For the same money, I'd take Tarasenko over Panarin to be honest. The guy is a better goal scorer and harder to stop physically. Nothing against Panarin, but playing with Kane was an advantage Tarasenko doesn't enjoy and I think if he did he'd be challenging Ovie for goal scoring. Just in my opinion so far, but who knows if Panarin finds a way to take it to another level.
- breadbag

I wouldn't. Tarasenko's been in the league already 4 years, don't get me wrong but we know what his upside is, however great that might be. I think Panarin is going to score 40+ this year. And pullleeeeeze stop this 'Kane makes him a better player' stuff...
(did that formula work for Toews last year?)
Look at the kid play--his skills are electric, and he's going to be lethal on any line...

Orrrrrrr........... did Panarin make Kane more productive ??? Lots of thought in that philosophy as well .
- Hawkytalk

and the answer is neither. Only one guy gets the puck at a time, and what they do with it is all on them.

Yandle is 2 years younger and got 1 year less so his contract ends at 36 not 39. Seabs is better and if his contract ended at 36 I would no problem with it.

Seabs for being so great in that series was -2 compared to HAmmer +5 and keith +3, I said I like Seabs but you cannot pay some top d money from 31-39 and not expect it to cripple you down the road.

I like Seabs put if you have to move his contract if its even possible you do it to keep Panarin who will be his prime his whole contract. Compared to Seabs is already past his prime and his contract has not even started.

Yandle actually went to FA Seabs signed his a year in advance on a team he wanted to finish his career with. Hedmen only got 900 K more then Seabs are you going to tell me in 5 years hedmon will only worth 900k more. he is already worth how much more today?

At this point I will stop talking about it, people are missing the point.
- kmw4631

Seabrook's contract turns into a NTC in the final two years, so his stint with the Hawks may end when he's 36. Yandle did not go to FA - he signed with the team that had his rights (they were traded to FLA) and he signed before July 1st.

Tbh Hedman probably used Seabrook and Yandle's deal as comparables. Contracts are usually signed as the current market value, not always what they will be worth down the line. There are a lot of players that are signed to 'sweetheart' deals because of when they signed in comparison to current value. It's why you can't really compare contracts from different years. Hedman is also in Florida, which we all know from the Stamkos discussions means that he's banking a lot more money than if he signed elsewhere.

+/- is an almost completely useless stat when evaluating individual success/failure, especially in small sample sizes like a single playoff series. Stats aren't meant to be used purely alone either, they need context, and +/- needs it more than most.

Nope I want to pay guys who give me a chance to win a cup, game 7 was Keith who was responsible for the first 2 goals of the game, not willing to use the body and Gusto the game winning goal, if you watched that playoff game you would know that though, Seabs 27 minutes of ice per game in the playoffs but yeah he was awful he's washed up, I think not and like I said we'll see this year
- BetweenTheDots

Last season the only Hawk dman who saw consistent ice time and was better than the previous year was TVR....Keith wasn't the same after his injury...Hammer probably had his worst year since the first Cup. Seabrook was inconsistent after Keith returned but who wasn't?

Also....One would think Seabrook would have benefited by playing with Keith more often.

Seabrook never misses time but I'm sure his back and whatever else was not right for a good portion of last season. Last year teams targeted Keith and Seabrook and they were able to catch them with big hits....That will take its toll eventually.

According to reports Seabrook's back was so bad he needed help to board the plane after the last game vs the Blues.

Yandle is 2 years younger and got 1 year less so his contract ends at 36 not 39. Seabs is better and if his contract ended at 36 I would no problem with it.

Seabs for being so great in that series was -2 compared to HAmmer +5 and keith +3, I said I like Seabs but you cannot pay some top d money from 31-39 and not expect it to cripple you down the road.

I like Seabs put if you have to move his contract if its even possible you do it to keep Panarin who will be his prime his whole contract. Compared to Seabs is already past his prime and his contract has not even started.

Yandle actually went to FA Seabs signed his a year in advance on a team he wanted to finish his career with. Hedmen only got 900 K more then Seabs are you going to tell me in 5 years hedmon will only worth 900k more. he is already worth how much more today?

At this point I will stop talking about it, people are missing the point.
- kmw4631

No, they're not. As you simply said Seabs' term will cripple this club, just a matter of when. That price is worth it though if you add another cup or two....... Acknowledging Dmen are more important and harder to find and considering Seabs' hit and term if you can move him to keep Panarin next year you do it.

