap continues to grow very slowly it's just going to be impossible to maintain a team with superstar players for any length of time. Making the playoffs 20 years in a row means little to me, winning championships matters more.

CBS Sports projecting the Las Vegas roster.....

I didn't realize that CBS had a hockey department?

http://www.cbssports.com/...las-vegas-expansion-team/

Headlined by Rick Nash
- EnzoD

Must be old guys at CBS , They were the first American Network to televise NHL games in the 50's

To me it comes down to this, would you rather the FO try and go for it over these next couple of year, realizing after 2 to 3 years, the Hawks will probably have to go into tank/rebuild mode, OR have them try and stay ahead of the curve while maybe not icing as strong a team as they could have with a few more bold moves?

Honestly, I don't mind them going for broke over the next 2 to 3 years and then just tear the thing down afterwards. If the cap continues to grow very slowly it's just going to be impossible to maintain a team with superstar players for any length of time. Making the playoffs 20 years in a row means little to me, winning championships matters more.
- hawkfan79

I think it is a great problem to have. I honestly am ok with either of the options you present. I think both provide for the opportunity to have success. Look at Pitt. Did many people think they had a better that 50/50 shot at the cup when the playoffs started? They won because their big guns flexed their muscle and the whole team bought into the system.

It all depends on who fills the holes. We've won with Handzus, Roszival, Timonen, and Ben Eager on our teams.

Interesting....between the Hawks "big 3 on D" since 2009-10

Seab - 530gms - 1166hits - 1008blks - 430 giveaways - 181 takeaways 23:08gm
Hjarl - 516gms - 283hits - 974blks - 417 giveaways - 213 takeaways 20:41gm
Keith - 511gms - 223hits - 797blks - 411 giveaways - 288 takeaways 25:48gm

And even strength points...
Keith - 32g - 170a - 202pts
Seab - 35g - 125a - 160pts
Hjarl - 16g - 94a - 110pts

Not sure Seabrook is as expendable as some like to think
- PatShart

TODAY, Seabrook is NOT "expendable". But, his contract, going forward, is going to be an anchor.
It's better to trade a guy a year too soon, than a year too late.

If you can get a high first rounder for him, you have to consider it.

Still think moving Crawford for as much cap space as possible is the right idea. Bring in Campbell if he's willing to take a cheap 1-1.5mil deal(instantly have our best D unit in years), bring back Shaw and try to add one other forward to the depth chart thats not a rookie(preferably a LW).

IMO if we keep Crawford our forward depth will simply not be good enough for Cup contention. Moving him would give us the space to possibly fill in 2 forward spots. Thats a huge difference, ESPECIALLY if it allows to keep Kruger and Desjardins on the 4th line. As it stands Desi, Kruger, and Schmaltz look like our 3rd line with a bunch of Ice Hogs(Hartman/Moose/Motte) making up a 4th line. Not nearly enough.