Rebuild/Retool?

[b1e9a8r5s]

ref Q, that is fine, but come next season, i am looking at the new salary cap and how the team will need to be fixed.

ref the pkg, any team who will be willing to take on Seabs contract, you know as well as I, that they will want a king's ransom to sweeten the deal.

I'd rather have Seabs and his contract (especially with the possibility of the buyout coming) than no Seabs contract and no Schmaltz.

I'm not a salary cap expert but it seems to me that they are expecting a sizable jump this year and that Hawks don't have too many guys to sign this offseason. After next season is when they will have decisions to make with Schmaltz and Forsling hitting RFA.

 

[LordKOTL]

and what happen if there isn't a compliance buyout or is much later than anyone expected..... what to do ??

You deal with it--try to put Seabs in a position where he's more apt to succeed even if he's playing bottom minutes and role just like Bolland, Frolik, Bickell before MS really took hold, etc.

It's simple math: Seabs, without any buyout is signed until 2024. 2023 his NMC gets a 5-team trade-to L-NTC, which expands to 10-teams in 2024. Without a compliance buyout part of Seabs' cap is on the books 6. Years. Longer.

I believe it's Sept 2019 where the NHLPA can opt-out, which means it would be 2020 for a new CBA. No matter how you slice it I think no move can be done on Seabs until at least 2020 unless Seabs agrees to go.

You also have to consider that in years before seabs contract expires, it's not a straight 944k/year (for a buyout this summer) on the cap. the cap hit is the cap savings, which in some cases can total almost as-much as his current cap number; i.e. if we buy him out this summer we'd have 4+M in dead cap until 2024 (and, according to cap friendly, 6+M in 2021 and 2023).

Trust me...we do not want to buy him out without a compliance buyout. It would hamstring the team for a long, long time.

 

[LDF]

You deal with it--try to put Seabs in a position where he's more apt to succeed even if he's playing bottom minutes and role just like Bolland, Frolik, Bickell before MS really took hold, etc.

It's simple math: Seabs, without any buyout is signed until 2024. 2023 his NMC gets a 5-team trade-to L-NTC, which expands to 10-teams in 2024. Without a compliance buyout part of Seabs' cap is on the books 6. Years. Longer.

I believe it's Sept 2019 where the NHLPA can opt-out, which means it would be 2020 for a new CBA. No matter how you slice it I think no move can be done on Seabs until at least 2020 unless Seabs agrees to go.

You also have to consider that in years before seabs contract expires, it's not a straight 944k/year (for a buyout this summer) on the cap. the cap hit is the cap savings, which in some cases can total almost as-much as his current cap number; i.e. if we buy him out this summer we'd have 4+M in dead cap until 2024 (and, according to cap friendly, 6+M in 2021 and 2023).

Trust me...we do not want to buy him out without a compliance buyout. It would hamstring the team for a long, long time.

excellent update, esp in the compliance buyout and the buying out his contract.

so if the team needs, for whatever reason, need to work within the propose cap and can't, then it reinforce the idea of like it or not, the hawks will need to sweeten the pkg. that is if they need to get rid of Seabs contract and trade him.

again, excellent post.

 

[LordKOTL]

excellent update, esp in the compliance buyout and the buying out his contract.

so if the team needs, for whatever reason, need to work within the propose cap and can't, then it reinforce the idea of like it or not, the hawks will need to sweeten the pkg. that is if they need to get rid of Seabs contract and trade him.

again, excellent post.

Thanks. One thing to consider though is that sometimes it's better to stand pat with an underachieving piece you have, than try to move them with a worthwhile piece that's having a positive impact, and also risk a negative piece coming back, because even if that negative piece coming back doesn't have the depth or breadth of wasted cap, you're also losing the positive piece.

Hence why people don't like Seabs+Schmaltz. Schmaltz is coming into his own and would weaken the O. Meanwhile in the last months with controlled minutes Seabs has been good. Not 6.875M good but not a Runbladian liability. In that case sure we're dealing with wasted cap in Seabs, but if dealing him away puts the team back further with less O and no real net gain on D, the team's further back.

Personally, I think it's a wait-and-see game. Control Seabs' minutes and start getting rookies in to take his old role, and if someone has an offer that he's amenable to, listen. If a compliance buyout comes, by all means use it, but don't mortgage the future.

 

[LDF]

Thanks. One thing to consider though is that sometimes it's better to stand pat with an underachieving piece you have, than try to move them with a worthwhile piece that's having a positive impact, and also risk a negative piece coming back, because even if that negative piece coming back doesn't have the depth or breadth of wasted cap, you're also losing the positive piece.

Hence why people don't like Seabs+Schmaltz. Schmaltz is coming into his own and would weaken the O. Meanwhile in the last months with controlled minutes Seabs has been good. Not 6.875M good but not a Runbladian liability. In that case sure we're dealing with wasted cap in Seabs, but if dealing him away puts the team back further with less O and no real net gain on D, the team's further back.

