Wow.
You win a Stanley Cup and every blogger on the planet becomes an expert on your roster and cap situation.
Let me reiterate what I said on the comment thread of my last blog: anyone pretending to have a complete handle on the Hawks’ cap situation and offseason plans, who doesn’t also work at 1901 W. Madison Street in Chicago, is full o’ baloney.
Because I’m not convinced the Hawks are entirely sure themselves. There are just too many variables right now.
So let’s unpack this, shall we?
First, what we do know is this year’s cap is going to settle around $71 million. And for the Blackhawks, that’s not the greatest news, considering the $21 million cap hit they’ll have wrapped up in two players alone, and another roughly $36 million they have wrapped up in 7 other players. That leaves about $14 million for about 14 players, and those players include upcoming RFA’s Marcus Kruger and Brandon Saad.
So really, the conundrum is having about $7 million to pay the remaining 12 players.
Something like that.
And that’s not workable. Not this summer, nor next, when Brent Seabrook hits unrestricted free agency. And the cap is not expected to rise substantially.
And what I have been told by someone who works at 1901 W. Madison Street is that the organization’s laser-like focus is re-signing Saad this summer, and Seabrook the next.
So, yes, something has to give. A whole lot of something.
As a result, amateur capologists have been hard at work solving the mess on behalf of Stan Bowman. But as we all know, they’re usually not working in real-world models, instead, they typically operate in the paradigm where 29 other GMs are lining up to relieve the Hawks of bad contracts.
To be more clear, it is likely, when/if the Hawks part ways with Patrick Sharp, they will have to take a contract and cap hit (albeit lesser) back.
Same with Bryan Bickell, who might just have to be bought out.
Johnny Oduya, who may leave as a UFA as well, will nonetheless need to be replaced—and the Hawks literally have no NHL-ready, puck-moving left-side defenseman in their system.
If Brad Richards leaves (and contrary to reports elsewhere, that is far from a given), he needs to be replaced at second line center. Any cheaper alternatives on the Hawk roster are a serious downgrade—next season at least.
So, for the Hawks, knowing that addressing the cap and the team’s long-term goals is much more complicated than mere subtraction of salaries, the choice is rather stark: suck big-time for a year or more, force young players into roles they’re not ready for, hurting the team and possibly their development, or . . . OR . . .
Trading Corey Crawford.
And here’s where you have to give the Hawks some credit, beyond just being really good at that hockey stuff. They have anticipated this for some time.
I first heard back in late February that the Hawks were having some initial conversations with a team from each conference about the possibility of moving Crawford some time around the draft. There was significant interest then from both clubs. There probably is now. And the market has widened to any team looking for an upgrade in net.
The only difference is, as I heard two days ago, the Hawks’ asking price on Crawford has gone up: a high first round pick and a good young player or prospect.
When you consider what else is available in trade or free agency to teams looking for a #1 goalie, Crawford is the cream of the crop this summer. His resume’ is fairly impeccable. No, he’s not Lundqvist or Quick or Rinne. But he’s right there behind them, with 2 Stanley Cups he was a huge part of, barely 30 years old, not terribly expensive for a #1 netminder (on a team not paying Kane and Toews).
And from the Hawks’ perspective, knowing they probably have to deal him in the next 13 months for purely financial reasons, his trade value will never be higher than it is right now.
I’m also told the Hawks know this as well.
Connect the dots. And start the list with Buffalo and Edmonton, the two teams I referred to earlier. Expand it to San Jose, Calgary, Winnipeg and possibly a few others.
Some may ask, isn’t going to Scott Darling as #1 next year hurting the team and his development?
Answer: we’ve seen enough of Darling to say probably not. Further, at 26, Darling has far more pro, and marginally more NHL experience than Stephen Johns, Philip Danault, Ryan Hartman, Mark McNeill, Ville Pokka, etc.
Regardless, there are whispers that the Hawks would not be worried going to Darling. They certainly weren’t in the first round of the playoffs—for which they were rewarded with a mostly stellar performance until Crawford took back over.
Then there’s the asking price—who’s going to pay that for Crawford? Hard to say. And remember, it's all a negotiation. And the outcome of the Sharp, Bickell, Oduya and Richards scenarios could have some bearing.
Crawford is what he is to a team like Buffalo or Edmonton: a proven veteran, legit #1 netminder, paid $6 million a year for the next handful of seasons. And a guy you know can carry you in the playoffs when you get there. Big box checked for any franchise with serious designs on becoming a serious Cup contender.
I’m not predicting Crawford will be traded this summer. But anyone buying Stan Bowman’s statement (or implication) that Crawford is “untouchable… is misreading the tea leaves and GM-speak.
In fact, Bowman’s most recent comments, which tellingly included Darling specifically as sort of an “equal… part of the Hawks’ goaltending picture going forward, would indicate he’s going to listen on Crawford.
So watch closely fans. It’s going to be a very interesting summer.
All for now,
JJ
Check out Hockey Streams. See NHL, AHL and CHL streamed in HD right to your computer, tablet or gaming device for a small donation: http://www.hockeystreams.com/ref/51981