Stan should of held out for the rights to Dylan Sikura

- LAHawk

Ha ha. First Darth with fire dumpster and now LA with the Sikura add in. This day is only getting better and better.

Who said Chicago isn’t a friendly city? See, we take other teams’ cap problems and make them disappear for absolutely nothing in return.

Maybe the almighty Hockey Gods will take pity on us Good Samaritans and make us a .500 team again (once you factor in all the OTWs and discount all the OTLs).

This is the strangest acquisition of all time.

The onus is not on Bowman to prepare Fluery for the trade, that is on Vegas.

This doesn't smell right.

This is the strangest acquisition of all time.

The onus is not on Bowman to prepare Fluery for the trade, that is on Vegas.

This doesn't smell right.
- NamedSources

he was prepared...read McCrimmon presser.

He is butt hurt because he didn't land back in Pittsburgh.....yet.

he was prepared...read McCrimmon presser.

He is butt hurt because he didn't land back in Pittsburgh.....yet.
- SteveRain

I wonder how many teams are calling Fleury's agent saying if we can do a deal with Chicago, Marc-Andre play for us?

I wonder how many teams are calling Fleury's agent saying if we can do a deal with Chicago, Marc-Andre play for us?
- LAHawk

any legit cup contender...who out of which has a better option in goal than Fleury?

I wonder how many teams are calling Fleury's agent saying if we can do a deal with Chicago, Marc-Andre play for us?
- LAHawk

If you guys think Stan Bowman is playing 3D chess like that, you haven’t been watching the movie.

So, let me understand.

1. Stan has CC coming off an expiring contract. He could have signed CC for 2-3 years at around $3M per. If resigned by the Hawks, CC is unlikely to retire and ends his career in Chicago, as a mentor for the 3 young goalies.

2. Stan doesn't sign CC because he wants to give his 3 young goaltenders a chance to prove themselves. Stan says something along the lines of 'we really like them'.

3. Today he pivots again, and trades for MAF, takes CAP pressure off LV, and gets nothing else (picks or prospects) in return.

Does this make sense?

So, let me understand.

1. Stan has CC coming off an expiring contract. He could have signed CC for 2-3 years at around $3M per. If resigned by the Hawks, CC is unlikely to retire and ends his career in Chicago, as a mentor for the 3 young goalies.

2. Stan doesn't sign CC because he wants to give his 3 young goaltenders a chance to prove themselves. Stan says something along the lines of 'we really like them'.

3. Today he pivots again, and trades for MAF, takes CAP pressure off LV, and gets nothing else (picks or prospects) in return.

Does this make sense?
- scottak

Only in an alternate universe.

So, let me understand.

1. Stan has CC coming off an expiring contract. He could have signed CC for 2-3 years at around $3M per. If resigned by the Hawks, CC is unlikely to retire and ends his career in Chicago, as a mentor for the 3 young goalies.

2. Stan doesn't sign CC because he wants to give his 3 young goaltenders a chance to prove themselves. Stan says something along the lines of 'we really like them'.

3. Today he pivots again, and trades for MAF, takes CAP pressure off LV, and gets nothing else (picks or prospects) in return.

Does this make sense?
- scottak

When he declined to offer CC a contract
1) Did he know Toews was going to have a debilitating condition that put him out for a year
2) Did he know Seabrook would undergo multiple surgeries that did not heal him properly and he had to retire
3) That Keith wanted to be traded to a team in Western Canada.

That right there is about $23 million that he had to believe would still be on the books this year and for a couple of more.

He is a GM, not Uri Geller.

So, let me understand.

1. Stan has CC coming off an expiring contract. He could have signed CC for 2-3 years at around $3M per. If resigned by the Hawks, CC is unlikely to retire and ends his career in Chicago, as a mentor for the 3 young goalies.

2. Stan doesn't sign CC because he wants to give his 3 young goaltenders a chance to prove themselves. Stan says something along the lines of 'we really like them'.

3. Today he pivots again, and trades for MAF, takes CAP pressure off LV, and gets nothing else (picks or prospects) in return.

Does this make sense?
- scottak

I believe Crawford wanted to start not be a back-up so the Hawks let him walk. He then realized he wanted to retire after signing with the Devils.

This Fleury situation materialized long after the Crawford decision. You can't look at everything in a vacuum. Moreover, none of us know why Bowman made this trade. Maybe it is for the purpose of flipping Fleury. We will have to sit tight and see what unfolds.

