Hawks and NJ in preliminary talks, player for player swap where the Hawks would add a little salary, but arguably upgrade the position. More size and speed, probably more production.

Will provide names tomorrow. Again, I was asked to withhold as the talks are "EARLY."

Hawks and NJ in preliminary talks, player for player swap where the Hawks would add a little salary, but arguably upgrade the position. More size and speed, probably more production.

Will provide names tomorrow. Again, I was asked to withhold as the talks are "EARLY."
- John Jaeckel

Hawks and NJ in preliminary talks, player for player swap where the Hawks would add a little salary, but arguably upgrade the position. More size and speed, probably more production.

Will provide names tomorrow. Again, I was asked to withhold as the talks are "EARLY."
- John Jaeckel

Henrique at center in place of Kruger? Just a wild azz guess....not sure what else. Cammerlarri is a LW at 5 million. Don't see getting one of their top two D.

You should care. Here's why. When were Canadian teams more successful? When there was no cap and the Cdn dollar was stronger.

Part of the desirable destinations are in part brand management. Think John McDonough knows that? He turned Wrigley Field into a tourist destination, top 3 in the state. Let me be clear here, he turned a baseball stadium into the 3rd highest tourist destination in a state of 15-20 million and a city rich in many, many other traditions. Primarily day baseball, cramped seating, poor fan amenities, poopty parking........ For a team historically poopty. Brand Management. Now its turned around. Thank you PaPa Joe Ricketts and Tommy Ricketts. Thank you Theo, Jed & Jason.

McD took that brand mgmt to United Centre. Rest as they say is history. The 'Hawks averaged 110% of seating capacity for seven straight seasons. Much of that is winning. But they already had a 50-60 game sellout streak before the first cup. Not bad for team actually drawing 5,000 a night in a 20,000 seat arena just three years earlier.

Of course there is a chance the 'Hawks will fall again in attendance, probably not soon. Any one who says never will be wrong.

Problem here is Bettman tried to push growth geographically without supporting the demographics. That is the failed premise.

I am for a revenue sharing model like MLB. Teams on the take MUST put their coin into the team payroll, not pocket it. No cap. Wanna spend? Fine. Blow it? Too bad. No tanking. Similar draft lottery.
- blackhawk24

You don't get toews, Kane etc and turn into a perennial contender, you aren't where you're at. Regardless of the brand management.
And I'll say this is true in almost every American market.

Canadian teams outside of Toronto and mtl weren't neccesarily super successful pre cap. Quite the opposite actually.
But alots changed since then in terms of pro athletics and the fervor for Canadian teams To win the cup. Kinda apples and oranges from pre cap era to now.

The oilers are the proof imo. Bottom feeder for a decade and making money hand over fist and selling out game after game.
Sh1t, the leafs been doing it for 30 years.

I won't argue with pushing markets that weren't equipped as less than prudent. But I think you're also ignoring the middling franchises that would probably struggle as well

Hawks and NJ in preliminary talks, player for player swap where the Hawks would add a little salary, but arguably upgrade the position. More size and speed, probably more production.

Will provide names tomorrow. Again, I was asked to withhold as the talks are "EARLY."
- John Jaeckel

Interesting, considering that less than half of NJ's roster is under contract for next season.

Taking the goalies out of the equation, it's even to choose from.

You either get what we have now or return to the days of the Rangers, Avs and Wings making the lesser teams their personal farm teams.
- prismo

So you are saying we can only have two extremes? One being the wild wild west where you spend at will the other being a system that sees tv ratings at it's worst in forever and in Canada worse than that?.............At the risk of offending you you sound like many a politician here. There is a middle, there is nuance and it isn't a choice between black and white or fight em over there so you don't have to fight em over here.

No, I think the smarter folks in the room can put together a system where the big guys are restricted but not choked so they can drive revenue and the little guy with prudent management can contend.

Seems to be a lot of EDM folk arriving and posting having not read through the thread. With that in mind I'm pasting what I feel is the most important thing I've ever read concerning hockey written by Katana777 and posted earlier in the thread:


2,190, 000, 000.00

Why is this figure important?

It is the 2016-17 Salary Cap for the entire league.

Why should a fan of one particular team care about that?

Because eventually, more and more teams will succumb to the cap casualty operating system that the Blackhawks (and several other recent successful teams) have gone through, and once it claims all 30 teams, the league will be forced to reconfigure the Cap concept in order to maintain economic balance between the owners, the NHLPA, and the ability to allow for competitive equality.

It will never “claim” all 30 teams.

Ecomomics and basic math say otherwise. If player salary inflation and Cap ceiling do not increase at equal levels percentage wise, it is a mathematical certainty that eventually the gap between available cap space league wide and current salary commitment will close, shrinking to the point of equilibrium between the two numbers, or in economic terms, monetary Armageddon.

