here's another from CBS before the deals were signed saying they could reach $12m. My argument is just that had they hit the open market, they would have both likely received more than what they signed for with the Blackhawks. http://www.cbssports.com/...ss-11m-on-next-contracts/
- matt_ahrens

And, pretending like the two of them, after being told by their agent what they COULD get on the open market, didn't think they were giving a discount when they agreed to $10.5 each is ludicrous. As is hating on them for taking that money.

In real life, what if a recruiter said, "hey, I think you're worth $200K a year and I've had several under-the-table calls from companies offering that if you'll make the move." And, based on that a person went to their current employer during raise negotiations and said, "yeah, I am definitely worth $200K based on offers out there, but I'll take $175." Wouldn't you think he/she did that out of happiness with their current situation and a sense of loyalty to their current employer? Wouldn't most people assume (like they did at the time of the signing) the employer got a pretty good deal?

Also ludicrous to continue to litigate a decision long past (and yes, I see the irony in this statement). Yes, people can, in hindsight, blame that decision by the FO and what has happened to the cap in reality as a part of the reason the team is where it is. But, what does that do besides drag out and stoke the flames of frustration. Better to talk realistic solutions that could solve the problem.

Maybe someone should ask them if they'd each give up a million per year to ensure the team will win more. Bet they'd both say, "yes."

A .500 record won't win you cups.
- EKB13

No, it won't, but, its 7 games into the season with a whole bunch of new players/rookies. Look around the western conference. SJ is .500, DAL is .500, ANA, MIN also. LA, NSH, WPG are below .500. Does anyone expect VAN and EDM to remain at the level they started at so far?.

Right now, while still feeling things out, the Hawks remain right where a lot of people thought they would be and thats in the Mix with DAL, NSH, COL, WPG. Heck they are a game back of StL. If at game 40 they are still around .500 with no marked improvements or changes to the lineup, feel free to open the window and step onto the ledge, but until then, as long as the rest of the division is in the same ballpark it's a little early to panic.

And, pretending like the two of them, after being told by their agent what they COULD get on the open market, didn't think they were giving a discount when they agreed to $10.5 each is ludicrous. As is hating on them for taking that money.

In real life, what if a recruiter said, "hey, I think you're worth $200K a year and I've had several under-the-table calls from companies offering that if you'll make the move." And, based on that a person went to their current employer during raise negotiations and said, "yeah, I am definitely worth $200K based on offers out there, but I'll take $175." Wouldn't you think he/she did that out of happiness with their current situation and a sense of loyalty to their current employer? Wouldn't most people assume (like they did at the time of the signing) the employer got a pretty good deal?

Also ludicrous to continue to litigate a decision long past (and yes, I see the irony in this statement). Yes, people can, in hindsight, blame that decision by the FO and what has happened to the cap in reality as a part of the reason the team is where it is. But, what does that do besides drag out and stoke the flames of frustration. Better to talk realistic solutions that could solve the problem.

Maybe someone should ask them if they'd each give up a million per year to ensure the team will win more. Bet they'd both say, "yes."
- pdx2ord

When the person I assume you're referring to has a chance to watch his team in the Cup finals, especially late in one-goal games, and one team is dominating the other in the dot, he may appreciate the importance of face-offs.

It's all more logic than a hard traceable data point, but . . . face-offs won will generally lead to more shots which will generally lead to more goals for you and less for the other team—unless your lineup consists of all word centers and the Winnetka Beer League at the other four skating positions.
- John Jaeckel

I 100% agree with you

$4.2 million will be free up from carry forward from last season. If Panarin doesn't hit his bonuses then Campbell's $750K should be the only carried forward. That leaves about $3.5 million in extra cap space. Add back in Parin's base salary and we're at around $4.3 million as the starting point of cap space available. If the cap goes up by $2 million there should be enough. Granted, some guys like Kempny and Panik would need to be resigned, but losing UFAs like Campbell, Tootoo, Rozsival and Desjardins can all help with that (and carrying 22 players instead of 23).

If the cap doesn't go up and the team is comfortable with this move Kruger can be exposed in the expansion draft to create $3 million in cap space.
- DarthKane

And don't forget Scuderi comes off the ledger, too. There's another million+.

No, it won't, but, its 7 games into the season with a whole bunch of new players/rookies. Look around the western conference. SJ is .500, DAL is .500, ANA, MIN also. LA, NSH, WPG are below .500. Does anyone expect VAN and EDM to remain at the level they started at so far?.

