Why should he have to move? He earned the contact and is now raising a family in Chicago...people forget hockey players are people with actual lives.

Would you want to have to move your family accross the country or into Canada just to make your boss happy? It's Bowman's fault for giving him a NMC. Crawford is just using what he has to an advantage. The NMC isn't given to make a contract look pretty
- Santo_44

Exactly unless the player wants to move I can't blame them for exercising the option to veto a trade.

Sure, Crow is going to change his mind and agree to move his pregnant girlfriend from her hometown and family in Chicago, just because the Old Duffer wants it to happen.

As you say, sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. Well, unfortunately, it's time for the Hawks to lose, as SB's bad contract and trade decisions, and Q's inability to adjust, can no longer be overcome by a Blackhawks' abundance of talent. As a loyal fan who saw my first game at the Stadium in 1959, this run was terrific. I never thought I'd live to see 3 Hawks' Cups in 6 years, but let's face it -- it's over.

It's now time to focus on and enjoy another equally likable, historic and talented team, but one with a much better front office and coaching staff -- the Chicago Cubs!
- BMWChiFan

I just said it may happen ,and to be truthful I Don't want it to happen and have been very clear on that point . Crow has been more then a loyal and good soldier .And is IMO still one of the better goalies in the league ..I just felt as many he would be the most easy to move and get a decent return . Now I see Jhammer may move ,and they may ask Seebs to wave his NMC so to leave him unprotected .Seeb may not mind a move to Vegas ,they may not be interested but worth a try .. A lot may not happen ..and I am fine with that .Not happy but still grateful for what we have been given over the years .. GO HAWKS !!

Panarin for Rask

Or

Panarin for Horvat

I don't see how Crawford would be easy to move... better options (due to talent and salary) include darling, MAF, Condon, etc. 6 mil for crawford would have made him hard to move more likely.

You know, everyone wanted more cups after 2010. So they go and do what they had to do to get two more. Everyone knew the band would have to get paid, so suck it up. Have to take the good with the bad. Don't potshot the guy now after he accomplished what all wanted, knowing all the time a situation like this was inevitable. It's like the day after a blow out party. Right now is the hangover. Most of us have been there, it takes time.
- 6628

Very true. The Hawks could have made moves to avoid being in the cap situation they are in but in doing so they might have not won the cups in 2013 and or 2015. The mindset since winning the 2010 cup was winning the cup the next year and not worrying about what was going to happen in 2018 and 2019. I think all in all it worked out pretty good.

So excited to be attending the Hawks convention this July. I hope the boo birds are deafening for Stan during any panel he participates in. Though honestly he will probably chicken out of any front office panels to begin with.

Myself and many close friends have finally come to the conclusion that this current Blackhawks team is much closer to a full rebuild than any kind of subtle tweaking. The question now is will Stan expedite the overhaul or drag his feet and let us sit through another 3-4 years of mediocrity.

Better to trade the assets now when their value is worthwhile than to wait and hold onto these players whose contracts will become albatrosses on the franchise.

So excited to be attending the Hawks convention this July. I hope the boo birds are deafening for Stan during any panel he participates in. Though honestly he will probably chicken out of any front office panels to begin with.

Myself and many close friends have finally come to the conclusion that this current Blackhawks team is much closer to a full rebuild than any kind of subtle tweaking. The question now is will Stan expedite the overhaul or drag his feet and let us sit through another 3-4 years of mediocrity.

Better to trade the assets now when their value is worthwhile than to wait and hold onto these players whose contracts will become albatrosses on the franchise.
- falseprophet93

Well then how many cups would it take not to Boo, 4,5 6 is there really a number if the current season was a loss?

The Hawks are beyond doomed.

The guys that need to be traded can't because of their NTC/NMC - Toews, Seabrook, Anisimov, Crawford, Hossa, and Keith.

The guys that can be traded because of limited trade clauses or no clauses at all only hurt the team to lose - Hjalmarsson, Panarin, Darling (who was dealt).

Stan in completely inept and cannot make a decent hockey trade to save his job. Plus he has crippled the team by overpaying 19, 88, 15, 7, and 50. Not to mention all the NMC/NTCs.

Q is a line juggler who won't play young guys and has lost the room. His best friend was fired so he will no longer be fully vested into the team.

The rookies and prospects are AHL fodder at best, there is no help on the horizon.

That leaves the team with an aging, past their prime "core" that's shown they don't care anymore and a totally incompetent GM who painted the team in a corner by overpaying these same losers and giving them no trade clauses. As fans we're stuck with this garbage and we have to watch as this slow painful decline continues.
- DarthKane

100 % Agree......the NEW motto will be "ONE MESS"

Great write up as always John...