Personally, I think it's a wait-and-see game. Control Seabs' minutes and start getting rookies in to take his old role, and if someone has an offer that he's amenable to, listen. If a compliance buyout comes, by all means use it, but don't mortgage the future.

a wait and see..... i can see that, however when i was ranting against Seab this season, he was playing terrible. now i am seeing some stabilization in his play. again as you mention, not in the realm of his salary, which will make him vastly overrated and over-paid.

but again, this will go, the moving of Seabs is based on my crossing the T's and dotting the I's and thinking how will he affect the future. the future also includes the idea, which i do not have any idea at this point, but the future of investing, smartly in the FA / trading for players.

 

[goldenbladz1]

Thanks. One thing to consider though is that sometimes it's better to stand pat with an underachieving piece you have, than try to move them with a worthwhile piece that's having a positive impact, and also risk a negative piece coming back, because even if that negative piece coming back doesn't have the depth or breadth of wasted cap, you're also losing the positive piece.

Hence why people don't like Seabs+Schmaltz. Schmaltz is coming into his own and would weaken the O. Meanwhile in the last months with controlled minutes Seabs has been good. Not 6.875M good but not a Runbladian liability. In that case sure we're dealing with wasted cap in Seabs, but if dealing him away puts the team back further with less O and no real net gain on D, the team's further back.

Personally, I think it's a wait-and-see game. Control Seabs' minutes and start getting rookies in to take his old role, and if someone has an offer that he's amenable to, listen. If a compliance buyout comes, by all means use it, but don't mortgage the future.

I agree the wait and see is the proper way, complete rebuilds rarely work. Look at the Oilers they have been years in the toilet and just coming out of it and have already hemmed themselves in CAP and the Buffalo Sabres are a tire fire despite all the high picks

 

[BK]

From a cap perspective, don't we have 3.6 coming off in bonuses, plus Hossa money, and then the jump in the cap? If that is the case, we have 12-13 million in cap space.

 

[LDF]

From a cap perspective, don't we have 3.6 coming off in bonuses, plus Hossa money, and then the jump in the cap? If that is the case, we have 12-13 million in cap space.

according to cap friendly Hossa contract is not up for several more yrs. while you are somewhat right on the other players who are on the last yr of their deal, they would need to be replace with bodies and their contract. so in essence it is a revolving door.

Chicago Blackhawks - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

Hossa money is for in season additions every year, no? There's no LTIR in the off season so they have to be under the cap to start the season and then can put him on LTIR and get the cap space back. At least that's my understanding.

 

[Styles]

After next season is when they will have decisions to make with Schmaltz and Forsling hitting RFA.

I hope Stan can sign both of these guys this off-season to a 2 year bridge deal in the 2.5-3M range. Similar to what both Dumba(2.5M)(16-17) and Galchenyuk(2.8M)(15-16) got recently.

 

[LDF]

Hossa money is for in season additions every year, no? There's no LTIR in the off season so they have to be under the cap to start the season and then can put him on LTIR and get the cap space back. At least that's my understanding.

excellent point.

 

[ClydeLee]

Kinda why I don't get the at this time fear of trading seabs with someone talented for cap.

They're far more likely to just trade Hossa and a 1st to some team instead.

 

[LDF]

Kinda why I don't get the at this time fear of trading seabs with someone talented for cap.

They're far more likely to just trade Hossa and a 1st to some team instead.

i think hossa is a org fav and even now a unmovable player. his salary acting as a LITR is a valuable asset .

 

[migi]

i think hossa is a org fav and even now a unmovable player. his salary acting as a LITR is a valuable asset .

Valuable asset? No. Movable? Yes, but its not valuable.

 

[BK]

according to cap friendly Hossa contract is not up for several more yrs. while you are somewhat right on the other players who are on the last yr of their deal, they would need to be replace with bodies and their contract. so in essence it is a revolving door.

Chicago Blackhawks - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

Obviously his deal is not up for a few years but we get that money back in LTIR.

 

[LDF]

Valuable asset? No. Movable? Yes, but its not valuable.

it is in how you look at it.

 

[LDF]

Obviously his deal is not up for a few years but we get that money back in LTIR.

and that is what i am liking about hossa contract. i think someone corrected me on the ltir ......

 

[LordKOTL]

From a cap perspective, don't we have 3.6 coming off in bonuses, plus Hossa money, and then the jump in the cap? If that is the case, we have 12-13 million in cap space.

The way it stands right now for next year:

We have $65,864,295 in cap salary (including Hossa's deal). We also have 5 Roster D, 7 Roster FWDs, and 2 roster G. That means we'll need 1D, 5 FWD, and possibly 1D and 1FWD to schlep for Eddie O (not counting Hossa as a roster player).

So going off of the ideal situation (13FWD, 7D, 2G), that means we need to fill 2D and 6FWDs.

If the cap goes up, we can expect cap inflation. Thus, anyone we directly sign will cost a bit more so part of the cap usage should be for already-signed players. Depeinding on the jump it may not be much (i.e. the now 650k becomes 800k), but it should be under consideration. Anyone already signed or a rookie on an ELC/RFA deal will help. So, if the cap ups to about 78M, the way I figure it is for the 8 slots needed, we got about 1.5M/slot.