Right now, while still feeling things out, the Hawks remain right where a lot of people thought they would be and thats in the Mix with DAL, NSH, COL, WPG. Heck they are a game back of StL. If at game 40 they are still around .500 with no marked improvements or changes to the lineup, feel free to open the window and step onto the ledge, but until then, as long as the rest of the division is in the same ballpark it's a little early to panic.
- TheTrob

I'm going to wait until the Circus Trip. That is USUALLY a good measuring stick.

Or would they rather make 1 mil per year and play in AZ or one of the small Canadian cities. the teams that have money are usually the bad teams so would you want to go and rebuild? its a 2 way street. In comparison the Seabs contract is 25% over value the teows and Kane is 10% about 1/2 of which is the Candian $.

How much time you wanna give 'em?
- John Jaeckel

AT LEAST 10 more games. Probably the midway point of the season is when we'll really know what we're dealing with and what moves/additions need to be made.

The level of concern/complaining is rather silly right now. BUT....that was expected, i was prepared for it. So it is what it is. In fact I've seen worse on these boards.

And don't forget Scuderi comes off the ledger, too. There's another million+.
- CanOCorn

I factored that into the $4.2 amount.

here's another from CBS before the deals were signed saying they could reach $12m. My argument is just that had they hit the open market, they would have both likely received more than what they signed for with the Blackhawks. http://www.cbssports.com/...ss-11m-on-next-contracts/
- matt_ahrens

Disagree 100%.

By the time the summer rolled around when they would have become free agents, the canadian dollar crashed and it was already announced the cap in the upcoming year would be flat

Nobody was giving them $10+ mil with that outlook

See here's the thing: We clearly aren't that good, not as good as we used to be, no longer an elite team, etc, etc...

Yes, all of this is currently true(though it may change as the season goes along, we may very well improve and become championship caliber).

What i don't get is why so many have to be/act so disgruntled about it. Like "Stan ruined this" and "Coach Q (frank)ed up that", stuff like that. All those out there that seem so upset, that's what i don't understand.

Sometimes there's no avoiding it, you just can't sustain excellence for that long, especially with the salary cap. So stop acting like you're fans of some incompetent failure of a franchise, and show some damn respect for everything you've been a part of the past 8 years. You'll never enjoy a ride like that again. And you can't possibly expect better/more.

See here's the thing: We clearly aren't that good, not as good as we used to be, no longer an elite team, etc, etc...

Yes, all of this is currently true(though it may change as the season goes along, we may very well improve and become championship caliber).

What i don't get is why so many have to be/act so disgruntled about it. Like "Stan ruined this" and "Coach Q (frank)ed up that", stuff like that. All those out there that seem so upset, that's what i don't understand.

Sometimes there's no avoiding it, you just can't sustain excellence for that long, especially with the salary cap. So stop acting like you're fans of some incompetent failure of a franchise, and show some damn respect for everything you've been a part of the past 8 years. You'll never enjoy a ride like that again. And you can't possibly expect better/more.
- SimpleJack

Except that is exactly what most here have been asserting all day....with better asset and salary management, the Hawks could still be the class of the NHL.

I don't know the chances of it happening or not, but to lose him next summer, someone would still have to give him an offer sheet, probably above $6MM per - giving up a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd in 2018 in the process.

So it would have to be a team that (a) has cap space to sign him, (b) has the draft picks, and (c) be a place he'd want to go.

I don't know which teams would satisfy all 3 of those conditions - and there aren't many offer sheets offered and accepted in this league.
- StLBravesFan

I think he'll get $6 mill assuming no regression this year. Just looking at Cap Friendly, there seem to be enough possiblities. NJ, Uncle Dale, Buffalo, etc. Whether it's a package of picks/prospects, a hockey trade, or offer sheet, hard to say. I think he will command more than Saad did in a trade, also. Different players, yes, but snipers seem to get paid a premium over low profile two way players.

Except that is exactly what most here have been asserting all day....with better asset and salary management, the Hawks could still be the class of the NHL.
- EnzoD

If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we'd all have a Merry Christmas.

I mean, come on...every team and every GM has issues they have to work through. It could be ownership or location or salary cap or poor play or injuries or, or, or...

The Blackhawks have paid players that helped bring the franchise back from the LITERAL bottom of the NHL. No one wanted to come here. Before this crop of players, the Blackhawks wouldn't get a Brian Campbell or Mike Richards type player to sign here for nothing just for a chance to win. You think this team would be playing outdoors every year? Toews and Kane are the top selling jerseys. EA NHL covers in 2010, 2011, and 2016.

