News Article: Bowman and Colliton to return next year

[Putt Pirate]

I sense Rocky is afraid to make any big changes. As long as he is printing money with the UC full and trotting out the memories of the core as they age so the fans can remember the good times. That is McD's job security.

 

[BobbyJet]

I sense Rocky is afraid to make any big changes. As long as he is printing money with the UC full and trotting out the memories of the core as they age so the fans can remember the good times. That is McD's job security.

Dat burn it, you're probably right.

 

[Dr Salt]

They were gone regardless. Once Teravainen reached RFA he was gone, and once Panarin reached UFA he was gone.
Should Bowman have received a different package for each? Sure, but Kayumov is one those the Hawks got in return for Teravainen and we don't even know how good he is yet.

Just looked it up. TT and Bickell were traded for the picks that became Kayumov and Barratt.
Might not have been horrible, but who knows when they're playing hockey again.

There has been quotes from Panarin that have come out since his move that heavily imply he didn't want to leave Chicago.

 

[HeisenBaez]

There has been quotes from Panarin that have come out since his move that heavily imply he didn't want to leave Chicago.

You can only have so many big $$$ contracts on the book and still field a competitve team. Many of us would rather have Breadman back over certain current Hawks but what's done is done. Wish he was still a Hawk but...

 

[CallMeShaft]

Holy mini necrobump, Batman!

 

[Dr Salt]

You can only have so many big $$$ contracts on the book and still field a competitve team. Many of us would rather have Breadman back over certain current Hawks but what's done is done. Wish he was still a Hawk but...

Going into last offseason we had the cap to bring in Breadman, but we spent up to the floor with other acquisitions.

 

[SimpleJack]

Going into last offseason we had the cap to bring in Breadman, but we spent up to the floor with other acquisitions.

You mean you’d rather have Panarin instead of Andrew Shaw, Zach Smith, and Oli Maatta? What are you some kind of crazy person?

 

[Dr Salt]

You mean you’d rather have Panarin instead of Andrew Shaw, Zach Smith, and Oli Maatta? What are you some kind of crazy person?

crazy is an understatement

 

[BK]

Going into last offseason we had the cap to bring in Breadman, but we spent up to the floor with other acquisitions.

No. We did not really have room to add 11.642 AAV player. Also, there is no chance in hell the Hawks are paying someone more than Kane.

 

[Rick C137]

With the uncertainty of the cap for next season, this is a really strange time to bump this thread with that opinion. Panarins contract on this team with a flat cap next season would have absolutely crippled the hawks.

 

[Dr Salt]

With the uncertainty of the cap for next season, this is a really strange time to bump this thread with that opinion. Panarins contract on this team with a flat cap next season would have absolutely crippled the hawks.

My point about signing Panarin was we spent to the floor on other moves, you could absolutely do away with certain acquisitions and be able to afford Panarin. Maatta, Shaw, and De Haan's cap hits are worth around the same or more when combined. I don't think I'm insane for preferring Panarin to those three.

That being said those moves were all done in the buildup to FA, it wouldn't surprise me if the trade still stung for Panarin and he had no desire to come back, which is why Bowman made those moves. But going off the earlier quote, it really does feel possible he stays if he's not dealt.

 

[ClydeLee]

My point about signing Panarin was we spent to the floor on other moves, you could absolutely do away with certain acquisitions and be able to afford Panarin. Maatta, Shaw, and De Haan's cap hits are worth around the same or more when combined. I don't think I'm insane for preferring Panarin to those three.

That being said those moves were all done in the buildup to FA, it wouldn't surprise me if the trade still stung for Panarin and he had no desire to come back, which is why Bowman made those moves. But going off the earlier quote, it really does feel possible he stays if he's not dealt.

It's an insane struggle to field a roster with two 10.5 mil players.

Keeping Panarin was never an option. Having 3 players in that range isn't a capable fit.

 

[Dr Salt]

It's an insane struggle to field a roster with two 10.5 mil players.

Keeping Panarin was never an option. Having 3 players in that range isn't a capable fit.

Except we very much so had the young talent on entry-level contracts to make it work. Along with money expiring by the time those players need a new deal.

 

[magnificent]

it wouldn't surprise me if the trade still stung for Panarin and he had no desire to come back

I'm sure. The world doesn't revolve around the Blackhawks, he realized that.

 

[Rick C137]

Except we very much so had the young talent on entry-level contracts to make it work. Along with money expiring by the time those players need a new deal.

I’m curious. What deals are expiring in the next 2-3 seasons that are covering all these ELC players new deals? Dach/Boqvist/Nylander/Strome/Kubalik are all gonna need new deals in that frame. CDH/Shaw/ Maatta wouldn’t be here in a scenario where Panarin is. Murphy/Smith/Saad are the only expiring deals with money in that time frame. Murphy and saad are both really good players that you would need to replace so it’s not like that money just frees up. Murphy is on a pretty good contract himself too. Even without replacing those players, let’s say they create that 13 million in cap. It’s wildly optimistic to expect to sign all of Dach/Boqvist/Kubalik/Nylander/Strome/Caggiula for 13 million.

Panarin has the second highest cap hit in the league with a full NMC. If we had Panarins contract, we’d have 45 million in 5 players long term with full NMC. That’s well over half the cap on just 5 guys that you literally can’t move. You’ve completely painted yourself into a corner and have no wiggle room. If the cap stays flat, that’s 36 million to fill 15+ spots including both goaltenders. That’s not a lot of money when you have high profile RFAs coming up (or even if you don’t tbh). Kubalik would be as good as gone this off season and It probably ends up costing you one of Boqvist/Dach or at least both of Strome/Nylander

Bringing Panarin back into the fold would have been really short sighted all things considered . Maybe we could make it work for a year or two but long term it was never going to work. We’d be stuck continually gutting the depth year after year. And right now is just a strange time to bring up Panarin because we’d be at the mercy of the cap if we had the Panarin contract. I’m honestly glad we don’t have to sit here and sweat it out and pray the cap doesn’t fall/freeze so we don’t end up losing elite young talent.

love Panarin and that contract makes sense for a few different teams in the league. However the Blackhawks aren’t one of them.

