You don't think Seabrook would have goten as much or more on the open market?
- Al

Of course he would have, GM's can't help themselves (the reason we had two lockouts). Still wouldn't make it a good contract.

Of course he would have, GM's can't help themselves (the reason we had two lockouts). Still wouldn't make it a good contract.
- tyweb69

So that is the million dollar question. Would that Hawks have been better off letting Seabrook or Kruger walk (if they really wanted to play hardball?), and replacing them with UFAs that fit a similar role, but with less experience? I dont think there is a good answer to the question, but I do think that 19, 88, 7, 50, and 22 (or 16?) are happy that they got paid for past performance and being part of a great TEAM. Good luck putting together a complete team around those massive cap hits with a salary cap that isnt increasing.

Who benefits from Kruger's transition game is typically dependent on home/away situation, especially the former where Q can dictate matchups. Toews still faces the highest QOC, but in more OZ/NZ deployment. There's less control on the road because Q does not have last change. The Anaheim in 2015 series is a good example of how having Kruger can help Toews with matchups: Q wanted Toews away from Kesler, so he matched Kruger there when they were in the DZ esp at home. Toews had to see Getzlaf more as a result at home, but that was a better match for Toews as he owns Getzlaf. Esp helpful when Q loads up a line with Toews-Kane because then he uses two other lines as checking lines - Kruger's and whoever has Hossa. It's different on the road, but having a good shutdown center is great for matchup and deployment options.

Anisimov did take some pressure off Toews too, btw. Splitting up Kane and Toews had always forced opposing coaches to try to match their top guys / shutdown guys against one, leaving the other exposed. Anisimov, as a good defensive center, means that Q is able to allow those matchups to happen more without drop in production from Kane / Panarin.

I know Kruger is always called the '4C' because of ev TOI (except the last two years where's been 3C minutes), but Q has a predominantly 3 lines matchup process with top 2 plus checking line. The other line is a bumslaying line. In 2010, that was the 4th line - lowest QOC, sheltered minutes; in al the other cup years, that was the line without Toews, Kane, or Kruger on it.

Also, Kruger-Shaw did not actually play together much in the regular seasons. A bit to start last season, but then Shaw was moved up to the 1st line and Kruger was hurt. He has more regular season TOI with Bollig, Carcillo, and Nordstrom than Shaw.
- L_B_R

Thanks! Love the insight and information! Much appreciated.

Of course he would have, GM's can't help themselves (the reason we had two lockouts). Still wouldn't make it a good contract.
- tyweb69

Then you pay him or let him go...They chose to pay #7.

So that is the million dollar question. Would that Hawks have been better off letting Seabrook or Kruger walk (if they really wanted to play hardball?), and replacing them with UFAs that fit a similar role, but with less experience? I dont think there is a good answer to the question, but I do think that 19, 88, 7, 50, and 22 (or 16?) are happy that they got paid for past performance and being part of a great TEAM. Good luck putting together a complete team around those massive cap hits with a salary cap that isnt increasing.
- EnzoD

Definitely not and of course we all would have wanted Stans head on a platter had he let them (at least Seabrook) walk. But, I think he could have been a lot tougher with negotiations. As mentioned a few posts back would 7 really have walked if only 6M was offered? My guess is no especially since he was paid handsomely his previous contract.

I have to respectfully disagree in one respect. Another team might offer Seabs a 7 yr deal with AAV of $7m ($49m total) and the Hawks could offer an 8 yr deal at $6m AAV ($48m). I would have gambled that Seabs, given his character as I see it, would stay with the Hawks as I don't see him leaving a team and teammates for $1m over 8 years. I simply don't understand Stan's thinking on Seabrook's deal. For an ND graduate I sometimes think he makes deals out of fear of losing someone rather than using simple logic like "Hey Seabs, we will make that $1m and more up in endorsements here in big market Chicago. So we could have saved $ 800k per year which down the road could be HUGE! But WTF do I know...
- FourOrr

Forget the million in endorsements in Chicago - except for Toews and Kane, there isn't a Blackhawk who makes $100,000 in off-the-ice pay.

Definitely not and of course we all would have wanted Stans head on a platter had he let them (at least Seabrook) walk. But, I think he could have been a lot tougher with negotiations. As mentioned a few posts back would 7 really have walked if only 6M was offered? My guess is no especially since he was paid handsomely his previous contract.
- tyweb69

I see the point but that's where the 3 Cup premium comes into play.

Think Seabs 6.8 is worth less to TOR (Phaneuf), NYI (Boychuk), BOS (Chara), DET (Green), WSH (Niskanen), NYR (Staal), COL (Johnson), MN (Suter), WPG (Enstrom) just to name a few of 20 or 30?
- Mr Ricochet

Well either I worded it poorly or you missed the point entirely and can't figure it out.