Keep in mind if we resign, say, Rutta, to like 3M AAV, it cuts into the rest of the money, so we'd be down to about 1.28M/slot for the remaining 7.

The big thing is going to be allocating that space so the team has the right balance of depth to support the rest of the players remaining. A team with a depth of Nordstroms, McLeods, or Moores might not be enough to support out core, but meanwhile a couple of 3-4M players for depth might mean the roster warm bodies might be approaching Rosie/Tootoo territory.

 

[migi]

@LordKOTL good post there.

Biggest (most meaningful) re-signing guys are Hartman, Hayden and Rutta. I dont see Rutta getting that $3mil cap hit, but if he does, its doable. I think good comparable for Hartman is Shaws first deal after ELC (2x2). I dont know how Hayden will get anything over 1,2mil and I think he is happy to do it.
Next year play him in middle 6. Vinnie and Wingels as local boys together about 2mil I think.

Sign Sikura, he is ELC guy. Im counting on Jokiharju or Snuggerud or Krys to play in NHL next season, it's ELC contract.

I think it's realistic and it allows us to sign some UFA. The biggest thing is that our top-9 and top-4 and #1G is set to next season.

Saad - Toews - Hayden (Panik)
DeBrincat - Schmaltz/Anisimov - Kane
Hartman - Anisimov/Schmaltz - Sikura

Keith - Murphy
Forsling - Rutta

And when Forsling and Schmaltz need to be re-signed, cap hopefully goes a bit up, Panik is gone and one or two ELC Dman comes to play. If you have to, trade Anisimov.

 

[LDF]

@LordKOTL good post there.

Biggest (most meaningful) re-signing guys are Hartman, Hayden and Rutta. I dont see Rutta getting that $3mil cap hit, but if he does, its doable. I think good comparable for Hartman is Shaws first deal after ELC (2x2). I dont know how Hayden will get anything over 1,2mil and I think he is happy to do it.
Next year play him in middle 6. Vinnie and Wingels as local boys together about 2mil I think.

Sign Sikura, he is ELC guy. Im counting on Jokiharju or Snuggerud or Krys to play in NHL next season, it's ELC contract.

I think it's realistic and it allows us to sign some UFA. The biggest thing is that our top-9 and top-4 and #1G is set to next season.

Saad - Toews - Hayden (Panik)
DeBrincat - Schmaltz/Anisimov - Kane
Hartman - Anisimov/Schmaltz - Sikura

Keith - Murphy
Forsling - Rutta

And when Forsling and Schmaltz need to be re-signed, cap hopefully goes a bit up, Panik is gone and one or two ELC Dman comes to play. If you have to, trade Anisimov.

alot of good work here

now that this is posted, maybe now people can see my pet and continuous rant on Seabs going now, in a trade. i really don't see much wiggle room in the new salary cap numbers.

 

[migi]

alot of good work here

now that this is posted, maybe now people can see my pet and continuous rant on Seabs going now, in a trade. i really don't see much wiggle room in the new salary cap numbers.

True but I kind of think this team is retooling till Seabrook contract is bought out via compliance buy-out. And hopefully cap keep rising, though cap has always come down when new CBA is made so dont know what to think.

I just dont want to trade any of the next big three with Seabs. And by all means I dont believe Forsling, Cat and Schmaltz are going to be T&K&K level ever but they are currently the next big three for us.

 

[LDF]

True but I kind of think this team is retooling till Seabrook contract is bought out via compliance buy-out. And hopefully cap keep rising, though cap has always come down when new CBA is made so dont know what to think.

I just dont want to trade any of the next big three with Seabs. And by all means I dont believe Forsling, Cat and Schmaltz are going to be T&K&K level ever but they are currently the next big three for us.

ref the bold, this is the next group of prospects to build the team around, however there is the economic part of this hockey as a business. each team has a hard cap and a smart GM in the scope of cap part of the business, needs to make hard choices.

bottom line when Seabs contract was up, it was time to say, "it was a great run, but don't let the door hit you on the way out" this is the cold hard facts on this business side of hockey.

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

alot of good work here

now that this is posted, maybe now people can see my pet and continuous rant on Seabs going now, in a trade. i really don't see much wiggle room in the new salary cap numbers.

Everyone would trade Seabs for nothing (cap relief). Where you are getting resistance is with the idea of trading Schmaltz to get that relief. That's a bridge too far for many of the posters on here, myself included.

 

[TLEH]

No chance im trading schmaltz as a cap dump enhancer.

 

[LDF]

Everyone would trade Seabs for nothing (cap relief). Where you are getting resistance is with the idea of trading Schmaltz to get that relief. That's a bridge too far for many of the posters on here, myself included.

i know what you mean, but the hawks may be in a spot that they would have to. the hawks fo screwed this team's cap and it needs a harsh decision.

flip this around and give me a realistic way the team can fix the cap ??