Sure, IF this didn't happen, then THAT may not have happened. Can't that be said about almost anything? They are still 3-3-1. They will probably still make the playoffs. There are teams out there that have and are struggling to just get to the playoffs. I want yearly cup wins too, but that's not possible. Only the POTENTIAL to win and the Hawks potential, with this core, is MUCH better than many teams out there.

My view is this team was NEVER about "the core". It was about "the core" and then some really good players around them, MANY of these players now playing more prominent roles for their current team...guys like

Leddy goes from 3rd pair to top pair
Buff from checking winger to D
Brouwer from 4th line to top line
Ladd from 3rd line to captain of his next team

Toss in losses of very good (even great) players like Saad, Sharp, Oduya, Bolland, victims of the cap....further combined by trading young players like TT, Johns for no other reason than to "sweeten the pot" just to take said players adds another layer of dynamics that should further explain why this team is now a shell of its former self.

The "core guys" have gotten paid like they are the ONLY reason the Hawks ever won. That has never been true. The prominent roles played in winning those Cups by a plethora of the names aforementioned (that's not to even mention Bickell who was instrumental in 2013) has always been understated. Instead of making hard choices with the cap and maybe subtracting "one" of the core to "save" 3 of those "role players" is a major reason we are now seeing what is possibly (POSSIBLY) the fast decline of this team.

And what changes are there to be made? Someone enlightened me as to WHO we can trade and for what? NO ONE is going to be lining up for ANYTHING this team has unless it's someone like Hammer, Panarin...players in their prime with ostensibly good deals. The remaining real talented players the Hawks have carry price tags that simply won't work for nearly every other NHL team. And the farm system is so depleted there is nothing there to help either. I see ZERO chance of a major deal to do anything to improve the team. Hell, the Hawks tried "small deals" for Yakupov and Hudler and still couldn't get either of those done, because NO MONEY...now those two players are playing in the Central division against the Hawks (though Hudler has been injured). The math is simple.

The ONLY hope is that the team as current can coalesce into a viable force. Players like Motte, Schmaltz, Hartman, Forsling must develop into those same type players we lost and lets hope the core guys are not too run down or have simply not been bypassed by other team's top players (which happens all the time in every sport). That's the wait and see game there, but early returns (yes still EARLY) are dreadful.
- kwolf68

Sad to say but this is probably the best post by a reader that I think I've ever seen. Especially the part about making a hard choice to subtract one of the "core" to preserve three other really good players. And the part about teams coveting only the players in their prime with good deals.

See here's the thing: We clearly aren't that good, not as good as we used to be, no longer an elite team, etc, etc...

Yes, all of this is currently true(though it may change as the season goes along, we may very well improve and become championship caliber).

What i don't get is why so many have to be/act so disgruntled about it. Like "Stan ruined this" and "Coach Q (frank)ed up that", stuff like that. All those out there that seem so upset, that's what i don't understand.

Sometimes there's no avoiding it, you just can't sustain excellence for that long, especially with the salary cap. So stop acting like you're fans of some incompetent failure of a franchise, and show some damn respect for everything you've been a part of the past 8 years. You'll never enjoy a ride like that again. And you can't possibly expect better/more.
- SimpleJack

I get ya Jack and you are absolutely right on the mark ,we have been treated to great meal of Stanley cups .And now it's time to pay the bill ,there is always someone who thinks the tip is to high . It seems about right to me ..

And on me wondering about coach Q .Well I have been 2nd guessing him a bit of late ,but It is real hard to argue with his record . I just get this feel the knives might be out for him ,hard to say just a feeling .

I'm looking ahead to next season's payroll and wondering how they can possibly keep Panarin. I wouldn't be surprised if he does get dealt, either at the TDL if they can't make the playoffs, or this summer. And dealing Anisimov might hurt his chances of staying. I have to think he really likes having him for a teammate.

Panarin's value gets inflated playing with Kane. If they moved him to a different line, his trade value goes down. It's possible the Hawks believe they can't sign him, so they have to maximize his trade value, meaning the PAK line doesn't get broken up.

Panarin will bring a lot in a trade, and I would think there would be a lot of teams lining up for him. I don't see it happening with any of the core players with those contracts.
- 333inthe3rd

I do not think they will be able to keep Panarin as they would need to trade someone to pay him more $ and short of Hammer there is nobody other GM would probably want on Hawks roster without money retained by Chicago.
However, if they trade Panarin at TDL or before draft, given what Stan got for Saad (Anisimov and Dano) Hawks will not get anyone significant to help with left wing. And Saad IMO was a better player overall and with bigger potential. I think next year will get worse than this year.