But I have a feeling it ain't gonna be that easy. If Seabs gets back to "normal" there should be enough takers to get a decent return. You're core gets younger with Panarin and Seabs brings a couple 1st rounders or a top 6 prospect plus.

Completely "Yes" I agree.
- breadbag

I also think part of the Toews/Kane contracts was with the expectation of a continually rising cap, prior to the drop of the CAD$ and subsequent HRR. Can say he misplayed the hand on their contract figure and should have considered 2 different directions the cap could take, but hard in retrospect given the circumstances at the time.

Let's be real though, who would want to be searching for top-10 positional talent for their top-6, or shuffling mid-tier players as their top lines vs looking for secondary scoring like many of the discussions are about right now?

Maybe it's because we've been here before, but remember losing Buff, Ladd, Steeg, Niemi, Eager after 2010 and had to retool. I'm definitely ok with being skeptical about changes, but also think they can be a good thing for the team to get some new blood in.

For the same money, I'd take Tarasenko over Panarin to be honest. The guy is a better goal scorer and harder to stop physically. Nothing against Panarin, but playing with Kane was an advantage Tarasenko doesn't enjoy and I think if he did he'd be challenging Ovie for goal scoring. Just in my opinion so far, but who knows if Panarin finds a way to take it to another level.
- breadbag

Tarasenko went down a couple notches in my book watching last year's playoffs. You didn't have to watch too closely to see why Hitch kept his minutes sheltered. He was at best a liability defensively.

He has some developing and buying in to do IMO.

Quick question...who had the superior mustache in your guys opinion:

Michel Goulet or Dirk Graham?

Tarasenko went down a couple notches in my book watching last year's playoffs. You didn't have to watch too closely to see why Hitch kept his minutes sheltered. He was at best a liability defensively.

He has some developing and buying in to do IMO.
- Mr Ricochet

Yes and...That wasn't Hitchcock's first rodeo...

Bowman better "pony up" for this kid, they have ZERO replacement for the kind of points he puts up based on what we've seen so far...and losing Saad was a fiasco in itself. If Crawford is gone and Darling has to step up, so be it IMO. Unless they truly want to go into a rebuilding status while we wait 2-3 years for the picks we get for him to acclimate as the "core" continues to age.
- Murph76

What Schmaltz does or doesn't do this year will have bearing on what is done, or isn't, with Panarin at year's end. ...I think the Hawks think Schmaltz can be a 65-70 point guy and he plays the pivot.

and the answer is neither. Only one guy gets the puck at a time, and what they do with it is all on them.
- Kewl1

This is a weird statement. Hockey is a team sport and it's pretty obviously that certain players work better together. Eye test and stats both prove that.

If you look at underlying numbers, Kane has a positive impact on pretty much everyone - the team is better when he's on the ice vs when he's off. Looking at WOWY numbers of specific combos, Panarin had a positive impact on Kane, though Kane's impact on Panarin was more significant. They had the best 'together' WOWY numbers in the league last year (of 500 minutes or more). Only Toews has similar 'together' numbers with Kane as Panarin, though Saad and Sharp come close at different times over the years.

Orrrrrrr........... did Panarin make Kane more productive ??? Lots of thought in that philosophy as well .
- Hawkytalk

It was chemistry, plan and simple. Both players made each other better from an offensive output point of view. Without Panarin, Kane doesn't break 100 points and without Kane, Panarin wouldn't have been winning the Calder.

I'd prefer to keep Kempny on the 3rd pairing, if nothing more than to help slowly acclimate him to the NA game and because he's an RFA as well next summer, to keep his stats, cost down for that contract (in the case where he adjusts well, which I think he will).
- gringointoronto

Options, option, options, flexibility. What IF Kempny shows he can handle top 4 duty? It gives the Hawks options as to who can be moved to find Panarin money IF they want to keep him.

Same IF Schmaltz shows enough to make the Hawks think he can be a top 6 pivot. More options. If StanBow has another Sharp/Saad situation he'll have more options for a better deal, or get fleeced LESS, if they think Kempny and or Schmaltz can fill a core roll in some aspect.

