The Union was in on this as far as I know there was never a point of contention made. Hossa's contract was the poster boy because the cost to the Hawks really dropped off the edge of the table the last few years.

Evidently the Union was focused on escalating the salaries of players rather than the the effect on a franchise....In reality that is their mission.

What you need to understand is there was a ton of time for the last CBA to be made better-Instead it seems much of it was written over a long weekend, actually that is more true than not most likely. If the lockout didn't end when it did there wasn't going to be a season, there were arena commitments in many cities that couldn't be changed.

If one line would have been added saying-in the last three years of a contract a certain percentage of salary had to be paid out, or something to that effect this wouldn't be an issue now.

The tradeoff so to speak which happened later was a team trading a player could retain salary but there wasn't any contention I know of about the rules pertaining to Hossa's contract.
- Al

Very good points. I noticed that too. Curious that there was no contention at least publicly, from the Hawks... Which makes me think there's a back door out of the Hossa contract, perhaps pre-negotiated behind closed doors, that we haven't been made aware of. There would be some grounds, seeing as how its ex post facto and everything.

Yeah, but, doesn't his cap hit have to be analyzed within the Hawks current salary structure? Just like every other move the Hawks make or contemplate?
- BMWChiFan

it absolutely does, no argument. However, the Hawks made a calculation when they signed him that he was worth it. I don't necessarily buy that some portion of it was a "reward" for taking a low-ball line year bridge either. Maybe. But i think it's where they assessed his value.

When you look at things like where his shifts begin typically and end typically, the impact that dynamic had in the 2015 playoffs, ability to shadow and frustrate high end forwards (play away from the puck that frankly is not often seen on tv and not in the box scores), the fact that he is Toews' primary backup on critical face-offs, all that, then I think you can see why the Hawks would have valued him as such.

Certainly, they may have completely miscalculated Panarin's rookie performance and bonuses, but I am willing to bet (a lot) they know the relative value of what kruger brings to the table better than 99.9% of the blogosphere.

It's real easy to armchair GM and say Kero or Rasmussen or some other fringe NHLer can do all that stuff—but they can't. If they could, Kruger would be long gone and never would have been signed to that deal.

Again, what some completely can't process is what he brings away from the puck—so they default to "he doesn't score enough."

Fact is, not allowing goals in (or shots on) is as important as how many you score. That's his job. Is he doing that as well today as when he was signed due to the wrist issues? Fair question.

Thanks for enlightening all of us dummies who happen to disagree with you about Kruger.
- BMWChiFan

Well, that's how you choose to take it and play it back for the sake of your "agenda." Not how it was intended. I think I have provided a fact-based response to your original post.

Please present the argument other than "he doesn't score enough." I have clearly and robustly laid out the counter-argument. otherwise, get over it.

Agreed....then I have to live with Canucks fans thinking they are just as good as the Hawks because the won one game.
- DarthKane

I'm a fan of Bo Horvat (very savvy late round Fantasy Hockey selection if I dont say so myself ) but do they have any Elite young Talent either playing on the Big Club now or in the Prospect pipeline? They seem to be stuck in mediocrity.

I hear you, but Panik doesn't hold as much leverage as Saad did. While anything is possible I highly doubt anyone will offersheet Panik. Luckily for Stan there are some major RFA who will get a lot more attention than Panik and hopefully drive down his price:

- Ryan Johansen
- Ondrej Palat
- Tyler Johnson
- Tyler Toffoli
- Evgeny Kuznetsov
- Alex Galchenyuk
- Tomas Tatar
- Nino Niderrieter
- Tanner Pearson
- Mika Zibanejad
- Alexander Wennerberg
- David Pastrnak
- Jonathan Drouin
- Bo Horvat
- Leon Draisaitl
- Mikael Grandlund
- Viktor Arvidsson
- DarthKane

Well said DK. Posters act like this is an either or. When in fact there are multiple factors:
1) Length of contract
2) He is an RFA. If he gets an offer sheet over $1.88mil the offering team uses cap space and loses a 2nd round pick.
3) As DK said Bowman has to decide if he can find a better value for the same amount of money he would have to pay to keep Panik and he might have some options.
4) Hawks could trade him to the team that wants to give him an offer sheet (ala Brandon Saad) and get another signable player back.
5) Panik and other teams have to decide how much of a factor was playing on the Toews line.

IMHO at about $2mil to $2.5mil for 3 years or more the Hawks try to keep him. More than that and they just cannot afford him whether they like him or not.

Calling it now....Jurco with his first goal as a Blackhawk tonight.
- DarthKane

he's due.

Well said DK. Posters act like this is an either or. When in fact there are multiple factors:
1) Length of contract
2) He is an RFA. If he gets an offer sheet over $1.88mil the offering team uses cap space and loses a 2nd round pick.
3) As DK said Bowman has to decide if he can find a better value for the same amount of money he would have to pay to keep Panik and he might have some options.
4) Hawks could trade him to the team that wants to give him an offer sheet (ala Brandon Saad) and get another signable player back.
5) Panik and other teams have to decide how much of a factor was playing on the Toews line.

IMHO at about $2mil to $2.5mil for 3 years or more the Hawks try to keep him. More than that and they just cannot afford him whether they like him or not.
- -Doh-

Spot on IMO, a few comparables:

https://www.capfriendly.c...ers/vladislav-namestnikov

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/joe-colborne

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/riley-sheahan

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/lance-bouma

Spot on IMO, a few comparables:

https://www.capfriendly.c...ers/vladislav-namestnikov

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/joe-colborne

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/riley-sheahan

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/lance-bouma
- walleyeb1

Panik's stats this year make him slightly more appealing on the market than Colborne or Bouma. Bouma got 2.2M as an RFA and Colbourne 2.5M as a UFA.

