I'm against giving up our best player period. I'm against giving up our best player to a division rival. The trade proposal of Kane and Gus and 4th for Barrie, Makar, and 1st (and 7th?) Doesn't do it for me. I'm willing to trade many others, just not him.

I don't think it's meant to be a tank move, but it's what will happen when you trade 88.
- I Am The Breadman

I wouldn't trade Kane either if not for more than that. But if that 1st is Ottawa's pick, imagine if we had the first and second pick with KK and Hughes? It would be like having Kane and Toews all over again provided that either or both becomes a superstar. That's a big if though. Look at players like Yakupov, Falloon and Daigle...

Just some points for discussion. I think this all depends on how long they figure it will take to get competitive. Don't know if it is as simple as it sounds either.

How much term is on these big contracts we are taking on?
Is the best solution to having too many big contracts with term to take on more?
What happens if CC is ready to start playing a month from now? (I know he might not come back, but it isn't impossible either) Or to start next season? Are we going to have to trade a good young player to dump a bad contract?
What about the performances bonuses the Hawks may have to pay out? I'm sure they won't have to pay out the expensive schedule B ones for league awards to guys like Kampf and Strome, but I have to assume some of the 6+ million in bonuses this season will happen. Going up to the cap and using LTIR would mean having to eat into next years cap space already.

I get the idea that we want picks, but these aren't top 10 first round picks we are talking about either, so more likely they are 2-4 years away. Are the Hawks going for a long rebuild still after being nearly 2 years into it already?

Edit: I meant Kahun for the bonus, not Kampf.
- breadbag

Taking on bad contracts for 1st's aren't really in Stan's nature and tells others of rebuilding. Wrong image he's "trying" to sell. I haven't been against his recent trades, so I'll assume he stays that path. I know he knows he's a seller, but maybe more Hartman like deals come up (and pan out.)

Taking on bad contracts for 1st's aren't really in Stan's nature and tells others of rebuilding. Wrong image he's "trying" to sell. I haven't been against his recent trades, so I'll assume he stays that path. I know he knows he's a seller, but maybe more Hartman like deals come up (and pan out.)
- I Am The Breadman

The Lackhawks are in 30th place. 30th. Whatever they are trying to sell is out the window. The Lackhawks need to sell off players and take on bad contracts add 1st round picks and near ready talent. Get one of the top 2 picks in the draft.

Taking on bad contracts for 1st's aren't really in Stan's nature and tells others of rebuilding. Wrong image he's "trying" to sell. I haven't been against his recent trades, so I'll assume he stays that path. I know he knows he's a seller, but maybe more Hartman like deals come up (and pan out.)
- I Am The Breadman

I guess I'm just thinking if they want a shot with this core (or part of it), it has to be a quick rebuild or nothing. I don't know that they can play the long game on getting a large number of draft picks and waiting to see who pans out. What happens if you draft the next Cam Barker and Kyle Beach with your first round choices?

I think the Hawks path will be more "hockey trades" to try to improve the team and try to fill holes with a couple UFA. Right or wrong, I can't see Stan going too crazy in a deep rebuild.

Collin Delia is first off the ice, but Cam Ward was in the starter's net. INTRIGUE.

Collin Delia is first off the ice, but Cam Ward was in the starter's net. INTRIGUE.
- walleyeb1

Knowing how things go lately, probably Delia injured himself and his season is over...jk.

The Lackhawks are in 30th place. 30th. Whatever they are trying to sell is out the window. The Lackhawks need to sell off players and take on bad contracts add 1st round picks and near ready talent. Get one of the top 2 picks in the draft.
- mrpaulish

Since Bowman could still say playoff team and I like our team, he's selling winning, I guess. I don't think he's said different, I don't believe it because I have eyes. I'm putting myself in moves he's previously done. I didn't say I was against it, page 1 I say I'm for it, I just don't expect him to do it.

I guess I'm just thinking if they want a shot with this core (or part of it), it has to be a quick rebuild or nothing. I don't know that they can play the long game on getting a large number of draft picks and waiting to see who pans out. What happens if you draft the next Cam Barker and Kyle Beach with your first round choices?

I think the Hawks path will be more "hockey trades" to try to improve the team and try to fill holes with a couple UFA. Right or wrong, I can't see Stan going too crazy in a deep rebuild.
- breadbag

All of your 2nd paragraph, I agree and see it happening. I hope his UFA day isn't as crazy as some predict.

I wouldn't trade Kane either if not for more than that. But if that 1st is Ottawa's pick, imagine if we had the first and second pick with KK and Hughes? It would be like having Kane and Toews all over again provided that either or both becomes a superstar. That's a big if though. Look at players like Yakupov, Falloon and Daigle...
- Popsghostly

It is a tempting thought, but I'm staying with no. All of the others will probably follow.