Definitely not and of course we all would have wanted Stans head on a platter had he let them (at least Seabrook) walk. But, I think he could have been a lot tougher with negotiations. As mentioned a few posts back would 7 really have walked if only 6M was offered? My guess is no especially since he was paid handsomely his previous contract.
- tyweb69

Exactly. What is a bit disappointing to me, as a fan, is that I am SURE Stan tried to get these guys on a lower AAV. If not, then he should lose his job. I'm giving Stan the benefit of the doubt that he tried to sign 19/88 + 7 + 16 to a lower AAV. So, that means that the players/agents got greedy. As such, here we stand, with the 2 highest paid players in the NHL, Seabs paid as a Top 10 Dman in the NHL, and Kruger ( a glorified 4C) paid like a 2nd/3rd liner. So, the CORE (minus Hammer, Keith + Hossa) all went for the money, and this gutted roster is what is left. I hope they enjoy their inflated salaries and early playoff exits.

Bc Hawks fans are desperate to shed cap space. LOL. You are a good poster and probably one of the only Oiler/Leaf fans that isn't a pure troll. I'd just ask you to post saying "I" or IMO, as you have no idea if Chiarelli would actually want Seabrook, Crawford, or anyone. It's an opinion, not a fact.
- EnzoD

I like you too Enzo, but (frank) off with your proper 'Hawks thread protocol.

Per @TheFourthPeriod
Further to @DJ_Bean report on Lucic, source in Lucic camp tells me they haven't even received an offer from a team yet. So, there's talk.

Bean's report? That Lucic said to tell folks that reports that he's going to the Oilers are BS (he didn't use the abbreviation).
- Marlowe

Lucic was in Edmonton today, but no offer can legally be made.

Exactly. What is a bit disappointing to me, as a fan, is that I am SURE Stan tried to get these guys on a lower AAV. If not, then he should lose his job. I'm giving Stan the benefit of the doubt that he tried to sign 19/88 + 7 + 16 to a lower AAV. So, that means that the players/agents got greedy. As such, here we stand, with the 2 highest paid players in the NHL, Seabs paid as a Top 10 Dman in the NHL, and Kruger ( a glorified 4C) paid like a 2nd/3rd liner. So, the CORE (minus Hammer, Keith + Hossa) all went for the money, and this gutted roster is what is left. I hope they enjoy their inflated salaries and early playoff exits.
- EnzoD

Hossa got pretty mad bank as well...but it sure felt like he was in it for the Cup more than the cash.

Agree...The argument can be made there are not 20 true first pairing dmen in the entire NHL...Careful!
- Al

D
I'm giggling at this a bit, AL. There have to be 60 "true" 1st pair D. Exactly 60. They might not be as good as the 1st pair quality of 10 years ago, and some teams might have 4 of them and other teams none. But the top 60 Dmen in hockey are "truly" 1st pair quality.

It's like the naive little girl representing the student protest at U of Missouri. She said "the 1%" could have increased taxes to pay for the programs she was advocating. The interviewer asked what would happen if we raised taxes and the 1% moved away. She responded that "there is always a 1%". That's true, by definition. The only intelligent answer she had.

Just giggling. I know what you meant.

Hossa got pretty mad bank as well...but it sure felt like he was in it for the Cup more than the cash.
- Jeropotato

Hossa got paid like he deserved to be paid. Marian Hossa was arguably the Hawks best forward from 2010-2013. Duncan Keith was/is the Hawks #1 D and is STILL a Top 10 Dman in the NHL. Those guys got paid and deserved to. I know their contracts were in the "illegal" front-loaded structure, but when 2x Norris Trophy winner Keith and HOF 200' forward Hossa are at about 55% of your salary, you are overpaid. 19/88 got paid based on team success and their status as the primary faces of the franchise. Byfuglien, Ladd, Campbell, Sharp, Saad, Oduya, Versteeg, Shaw, Frolik, ect were all crucial parts of the championship teams. The marketing machine of the Hawks inflated the egos of the Hawks main guys and now Stan has to try and backfill a roster that is more top-heavy than any team in the league (even more top-heavy than the Pens). I'm ranting now, but if these guys were truly concerned with winning over an extra $1-2 million/year, this would be a very different looking roster.

Hossa got paid like he deserved to be paid. Marian Hossa was arguably the Hawks best forward from 2010-2013. Duncan Keith was/is the Hawks #1 D and is STILL a Top 10 Dman in the NHL. Those guys got paid and deserved to. I know their contracts were in the "illegal" front-loaded structure, but when 2x Norris Trophy winner Keith and HOF 200' forward Hossa are at about 55% of your salary, you are overpaid. 19/88 got paid based on team success and their status as the primary faces of the franchise. Byfuglien, Ladd, Campbell, Sharp, Saad, Oduya, Versteeg, Shaw, Frolik, ect were all crucial parts of the championship teams. The marketing machine of the Hawks inflated the egos of the Hawks main guys and now Stan has to try and backfill a roster that is more top-heavy than any team in the league (even more top-heavy than the Pens). I'm ranting now, but if these guys were truly concerned with winning over an extra $1-2 million/year, this would be a very different looking roster.
- EnzoD

Yeah, 19 and 88 got paid like the best players in the NHL, when they were only the best players on the best team in the NHL, if that makes any sense.