Quick question...who had the superior mustache in your guys opinion:

Michel Goulet or Dirk Graham?
- Hank3Henshaw

Dirk

Orrrrrrr........... did Panarin make Kane more productive ??? Lots of thought in that philosophy as well .
- Hawkytalk

Kane had 557pts in 576gms prior, and I believe was in the top 2-3 in the scoring race the prior season (if not leading it), if not mistaken. As well as 114pts in 116 playoff games. I'm pretty sure Kane does just fine without Panarin

So, Kempny might be a late starter for us this year. He is going to miss camp (or a significant portion) since he is playing for his country like most of the Hawks. I wonder if signing Rozy was also to help earlier in the season until Kempny gets totally up to speed on Q and the defensive system.
- Beaks99

This is a good point. As we saw with Daley Q has little patience for Dmen not acclimating. A full camp would have been ideal for Kempny but that ain't gonna happen.

Interesting article from the Devils and their head equipment manager on how they assign players their numbers in camp.

http://devils.nhl.com/club/blogpost.htm?id=47231&navid=DL|NJD|home

Tarasenko went down a couple notches in my book watching last year's playoffs. You didn't have to watch too closely to see why Hitch kept his minutes sheltered. He was at best a liability defensively.

He has some developing and buying in to do IMO.
- Mr Ricochet

Yet he was still better than a lot of our star players in the series. He beat Crawford with his shot often. Since the Hawks have been a playoff team again, he has scored the most goals against us in the playoffs with 8 in 13 games. (Daniel Sedin also had 8 in 19 games)

Sure he may have some more maturing to do but defensively there is very little difference between Panarin and Tarasenko, IMO. From a statistic point of view, Panarin also got an edge is more offensive zone/defensive zone starts.

Panarin is great, but Tarasenko is better. No shame in it.

I think the point is crystal clear and valid. 19, 88 + 7 all got a MAXED out contract for a team that had already dumped a half dozen All-Stars due to the Salary Cap. I feel as though the nostalgia of the 3 Cups has elevated the Hawks Core to almost Saint-like levels, where questioning their greed over winning is taboo.

Whether it was their agents, parents or the false cap growth projections, those three guys wanted to get paid...regardless of the impact it would have on KEY role players like Saad, Sharp, Oduya and Shaw. They got the big bucks, now carry the kids (or over the hill Vet) on ELC/league minimum bc that is all Stan can afford now to fill out the roster. And again, Stan had to retain them, just unfortunate they chose dollars over team depth.
- EnzoD

Saad, Shaw and Oduya chose dollars over depth too.

Kane had 557pts in 576gms prior, and I believe was in the top 2-3 in the scoring race the prior season (if not leading it), if not mistaken. As well as 114pts in 116 playoff games. I'm pretty sure Kane does just fine without Panarin
- PatShart

Exactly. In football (also a team game) who does the receiver make the QB better or vice versa? Does a Jerry Rice make a Jonathan Quinn a Tom Brady????

Kane had 557pts in 576gms prior, and I believe was in the top 2-3 in the scoring race the prior season (if not leading it), if not mistaken. As well as 114pts in 116 playoff games. I'm pretty sure Kane does just fine without Panarin
- PatShart

Kane is a career 1.01 point per game player.
2014-15 he was 1.05 PPG

Last year that jumped to 1.29 PPG.

He may be "fine" without Panarin, but he is offensive MVP with Panarin.

Yet he was still better than a lot of our star players in the series. He beat Crawford with his shot often. Since the Hawks have been a playoff team again, he has scored the most goals against us in the playoffs with 8 in 13 games. (Daniel Sedin also had 8 in 19 games)

Sure he may have some more maturing to do but defensively there is very little difference between Panarin and Tarasenko, IMO. From a statistic point of view, Panarin also got an edge is more offensive zone/defensive zone starts.

Panarin is great, but Tarasenko is better. No shame in it.
- breadbag

waaaay too soon to be making that judgement IMO.....

Tarasenko went down a couple notches in my book watching last year's playoffs. You didn't have to watch too closely to see why Hitch kept his minutes sheltered. He was at best a liability defensively.

He has some developing and buying in to do IMO.
- Mr Ricochet

Kane was a defensive liability his first 3 to 4 seasons.

Kane is a career 1.01 point per game player.
2014-15 he was 1.05 PPG

Last year that jumped to 1.29 PPG.

He may be "fine" without Panarin, but he is offensive MVP with Panarin.
- breadbag

He was on his way to being MVP before he got hurt the season before without Panarin.

Kane is a career 1.01 point per game player.
2014-15 he was 1.05 PPG

Last year that jumped to 1.29 PPG.

He may be "fine" without Panarin, but he is offensive MVP with Panarin.
- breadbag

and no other factors at play? like maybe he's hitting his prime? Kane flat out played better last year than any year before.