Yes - but a Swede is a Swede....
- StLBravesFan

Remember when Stan would collect Swedish Dmen like crazy looking for the next Hammer

Any chance that Stan can pry Zach Hyman out of Toronto?
- Bjm84

Yes! This. Toronto would be a natural trading partner, especially if they need inexpensive defensemen with low salaries..

I think in his case there is an argument to be made. I normally push the longer development path.

Buts he's now played in the WHL for 3 years. At his size, playing against boys, he'll dominate. Just not sure it is of any benefit or will help his development.

They are pushing him big time, more than anyone since Kane. If I remember correctly, Kane never went back to the minors, and he was no where as physically mature as Dach is now.

I'm just thinking they believe being with the big club, with the vets here, is better for his development than being in WHL
- vabeachbear

This makes sense. I'm sure there is some logic about why the player can't join the AHL farm team, but when the player's already played jr for 3 years, I think there is a case to be made.

paulr most likely.
- Ogilthorpe2

Bob is my guess

I’ve got a hunch that #7 is on the move. Just as improbable as it was for the Hawks to win the #3 pick in the draft lottery, can the immovable contract of Seabrook be shipped out??? Seems to be too much salary in the bottom 2 defense pairs right now and Murphy is just entering his prime so I wouldn’t want to move him....
- EnzoD

Seabrook has a full NTC, and probably the only team he would entertain a deal to is his home town area of Vancouver. Personally, I think the trade rumor was fake news. Seabrook does not want to leave Chicago, not matter how many prognosticators say otherwise. They could deal him, yes. But it would have to be the perfect situation with a team that either has cap space or is going to respond by dumping dead weight back.

Seabrook has three cups and was integral to all. The dead weight probably won't have any of the above.

Seabrook has a full NTC, and probably the only team he would entertain a deal to is his home town area of Vancouver. Personally, I think the trade rumor was fake news. Seabrook does not want to leave Chicago, not matter how many prognosticators say otherwise. They could deal him, yes. But it would have to be the perfect situation with a team that either has cap space or is going to respond by dumping dead weight back.

Seabrook has three cups and was integral to all. The dead weight probably won't have any of the above.
- jrsamu

I'd be surprised if Seabrook would exercise his NTC if he was asked to go. I'm sure he'd ensure he wouldn't allow himself to go to a hockey purgatory like Arizona or a pergatory town like Buffalo or Winnipeg but I also doubt the Hawks would do that to him. My guess is if and when the time comes, Chicago will quietly work out a mutualy acceptablel deal and Seabrook will accept it. Should the situation like Marleau occur where Seabrook is traded to a team who will buy him out I wonder if Chicago will supply the buyout funds just like I wonder if part of the Marleau deal included the money to buy Marleau out?

What if its..

AA + prospect for Kessel

Rutherford decides to trade Malkin for a return around Huberdeau +

So FLA can sign Panarin and Bobrovsky
- PatShart

Malkin is not going anywhere. Lemieux has made it quite clear that he wants Malkin to retire as a Penguin, as he doesn't want to see another Jager type situation to happen. The only way Malkin is moved is if he requests a trade or the penguins are absolutely blown away by a trade offer (even then, Malkin could sink it).

The deal that had Kessel heading to Minny also included Jack Johnson going with him. The reason we got Matta was because Kessel shot that deal down and they were forced to move cap space from somewhere. The price of Kessel will likely involved taking Johnson. Penguins would likely be looking for a good prospect in return who can contribute immediately to the NHL level, and is on an ELC.

Kessel is a good goal scorer, but I don't see him adding much to the team that we don't already have. I would pass.

Seabrook has a full NTC, and probably the only team he would entertain a deal to is his home town area of Vancouver. Personally, I think the trade rumor was fake news. Seabrook does not want to leave Chicago, not matter how many prognosticators say otherwise. They could deal him, yes. But it would have to be the perfect situation with a team that either has cap space or is going to respond by dumping dead weight back.

Seabrook has three cups and was integral to all. The dead weight probably won't have any of the above.
- jrsamu

Bowman knows what it'll take to trade Seabrook, and it'll be a steep price. Bowman is waiting for the next cba to be negotiated.

The twist is the player's are probably not going to opt out of the cba since the new tv deal would begin after the 21-22 season. Same time when the cba expires

Curious if the owners opt out. I imagine they won't and by then the tv deal might double, that's why so many 5 year contracts are being negotiated.

Yes! This. Toronto would be a natural trading partner, especially if they need inexpensive defensemen with low salaries..
- hpk90

I was thinking of a trade with Toronto, too. Even if they move Zaitsev for a defenseman they could still use another inexpensive one. Gus could replace Gardiner for one year. Would anybody trade Gus for either Zach Hyman or Connor Brown?

Any chance that Stan can pry Zach Hyman out of Toronto?
- Bjm84

Hyman is a bust, I had to...it was right there.

Hyman is a bust, I had to...it was right there.
- BlackhawkMike

I was thinking of a trade with Toronto, too. Even if they move Zaitsev for a defenseman they could still use another inexpensive one. Gus could replace Gardiner for one year. Would anybody trade Gus for either Zach Hyman or Connor Brown?
- boilermaker100

I'd like to see Hymen on on the Hawks in a heartbeat but not only would Hymen return much more than Gus, I doubt the Leafs would want to move him.

I think in his case there is an argument to be made. I normally push the longer development path.

Buts he's now played in the WHL for 3 years. At his size, playing against boys, he'll dominate. Just not sure it is of any benefit or will help his development.