"Crawford and his agent made it abundantly clear they didn't want to move and could possibly make it extremely difficult to move him (limited NTC). Darling and his agent are fully prepared to test the market. This was not the direction Chicago wanted, but Stan backed himself in a corner."

You'll be hearing a lot more of that phrase over the next couple of seasons...this is on the caretaker and his structuring of those deals with the clauses. Deals that are overpayments based on past performance...sure you can point to the deals for 19 and 88 and say well they thought the cap would go up...but did Stan learn from that...look at Seabrook's deal.

You have an aging high paid core of players that you are having to subtract secondary talent from every summer. Add that to Bowman's trade record the last couple of offseasons and TDLs and you can see why we're here.

With the lack of flexibility with some of these deals it'll be interesting to see who he can actually move to free cap space up so this team can get younger and faster.

As far as Crawford - he's been stellar and you can't blame him or his agent for expressing their rights according to the deal they were given by the Hawks. Meanwhile hats off to Darling - sad to see him go. I'm sure he'd love to still be here.
- DK002

Pulling big contract veterans with no movement clause off a trade list is the logical assumption. A surprise trade is only something Stan has in tow. Often reworking contracts is devised, but the Blackhawk guys in this category already are sitting comfortably and happily enough in the "as is" mode.

There is one way to attempt to trade them: find a team which lost or needs a core guy FO LLOWING the Expansion Draft. Identify how they might rebuild a roster for next season. Do they have returning players, maybe some young players or prospects but would also like to insert say, Seabrook, to their lineup?

If so do we have to overpay to move that contract? Because if the answer is "yes," then better not trade the one "potential" asset. Our high draft choices is a where we hope to obtain our next difference maker and eventual core player. Warnung Will Robinson, do not go near that asset fearing this team gets lost or damaged incredibly worse in the long term. Might as well be lost in space with no clue how to return to normalcy if you trade your top draft pick slots.

100 % Agree......the NEW motto will be "ONE MESS"
- Hawkytalk

Now this is funny.

Well then how many cups would it take not to Boo, 4,5 6 is there really a number if the current season was a loss?
- riozzo

I can't give Stan that much credit when he was not the true architect of this "core." A large portion of the cup-winning teams had key players brought in during the Tallon regime. And while I compliment Stan for maintaining the roster for as long as he did, I don't trust him any longer to manage this team.

His failures as a GM have directly shaved years off of this team's "dynasty" run. There is no forgiving overpaying Toews/Kane, the Seabrook contract, and the failure to sign Saad. No smart GM would have made those deals with such high costs and long terms. The management that always win in sports are those who sell high and retool/reload.

Look at someone like Bill Belichick in football who has kept his team relevant for well over a decade now. He has built rosters by drafting, developing, and not overpaying his talent. When you sell players when their value is high you get the youth and draft picks to develop your next generation of talent. It's a sports franchise life-cycle.

When people like Stan think they can outsmart everyone else and retain a large group of core players, it's just not smart. Locking in aging stars has never been a good idea. Everyone gets old and it will always be better to cut someone loose one year too early than a year too late.

Bowman held onto Bickell for far too long, and then moved the "untouchable" Teuvo to dump Bickell. And it's quite remarkable how he has attempted to always save face through his carrier pigeons in the media like Laz & Myers.

Stories such as Teuvo being lazy, the youth movement's talent, the lack of concern over the tightening cap. Anyone willing to see the truth knows that Bowman is the reason why the window has closed.

Trade Seabrook, keep Hjalmarsson. That's one easy choice.

Trade Seabrook, keep Hjalmarsson. That's one easy choice.
- Rexypoo

Trade him to where? Who is going to take that contract on? Answer = Nobody!

Trade Seabrook, keep Hjalmarsson. That's one easy choice.
- Rexypoo

Trading 33 year old Seabrook with $6.8M cap hit for next six years is impossible without retaining salary, taking back some other bad salary, and/or adding a valuable sweetener. Trading 29 year old Hammer with $4.2M salary hit for remaining two years could regrettably happen, out of cap necessity.

Trade Seabrook, keep Hjalmarsson. That's one easy choice.
- Rexypoo

Vague comment this AM leads me to believe a NMC guy (or more than one) WILL be approached about waiving. That, in and of itself, would be fairly bold because it kinda cant be "undone" or taken back once asked. Stay tuned. I did definitely hear the Hawks are gonna explore some things.

