ANNUAL VALUE RFA COMPENSATION
Less than $1,239,226 Nothing
Over $1,239,226 to $1,877,615 Third-round pick
Over $1,877,615 to $3,755,233 Second-round pick
Over $3,755,233 to $5,632,847 First and third-round picks
Over $5,632,847 to $7,510,464 First, second and third-round picks
Over $7,510,464 to $9,388,080 Two firsts, a second and third-round picks

I'm guessing if Shaw was given and signed an offer sheet it would probably be in the second round pick category. So yeah he's worth a second for sure, given he's a proven commodity, might be worth a late 1st, in this year's draft IMO.

His suppression numbers when he was in the PK slot were great. Better than Kruger's actually.
- JRoenick97

OK. How was he in defensive zone starts? FO%? One statistic doesn't make him the replacement. Not saying he couldn't be, but also not saying he would be, either.

His suppression numbers when he was in the PK slot were great. Better than Kruger's actually.
- JRoenick97

I thought Danault showed a ton of potential. I also watched him play extensively in the QMJHL so I saw how he also had a lot of offensive upside as well. However when he was playing with the Hawks I saw a different side to his game, he was calm and made smart plays and played a simple defensive minded game. As he matures and settles into the league his offense will show through but he seemed to get it right off the bat that he wasn't going to get ice time without playing smart hockey and limiting defensive mistakes or by trying to doo too much. Q must have loved him, really not sure why they ever made that trade considering how Fleischmann and Weise were utilized or under-utilized I should say.

Like with Saad last year...I wonder if Stan is forced to deal Shaw's RFA rights...that he deals him to a lower rated Eastern Conference team that has the cap space to sign Shaw long term.

That way at least Stan is dictating that Shaw is not helping out a contender.
- onehundredlevel

If Shaw has to be dealt my preferred trade would still be for Maroon in Edmonton.

If Shaw has to be dealt my preferred trade would still be for Maroon in Edmonton.
- DarthKane

Shaw for Danault...Everyone's happy!

OK. How was he in defensive zone starts? FO%? One statistic doesn't make him the replacement. Not saying he couldn't be, but also not saying he would be, either.
- CanOCorn

No replacement guy is going to be s good as a seasoned guy right away, it's more about if he shows the potential to be that replacement, and Danault did.

I thought Danault showed a ton of potential. I also watched him play extensively in the QMJHL so I saw how he also had a lot of offensive upside as well. However when he was playing with the Hawks I saw a different side to his game, he was calm and made smart plays and played a simple defensive minded game. As he matures and settles into the league his offense will show through but he seemed to get it right off the bat that he wasn't going to get ice time without playing smart hockey and limiting defensive mistakes or by trying to doo too much. Q must have loved him, really not sure why they ever made that trade considering how Fleischmann and Weise were utilized or under-utilized I should say.
- Ballam

Great intentions but it really was a total waste of a trade the way Q played those 2 guys. Hard to see either of the two coming back. Especially Weise regardless of what happens with Shaw.

No replacement guy is going to be s good as a seasoned guy right away, it's more about if he shows the potential to be that replacement, and Danault did.
- JRoenick97

OK...I'll agree with you, but the 'hawks are in WIN NOW mode. Could they afford to wait? I think it probably takes longer to learn defensive positioning in Q's scheme than it is to learn the offensive game, hence dumping TT. Schmaltz or Motte MAY be able to step in quicker to TT's spot than Danault would be in Kruger's spot.

I'm certainly agreeing with you, but trying to figure out why Danault was traded.

OK...I'll agree with you, but the 'hawks are in WIN NOW mode. Could they afford to wait? I think it probably takes longer to learn defensive positioning in Q's scheme than it is to learn the offensive game, hence dumping TT. Schmaltz or Motte MAY be able to step in quicker to TT's spot than Danault would be in Kruger's spot.

I'm certainly agreeing with you, but trying to figure out why Danault was traded.
- CanOCorn

Eh, it's hard to say. We lost our best/second best PK guy in Frolik after the cup and Kruger managed to step up his game more and his spot was filled relatively well, so you never know. Danault showed best potential my mind though. Still not liking that trade, but I get the all in bet Stan was making.