Definitely anyone could be traded for the right return. I think we've seen that in the NHL, nobody is really untouchable. I think for the right package, you make a deal, but I guess it would be good to know the plan.
- breadbag

I agree but honestly I don't think that they really know what the plan is. Their goal, is that the can turn this around ASAP. Make a few trades, have one or two prospects come in next year make an impact, along with our 1st pick as well, add a few guys in FA and be good to go. Whether or not that is likely or not time will remain to be seen but I think that's why you're not seeing them super active.

Agree, when the greatest player in sport can be traded everyone is fair game. If they come to Chicago with an offer starting with Ottawa's 1st, their 1st (this or next year), and Makar a stud D prospect I would definitely consider it. Some may think that's too much but for a Top 5 player in the world you better be asking for the world in return.

I wouldn't trade Kane either if not for more than that. But if that 1st is Ottawa's pick, imagine if we had the first and second pick with KK and Hughes? It would be like having Kane and Toews all over again provided that either or both becomes a superstar. That's a big if though. Look at players like Yakupov, Falloon and Daigle...
- Popsghostly

That's the huge risk with making a deal like that which is why Ottawa's pick would be a must but there would have to be several other pieces involved as well to get me to bite

Taking on bad contracts for 1st's aren't really in Stan's nature and tells others of rebuilding. Wrong image he's "trying" to sell. I haven't been against his recent trades, so I'll assume he stays that path. I know he knows he's a seller, but maybe more Hartman like deals come up (and pan out.)
- I Am The Breadman

True, but Stan's MO has got them where they are now so taking different paths would be a wise move if he wants to try and get this team back in contention sooner rather than later. I do agree that it may provide the look of "rebuilding" but not if the contract they are taking is only for say one year like Callahan and you get an extra 2nd Rd pick and a highly regarded prospect that could be developed or flipped for immediate help. If they take a contract that has lots of term left then yeah you're looking at putting it out there that you are "rebuilding" but doing that would open the door for a quicker "re-tool" IMO. I don't think Stan will do that though. Still think their plan is go big in FA and make that kinda splash whether good or bad

True, but Stan's MO has got them where they are now so taking different paths would be a wise move if he wants to try and get this team back in contention sooner rather than later. I do agree that it may provide the look of "rebuilding" but not if the contract they are taking is only for say one year like Callahan and you get an extra 2nd Rd pick and a highly regarded prospect that could be developed or flipped for immediate help. If they take a contract that has lots of term left then yeah you're looking at putting it out there that you are "rebuilding" but doing that would open the door for a quicker "re-tool" IMO. I don't think Stan will do that though. Still think their plan is go big in FA and make that kinda splash whether good or bad
- Savetheembers33

What I wouldn't give to be a fly on the wall in the hawks front office.

What I wouldn't give to be a fly on the wall in the hawks front office.
- I Am The Breadman

I'm sure that is what Jay Blunk is for - to kill all the flies.

What I wouldn't give to be a fly on the wall in the hawks front office.
- I Am The Breadman

Where's JJ and his sources when we need him?

Should be an interesting couple of upcoming months. Come on Stan, don't pass up the opportunity to accumulate some prospects and picks.

Just some points for discussion. I think this all depends on how long they figure it will take to get competitive. Don't know if it is as simple as it sounds either.

How much term is on these big contracts we are taking on?
Is the best solution to having too many big contracts with term to take on more?
What happens if CC is ready to start playing a month from now? (I know he might not come back, but it isn't impossible either) Or to start next season? Are we going to have to trade a good young player to dump a bad contract?
What about the performances bonuses the Hawks may have to pay out? I'm sure they won't have to pay out the expensive schedule B ones for league awards to guys like Kampf and Strome, but I have to assume some of the 6+ million in bonuses this season will happen. Going up to the cap and using LTIR would mean having to eat into next years cap space already.

I get the idea that we want picks, but these aren't top 10 first round picks we are talking about either, so more likely they are 2-4 years away. Are the Hawks going for a long rebuild still after being nearly 2 years into it already?

Edit: I meant Kahun for the bonus, not Kampf.
- breadbag

Thanks Breadbag. I like your posts. Thoughtful, gracious and sound thinking.

#1) Ideally you take on expiring contracts. (Stralman) At worst they have one year left after this year. If they have one year left on a big contract they should fill a roll on next year's team. (Muzzin)
#2) I am not proposing we give up "A" level prospects. But we have a ton of "so so" prospects that we could give up.
#3) Corey is getting paid and this team is awful. I do not think it would be hard to convince him to sit out the rest of the year for his health benefit and that of the team.

Basically we are not giving up much now and would see the benefit of having some late first round picks or 2nd picks two or three years down the road. (or should we be in contention sooner we can use the high end prospects in trades.)