Yeah, 19 and 88 got paid like the best players in the NHL, when they were only the best players on the best team in the NHL, if that makes any sense.
- Jeropotato

I have been saying that for weeks. Toews and Kane were both Top 10 players in the league at the time of their extensions. Did they deserve to be paid more than Crosby? Heck no. They should have both taken $9mil/year MAX. That is a legitimate roster player on this team. Bettman and his BS cap projections played a part in their inflated salaries, but they did not deserve to be the highest paid players in the league. Very similarly, Stamkos does not deserve to make more than Crosby this summer. Patrick Kane deserves his contract after his last 2 seasons as he has increased his production since that extenstion was signed. Meanwhile, Jonathan Toews scored 57 points this year. I love both those guys for what they have done for this city and this franchise, but greed is not always good...

Yeah, 19 and 88 got paid like the best players in the NHL, when they were only the best players on the best team in the NHL, if that makes any sense.
- Jeropotato

Kane is arguably the best in the league imo,just won the hardware to support it,and again,imo,toews is the best captain in the league,maybe slightly overpaid,but worth it in my eyes,we have bigger issues than those 2

Kane is arguably the best in the league imo,just won the hardware to support it,and again,imo,toews is the best captain in the league,maybe slightly overpaid,but worth it in my eyes,we have bigger issues than those 2
- Wabush_Hawks

Kane had the best regular season last year....but I guess you would also say Panarin>McDavid because he had the better season.

Crosby is still the best player in the NHL, as he has the more important to prove it.

Kane is arguably the best in the league imo,just won the hardware to support it,and again,imo,toews is the best captain in the league,maybe slightly overpaid,but worth it in my eyes,we have bigger issues than those 2
- Wabush_Hawks

Yes the last 2 seasons Kane has become the best offensive player in the league. If not for a dirty crosscheck from behind, he could have gone back-to-back Art Ross/Hart Trophies. However, at the time of their extensions, Kane had never been Top 3 in scoring, and Toews had never been Top 5. Why did they deserve to be paid $1mil more than the 100points per year Crosby?

Kane had the best regular season last year....but I guess you would also say Panarin>McDavid because he had the better season.

Crosby is still the best player in the NHL, as he has the more important to prove it.
- Jeropotato

Mcdavid is better than panarin,no doubt about it,never said anything about that,all I'm saying is their contracts are justified

Mcdavid is better than panarin,no doubt about it,never said anything about that,all I'm saying is their contracts are justified
- Wabush_Hawks

Somewhat, but I think they are a tad high, as is Seabrookes. But none of really matters to me, they a re the Hawks cap issues, not mine, and I expect McDavid will make the same or more in a few years.

Will be interesting-- Would someone like Darren Helm be an option just below that first tier salary base-- he made 2.5M last year--
- jb3333

Tough call, but I don't think so. I'm not the very best judge of salaries but it seems to me Helm brings elite speed, some skill, secondary scoring, versatility. 3 mil?

I have been saying that for weeks. Toews and Kane were both Top 10 players in the league at the time of their extensions. Did they deserve to be paid more than Crosby? Heck no. They should have both taken $9mil/year MAX. That is a legitimate roster player on this team. Bettman and his BS cap projections played a part in their inflated salaries, but they did not deserve to be the highest paid players in the league. Very similarly, Stamkos does not deserve to make more than Crosby this summer. Patrick Kane deserves his contract after his last 2 seasons as he has increased his production since that extenstion was signed. Meanwhile, Jonathan Toews scored 57 points this year. I love both those guys for what they have done for this city and this franchise, but greed is not always good...
- EnzoD

No offense, but it's kind of silly comparing Toews/Kane's contracts to Crosby's when his was signed years earlier with a term length that isn't allowed anymore. Crosby entire contract is worth over $20 million more than the Hawks duo, it's just spaced out over a lot more years. Ovechkin's contract is $40m more ffs. Crosby is being paid more, dude. A lot more.

If Crosby had sign post the new-CBA, he would have a cap hit of $10-12m too.

D
I'm giggling at this a bit, AL. There have to be 60 "true" 1st pair D. Exactly 60. They might not be as good as the 1st pair quality of 10 years ago, and some teams might have 4 of them and other teams none. But the top 60 Dmen in hockey are "truly" 1st pair quality.

It's like the naive little girl representing the student protest at U of Missouri. She said "the 1%" could have increased taxes to pay for the programs she was advocating. The interviewer asked what would happen if we raised taxes and the 1% moved away. She responded that "there is always a 1%". That's true, by definition. The only intelligent answer she had.

Just giggling. I know what you meant.
- Cmonalready

Well if you ask all 60 I'm certain they would agree with you.

No offense, but it's kind of silly comparing Toews/Kane's contracts to Crosby's when his was signed years earlier with a term length that isn't allowed anymore. Crosby entire contract is worth over $20 million more than the Hawks duo, it's just spaced out over a lot more years. Ovechkin's contract is $40m more ffs. Crosby is being paid more, dude. A lot more.

If Crosby had sign post the new-CBA, he would have already been making $10-12m too.
- L_B_R

Correct and if there was a comp at that time it was Getzlaf/Perry and if you adjust for age and accomplishments Kane and Toews got what they deserved.