I love how this board always assumes there was a better deal to be had and Stan franked up.....like any of us know what the other GMs in the league are doing.

I believe Crawford wanted to start not be a back-up so the Hawks let him walk. He then realized he wanted to retire after signing with the Devils.

This Fleury situation materialized long after the Crawford decision. You can't look at everything in a vacuum. Moreover, none of us know why Bowman made this trade. Maybe it is for the purpose of flipping Fleury. We will have to sit tight and see what unfolds.

I love how this board always assumes there was a better deal to be had and Stan franked up.....like any of us know what the other GMs in the league are doing.
- bhawks2241

No deal would have been better than the last two deals. Pretty certain that option was available.

Wonder if and when Fleury will retire?
I hope we get a season outta him.
He could be a another great leader, motivator and mentor on the team.

“The opportunity to acquire a Vezina-winning goaltender is rare and one you cannot pass up," said Blackhawks President of Hockey Operations and General Manager Stan Bowman. "Marc-Andre improves our goaltending, strengthens our team defense and will have a huge impact on the overall development of the Blackhawks. Having a goaltender like this on our team will put the talent we currently have on our roster in a better position to achieve sustained success. The entire organization is thrilled to have this future Hall of Famer on our team and his reputation of being an excellent teammate on and off the ice precedes him."

Delusional.

Tic-Tok

Man...I don't get the anger over this one.....as there were reports, again, of the Hawks looking to add a veteran netminder to supplement Lankinen.

If Fleury retires, and that's a huge IF, Hawks are responsible for $0 towards the cap. SO this chicken little cap crap needs to stop.

IF Fleury plays....a few things.....

1. Your young goalie maybe of the future, maybe not, gets to learn from 1 of the best. Does that matter? How much of an impact did a guy like Hossa have on young forwards?

2. Your young D has the confidence knowing that every single mistake isn't going to be turning on the red light....young d gains confidence similar to the last go around when the Hawks signed Khabibulin.

3. Maybe you compete for a playoff spot, maybe you don't. Tons of variables there but they are 100000 times better with Fleury and Lankinen than Lankinen and which ever turd Subban and/or Delia you want to place there.

4. If you aren't in playoff contention come deadline time.....what would the going rate be for a rental goalie who has won a cup, played in another cup final, and looks to be still at the top of his game? Think BOwman may able to get a 1st back from the JOnes deal? LIKELY.....Think a team like Toronto if the Hawks retained salary, wouldn't give that up to lock down the spot that ails them and a guy who won't flinch in big games and a big city?

Instead, lets just bash the living hell out of Bowman who gave up a nobody prospect for a roll of the dice that either still will NOT count against his cap in the worst case scenario OR allow his young D men to take strides improving with a PROVEN #1 NHL caliber goalie AND/OR trade this piece at the deadline for assets.....

Who gives a crap about Pius Suter. Nice player? SUre....is he going to break this team not being here? Nope. WHo gives a crap about Zadorov or DeHaan.....they can throw Shaw/Seabrook on LTIR and get Hagel in and if they make a trade or 2 or 3 and dump some of the other turds.....DeHaan, Connolly, Strome, they can still
add a guy or two in UFA and be cap compliant by opening night....believe you can spend up to 10% over the cap at 1 particular time....I am sure Stan has multiple irons in the fire and just going progressing through as his offseason plan takes shape.
- SteveRain

I haven't posted here since . . . , well, it has been a long time. Maybe after the 2015 Cup win. Anyway, nice to know you're still here chiming in--I remember you from the Sassone/Daily Herald days. Always appreciate your opinion (and agree more often than not).

I think I am with you re. Fleury. I don't get all the anger. I can't say I really liked the Seth Jones trade, but now that it's done--and (apparently) the exact nature of the "rebuild" seems to have taken on a different look than a year ago, when they told Crawford they weren't interested and left Toews depressed and ill--so what? Why not Fleury for one year?

The team is full of fourth-line forwards and soft players like Nylander (and Suter)--they'll put a patchwork team together like they've been doing and be cap compliant.

And I am sure there will be some Ken Yaremchuks and Tyler Arnason's on the cusp of greatness in the system. And if Colliton stumbles, I am sure there is an Alpo Suhonen out there.

They might surprise us and be competitive--who knows?

Some earlier mentioned that if the team starts out slow, JC will have a shorter tenure than Savard's Last season as coach, just remember, Eddie O was Fleury's first coach in the NHL....

