Sorry Scott but Toews isn't getting dealt. I'll be surprised if he doesn't play out his contract here.

I know you like trades and in the right deal everyone's tradable. This thing's already been pretty much ripped down to the studs and after next season the only significant money on the books is Jones.
- HawkintheD

No chance that we will have enough willing partners to "trade everyone" for picks or players. Shouldn't the future FO leadership (whomever that might be) identify at least a handful of players - skilled and role - they think can form a solid foundation for the rebuilding team? Seems that if you "blow it all up," you set yourself back an additional 3-5 years trying to rebuild from the draft and FA markets.

Sounds like you went to the Jerry Krause school of how to set your franchise back by decades
- BetweenTheDots

I didn't trade everyone my point was to listen to potential trade offers on everyone. In the end the gm needs to decides who to build around and who goes.

What’s wrong with you Francis? The NHL isn’t about wins and losses or Stanley Cups. It’s about trades, the more the better! Get with the program.
- paulr

Ha that's funny everything in all sports is about winning it all and trades and signings play a big part in it.

No chance that we will have enough willing partners to "trade everyone" for picks or players. Shouldn't the future FO leadership (whomever that might be) identify at least a handful of players - skilled and role - they think can form a solid foundation for the rebuilding team? Seems that if you "blow it all up," you set yourself back an additional 3-5 years trying to rebuild from the draft and FA markets.
- pdx2ord

I'm kind of a fan of a hybrid approach. I will hold to my theory that it is better to keep all contracts at a maximum of 4 years (even though I know that will never happen). You can absolutely single out 4, maybe five players as guys to build around. My only contention is that if you end up acquiring other players who perform as well or better, you need to be willing to let those identified players go if the right situation presents itself.

I don't think you can be tied to players for the long haul anymore. It simply gets too expensive and cumbersome toward the end of the contract (sometimes sooner).

Yeah, Strome is inconsistent. At times he is playing like a top C and then other times just floating. We've seen him play like he did last night, but we need that effort on a much more consistent basis. It doesn't seem like he is part of the future of the team, so they can make a trade if there is something offered.
- breadbag

Strome and Dach should start their own air and water show...
Floater and Glider !!!!!

I didn't trade everyone my point was to listen to potential trade offers on everyone. In the end the gm needs to decides who to build around and who goes.
- Scott1977

Fair enough, so you're saying if you plan to build around someone and they offer you a fantastic deal then you move on it, i get that, unfortunately Bowman isn't going to get another job with a franchise and trade us 2 firsts a second and a young promising dman

They could trade Gus for the right bag of pucks. Kidding aside, are you thinking Murphy?
- 333inthe3rd

If we could find a coach that used Gus in the right way, maybe he could be of help. 7th defense man with 11 forwards. Play him the occasional 4th line winger to keep him loose. WTH they only get about 5 minutes a night anyway ? Then use him on PP and 2nd dman in 3 on 3 OT only.
I'll take him in OT any day of the week over Murphy, deHAAN, and the rest. He has offensive skills only, and can skate with open ice. What do they have to lose ? Let's find a professional Coach PLEASE ! This guy is no better than Dr.Death !!

I'm kind of a fan of a hybrid approach. I will hold to my theory that it is better to keep all contracts at a maximum of 4 years (even though I know that will never happen). You can absolutely single out 4, maybe five players as guys to build around. My only contention is that if you end up acquiring other players who perform as well or better, you need to be willing to let those identified players go if the right situation presents itself.

I don't think you can be tied to players for the long haul anymore. It simply gets too expensive and cumbersome toward the end of the contract (sometimes sooner).
- Chunk

Yes, and I like the short-term contract idea - if only players would accept that. You can bet McDavid and Matthews might be rethinking their max term deals.

I'd just hate to see us give up birds in the hand for the unknown quantity of a draft pick. Our track record on those in the early rounds needs to be a lot better before I bet the future on that as primary means of rebuilding.

Fair enough, so you're saying if you plan to build around someone and they offer you a fantastic deal then you move on it, i get that, unfortunately Bowman isn't going to get another job with a franchise and trade us 2 firsts a second and a young promising dman
- BetweenTheDots

It's up to gm to make decisions. For example we'll take dcat if say a team comes to hawks and offers 2 1st and good prospect in return for him then the current gm of the Hawks has to decide is dcat someone I want to build around as part of the core going forward or are the assets coming back are worth letting him go. Tough decisions will have to be made. If Davidson is the permanent gm going forward then he needs to identify the core players to build around.

Fair enough, so you're saying if you plan to build around someone and they offer you a fantastic deal then you move on it, i get that, unfortunately Bowman isn't going to get another job with a franchise and trade us 2 firsts a second and a young promising dman
- BetweenTheDots

It's up to gm to make decisions. For example we'll take dcat if say a team comes to hawks and offers 2 1st and good prospect in return for him then the current gm of the Hawks has to decide is dcat someone I want to build around as part of the core going forward or are the assets coming back are worth letting him go. Tough decisions will have to be made. If Davidson is the permanent gm going forward then he needs to identify the core players to build around.