The reason it is not a premium concern currently is that there are enough teams with space available where UFA’s and RFA’s can relocate and collect on a salary increase. However, over time (as stated above) the available funds will diminish year after year, due in large part to a Salary Cap that does not increase enough to absorb all of the increases given out. In the short term, it can work because as long as there are teams with space, there will be player movement to those areas. And it may even look good on paper to the eyes of Gary Bettman, because parity will become almost to perfection level. But once that is attained, it has no where to go but off the cliff, as the players union will never agree to a wage structure that has no room for growth. And herein lies the importance of the relationship between the Salary Cap percentage increase in relation to annual salary inflation.

Aren’t there are enough new players entering the NHL every year on ELC’s, combined with older vets retiring, to keep the numbers proportionate to each other?

Possibly. But not necessarily. Those 2 factors definitely influence the danger zone in which the teams are operating from an accounting standpoint. However, a quick evaluation from 2010 – 2015, comparing the relationship of the league operating Salary Cap (current year team Cap x 30) and the committed funds to all players for same year, shows a decrease of the available player funds in each of the last 5 seasons. This number represents not only the conclusion that there is simply not enough league wide cap space to support contract increases, but that without a reconfigured Cap system the league would be at risk of strikes / lawsuits from the NHLPA on grounds of collusion. Again, this is the extreme result and seems unlikely in the short term, but 5 years from now is not only a possibility, but likely reality.

To illustrate this, take the Blackhawks current roster and salary structure. After the forthcoming raise to Panarin, they will have roughly 58 million tied up into 9 players. The remaining roster slots will be taken up by 14 players making 1 to 1.5 mil per.

Now envision all 30 teams being comprised likewise. It will happen eventually under the current salary inflation vs. Cap limit structure. And once it does happen, the levy will break in the form of a corporation crash. Unless a change to the system happens. Fair warning.

Hawks and NJ in preliminary talks, player for player swap where the Hawks would add a little salary, but arguably upgrade the position. More size and speed, probably more production.

Will provide names tomorrow. Again, I was asked to withhold as the talks are "EARLY."
- John Jaeckel

Looking at there roster and the select few they have under contract, I don't see a fit for the Hawks unless they are going to deal AA for Camalleri? That move leaves a big hole at 2C.

So you are saying we can only have two extremes? One being the wild wild west where you spend at will the other being a system that sees tv ratings at it's worst in forever and in Canada worse than that?.............At the risk of offending you you sound like many a politician here. There is a middle, there is nuance and it isn't a choice between black and white or fight em over there so you don't have to fight em over here.

No, I think the smarter folks in the room can put together a system where the big guys are restricted but not choked so they can drive revenue and the little guy with prudent management can contend.
- Mr Ricochet

How would said teams 'drive revenue furthur' by being able to spend more ?


How does msrginslizing a vast majority of the leagues chances at winning drive revive Furthur

Regardless that pushing expansion in ill equipped markets hasn't worked in many cases, the logic of game growth and therefore revenue growth is sound. On paper anyway

Looking at there roster and the select few they have under contract, I don't see a fit for the Hawks unless they are going to deal AA for Camalleri? That move leaves a big hole at 2C.
- scott.jackson

Since he says the 'Hawks take on a little bit of salary for a player that is bigger and has better production (and of course an upgrade), I think something along the lines of a Hendrique/Kruger swap (with more parts heading to NJ).

Also, if I recall correctly, I remember JJ saying at one point in the past that the 'Hawks had interest in Henrique. Might be mistaken, though.

So you are saying we can only have two extremes? One being the wild wild west where you spend at will the other being a system that sees tv ratings at it's worst in forever and in Canada worse than that?.............At the risk of offending you you sound like many a politician here. There is a middle, there is nuance and it isn't a choice between black and white or fight em over there so you don't have to fight em over here.

No, I think the smarter folks in the room can put together a system where the big guys are restricted but not choked so they can drive revenue and the little guy with prudent management can contend.
- Mr Ricochet

Hear! Hear! Mr R! There are not just the two most absolute choices - hard cap (now) or no cap (years ago). There are myriad ways to structure things as you've outlined. It's called middle ground. I agree with Katana - if you don't allow for some bread, the darn thing is gonna break.

Since he says the 'Hawks take on a little bit of salary for a player that is bigger and has better production (and of course an upgrade), I think something along the lines of a Hendrique/Kruger swap (with more parts heading to NJ).

Henrique is an upgrade over AA on the second line and would permit AA to slide and center the third line where he would be the best 3C we've had in a long, long time. That would be serious depth up the middle.