Taking on bad contracts for 1st's aren't really in Stan's nature and tells others of rebuilding. Wrong image he's "trying" to sell. I haven't been against his recent trades, so I'll assume he stays that path. I know he knows he's a seller, but maybe more Hartman like deals come up (and pan out.)
- I Am The Breadman

It is not like I am suggesting we give up top 6 forwards or top pairing defensemen. Not even potential top six forwards and potential top pairings dmen. I am suggesting that if teams need to dump an expiring contract and a first round pick for next to nothing, you need to take a look at. Stan has been on the other side of those deals plenty in the last few years.

I guess I'm just thinking if they want a shot with this core (or part of it), it has to be a quick rebuild or nothing. I don't know that they can play the long game on getting a large number of draft picks and waiting to see who pans out. What happens if you draft the next Cam Barker and Kyle Beach with your first round choices?

I think the Hawks path will be more "hockey trades" to try to improve the team and try to fill holes with a couple UFA. Right or wrong, I can't see Stan going too crazy in a deep rebuild.
- breadbag

I am thinking you take on cap space this year, and maybe in the right deal next year. So you have cap room after this year, and even more next year. Then 2 years from now with Kane and Toews still playing well, plus the development of some d prospects, you have cap space to sign free agents. You also hope you hit on some of the extra 1st and 2nd round picks.

Not a sure thing by any means.

I'm sure that is what Jay Blunk is for - to kill all the flies.
- powerenforcer

Probably, hahaha.

Where's JJ and his sources when we need him?

Should be an interesting couple of upcoming months. Come on Stan, don't pass up the opportunity to accumulate some prospects and picks.
- boilermaker100

I'm cautiously excited for the tdl. I'm trying to be careful what I wish for.

I get what you mean about putting him on LTIR and they can do that, but if he is healthy and wants to come back, I don't know that they can just force him to stay on LTIR. Again, not saying I hope he rushes back, just saying with concussion it is not certain how long a guy will be out, so hard to eat up that cap space.

I think the main question is, are the Hawks prepared to write off next season already? Essentially they would have be willing to say, we aren't trying to make the playoffs next year. I get that everyone wants to build around Kane (and I'm not saying he should be traded) but how much of a long term strategy is that? Are we trying to eek out one more cup or build for the future. Kane is good offensively, but he will be 31 a month into next season. When the Hawks are done building, will they have built around a guy who is going to be 34-35 and starting to decline for real? Not taking anything away from Kane, who is playing great, but just looking at the numbers game, typically I think the plan should build around a young player.

Just some food for thought, I don't think the GM will have an easy job.
- breadbag

Martin St Louis bro. PPG player until he was 37. Two seasons over 90 points as a 35 and 36 year old. 52 points his 39 year.

I think you see Kane take that type of career arc. Kane is a similar player with more talent and feeding a guy like Strome or DeBrincat the next 5 years will be fun to watch even if the rest of the team sucks.

Move existing veterans. Kruger, AA and Keith at the TDL. Move Gus for a first or second to throw a wrench in the PP. Throw Crow on LTIR and take some junk for futures. Start Ward in 20 of the last 35 games and that should be enough to finish at or close to the bottom and get a top 2 pick.

Now they have money to spend if they want and assets to move for a defender who isnt 18. Suck for one more year. Turn the corner the next. Then hopefully back in the mix.

It is not like I am suggesting we give up top 6 forwards or top pairing defensemen. Not even potential top six forwards and potential top pairings dmen. I am suggesting that if teams need to dump an expiring contract and a first round pick for next to nothing, you need to take a look at. Stan has been on the other side of those deals plenty in the last few years.
- -Doh-

I have never said that I'm against Stan taking on contracts for picks, I've been for it. Said so on page 1 and this page. I just don't know if Stan will do it. I would love to be wrong though.

Plus Hughes is seen as a franchise type player. I don't see a first overall getting flipped this year. Or second for that matter.

[quote=Savetheembers33]I wouldn't take on any deals that are more than two years long (including this year, maybe two after this year depending on the cap hit and return) like TC suggested ...

I don't disagree but, keep in mind that the Hawks (and some other teams) may have to bring in some warm bodies to expose for the Seattle expansion draft. As I understand it same rules apply as the Vegas draft.

Teams must protect players with NMC/NTC,
most younger players are ineligible,
can only protect X amount of players total,
exposed players must meet some sort of minimum of pro games.

Bottom line is the Hawks will either hang on to a few of those types that can be exposed or will bring in someone that can be and we'll all be sitting here thinking "why that guy"?

Mark Lazerus‏Verified account @MarkLazerus · 41m41 minutes ago

No line rushes at the optional skate, but here's what we know:
-- Delia starts
-- Koekkoek sits (back to 6D)
-- Pairings in flux
-- Saad-Toews-DeBrincat
-- Caggiula-Strome-Kane

I'm on record saying that we should not sweat the lineups and changes for the rest of the year, but I'm interested to see how those top two lines work out.