John Jaeckel: Three Names “In Play”

Is Ladd being resigned?

Is Ladd being resigned?
- Streit2ThePoint

Have not heard anything beyond when they dealt for him, a quiet note that there was some talk about a possible extension.

Obviously, the Hawks would need to get some other business done first. But a physical LW they can play in the top 9 is #2 on the wish list after a 4-5 defense upgrade.

Not sure how Crawford would fit with Philly. They seem to have two goalies already. I would think they would be more interested in TT.

Woo hoo, new stuff
Thanks JJ

JJ,
Nice to have a new blog to read! Thank you for that. Also, Bickell? Any news on that $4 million coming back into play? (and then over to Shaw would be my hope)

Sign Weise trade shaw...save $$

Have not heard anything beyond when they dealt for him, a quiet note that there was some talk about a possible extension.

Obviously, the Hawks would need to get some other business done first. But a physical LW they can play in the top 9 is #2 on the wish list after a 4-5 defense upgrade.
- John Jaeckel

I thought a good trade would be Philly sending Streit(salary retained), Chicago's 2nd rounder back for Bickell and Hartman.

Streits on last year of deal and can help fill the 4,5,6 defender role and Chicago gets their pick back.

Flyers take Bickell who adds some size and get Hartman to help with future.

JJ,
Have you heard specifically any names of "D" men the Hawks might be interested in?

cant see the flyers being interested in Crawford. your thoughts John?

The only way I see Flyers getting involved is if we are trading Neuvy to Chicago in the deal for Crawford AND have other plans to deal Steve Mason. I can't see us having any intention of keeping one of Mason or Neuvy IF Crawford were to be acquried. But I don't think this scenario is likely at all.

and so it goes...drip by drip...one by the one cup winning players departing:

2015: saad and oduya
2016: shaw and/or TT, craw
2017: hossa and craw if not this year

and then there was 5: toews, kane, keith, seabs and hammer..

I can't imagine interest in Crawford from Buffalo, having just traded a 1st last year for one who played well while he was healthy, not to mention a surprising Johnson who put up numbers close to Crawford himself:

Johnson: 2.36, .920
Lehner: 2.47, .924

Crawford: 2.37, .924

Id be pretty damn hesitant to trade Crawford at this point given the season he just had.

We better get a damn good return on him to decide to part ways with him and roll with some guys who are unproven as starters. Also, taking back a chud like Pavelec is not an option IMO

Saves only a small amount of cap ($2 mil) and we get a serious downgrade in net

and so it goes...drip by drip...one by the one cup winning players departing:

2015: saad and oduya
2016: shaw and/or TT, craw
2017: hossa and craw if not this year

and then there was 5: toews, kane, keith, seabs and hammer..
- bogiedoc

Well worth the price when winning cups - even if it was just 1!

cant see the flyers being interested in Crawford. your thoughts John?
- rinaldo

Agree.

Also Crawford makes what the Flyers are paying Neuvirth and Mason combined.

What about Crawford to Calgary? Hiller, Ramo, and Backstrom are all UFA's this summer.

I can't imagine interest in Crawford from Buffalo, having just traded a 1st last year for one who played well while he was healthy, not to mention a surprising Johnson who put up numbers close to Crawford himself:

Johnson: 2.36, .920
Lehner: 2.47, .924

Crawford: 2.37, .924
- stashu

I doubt Buffalo has any interest in Crawford. Lehner and Johnson combined make less than him. Even after both are resigned to new contracts, IMO.

And as you stated very similar numbers.

Its going to be very hard for the Hawks to trade Crawford, IMO. May even have to hold salary.

Well said JJ.

It's pretty easy to figure out why.

1) Crawford brings you the biggest cap relief opportunity
2) TT brings you the biggest possible return
3) Shaw may not fit under the clubs cap number and still brings a return.

It was not hard to figure out looking at the current roster that those were the most obvious moves.

What about Crawford to Calgary? Hiller, Ramo, and Backstrom are all UFA's this summer.
- EKB13

Interesting. What comes back? Also would Crow agree to go there? It's at the opposite end of Canada from Montreal and not a playoff team.

Isn't Dineen in the mix for the headcoaching job there?

EDIT: Thanks JJ for the timely shiny new blog! It's clear as Pat Foley likes to say "something's gotta give!" Appreciate the intel on what might be in play.

Well said JJ.

It's pretty easy to figure out why.

1) Crawford brings you the biggest cap relief opportunity
2) TT brings you the biggest possible return
3) Shaw may not fit under the clubs cap number and still brings a return.

It was not hard to figure out looking at the current roster that those were the most obvious moves.
- TheTrob

Crawford definitely brings you the biggest possible return. No.1 netminder at market value contract with 2 cups and coming off his best year

Crawford and Shaw please.

You can get L.A's 1st Round Pick + +

Crawford definitely brings you the biggest possible return. No.1 netminder at market value contract with 2 cups and coming off his best year
- hawkeytalkman

I don't think he does.

What teams
A) Need a starting Goalie
B) Have 6MM in cap space to take on without sending anything back to Chicago.


Also, teams know Chicago is in a cap crunch.

Edit - And Crawford can block any trade.

Well said JJ.

It's pretty easy to figure out why.

1) Crawford brings you the biggest cap relief opportunity
2) TT brings you the biggest possible return
3) Shaw may not fit under the clubs cap number and still brings a return.

It was not hard to figure out looking at the current roster that those were the most obvious moves.
- TheTrob

Out of the three listed, yes.

However, who would bring the biggest cap relief opportunity, as well as the best return is Kane.

I know, to even assert the idea is blasphemy!

Honestly, just ponder the idea for five seconds. Kane has to be worth a top five pick in this summer's draft, another first round pick, a top six wing or solid defenseman that can play on the second paring - at minimum.

If Stamkos decides to stay in Tampa, wouldn't the idea of getting a shot at Auston Matthews first overall plus another pick and a competent player in return make some sense, despite giving up the talent Kane brings to the table?

I'm not necessarily advocating that this is the answer, but it is something to think about.

Of the 3 - Crawford, TT and Shaw - I would keep Crawford. First, because he's proven he can take you to the promised land - twice. But also because (1) it would probably slide Darling to #1, or at least give him a lot more starts to where he will need a substantial raise after next season. Keeping CC will mean keeping Darling at #2 with limited games and a lower asking price for an extension. And (2), trading CC and replacing him with a veteran will probably only result in about a $3M cap savings, along with the impact of #1 above the following off season.

Shaw will probably require $3M+ if it is more than a 1-year deal and signing player like Weise for ~$1M will be better long range to have the cap space required to sign Panarin long term.

TT - get something while you can.