Also, if I recall correctly, I remember JJ saying at one point in the past that the 'Hawks had interest in Henrique. Might be mistaken, though.
- TommyHawk

I like the sounds of that deal, but what does that do for Toews and Hossa? I absolutely think that Toews has spoken to management about getting his line a left winger and one that has not only a decent scoring touch, but one that doesn't mind getting his hands dirty when cheap shots are taking

You don't get toews, Kane etc and turn into a perennial contender, you aren't where you're at. Regardless of the brand management.
And I'll say this is true in almost every American market.

Canadian teams outside of Toronto and mtl weren't neccesarily super successful pre cap. Quite the opposite actually.
But alots changed since then in terms of pro athletics and the fervor for Canadian teams To win the cup. Kinda apples and oranges from pre cap era to now.

The oilers are the proof imo. Bottom feeder for a decade and making money hand over fist and selling out game after game.
Sh1t, the leafs been doing it for 30 years.

I won't argue with pushing markets that weren't equipped as less than prudent. But I think you're also ignoring the middling franchises that would probably struggle as well
- Ihateallofu

Toews and Kane are big pieces bar none, however....unlike hoops where two supstars can win a title with an average supporting cast, we all know there is so much more to a title winning team in the NHL. THAT is where better management comes in.

In fact what you describe in sellouts in Edm and Tor (been to both cities and love the atmoshpere) are what I used to see with the Cubs until about 2011. Showed up in droves year after year. That was McD brand mgmt most of those years and the carryover affect after he came to the 'Hawks Nov-2007.

Maybe you guys are your own worst enemy. Show up come hell or high water. Can't fault you too much. You're diehards. But if the team mgmt knows you guys will come no matter what, are they really being held accountable? I had this argument with other Cubs STHers for years. Dared 'em to get out when they were female doging about poopty teams. Hardly no takers. Lucked out now with the Ricketts ownership.

Hawks and NJ in preliminary talks, player for player swap where the Hawks would add a little salary, but arguably upgrade the position. More size and speed, probably more production.

Will provide names tomorrow. Again, I was asked to withhold as the talks are "EARLY."
- John Jaeckel

TVR for John Moore. Just a hunch.

Stanley my memory is poor but are you saying that given the choice the Hawks moved Saad to CLB instead of Sharp? If so why, because Dano would be part of the deal only if it was Saad and not Sharp going?
- Mr Ricochet

It is my understanding (not always correct because I have no way of verifying) that moving Saad became a priority over moving Sharp when the specter of an offer sheet reared its ugly head. Rumors of a hometown discount proved false, so Stan moved him before losing him for picks, and also had some control over where he went. But all of this may be inaccurate speculation. My basic source of information has been this discussion board...

Since he says the 'Hawks take on a little bit of salary for a player that is bigger and has better production (and of course an upgrade), I think something along the lines of a Hendrique/Kruger swap (with more parts heading to NJ).

Also, if I recall correctly, I remember JJ saying at one point in the past that the 'Hawks had interest in Henrique. Might be mistaken, though.
- TommyHawk

Kruger for Zajac?

Didn't see anyone post this, but sometimes we can forget the human side of the draft.

@walsha tweeted this a bit ago --
Undrafted last year, Nathan Noel's emotional reaction when informed he was drafted 4th round by Chicago this year.
https://twitter.com/walsh...status/747180148298915843

Above is the link to the tweet - can't figure out how to input the image.

Hawks and NJ in preliminary talks, player for player swap where the Hawks would add a little salary, but arguably upgrade the position. More size and speed, probably more production.

Will provide names tomorrow. Again, I was asked to withhold as the talks are "EARLY."
- John Jaeckel

Read before the draft that Larsson may be available.

How would said teams 'drive revenue furthur' by being able to spend more ?


How does msrginslizing a vast majority of the leagues chances at winning drive revive Furthur

Regardless that pushing expansion in ill equipped markets hasn't worked in many cases, the logic of game growth and therefore revenue growth is sound. On paper anyway
- Ihateallofu

If the complete and total shunning of the NHL playoffs by people in Canada and many in the US as shown by tv ratings doesn't help you out with your questions I have nothing to add in a Blackhawks thread.

You read what you want not what is written, see what you want to see not what's in front of you. Good luck going forward Oilers fan.

No need to reply.

Hawks and NJ in preliminary talks, player for player swap where the Hawks would add a little salary, but arguably upgrade the position. More size and speed, probably more production.

Will provide names tomorrow. Again, I was asked to withhold as the talks are "EARLY."
- John Jaeckel

Hmmmm..... Smith-Pelly?

You should care. Here's why. When were Canadian teams more successful? When there was no cap and the Cdn dollar was stronger.