 

[ClydeLee]

Except we very much so had the young talent on entry-level contracts to make it work. Along with money expiring by the time those players need a new deal.

You seem to be stuck on arguing it was mathematically feasible under last years cap. Yes it would of been. Thats not the counter argument.

The reality of doing it and having any chance at future success is not gonna happen. Thats why it was never a possibility to add Panarin an extension after the previous deal.

 

[x Tame Impala]

@Rick C137 I've got nothing to back this up but I don't think Panarin signs for over $10.5m if we never traded him. Probably signs for $9.5-10m but still, point stands, he's a luxury that the Hawks couldn't have afforded now or ever.

 

[Dr Salt]

I’m curious. What deals are expiring in the next 2-3 seasons that are covering all these ELC players new deals? Dach/Boqvist/Nylander/Strome/Kubalik are all gonna need new deals in that frame. CDH/Shaw/ Maatta wouldn’t be here in a scenario where Panarin is. Murphy/Smith/Saad are the only expiring deals with money in that time frame. Murphy and saad are both really good players that you would need to replace so it’s not like that money just frees up. Murphy is on a pretty good contract himself too. Even without replacing those players, let’s say they create that 13 million in cap. It’s wildly optimistic to expect to sign all of Dach/Boqvist/Kubalik/Nylander/Strome/Caggiula for 13 million.

Panarin has the second highest cap hit in the league with a full NMC. If we had Panarins contract, we’d have 45 million in 5 players long term with full NMC. That’s well over half the cap on just 5 guys that you literally can’t move. You’ve completely painted yourself into a corner and have no wiggle room. If the cap stays flat, that’s 36 million to fill 15+ spots including both goaltenders. That’s not a lot of money when you have high profile RFAs coming up (or even if you don’t tbh). Kubalik would be as good as gone this off season and It probably ends up costing you one of Boqvist/Dach or at least both of Strome/Nylander

Bringing Panarin back into the fold would have been really short sighted all things considered . Maybe we could make it work for a year or two but long term it was never going to work. We’d be stuck continually gutting the depth year after year. And right now is just a strange time to bring up Panarin because we’d be at the mercy of the cap if we had the Panarin contract. I’m honestly glad we don’t have to sit here and sweat it out and pray the cap doesn’t fall/freeze so we don’t end up losing elite young talent.

love Panarin and that contract makes sense for a few different teams in the league. However the Blackhawks aren’t one of them.

You seem to be stuck on arguing it was mathematically feasible under last years cap. Yes it would of been. Thats not the counter argument.

The reality of doing it and having any chance at future success is not gonna happen. Thats why it was never a possibility to add Panarin an extension after the previous deal.

I see what you mean if its gonna ruin us on a flat cap. One of Kubalik or Strome are gone unless Saad is traded. Theoretically though if there's a small cap fall, and a compliance buyout is allowed, or if we can LTIRetire Seabrook (which I have doubts about) we could wiggle through. I'd say this is fair enough.

 

[Rick C137]

@Rick C137 I've got nothing to back this up but I don't think Panarin signs for over $10.5m if we never traded him. Probably signs for $9.5-10m but still, point stands, he's a luxury that the Hawks couldn't have afforded now or ever.

I don’t disagree at all but remember that’s probably gonna come at the cost of an additional year on the contract that the Hawks would have been able to give him (and remember he’s already 28 now). Could see 8yrs/10mil being realistic on the low side of his deal. 1.6 mil in additional cap is nothing to sneeze at but still doesn’t alleviate the concerns of having that money tied up in NMC vet deals considering the youth we’re gonna need to pay in the coming years.

 

[SimpleJack]

My rage for wanting Panarin on the team overrides any logic in this debate. HE SHOULD STILL BE A HAWK DAMMIT!!! I refuse to listen to reason!!

Seriously though only getting Saad in return was the real travesty here(Motte and Forsberg cancel each other out). Not equal value. NOT EVEN CLOSE.

 

[Brightwing]

My rage for wanting Panarin on the team overrides any logic in this debate. HE SHOULD STILL BE A HAWK DAMMIT!!! I refuse to listen to reason!!

Seriously though only getting Saad in return was the real travesty here(Motte and Forsberg cancel each other out). Not equal value. NOT EVEN CLOSE.

Saad had two more years of term ... that's a consideration.

 

[GaryU]

Saad had two more years of term ... that's a consideration.

And he's pretty solid.

 

[ColbyChaos]

And he's pretty solid.

Not at the cost of a top 10 player lol

 

[BK]

Not at the cost of a top 10 player lol

He wasn’t a top 10 player then and isn’t a top 10 player now.

 

[SimpleJack]

Saad had two more years of term ... that's a consideration.

f*** that. You don’t trade one of the best players in the league(at his position) for an above average 3rd liner/average 2nd liner just because he has 2 more years of term. You move on and explore other options with other teams.

That’s my issue. I truly believe Stan didn’t do his due diligence in exploring and looking for the best possible package/value in return. He made a quick, flawed decision in thinking “Saad was great here before, he’s a fan favorite, he’ll look nice next to Toews, etc”....and completely misjudged the situation. I have zero proof of this, but it’s definitely the way it seemed to unfold. There’s simply no way that Saad was the best possible return value he could have gotten across the entire league.