I haven't posted here since . . . , well, it has been a long time. Maybe after the 2015 Cup win. Anyway, nice to know you're still here chiming in--I remember you from the Sassone/Daily Herald days. Always appreciate your opinion (and agree more often than not).

I think I am with you re. Fleury. I don't get all the anger. I can't say I really liked the Seth Jones trade, but now that it's done--and (apparently) the exact nature of the "rebuild" seems to have taken on a different look than a year ago, when they told Crawford they weren't interested and left Toews depressed and ill--so what? Why not Fleury for one year?

The team is full of fourth-line forwards and soft players like Nylander (and Suter)--they'll put a patchwork team together like they've been doing and be cap compliant.

And I am sure there will be some Ken Yaremchuks and Tyler Arnason's on the cusp of greatness in the system. And if Colliton stumbles, I am sure there is an Alpo Suhonen out there.

They might surprise us and be competitive--who knows?
- Al Secord

The problem lies in that Stan let a desperately cash strapped conference foe off the hook by taking their trash heap and not gaining any assets as a sweetener. Fleury is just a guy, and apparently would rather retire than play in Chicago.

The problem lies in that Stan let a desperately cash strapped conference foe off the hook by taking their trash heap and not gaining any assets as a sweetener. Fleury is just a guy, and apparently would rather retire than play in Chicago.
- Ogilthorpe2

Just a guy?

Danault signing with Vegas?

The problem lies in that Stan let a desperately cash strapped conference foe off the hook by taking their trash heap and not gaining any assets as a sweetener. Fleury is just a guy, and apparently would rather retire than play in Chicago.
- Ogilthorpe2

If Fleury does retire, I suppose I would agree that SB helped Vegas out and will wish that he wouldn't have. We'll see what happens. Just to be clear, I am not a fan of Stan. But it's all beyond my control, and I don't even live in Chicago anymore; not a paying customer, just a fan who watches from a distance. So maybe that's why I am not so angry..

Just a guy?
- NamedSources

Just a guy.

Here’s a question….

How many times last year did we say to ourselves “damn, if only this team had a goalie they could count on, then maybe they’d have a chance”?

We didn’t. Most people were pleasantly surprised At how well the goaltending held up under overwhelming fire.

If Fleury does retire, I suppose I would agree that SB helped Vegas out and will wish that he wouldn't have. We'll see what happens. Just to be clear, I am not a fan of Stan. But it's all beyond my control, and I don't even live in Chicago anymore; not a paying customer, just a fan who watches from a distance. So maybe that's why I am not so angry..
- Al Secord

If Stan flips him to Pitt for assets, that could be a win, but based on his comments it sure doesn’t sound like that was his intent.

Only in an alternate universe.
- Ogilthorpe2

This move looks stupid on it's face. Even if they want the guy should have gotten a sweetener. Something unrealistic I'm afraid is going on in Rocky's head. I'm guessing Vegas had a deal with Pitt but not as good financially as the deal Stan gave them.

If Stan flips him to Pitt for assets, that could be a win, but based on his comments it sure doesn’t sound like that was his intent.
- Ogilthorpe2

If being a pass through for Fleury is Bowman's intention, he still has to engage in GM speak about trading for him. If Fleury does get dealt again, something along the lines of long term plans and how Fleury really wanted to be in Pittsburgh will be brought up. And as much as we liked Fleury, we couldn't pass this deal up. And God forbid he couldn't move him and Fleury is still here on the opening night roster, the initial spin would be important later.

The problem lies in that Stan let a desperately cash strapped conference foe off the hook by taking their trash heap and not gaining any assets as a sweetener. Fleury is just a guy, and apparently would rather retire than play in Chicago.
- Ogilthorpe2

Yep....... Take MAF and a 2nd to clear SEVEN mil off of Vegas' books so they can FA shop tomorrow. Ok, flip MAF at sometime, maybe the TDL, for a 2nd. Now you have TWO 2nd's instead of one.... StanBow had leverage and did not use it.

Jarmo going into the silly season wanting to rebuild/retool had NOBODY to send Jones to except the Hawks. Somehow he gives up what amounts to two 1st's, a 2nd and a kid he drafted 8th overall 3 yrs ago........ StanBow had leverage and didn't use it.

Are draft picks sure things? Of course not, that's why you use your leverage to get as many as you can. ....... MAF and Jones are fine players but that doesn't mean you don't hammer out the best deal you can.