Part of the desirable destinations are in part brand management. Think John McDonough knows that? He turned Wrigley Field into a tourist destination, top 3 in the state. Let me be clear here, he turned a baseball stadium into the 3rd highest tourist destination in a state of 15-20 million and a city rich in many, many other traditions. Primarily day baseball, cramped seating, poor fan amenities, poopty parking........ For a team historically poopty. Brand Management. Now its turned around. Thank you PaPa Joe Ricketts and Tommy Ricketts. Thank you Theo, Jed & Jason.

McD took that brand mgmt to United Centre. Rest as they say is history. The 'Hawks averaged 110% of seating capacity for seven straight seasons. Much of that is winning. But they already had a 50-60 game sellout streak before the first cup. Not bad for team actually drawing 5,000 a night in a 20,000 seat arena just three years earlier.

Of course there is a chance the 'Hawks will fall again in attendance, probably not soon. Any one who says never will be wrong.

Problem here is Bettman tried to push growth geographically without supporting the demographics. That is the failed premise.

I am for a revenue sharing model like MLB. Teams on the take MUST put their coin into the team payroll, not pocket it. No cap. Wanna spend? Fine. Blow it? Too bad. No tanking. Similar draft lottery.
- blackhawk24

Yeah...that was 35 years ago when players were making peanuts and Alan Eagleson was lining his pockets along with the owners. Poor example, try again.

Seems to be a lot of EDM folk arriving and posting having not read through the thread. With that in mind I'm pasting what I feel is the most important thing I've ever read concerning hockey written by Katana777 and posted earlier in the thread:


2,190, 000, 000.00

Why is this figure important?

It is the 2016-17 Salary Cap for the entire league.

Why should a fan of one particular team care about that?

Because eventually, more and more teams will succumb to the cap casualty operating system that the Blackhawks (and several other recent successful teams) have gone through, and once it claims all 30 teams, the league will be forced to reconfigure the Cap concept in order to maintain economic balance between the owners, the NHLPA, and the ability to allow for competitive equality.

It will never “claim” all 30 teams.

Ecomomics and basic math say otherwise. If player salary inflation and Cap ceiling do not increase at equal levels percentage wise, it is a mathematical certainty that eventually the gap between available cap space league wide and current salary commitment will close, shrinking to the point of equilibrium between the two numbers, or in economic terms, monetary Armageddon.

The reason it is not a premium concern currently is that there are enough teams with space available where UFA’s and RFA’s can relocate and collect on a salary increase. However, over time (as stated above) the available funds will diminish year after year, due in large part to a Salary Cap that does not increase enough to absorb all of the increases given out. In the short term, it can work because as long as there are teams with space, there will be player movement to those areas. And it may even look good on paper to the eyes of Gary Bettman, because parity will become almost to perfection level. But once that is attained, it has no where to go but off the cliff, as the players union will never agree to a wage structure that has no room for growth. And herein lies the importance of the relationship between the Salary Cap percentage increase in relation to annual salary inflation.

Aren’t there are enough new players entering the NHL every year on ELC’s, combined with older vets retiring, to keep the numbers proportionate to each other?

Possibly. But not necessarily. Those 2 factors definitely influence the danger zone in which the teams are operating from an accounting standpoint. However, a quick evaluation from 2010 – 2015, comparing the relationship of the league operating Salary Cap (current year team Cap x 30) and the committed funds to all players for same year, shows a decrease of the available player funds in each of the last 5 seasons. This number represents not only the conclusion that there is simply not enough league wide cap space to support contract increases, but that without a reconfigured Cap system the league would be at risk of strikes / lawsuits from the NHLPA on grounds of collusion. Again, this is the extreme result and seems unlikely in the short term, but 5 years from now is not only a possibility, but likely reality.

To illustrate this, take the Blackhawks current roster and salary structure. After the forthcoming raise to Panarin, they will have roughly 58 million tied up into 9 players. The remaining roster slots will be taken up by 14 players making 1 to 1.5 mil per.

Now envision all 30 teams being comprised likewise. It will happen eventually under the current salary inflation vs. Cap limit structure. And once it does happen, the levy will break in the form of a corporation crash. Unless a change to the system happens. Fair warning.
- Mr Ricochet

That's because you guys are way too long winded for us to read the whole thread.

Kruger for Henrique

A Henrique/Kruger swap would be a huge upgrade production wise and overall with only an extra 1M on the cap. However I don't see Henrique being the player in question or a guy the Devils would easily part ways with. Probably someone else

A Henrique/Kruger swap would be a huge upgrade production wise and overall with only an extra 1M on the cap. However I don't see Henrique being the player in question or a guy the Devils would easily part ways with. Probably someone else
- Ballam

True, wishful thinking I guess Cammalleri would make more sense from a NJ perspective.