They are pushing him big time, more than anyone since Kane. If I remember correctly, Kane never went back to the minors, and he was no where as physically mature as Dach is now.

I'm just thinking they believe being with the big club, with the vets here, is better for his development than being in WHL
- vabeachbear

I think you’re right - about all of it. I too typically like to give a prospect more time to develop rather than plunge them right into the show. But, with the AHL not being an option, it may just be best to have him up and getting into it now. Physically, there’s really no concern. However, I still don’t think he’s an option to pencil in as the 3C, with critical face offs and defensive assignments typically part of the role. Most likely he’ll start on the wing and then progress from there. But, who knows... the kid seems pretty dialed-in and might just be able to take on more responsibility sooner than expected.

I’ve blocked that period out.

They sent Gilmour and dumont to buffalo for a turd. I just can’t remember the turds name.

Kilger?

Arnason-Calder-bell
Vs
Nylander-Dumont-daze

Or maybe it was Sullivan with 92/17.
- SteveRain

Hey Rain, the funny thing to me was that part of the reason Caron told Brett Hull to avoid Chicago was because he knew Brett Hull couldn't put up with Keenan. And I remember Keenan replacing Caron in St. Louis. He didn't last that long and after Keenan shuffled things around the Blues were paying more than just a couple guys to actually play against them. And for years. Yawney was one of them. Mike Keenan was either real good or real bad for guys and organizations, depending on who you were. And he single handedly set the Blues back for probably a decade.

I could see Seabrook taking one for the team and waiving his NMC so he can be exposed in the expansion draft so Hawks can protect some other D. But, because he is exposed, doesn't mean Seattle will take on a 36 year old with 3 years left at 6.875M.

Seattle is more likely to select another D who is not protected (possibly one of Murphy, Maatta or DeHaan who would be eligible for the draft if still on the team in 2 years), or an unprotected forward.

Speaking of Murphy, Maatta and DeHaan, I would expect one or two of them traded leading up to the draft to a team that needs to expose an eligible defenseman. Hawks possibly get a young asset or draft choice back and at the same time opens up a roster spot for a D prospect. Good planning Stan.

This makes sense. I'm sure there is some logic about why the player can't join the AHL farm team, but when the player's already played jr for 3 years, I think there is a case to be made.
- HawkintheD

I always operated under the assumption that it was to protect the CHL from a business standpoint. They get to have drafted 18 and 19 year-old players on their rosters (with the associated marque appeal) without fear of them all being shipped off to their respective AHL affiliates by the parent club.

I don’t like the rule, but from that standpoint I understand why it’s in place.

Seabrook retires from the ice and goes on the Hawks bench to be Defense/PK coach for $7mil a year
- EnzoD

Makes the most sense to me. They will negotiate something and Seabrook will be part of the deal moving forward. Just imagine the over the top retirement ceremony they will want to do. I imagine Seabrook will insist they tone it down. But he earned it.

NHLPA ‘93 on Sega for me
- yobwoc03

NHL 94 for me

I was thinking of a trade with Toronto, too. Even if they move Zaitsev for a defenseman they could still use another inexpensive one. Gus could replace Gardiner for one year. Would anybody trade Gus for either Zach Hyman or Connor Brown?
- boilermaker100

Straight up for hyman or kadria but straight for Brown more would have to come back on toronto side

Canadiends looking for a left defenseman per today's Montreal Hockey Buzz blogger. If they strike out in free agency or don't trade for someone like Gotisbehere, wonder if Bergevin will inquire about the Hawks excess D.

Aside from their untouchable young centers, there is nothing on their roster that interest me. Maybe Dahlstrom or Gus for some draft picks?

Makes the most sense to me. They will negotiate something and Seabrook will be part of the deal moving forward. Just imagine the over the top retirement ceremony they will want to do. I imagine Seabrook will insist they tone it down. But he earned it.
- 6628

Don't think the league would approve that

Canadiends looking for a left defenseman per today's Montreal Hockey Buzz blogger. If they strike out in free agency or don't trade for someone like Gotisbehere, wonder if Bergevin will inquire about the Hawks excess D.

Aside from their untouchable young centers, there is nothing on their roster that interest me. Maybe Dahlstrom or Gus for some draft picks?
- boilermaker100

Take shaw back with money retained by Montreal say 1 million per year retained be the only player i could see being traded not a whole lot in their system that is appealing.

I could see Seabrook taking one for the team and waiving his NMC so he can be exposed in the expansion draft so Hawks can protect some other D. But, because he is exposed, doesn't mean Seattle will take on a 36 year old with 3 years left at 6.875M.

Seattle is more likely to select another D who is not protected (possibly one of Murphy, Maatta or DeHaan who would be eligible for the draft if still on the team in 2 years), or an unprotected forward.

Speaking of Murphy, Maatta and DeHaan, I would expect one or two of them traded leading up to the draft to a team that needs to expose an eligible defenseman. Hawks possibly get a young asset or draft choice back and at the same time opens up a roster spot for a D prospect. Good planning Stan.
- boilermaker100

The math also works well on these three because the next wave of defencemen in the pipeline will be coming off their ELC's at about the time these contracts expire. I wonder if Stan had that in the back of his mind while making these trades.

Don't think the league would approve that
- Scott1977

I'm sure they wouldn't like it. But if a guy retires I'm not sure it's any of their business what the hawks pay their advisors, coaches, scouts....

Straight up for hyman or kadria but straight for Brown more would have to come back on toronto side
- Scott1977

I don't think it's likely that the Hawks trade for Kadri now. Not that the Hawks had any interest in him to begin with. He signed for 3 more years and will create a bottleneck with Dach waiting in the wings.