Panik will get no LESS than 2.2 and even 2.2 would be a steal i think.

However like DK said as an RFA, if a team is Using a Sheet, someone like Drouin would be the guy they go after.

I think the number could easily be 2.7M per but probalby settles in closer to 2.5M.

I'm a fan of Bo Horvat (very savvy late round Fantasy Hockey selection if I dont say so myself ) but do they have any Elite young Talent either playing on the Big Club now or in the Prospect pipeline? They seem to be stuck in mediocrity.
- EnzoD

I like Horvat too. I had him in the pool too but I had to trade him (too many centres on my team). The only prospect they have that really stands out is Schmaltz's former teammate at UND - Brock Boeser. I don't think much of Virtanen (I've heard stories) and I don't know much about the guys they got at the TDL. Demko may be good, but you never can tell with goalies.

Well said DK. Posters act like this is an either or. When in fact there are multiple factors:
1) Length of contract
2) He is an RFA. If he gets an offer sheet over $1.88mil the offering team uses cap space and loses a 2nd round pick.
3) As DK said Bowman has to decide if he can find a better value for the same amount of money he would have to pay to keep Panik and he might have some options.
4) Hawks could trade him to the team that wants to give him an offer sheet (ala Brandon Saad) and get another signable player back.
5) Panik and other teams have to decide how much of a factor was playing on the Toews line.

IMHO at about $2mil to $2.5mil for 3 years or more the Hawks try to keep him. More than that and they just cannot afford him whether they like him or not.
- -Doh-

Not that we know this for sure, but from everything I've read it appears that Panik wants to be in Chicago. I realize that only goes so far, but maybe that's enough to get a deal done for 2-3 years.

Spot on IMO, a few comparables:

https://www.capfriendly.c...ers/vladislav-namestnikov

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/joe-colborne

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/riley-sheahan

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/lance-bouma
- walleyeb1

Reasonable comparisons, but I think those guys has more games played when they signed their current deals. Just another factor to consider.

Bottom line, I hope Stan finds a way to keep Panik around at a reasonable rate.

Not that we know this for sure, but from everything I've read it appears that Panik wants to be in Chicago. I realize that only goes so far, but maybe that's enough to get a deal done for 2-3 years.
- DarthKane

Just amazing what he's turned into since coming over as a Toronto cast off.

Panik's stats this year make him slightly more appealing on the market than Colborne or Bouma. Bouma got 2.2M as an RFA and Colbourne 2.5M as a UFA.

Panik will get no LESS than 2.2 and even 2.2 would be a steal i think.

However like DK said as an RFA, if a team is Using a Sheet, someone like Drouin would be the guy they go after.

I think the number could easily be 2.7M per but probalby settles in closer to 2.5M.
- gnosox1986

Generally agree the number should be in 2.5m range, but then you also need to factor term. As far as comparisons:

Joe Colborne numbers prior to signing his 16/17-18 contract.

2015/16 season:

73 games 19 goals 25 assists 44 points.

In regards to Bouma, not much difference, however the playoffs loom:

78 games 16 goals, 18 assists, 34 points.

He also had a full 78 game season the previous where season production was roughly half.

Very good points. I noticed that too. Curious that there was no contention at least publicly, from the Hawks... Which makes me think there's a back door out of the Hossa contract, perhaps pre-negotiated behind closed doors, that we haven't been made aware of. There would be some grounds, seeing as how its ex post facto and everything.
- busmaster

Let's face it barring injuries I'm betting Hossa play out the deal...Even if the last two years he doesn't play more than 60 games.

As far as ex post facto...The NHL plays by different rules and franchises don't step out of line. Also, a union can go only as far as the league will allow them-There isn't a union without the league, and if push ever came to shove the players making big money would do just fine without the union.

So I guess that's a long winded way of saying it is what it is and all parties involved accept the situation.

Generally agree the number should be in 2.5m range, but then you also need to factor term. As far as comparisons:

Joe Colborne numbers prior to signing his 16/17-18 contract.

2015/16 season:

73 games 19 goals 25 assists 44 points.

In regards to Bouma, not much difference, however the playoffs loom:

78 games 16 goals, 18 assists, 34 points.

He also had a full 78 game season the previous where season production was roughly half.
- walleyeb1

Don't forget to factor into the equation the cast and crew Panik plays with compared to others....

Panik wasn't forgotten, he will be resigned at around $2.0M or slightly less. He's an RFA without many other options but he's earned a reasonable salary increase.

No G.M. other than guys like Mike Milbury moves a core player like Crawford to retain 3 absolute bottom of the roster guys with limited options as RFA's. It won't happen and I strongly suspect Darling will get himself a nice contract elsewhere and best wishes from the club.

And do you really think Rozsival, Campbell, Tootoo, Jurco, Kruger, Oduya, Desjardins, Hinostroza, and TVR will all be with the club next season? 3 of them maybe, all of the rest will be gone or playing in Rockford. And the cycle of surrounding the core with cheap young players will repeat itself.
- RickJ

Did you even read the original post?

Never mind, RickJ. You can see the landscape you see and belittle other posters if they see it differently. That's okay with me. Agreeing to disagree seems to be the thing to do here. Too far apart on a general understanding of what I've written, the hypothetical conditions I proposed and the lack of acknowledging that goalie depth is the Hawks greatest strength as per finances and flexibility/options moving forward.