I think he'll get $6 mill assuming no regression this year. Just looking at Cap Friendly, there seem to be enough possiblities. NJ, Uncle Dale, Buffalo, etc. Whether it's a package of picks/prospects, a hockey trade, or offer sheet, hard to say. I think he will command more than Saad did in a trade, also. Different players, yes, but snipers seem to get paid a premium over low profile two way players.
- 333inthe3rd

Hmm, he should get more than Kucherov 5mln? Player does not need Kane on his line to score, 2 way player and proven playoff performer? Think Kucherov and Johnny Hockey contracts set ceilings for RFAs as these 2 are overall better players than anyone in the RFA pipeline not named McDavid or Mathews.

Sad to say but this is probably the best post by a reader that I think I've ever seen. Especially the part about making a hard choice to subtract one of the "core" to preserve three other really good players. And the part about teams coveting only the players in their prime with good deals.
- DMChi2010

Thank you.

As far as the links posted in response to my comment about market rates NONE OF THEM ARE indicative of market value. NONE. Especially as it concerns the media commentary. Just because Bob McKenzie "speculates" a salary doesn't mean jack poop. You don't know value until you're on the market. The twins taking deals without EVEN GOING to market promotes the (false) narrative that they could get 12 million per year, though FOLLY...its given a sense of legitimacy because of well placed media sources.

Toews and Kane got their money as did a few other players. Enjoy it. I sure am not turning down bonuses at work. But when we ask why kids are playing top line, and we have no flexibility to improve the team all you have to do is look at the math. YES, in a perfect world it'd be nice if 19 and 88 had taken Stamkos money and we could keep Ladd, Leddy, Shaw, etc...and win Cups. But that's not gonna happen and it's not my place to cast moral value judgement against JT and Kaner.

I'll root for the team and hope things straighten out, some kids develop and management can mitigate a steeper decline than many envision.

Thank you.

As far as the links posted in response to my comment about market rates NONE OF THEM ARE indicative of market value. NONE. Especially as it concerns the media commentary. Just because Bob McKenzie "speculates" a salary doesn't mean jack poop. You don't know value until you're on the market. The twins taking deals without EVEN GOING to market promotes the (false) narrative that they could get 12 million per year, though FOLLY...its given a sense of legitimacy because of well placed media sources.

Toews and Kane got their money as did a few other players. Enjoy it. I sure am not turning down bonuses at work. But when we ask why kids are playing top line, and we have no flexibility to improve the team all you have to do is look at the math. YES, in a perfect world it'd be nice if 19 and 88 had taken Stamkos money and we could keep Ladd, Leddy, Shaw, etc...and win Cups. But that's not gonna happen and it's not my place to cast moral value judgement against JT and Kaner.

I'll root for the team and hope things straighten out, some kids develop and management can mitigate a steeper decline than many envision.
- kwolf68

(I love Jennifer )

That all said there is reason to be optimistic. Moose is a solid 4th line center, Tutu has done very well at playing good hockey. I'd much rather see him getting to the net, creating chances than participating in a stage WWF match. I really like what I am seeing from Hartman and Motte, though Motte has got to keep his butt out the box. Anisimov is in the early stages of what could very well be a career year for him. I just hope that inconsistency doesn't show up, but he's showing me something early on. Kane and Bread are studs. Panik looks like a nice find. The third line of Kruger/Hossa has potential. I am less excited about Schmaltz, but there is talent there. I've also been disapointed with Kempny's play early, but he's acclimating.

The PK is a joke. I know the experts in here keep saying "pressure the point", which is well and good, but if you have a wider box you create massive passing lanes. This PK is no different than what the Hawks have ever run and have run with success....that's to play positionally disciplined hockey, limit passing lanes, keep everything outside and win some battles low. What I've seen is a general discombobulation on the PK, not just being "too passive". For example, on Flames Goal 1 ALL FOUR players were below the goal line prior to the goal and the goal was scored by a Flame who was ALSO BELOW the goal line. How does that even happen? Poor positioning combined with lack of awareness and/or desire to compete. Lets try an entirely new PK unit. Q has no problems moving guys around who don't do well, sticking them in the doghouse...do the same damn thing with the PK...hell, give Moose and Tutu prominent roles there. See what they can do. Maybe you'll discover you don't need Toews playing 5-6 minutes a night on the PK which will allow him to be more juiced for 5v5/PP...