Yes, and I like the short-term contract idea - if only players would accept that. You can bet McDavid and Matthews might be rethinking their max term deals.

I'd just hate to see us give up birds in the hand for the unknown quantity of a draft pick. Our track record on those in the early rounds needs to be a lot better before I bet the future on that as primary means of rebuilding.
- pdx2ord

Matthew's only took a 5 year contract

It's up to gm to make decisions. For example we'll take dcat if say a team comes to hawks and offers 2 1st and good prospect in return for him then the current gm of the Hawks has to decide is dcat someone I want to build around as part of the core going forward or are the assets coming back are worth letting him go. Tough decisions will have to be made. If Davidson is the permanent gm going forward then he needs to identify the core players to build around.
- Scott1977

Yep! Would love to know who he thinks those players are today.

Matthew's only took a 5 year contract
- Scott1977

Oh - oops...good on him/them.

It's up to gm to make decisions. For example we'll take dcat if say a team comes to hawks and offers 2 1st and good prospect in return for him then the current gm of the Hawks has to decide is dcat someone I want to build around as part of the core going forward or are the assets coming back are worth letting him go. Tough decisions will have to be made. If Davidson is the permanent gm going forward then he needs to identify the core players to build around.
- Scott1977

I get what you're saying but where does it end of you continue to do this every year?

If i were trading DCat, for me it would have to be a very highly talented prospect in their system, then this way i don't have to worry about where the 1st round pick falls because the team trading it will probably be in the playoffs, but the 1st round pick would have to be included, but i would still have a tough time trading him because he's only 24 and is a few years away from his prime

Yes, and I like the short-term contract idea - if only players would accept that. You can bet McDavid and Matthews might be rethinking their max term deals.

I'd just hate to see us give up birds in the hand for the unknown quantity of a draft pick. Our track record on those in the early rounds needs to be a lot better before I bet the future on that as primary means of rebuilding.
- pdx2ord

Matthews contract is not max term, it is for 5 yeats.

Matthews contract is not max term, it is for 5 yeats.
- LAHawk

Yeah, Scott corrected me above...good on him/them.

I get what you're saying but where does it end of you continue to do this every year?

If i were trading DCat, for me it would have to be a very highly talented prospect in their system, then this way i don't have to worry about where the 1st round pick falls because the team trading it will probably be in the playoffs, but the 1st round pick would have to be included, but i would still have a tough time trading him because he's only 24 and is a few years away from his prime
- BetweenTheDots

correct that's the gm job. Hawks need a lot to get back to just being a playoff year in year out. Yes I get carried away with trades and trade talk. Imo you build your team through the draft developing those drafts picks and trades to upgrade or fix an issue. Not big fan of free agents signings and using those signing to build your team.

I get what you're saying but where does it end of you continue to do this every year?

If i were trading DCat, for me it would have to be a very highly talented prospect in their system, then this way i don't have to worry about where the 1st round pick falls because the team trading it will probably be in the playoffs, but the 1st round pick would have to be included, but i would still have a tough time trading him because he's only 24 and is a few years away from his prime
- BetweenTheDots

If ADB is playing better than anyone else that you are looking at or is available, then you keep him. If he's slipping, you don't just keep him because he's been here a long time.

For me personally, it doesn't end at all. It is a continual process of evaluation. You just have to be realistic and truthful about what you have and what you need.

If ADB is playing better than anyone else that you are looking at or is available, then you keep him. If he's slipping, you don't just keep him because he's been here a long time.

For me personally, it doesn't end at all. It is a continual process of evaluation. You just have to be realistic and truthful about what you have and what you need.
- Chunk

Agreed, but then again he was slipping in year 3 and many here were calling him a bust, what if we traded him in year 3? Young prospects to me are like buying stocks, in it for the long term, if they are entering their prime then cut your losses but until then you've got to ride the roller coaster, development and performance aren't linear. What if the Caps traded Ovi when he only scored 30+ goals at 25 and 26?

Ok, checked in this morning, gone busy all day, and I come back here before tonight's game to discover that with all the Strome love going on all day no one noted that the reason Strome most likely scored last night was because the Wild goalie was in the process of falling on his ass. Slackers the lot of you!

Wake me when the season ends .
- Lauerg

It's over.... And has been for a while. Either deal with it or don't. Perhaps find another team to get excited about. For the Hawks the light at the end of the tunnel has been permanently turned off until further notice.

Ok, checked in this morning, gone busy all day, and I come back here before tonight's game to discover that with all the Strome love going on all day no one noted that the reason Strome most likely scored last night was because the Wild goalie was in the process of falling on his ass. Slackers the lot of you!
- 6628

Well blog can not do no wrongs Kubalik and Dach more likely than not would of missed the net, that is if they didn’t bif the pass which is just as likely.

How about that they actually showed up for the first 5 minutes tonight. Young teams are so frustrating

Collectively we really are very weak on the puck

2 on 1 a pass right on the tape to Kubalik, and bif