Rumor: Blackhawks working on Keith trade

Status
Not open for further replies.

COHawk

Registered User
Sep 16, 2015
2,119
1,020
Hope not, that would be a bummer. I've always been confident Keith would retire a Hawk.
 

LavalPhantom

Registered User
Sep 12, 2014
445
493
He’s my favorite Hawks but at this point it might not be the worst thing if he brings back decent value (which he has). I’ll be pissed as hell if it’s just a 3rd or something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JaegerDice

LavalPhantom

Registered User
Sep 12, 2014
445
493
We could trade them Keith with retention to mentor their young team, and all we ask in return is for them to draft CdH! Voila....more money....to sign Hamilton or something.
I could probably live with that. It would create room for Hamilton and the kids.
 
  • Like
Reactions: coolhand

Hawkaholic

Registered User
Dec 19, 2006
31,615
10,965
London, Ont.
So, no rush on trading him I guess? I’m all for trying if he wants out, but it has to make sense for the team as well.
He has little value even if he didnt have a NMC. He probably wants out, he didnt look like he was enjoying hockey last year, which is why I started a thread about his future.
 

RayP

Tf
Jan 12, 2011
94,109
17,878
Winnipeg maybe? Only team in western Canada or the PNW that isn’t bad that I can see him actually wanting to go to if it’s about winning. Otherwise it’s all about getting out of Chicago with all this shit going on.

Unless he maybe thinks Vancouver can be decent. I don’t but can see the argument at least.
 

LavalPhantom

Registered User
Sep 12, 2014
445
493
He has little value even if he didnt have a NMC. He probably wants out, he didnt look like he was enjoying hockey last year, which is why I started a thread about his future.
I have a hard time wrapping my head about him having little value. He’s still a second pairing D, on a fair contract that expires in two years, and with a ton of experience and leadership. We would have killed for such an acquisition during the contending years.

Just my opinion of course. I’m probably very bias.
 

Kaners Bald Spot

Registered User
Dec 6, 2011
22,704
10,812
Kane County, IL
I have a hard time wrapping my head about him having little value. He’s still a second pairing D, on a fair contract that expires in two years, and with a ton of experience and leadership. We would have killed for such an acquisition during the contending years.
His advanced stats are shit because he's being overexposed on the Hawks.
 

RayP

Tf
Jan 12, 2011
94,109
17,878
I have a hard time wrapping my head about him having little value. He’s still a second pairing D, on a fair contract that expires in two years, and with a ton of experience and leadership. We would have killed for such an acquisition during the contending years.

Just my opinion of course. I’m probably very bias.


He was really, really bad last year after the first 5-10 games.


GMs are dumb though and love guys with hardware. I honestly have no idea what to expect.

As someone who watched him struggle last year like he did, I wouldn’t give up more than a second or third for him. On the other hand a bad GM might look at what he’s accomplished and still give up a first for him if we retain a little bit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LavalPhantom

DisgruntledHawkFan

Blackhawk Down
Jun 19, 2004
57,222
27,695
South Side
Winnipeg maybe? Only team in western Canada or the PNW that isn’t bad that I can see him actually wanting to go to if it’s about winning. Otherwise it’s all about getting out of Chicago with all this shit going on.

Unless he maybe thinks Vancouver can be decent. I don’t but can see the argument at least.
Vancouver has zero cap space. Maybe we get value if we eat one of their bad contracts.
 

Kaners Bald Spot

Registered User
Dec 6, 2011
22,704
10,812
Kane County, IL
He was really, really bad last year after the first 5-10 games.


GMs are dumb though and love guys with hardware. I honestly have no idea what to expect.

As someone who watched him struggle last year like he did, I wouldn’t give up more than a second or third for him. On the other hand a bad GM might look at what he’s accomplished and still give up a first for him if we retain a little bit.
I think it's going to be Eriksson or Neal+ for Keith.

No retention, contracts are equal-ish in money(and in the case of Neal, length)

Given that Eriksson only has 1 year left I could see that being straight up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad