In theory, a very good idea. The problem is that testing is still very limited. There are limited tests available even to those that need them. If the country can fix that issue, then this becomes more feasible.
- Chunk

I honestly don’t know how limited it is. Has anyone out there that’s legitimately sick and showing symptoms not been able to get a test? Lots of conflicting reports. But I do know that regardless of if they gave symptoms or not, testing would be available for anyone involved with sports organizations that are about to begin a locked-down playoff. Call it unfair if you’d like, but that’s the reality. Everyone calling for mass testing needs to understand that A. Though not everyone is getting tested, the testing rate has been ramping up exponentially each day. And B. Over the past week the cases and hospitalizations have been leveling off in many areas. Therefore C. If cases and hospitalizations have leveled off while testing keeps increasing, chances are the masses out there that haven’t been tested aren’t hiding some hidden case they can’t feel, they simply don’t have it/aren’t infected. That’s what that trend in data tells me.

Why were they tested? Likely because they were symptomatic. More and more data is suggesting that people are more contagious before they are symptomatic.

Again, if we get to the point where testing is far more available, then opening it back up will be easier to stomach.
- Chunk

Well hopefully by July-August when this post season scenario is most likely to occur the testing rate and availability will have grown even more so than it already has. Unfortunately our county has millions and millions of more people than Italy or Korea or other countries that tested more PC. So it’s going to be a longer process to test everyone.

I honestly don’t know how limited it is. Has anyone out there that’s legitimately sick and showing symptoms not been able to get a test? Lots of conflicting reports. But I do know that regardless of if they gave symptoms or not, testing would be available for anyone involved with sports organizations that are about to begin a locked-down playoff. Call it unfair if you’d like, but that’s the reality. Everyone calling for mass testing needs to understand that A. Though not everyone is getting tested, the testing rate has been ramping up exponentially each day. And B. Over the past week the cases and hospitalizations have been leveling off in many areas. Therefore C. If cases and hospitalizations have leveled off while testing keeps increasing, chances are the masses out there that haven’t been tested aren’t hiding some hidden case they can’t feel, they simply don’t have it/aren’t infected. That’s what that trend in data tells me.
- SimpleJack

And how are the cities and states, and the private industries that rely on professional sports that are now broke going to react because "The show must go on" ends up not in the state? How many business around Wrigley Field (including bars restaurants) could survive a year with minimal revenue?

Well hopefully by July-August when this post season scenario is most likely to occur the testing rate and availability will have grown even more so than it already has. Unfortunately our county has millions and millions of more people than Italy or Korea or other countries that tested more PC. So it’s going to be a longer process to test everyone.
- SimpleJack

And Korea is now finding that there is a reaccurance of the virus after they supposedly had it and recovered.

And how are the cities and states, and the private industries that rely on professional sports that are now broke going to react because "The show must go on" ends up not in the state? How many business around Wrigley Field (including bars restaurants) could survive a year with minimal revenue?
- LAHawk

Well they’ve gotta understand that it’s simply not safe enough yet to have large crowds gathering in bars and clubs and restaurants and the streets outside the stadiums. Just like it’s not safe enough for them to gather/attend events inside the stadiums. But not for a year. If mitigation continues and each phase is completed then, depending on the city/region/county, it might only be a matter of 1-3 months.

And Korea is now finding that there is a reaccurance of the virus after they supposedly had it and recovered.
- LAHawk

This is news to me. Are they back under lockdown? And are the new cases internal or from people that traveled there from other countries?

And currently any Russian player who is back in the country could not participate because Russia has closed its borders in and out because of the virus. Khabib couldn't get out of Russia, why he was going to be substituted for at UFC249

This is news to me. Are they back under lockdown? And are the new cases internal or from people that traveled there from other countries?
- SimpleJack

No, hear that this morning, they are finding people that had systems and were "cured" have been found to have the symptoms again.

And currently any Russian player who is back in the country could not participate because Russia has closed its borders in and out because of the virus. Khabib couldn't get out of Russia, why he was going to be substituted for at UFC249
- LAHawk

Chances are they won’t still be closed by the time this scenario would take place though(July-August). Mitigation has proven to work. So they’re being safe and smart for the time being.

No, hear that this morning, they are finding people that had systems and were "cured" have been found to have the symptoms again.
- LAHawk

Wow that’s strange. Like they recovered and developed anti bodies and yet somehow contracted the disease again? Maybe we’ll hear more about it because I’d imagine that would be big news.

Hmmm ... rumblings of cap staying flat ... and with that there's hope for a compliance buyout, maybe two. The Hawks first buyout is obvious as adding Seabrook's $6.8M back into the kitty will go a long way in building the 2020/21 roster (and beyond).

But what if the hockey gods smile down and grant 2 compliance buyouts - who would be the best bang for buck for that 2nd buyout. Just looking at the next obvious choices - Maatta ($4.0x2), deHaan ($4.5x2), Shaw ($3.9x2), and maybe even consider Murphy ($3.8x2). Put any one of those together with Seabrook's $6.8M and Stan will have at least $10M more cap room.

But which one of the four listed above? All 4 fall into the category of being pretty good players and not necessarily overpaid when they are healthy and playing well - the problem is all 4 have had injury and durability problems. Perhaps select the one with the least favorable traditional buyout numbers?

Traditional Buyouts:
1. Maatta: $2.7M over 4 years, max cap hit $680K
2. deHaan: $5.9 over 4 years, max cap hit $2.0M (2020/21)
3. Shaw: $6.2M over 4 years, max cap hit $2.8M (2021/22)
4. Murphy: $5.3M over 4 years, max cap hit $1.8M (2020/21)

Maatta is painless to buyout with traditional buyout so eliminate him from consideration. I think Murphy is the best player so eliminate him. The traditional buyout pain of both deHaan and Shaw are close so I guess I'd pick Shaw to be the 2nd compliance buyout ... unless he retires in which case it would be deHaan.

There you go - Seabrook ($6.875M) + deHaan ($4.55M) = $11.425. I used deHaan assuming Shaw retires, so adding in Shaw's $3.9M brings the total to $15.325M.

And you can add another $3.5M by doing a traditional buyout of Maatta.

Done. All we need is 2 compliance buyouts and for Shaw to retire. Was that too difficult?

Hmmm ... rumblings of cap staying flat ... and with that there's hope for a compliance buyout, maybe two. The Hawks first buyout is obvious as adding Seabrook's $6.8M back into the kitty will go a long way in building the 2020/21 roster (and beyond).

But what if the hockey gods smile down and grant 2 compliance buyouts - who would be the best bang for buck for that 2nd buyout. Just looking at the next obvious choices - Maatta ($4.0x2), deHaan ($4.5x2), Shaw ($3.9x2), and maybe even consider Murphy ($3.8x2). Put any one of those together with Seabrook's $6.8M and Stan will have at least $10M more cap room.

But which one of the four listed above? All 4 fall into the category of being pretty good players and not necessarily overpaid when they are healthy and playing well - the problem is all 4 have had injury and durability problems. Perhaps select the one with the least favorable traditional buyout numbers?

Traditional Buyouts:
1. Maatta: $2.7M over 4 years, max cap hit $680K
2. deHaan: $5.9 over 4 years, max cap hit $2.0M (2020/21)
3. Shaw: $6.2M over 4 years, max cap hit $2.8M (2021/22)
4. Murphy: $5.3M over 4 years, max cap hit $1.8M (2020/21)

Maatta is painless to buyout with traditional buyout so eliminate him from consideration. I think Murphy is the best player so eliminate him. The traditional buyout pain of both deHaan and Shaw are close so I guess I'd pick Shaw to be the 2nd compliance buyout ... unless he retires in which case it would be deHaan.

There you go - Seabrook ($6.875M) + deHaan ($4.55M) = $11.425. I used deHaan assuming Shaw retires, so adding in Shaw's $3.9M brings the total to $15.325M.

And you can add another $3.5M by doing a traditional buyout of Maatta.

Done. All we need is 2 compliance buyouts and for Shaw to retire. Was that too difficult?
- EbonyRaptor

I’d like to see Shaw retire for his own good, but if he doesn’t, and we get two freebies, I wouldn’t hesitate to buy him out.

DeHaan could be useful if healthy, and with a potential extremely long off season, with no pressure to rush back, maybe it gives him the added time he needs to finally get himself right?

I think my ideal scenario would be:

Seabrook and Maatta - Compliance Buyouts
Shaw - Retires

Hmmm ... rumblings of cap staying flat ... and with that there's hope for a compliance buyout, maybe two. The Hawks first buyout is obvious as adding Seabrook's $6.8M back into the kitty will go a long way in building the 2020/21 roster (and beyond).

But what if the hockey gods smile down and grant 2 compliance buyouts - who would be the best bang for buck for that 2nd buyout. Just looking at the next obvious choices - Maatta ($4.0x2), deHaan ($4.5x2), Shaw ($3.9x2), and maybe even consider Murphy ($3.8x2). Put any one of those together with Seabrook's $6.8M and Stan will have at least $10M more cap room.

But which one of the four listed above? All 4 fall into the category of being pretty good players and not necessarily overpaid when they are healthy and playing well - the problem is all 4 have had injury and durability problems. Perhaps select the one with the least favorable traditional buyout numbers?

Traditional Buyouts:
1. Maatta: $2.7M over 4 years, max cap hit $680K
2. deHaan: $5.9 over 4 years, max cap hit $2.0M (2020/21)
3. Shaw: $6.2M over 4 years, max cap hit $2.8M (2021/22)
4. Murphy: $5.3M over 4 years, max cap hit $1.8M (2020/21)

Maatta is painless to buyout with traditional buyout so eliminate him from consideration. I think Murphy is the best player so eliminate him. The traditional buyout pain of both deHaan and Shaw are close so I guess I'd pick Shaw to be the 2nd compliance buyout ... unless he retires in which case it would be deHaan.

There you go - Seabrook ($6.875M) + deHaan ($4.55M) = $11.425. I used deHaan assuming Shaw retires, so adding in Shaw's $3.9M brings the total to $15.325M.

And you can add another $3.5M by doing a traditional buyout of Maatta.

Done. All we need is 2 compliance buyouts and for Shaw to retire. Was that too difficult?
- EbonyRaptor

Hawks win the draft lottery and pick Lafreniere.

Hawks win the draft lottery and pick Lafreniere.
- HawkintheD

Well that goes without saying ... but ... well ... then I guess it didn't go without saying.

I’d like to see Shaw retire for his own good, but if he doesn’t, and we get two freebies, I wouldn’t hesitate to buy him out.

DeHaan could be useful if healthy, and with a potential extremely long off season, with no pressure to rush back, maybe it gives him the added time he needs to finally get himself right?

I think my ideal scenario would be:

Seabrook and Maatta - Compliance Buyouts
Shaw - Retires
- Ogilthorpe2

This is reasonable. Honestly, I would hate to see Seabrook in another uniform, but if this happens, then I hope he ends up in the east. One of my favorite players of this era of Blackhawk hockey.

This is reasonable. Honestly, I would hate to see Seabrook in another uniform, but if this happens, then I hope he ends up in the east. One of my favorite players of this era of Blackhawk hockey.
- Angotti

I doubt Seabs is gonna be good enough to make an NHL roster after this recent wave of surgeries. He was already bad enough, now he’s gonna be even worse. One year older. Slower. I think the sad reality for aging vets on the decline is the more work you get done to repair your body, the more of a toll it takes on your ability to perform. All around his game is so pathetic these days I doubt even the Sens would find him worthy. He should retire tbh, but I know there’s too much $ at stake.

Hmmm ... rumblings of cap staying flat ... and with that there's hope for a compliance buyout, maybe two. The Hawks first buyout is obvious as adding Seabrook's $6.8M back into the kitty will go a long way in building the 2020/21 roster (and beyond).

But what if the hockey gods smile down and grant 2 compliance buyouts - who would be the best bang for buck for that 2nd buyout. Just looking at the next obvious choices - Maatta ($4.0x2), deHaan ($4.5x2), Shaw ($3.9x2), and maybe even consider Murphy ($3.8x2). Put any one of those together with Seabrook's $6.8M and Stan will have at least $10M more cap room.

But which one of the four listed above? All 4 fall into the category of being pretty good players and not necessarily overpaid when they are healthy and playing well - the problem is all 4 have had injury and durability problems. Perhaps select the one with the least favorable traditional buyout numbers?

Traditional Buyouts:
1. Maatta: $2.7M over 4 years, max cap hit $680K
2. deHaan: $5.9 over 4 years, max cap hit $2.0M (2020/21)
3. Shaw: $6.2M over 4 years, max cap hit $2.8M (2021/22)
4. Murphy: $5.3M over 4 years, max cap hit $1.8M (2020/21)

Maatta is painless to buyout with traditional buyout so eliminate him from consideration. I think Murphy is the best player so eliminate him. The traditional buyout pain of both deHaan and Shaw are close so I guess I'd pick Shaw to be the 2nd compliance buyout ... unless he retires in which case it would be deHaan.

There you go - Seabrook ($6.875M) + deHaan ($4.55M) = $11.425. I used deHaan assuming Shaw retires, so adding in Shaw's $3.9M brings the total to $15.325M.

And you can add another $3.5M by doing a traditional buyout of Maatta.

Done. All we need is 2 compliance buyouts and for Shaw to retire. Was that too difficult?
- EbonyRaptor

Why would you consider buying out Murphy?

We may be nearer a return to normal than we thought. Early results from the Stanford antibody test show infections 50-80 times higher in Santa Clarita than is being reported nationally.

https://abcnews.go.com/He...espread/story?id=70206121

If these numbers pan out nationwide, it could mean a few things:
-We may be way closer to herd immunity than first thought
-The fatality rate is significantly lower than originally thought, perhaps approaching the rate of the flu
-The vast majority of those exposed to COVID-19 experience no, or very mild, symptoms
-The much higher flu rates this year may have actually been COVID-19
- COVID-19 may have been in California as early as the fall of 2019.