In the Shaw versus Kruger debate, I don't think there are any shoe-in candidates to replace either guy. But there are more possibilities to replace Shaw - Hartman, McNeill (if he says), and Baun amongst a few others. I'm not suggesting all 3 could replace Shaw, just that 3 guys (maybe more) would have the opportunity. I don't see any viable replacements for Kruger.

I would hate to lose either Shaw or Kruger but if forced to choose - I keep Kruger because he provides more from a defensive perspective - d-zone starts, FO's PK, check opponent's top players.

In the Shaw versus Kruger debate, I don't think there are any shoe-in candidates to replace either guy. But there are more possibilities to replace Shaw - Hartman, McNeill (if he says), and Baun amongst a few others. I'm not suggesting all 3 could replace Shaw, just that 3 guys (maybe more) would have the opportunity. I don't see any viable replacements for Kruger.
- DarthKane

Agreed. Put me in the I pick Kruger camp in the crappy Hobson's choice we have here. In addition to there being no clear replacement for Freddie, with Shaw there's the ease of injury due to style of play and potentially the issue of term (potential for injury) and $$. And I love Shaw, have a Shaw sweater.

In the Shaw versus Kruger debate, I don't think there are any shoe-in candidates to replace either guy. But there are more possibilities to replace Shaw - Hartman, McNeill (if he says), and Baun amongst a few others. I'm not suggesting all 3 could replace Shaw, just that 3 guys (maybe more) would have the opportunity. I don't see any viable replacements for Kruger.
- DarthKane

True, that's why they may be worth more as a package. Potentially we could get something we need and can use right away back.

Interesting exchange:

@craigcustance
Not sure Blackhawks can get new contract done with Andrew Shaw without moving Marcus Kruger. There's definitely trade interest in Shaw too.

@byscottpowers
Trading Kruger would likely change how Quenneville utilizes his lines

They're going to have much less than half of that 22 million when the signings of Gaudreau, Monahan and Colborne get done. Colborne might not get signed, but Gaudreau and Monahan are likely to get bridge deals in the 6M range. They are Calgary's Toews/Kane.

Calgary has a lot of guys with Shaw's type of skill set(Jooris and Bouma in particular). I don't see Shaw going there. Crawford is a very realistic possibility, but doubtful for Sam Bennett. Bennett is taking all the necessary developmental steps, and he is going to be a top 6 monster for them for a lot of years. Calgary can get a goalie without giving him up.
- Hawks_49

You've got a real solid take/feel for CAL. Indeed the cap will rear it's ugly head with the Flames soon as you mention Gaudreau and Monahan (nearing elite status) are RFA's this year and the very, very good Bennett will be an RFA next year. Add they've got 31 MILLION into their D and need a #1 goalie they will have cap issues.

And as you say they have their own Shaw's in Bouma and Jooris. ......This is a nice club and might make some noise this year.

True, that's why they may be worth more as a package. Potentially we could get something we need and can use right away back.

Interesting exchange:

@craigcustance
Not sure Blackhawks can get new contract done with Andrew Shaw without moving Marcus Kruger. There's definitely trade interest in Shaw too.

@byscottpowers
Trading Kruger would likely change how Quenneville utilizes his lines
- walleyeb1

A stiff breeze changes Q's lines

True, that's why they may be worth more as a package. Potentially we could get something we need and can use right away back.

Interesting exchange:

@craigcustance
Not sure Blackhawks can get new contract done with Andrew Shaw without moving Marcus Kruger. There's definitely trade interest in Shaw too.

@byscottpowers
Trading Kruger would likely change how Quenneville utilizes his lines
- walleyeb1

If you were Q and you had to pick one, who would you pick?

Not directed at you personally, more towards some comments that have been make about players salaries in general.