Vague comment this AM leads me to believe a NMC guy (or more than one) WILL be approached about waiving. That, in and of itself, would be fairly bold because it kinda cant be "undone" or taken back once asked. Stay tuned. I did definitely hear the Hawks are gonna explore some things.
- John Jaeckel

In all honesty who cares at this point. They have won multiple Cups and are making millions.

Vague comment this AM leads me to believe a NMC guy (or more than one) WILL be approached about waiving. That, in and of itself, would be fairly bold because it kinda cant be "undone" or taken back once asked. Stay tuned. I did definitely hear the Hawks are gonna explore some things.
- John Jaeckel

The Hawks players with NMCs are not idiots. They can see the Hawks' cap dilemma every bit as well as we fans can. If approached, they, like Michael Corleone, will understand that "it's not personal, it's business." Of course, this doesn't mean that any of them will waive their NMC.

Vague comment this AM leads me to believe a NMC guy (or more than one) WILL be approached about waiving. That, in and of itself, would be fairly bold because it kinda cant be "undone" or taken back once asked. Stay tuned. I did definitely hear the Hawks are gonna explore some things.
- John Jaeckel

Don't you (all of us) think that players understand the cap situation that this team is going through, and also know that sports is "win now" environment? Why would something have to be be undone if the team asks a player if they would waive the NMC? I'm sure they understand completely. I am wondering if some are surprised they haven't been asked yet.

Vague comment this AM leads me to believe a NMC guy (or more than one) WILL be approached about waiving. That, in and of itself, would be fairly bold because it kinda cant be "undone" or taken back once asked. Stay tuned. I did definitely hear the Hawks are gonna explore some things.
- John Jaeckel

I think it was Marlowe who said yesterday that the best thing they could do is ask EVERY player with an NMC/NTC for a list of 10 teams to which they would willingly go. (Not sure legal under their contracts, but whatever.) Then, you're not making it clear to just one or two guys that they are less important/no longer in the team's plans.

I think it was Marlowe who said yesterday that the best thing they could do is ask EVERY player with an NMC/NTC for a list of 10 teams to which they would willingly go. (Not sure legal under their contracts, but whatever.) Then, you're not making it clear to just one or two guys that they are less important/no longer in the team's plans.
- pdx2ord

A true fork in the road for this franchise.

One thing for sure is that management needs to balance a team that can make the playoffs(regular season team) And a team that can compete in the playoffs. Because they are two completely different animals. Build a team with to much finesse(great regular season)which is what we have now. And when the playoffs roll around the game is to "heavy" for them. Build a "heavy" team....And risk not even making the playoffs.
In conclusion i think this fall mostly on the NHL itself. They need to let all the teams know if they intend to enforce the rules they currently have. We all know that the playoffs allow for reduced penalties called., But the "clutch-n-grab"-"interference" is simply allowing less talented players to neutralize talent.
I also do not want to make this sound as if i am blaming this for Nashville beating the snot out of us. We simply did not compete. Where as the younger version of our super stars were willing to compete and were willing to out work any player the opposition threw out on the ice.

It's not as black and white as you make it - Stan has made some prudent trade and draft decisions. However, the rock this team is going to struggle to get out from under are the 19 & 88 contracts for the sum total of $21M. Those contracts were predicated on the cap going up much more than it has - AND - both players maintaining or even improving their level of play throughout the duration of their contracts. 88 has kept up his end of the bargain - 19 - not so much.
- Chief4Feathers

Your 100% correct but
OMG- We need to move on from Toews and Kane and the 21million
It's 3 Cups later and they will both retire Blackhawks with or without another Cup

I think it was Marlowe who said yesterday that the best thing they could do is ask EVERY player with an NMC/NTC for a list of 10 teams to which they would willingly go. (Not sure legal under their contracts, but whatever.) Then, you're not making it clear to just one or two guys that they are less important/no longer in the team's plans.
- pdx2ord

Yup. It was me. I think they should ask everyone for a list or whether they would be willing to waive, depending on what their contract says. They have the cover of McD's ire (Stan and Q's butts on the line) and the poor playoff performance, can say that no option will be ruled out (which is the truth, I believe).

based on your analysis and what we all can see...

I say "good Luck" mr stanbow....improving the team and staying cap compliant...

the hawks are not going to get both and since cap compliance is a must: improvement is not happening...

based on your analysis and what we all can see...

I say "good Luck" mr stanbow....improving the team and staying cap compliant...

the hawks are not going to get both and since cap compliance is a must: improvement is not happening...
- bogiedoc

Not that black and white. I'd say instead that improvement is less likely and more dependent on hitting an inside straight with a few players in that scenario. It isn't an absolute. People do win the lottery. It's just not the most likely thing to happen. And also not the best retirement planning strategy.