That all said there is reason to be optimistic. Moose is a solid 4th line center, Tutu has done very well at playing good hockey. I'd much rather see him getting to the net, creating chances than participating in a stage WWF match. I really like what I am seeing from Hartman and Motte, though Motte has got to keep his butt out the box. Anisimov is in the early stages of what could very well be a career year for him. I just hope that inconsistency doesn't show up, but he's showing me something early on. Kane and Bread are studs. Panik looks like a nice find. The third line of Kruger/Hossa has potential. I am less excited about Schmaltz, but there is talent there. I've also been disapointed with Kempny's play early, but he's acclimating.

The PK is a joke. I know the experts in here keep saying "pressure the point", which is well and good, but if you have a wider box you create massive passing lanes. This PK is no different than what the Hawks have ever run and have run with success....that's to play positionally disciplined hockey, limit passing lanes, keep everything outside and win some battles low. What I've seen is a general discombobulation on the PK, not just being "too passive". For example, on Flames Goal 1 ALL FOUR players were below the goal line prior to the goal and the goal was scored by a Flame who was ALSO BELOW the goal line. How does that even happen? Poor positioning combined with lack of awareness and/or desire to compete. Lets try an entirely new PK unit. Q has no problems moving guys around who don't do well, sticking them in the doghouse...do the same damn thing with the PK...hell, give Moose and Tutu prominent roles there. See what they can do. Maybe you'll discover you don't need Toews playing 5-6 minutes a night on the PK which will allow him to be more juiced for 5v5/PP...
- kwolf68

You know you're bad when the first positives that come to mind are guys named Moose and Tootoo

No but seriously, i agree with most of what you said, i think this season if anything else will be entertaining. Lets enjoy it, even if we aren't the cream of the crop anymore. At least we're young, fun, and full of potential. Plus we still have probably the best line in hockey, that's exciting. Gonna be a lot of ugly, sloppy play along the way, but maybe we'll figure things out who knows.

Thank you.

As far as the links posted in response to my comment about market rates NONE OF THEM ARE indicative of market value. NONE. Especially as it concerns the media commentary. Just because Bob McKenzie "speculates" a salary doesn't mean jack poop. You don't know value until you're on the market. The twins taking deals without EVEN GOING to market promotes the (false) narrative that they could get 12 million per year, though FOLLY...its given a sense of legitimacy because of well placed media sources.

Toews and Kane got their money as did a few other players. Enjoy it. I sure am not turning down bonuses at work. But when we ask why kids are playing top line, and we have no flexibility to improve the team all you have to do is look at the math. YES, in a perfect world it'd be nice if 19 and 88 had taken Stamkos money and we could keep Ladd, Leddy, Shaw, etc...and win Cups. But that's not gonna happen and it's not my place to cast moral value judgement against JT and Kaner.

I'll root for the team and hope things straighten out, some kids develop and management can mitigate a steeper decline than many envision.
- kwolf68

Exactly.

Remember when Giordano was going to get $8+ per this summer? What did he really get?

Remember when Gaudreau was going to get $7-8 per as well? What was the truth there?

Matt Beleskey was supposed to get $5+ per a couple summers ago as well. Got $3.8 per instead

Bottom line is, to your point, their market value was not set at some higher level. It was a blank check number and they pushed to see as much as they could get. Also, a lot of GMs at the time were in McKenzies ear pushing the idea they could get $13 mil, as well as their agent, to keep raising the ceiling on Toews and Kane. You dont think every GM was thrilled to see Chicago handing them $21 mil? Believe or not, they probably did a break dance when they saw we tied up those mega contracts on an already slippery slope cap structure.

Except that is exactly what most here have been asserting all day....with better asset and salary management, the Hawks could still be the class of the NHL.
- EnzoD

Well sure, "with better asset and salary management" the Hawks might be in better shape, but you could say that about any team in any league. Think about it, if you followed any team as closely as you follow these Hawks you'd have legit gripes about whatever mistakes they made as well. Nobody is perfect. Eventually all front offices make mistakes, things stop going their way. Even the best teams can't stay dominant forever, and even though the Hawks front office has done an overall amazing job there have still been mistakes here or there to point out. But probably far fewer mistakes than your average franchise.

If this is indeed the beginning of the downward spiral of the Golden Age of Blackhawks hockey (and I'm not sure it is) I can say without a doubt I'll happily watch and cheer for this team no matter what because they brought something home (3 times no less) that I thought I'd never see in my lifetime. For that I will always be grateful.

As a Sox fan I can also say that those memories of the first cup and the Sox championship are why I hope the Cubs can do the same thing for their long suffering fans. Everyone should get to experience that at least once in their life.