Kruger - overpaid, should have let him go
Shaw - likely to be overpaid, should let him go
Toews - overpaid, should have let him go
Kane - overpaid, should have let him go
Seabrook - overpaid, should have let him go
Crawford - overpaid, should have let him go

What kind of team would we have without these guys?
- DarthKane

No offense taken and as I said in my other posts, I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with my POV, but it is my opinion that 19/88 are overpaid. Sidney Crosby sets the bar. He has been and still is the greatest player in the world. How can anyone rationalize Toews, Kane, Stamkos or any other player making more money than Sidney Crosby? There is no logical argument for it, IMO. IDC if Stamkos gets $10.6mil/year or $15mil/year this summer, he will be overpaid too (IMO). The proof is in the pudding, and until the Hawks prove otherwise, I don't think you can win a Stanley Cup with the 2 largest Cap Hits in the NHL (and a very pricey 4-5 player supporting cast). The teams in 2010, 2013 and (to a lesser extent) 2015 all had superior team depth. The guys like Saad, Sharp, Buff, Ladd, Oduya, Frolik, ect are what made them the best team in the league each of those 3 seasons. TWT if Stan can build a winner with those two massive cap hits and a stagnant salary cap.


Finally, I never said that StanBo should have traded them. I'm hoping he fought hard for a lower AAV for 19/88 and was unable to get there due to the Agent and Bettman's BS growth projections. Heck yes you pay them what you needed to get them locked up for 8 years. Doesn't change the fact that Duncan Keith and Marian Hossa are also HOF players and make 55% AAV. It is what it is, now make it work Stan.

I can't believe how many people here think Kruger is overpaid...??
His contract is pretty good considering how much Q uses him...and also when he uses him...If you trade him, you realize you aren't going to find another Kruger type for 1.5k..right? You can only find a player that isn't as good for that kinda cash

Well it say's Pitt and TB not happy with what being offered for Bishop and Flurey .Maybe Stan can slide in there with a deal ,and show them how it done . Crow is worth as much as Anderson maybe a little more .

Even without a 1st pick HAWKS could find some solid players in the 2nd and 3rd rounds . Maybe even some diamonds in the ruff . Would like to see them take a flyer on Sean Day .He is big Defenseman 6.3 230 who was granted exceptional status to play in the OHL at 15 years old .Massive physical tools ,does he have the mind set . It what is said about him .Reminds me of what was said about both Saad and Beach .Could be right in the HAWKS wheel house late 2nd . Maybe Seebs and Toews can show him the way . Also like Cliff Pu but may need a 1st to get him .Star in the making out of London . Also with London there goalie Tyler Parsons ' Makes clutch saves on a élite team that gives up big chances " .Sound familiar ..
- oldduffman

Did not know this, thanks for the info......... Kid has some horrid plus minus numbers: http://www.eliteprospects.../player.php?player=228106

I can't believe how many people here think Kruger is overpaid...??
His contract is pretty good considering how much Q uses him...and also when he uses him...If you trade him, you realize you aren't going to find another Kruger type for 1.5k..right? You can only find a player that isn't as good for that kinda cash
- captainserious

Just off the top of my head, Matt Cullen had better "fancy stats"-possession, shot generation and supppression- and blew him away in point production (16G, 16A) for $850,000 last year. You sure about that?

If you were Q and you had to pick one, who would you pick?
- hpk90

Probably Kruger due to his PK play if for nothing else.

Excerpt from JJ's blog entry:

Second, Kruger gave the Hawks a huge discount on a bridge deal last summer in order to remain in Chicago—and get paid starting this year.

Trading him now would severely damage the Hawks' credibility with any player they ask to work with them in the future. Take that to the bank.

This cannot be stressed enough.

I can't believe how many people here think Kruger is overpaid...??
His contract is pretty good considering how much Q uses him...and also when he uses him...If you trade him, you realize you aren't going to find another Kruger type for 1.5k..right? You can only find a player that isn't as good for that kinda cash
- captainserious

Some think Toews and Kane are overpaid .

True, that's why they may be worth more as a package. Potentially we could get something we need and can use right away back.

Interesting exchange:

@craigcustance
Not sure Blackhawks can get new contract done with Andrew Shaw without moving Marcus Kruger. There's definitely trade interest in Shaw too.

@byscottpowers
Trading Kruger would likely change how Quenneville utilizes his lines
- walleyeb1

And blood pressure medication.

Its quiet....too quiet

No news from JJ or Grusso, hardly any on Twitter