Eklund: Hawks Extend Seabrook. 8 years, under 7 per. Good deal?

Eklund: Hawks Extend Seabrook. 8 years, under 7 per. Good deal?
- Eklund

He deserves it

Yes

Great deal. Definitely deserves it and some!!!

good cap hit for him. 8 years seems crazy taking him to his 39 but whatever they can figure it out later,

It's an excellent deal...hard guy to replace. In the long term maybe not so much, but GM's can deal with that later, or in most cases the next GM can deal with that.

Great deal for the Hawks. Obviously had to concede on the term to get the cap hit they wanted, might be a problem with the cap hit in the last few years, but for the next 5 years or so it's a sweet contract.

6 years would've been golden.

It depends how you look at it. I mean the Hawks have over 50% of their cap taken up by 5 players.

Not a huge fan of the length. But my flames pretty much just did the exact same thing with Gio. Seabrook is a great player. This is great "for now"

and on cue, Travis Yost is complaining about this contract saying its a bad deal
Graph boy needs to cool it

It depends how you look at it. I mean the Hawks have over 50% of their cap taken up by 5 players.
- xShoot4WarAmpsx

For a lot of years too. Toews, Kane, Hossa, Anisimov, Keith, Seabrook, Crawford for years and years to come.

and on cue, Travis Yost is complaining about this contract saying its a bad deal
Graph boy needs to cool it
- DDM-Coga

But TSN man.

But TSN man.
- smellmyfinger

him and cullen can go beat it to some charts.

him and cullen can go beat it to some charts.
- DDM-Coga

They can diddle each other's Buttons. See what I did there?

6 years would've been golden.
- TheCalSen

Mhm.

Cap hit probably would have come in around 8 in that case though. Chicago has immediate cap headaches, so it would seem they're willing to risk problems in 5-6 years to try and manage the immediate future.

Fair salary, bad term. Although, the latter might have been necessary.

and on cue, Travis Yost is complaining about this contract saying its a bad deal
Graph boy needs to cool it
- DDM-Coga

Well it kinda is.

Well it kinda is.
- TheRollingPuck

If they wanted to sign him to 4-5 years, which would have been ideal term wise, they would have had to trade him or let him walk. Chicago can't afford to have another contract north of 8mil on the books.

Not a huge fan of the length. But my flames pretty much just did the exact same thing with Gio. Seabrook is a great player. This is great "for now"
- thefreebird69

Gio is a stud. Seabrook is a notch below. Hawks will be regretting this deal in 3 years. Very shortsighted move.

Fair salary, bad term. Although, the latter might have been necessary.
- TheRollingPuck

It's a ridiculous hit for a 30 year old on an 8 year term. This is a terrible signing.

If they wanted to sign him to 4-5 years, which would have been ideal term wise, they would have had to trade him or let him walk. Chicago can't afford to have another contract north of 8mil on the books.
- ehabs9

He's making almost 7mill, which is still a lot, and for 8 years. This is going to look bad in a few years.

It's a ridiculous hit for a 30 year old on an 8 year term. This is a terrible signing.
- DoubleDown

Yeah, I just noticed this puts him in the the Top 10 in terms of salary. So yeah, the salary is bad too.

It's a ridiculous hit for a 30 year old on an 8 year term. This is a terrible signing.
- DoubleDown

I give that money to Keith but certainly not to Seabrook.

For a lot of years too. Toews, Kane, Hossa, Anisimov, Keith, Seabrook, Crawford for years and years to come.
- smellmyfinger

Crawford will be dealt in a year or two, especially if Darling keeps showing well.

Crawford will be dealt in a year or two, especially if Darling keeps showing well.
- hawks2010

I'm not as down on Crawford as others are, he's not a top 5 goalie, but he's not a liability either, with goalies hitting the 8 or 9 million a year mark his cap hit may actually be attractive in 2-3 years.