FWIW, I was sick in mid-January, my doctor wrote it off to 'the flu' even though I had a flu shot in the fall. I took the antibody test on Wednesday. Results next week.

Yup. I really miss the Friday night rat games with the other old guys.

We're gonna have to kick in a couple of extra bucks a session for oxygen tanks on the bench when we start skating again.

- Rota's Rooter

Haha, no kidding. Where do you play? My team plays out of Addison and Bensenville. Sunday nights are just that much more depressing.

In theory, a very good idea. The problem is that testing is still very limited. There are limited tests available even to those that need them. If the country can fix that issue, then this becomes more feasible.
- Chunk

They cannot play unless they are 100% certain that no player or crowd member could possibly get this awful disease.

At that point they can all assume the risk of developing CTE, which is no big deal.

We may be nearer a return to normal than we thought. Early results from the Stanford antibody test show infections 50-80 times higher in Santa Clarita than is being reported nationally.

https://abcnews.go.com/He...espread/story?id=70206121

If these numbers pan out nationwide, it could mean a few things:
-We may be way closer to herd immunity than first thought
-The fatality rate is significantly lower than originally thought, perhaps approaching the rate of the flu
-The vast majority of those exposed to COVID-19 experience no, or very mild, symptoms
-The much higher flu rates this year may have actually been COVID-19
- COVID-19 may have been in California as early as the fall of 2019.

FWIW, I was sick in mid-January, my doctor wrote it off to 'the flu' even though I had a flu shot in the fall. I took the antibody test on Wednesday. Results next week.
- scottak

Excellent post, Scotty.

The Hawks need to draft a goalie this year, I am convinced of that. It doesn't have to be in the first round, but I wouldn't wait until the 6th round either.

If the Hawks choose to pass on Askarov in the first round then in rounds 2-4 they should consider Jan Bednar, Joel Blomqvist, Samuel Hlavaj or Calle Clang. I wouldn't be opposed to taking 2 goalies this draft, one in the mid-rounds and one at the end.
- DarthKane

It's like saying the Bears need to draft a quarterback in later rounds. If no NFL quarterbacks to draft, it's a guaranteed wasted pick.

We may be nearer a return to normal than we thought. Early results from the Stanford antibody test show infections 50-80 times higher in Santa Clarita than is being reported nationally.

https://abcnews.go.com/He...espread/story?id=70206121

If these numbers pan out nationwide, it could mean a few things:
-We may be way closer to herd immunity than first thought
-The fatality rate is significantly lower than originally thought, perhaps approaching the rate of the flu
-The vast majority of those exposed to COVID-19 experience no, or very mild, symptoms
-The much higher flu rates this year may have actually been COVID-19
- COVID-19 may have been in California as early as the fall of 2019.

FWIW, I was sick in mid-January, my doctor wrote it off to 'the flu' even though I had a flu shot in the fall. I took the antibody test on Wednesday. Results next week.
- scottak

My friend also almost certainly had it while on a January vacation in the Caribbean. Says he had a dry cough, fatigue, and slight fever. No runny nose or congestion. Then after about 5 days felt fine.

I think those high at risk(based on age, pre-existing conditions, and other factors) will need to remain extra cautious and wait much longer to return to normalcy.

But the vast majority should be looking at only another 1-3 months depending on their region/county before they are able to go about their daily lives again.

This is reasonable. Honestly, I would hate to see Seabrook in another uniform, but if this happens, then I hope he ends up in the east. One of my favorite players of this era of Blackhawk hockey.
- Angotti

I would to ,but some team desperate for D may take a chance on a low ball contract if he bought out .I would hope Seabs is bought out then offer a Job with the organization .Forever a HAWKS as it should be .
His goal against Det his hit on Backas his controlling of Toews in the penalty box .All time favorite memory of the HAWKS dynasty tour

Yeah, something has to give. Compliance buy out seems like one option to help.

I tried to construct a CapFriendly roster based on the rumor that the cap could get slashed 25% to 40% (did one roster at 25% reduction and another at 40% reduction). Very difficult exercise.

Even assuming a compliance buy out and having a goaltending tandem with two of Subban, Delia, and Lankinen (kiss Crawford goodbye even at a discounted AAV of say $4-4.5M), it would be tough to re-sign even just one of Kubalik or Strome let alone both.

The Hawks would have to buyout or trade Maatta and Smith, be certain that at least Shaw and possibly even de Haan are on LTIR for the entire season, and fill out the roster with youngsters on ELCs and players on cheap deals like Carpenter and Koekkoek.
- AEL_Fox

I'm thinking like years past 2 compliance buyouts per team. I know Sage was arguing with me but here we are again. I wish the NHL and the players would negotiate a longer deal since it seams every time they are about to go into a new deal poop hits the fan