Value of: Brent Seabrook + Adam Boqvist

[Kevin Musto]

Any teams willing to take on Brent Seabrook's contract if Adam Boqvist is added as a sweetener?

Ottawa in paticular is a team that would make sense because they need to hit the cap floor, they need a vet with great leadership qualities to corral the young prospects, and Boqvist would be a big get for them.

Click to read more...

 

[780il]

I don't think Chicago would part with Boqvist as a sweetener to get rid of that deal. Your window is pretty much closed at this point so continue to retool and let your prospects develop.

 

[DarthProbert]

I don't think Chicago would part with Boqvist as a sweetener to get rid of that deal. Your window is pretty much closed at this point so continue to retool and let your prospects develop.

Depends who they get to protect at expansion. If keeping Seabrook means losing someone good, might be worth paying to get rid of him.

 

[Kevin Musto]

I don't think Chicago would part with Boqvist as a sweetener to get rid of that deal. Your window is pretty much closed at this point so continue to retool and let your prospects develop.

Since when is our window closed? Hawks are likely a playoff team next season.

 

[Esq]

Since when is our window closed? Hawks are likely a playoff team next season.

I think what he's trying to say is that we really don't have a "window" right now -- we have pieces in place that, if they play well and stay healthy -- are good enough to maketh a playoff team. But its not like we have mid-20s Kane/Toews back again where we had a true "window" to win because of outstanding talent.

 

[780il]

I think what he's trying to say is that we really don't have a "window" right now -- we have pieces in place that, if they play well and stay healthy -- are good enough to maketh a playoff team. But its not like we have mid-20s Kane/Toews back again where we had a true "window" to win because of outstanding talent.

That is exactly what I mean.

 

[LuckyBoeser]

Is it really worth getting rid of Boqvist so you can unload Seabrook's contact?

 

[Mrfenn92]

No go for me as a hawks fan. I know it will hurt if they ever trade seabs with his contract, but no interest in parting with Boqvist.

 

[Kevin Musto]

Is it really worth getting rid of Boqvist so you can unload Seabrook's contact?

For me yes. I have zero attachment to Boqvist. He's a high draft pick with high value, but losing him doesn't have a massive impact on our prospect pool. Seabrook's contract is really constricting.

 

[Langdon Alger]

Is it really worth getting rid of Boqvist so you can unload Seabrook's contact?

No it is not.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

Not enough to dump Seabrook.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

Is it really worth getting rid of Boqvist so you can unload Seabrook's contact?

A team will want significantly more than Boqvist to take on 24.5 million in salary (assuming CHI pays the bonus) and 34.375M in cap.

It's probably not worth it for Chicago either. It comes down to what they would do with the nearly 7 million per season in cap space, and how much they think Boqvist brings to the table on his ELC/pre-arbitration arb years where his salary will be lower than what a comparable player not on their ELC will cost. If CHI thinks Boqvist is still a few years away and they can turn around and get someone like Panarin or Lee partially with that 7 million, than all of a sudden it is a steal.

Boqvist alone to dump Seabrook would be incredibly cheap value wise. Although that doesn't mean CHI should do it.

 

[Canadian Canuck]

Canucks accept if nothing’s going back.

Boqvist+Seabrook for Schaller

 

[Fire Stan Bowman]

brady tkachuk for boqvist and seabs and 10 first round pics

 

[thesaadfather]

Why do this now? We don’t need the space this year. Next year we probably need to trade Anisimov to make room for Dach, so there’s more cap space there. Saad expires the year after, then we likely lose one of Murphy, Maatta, or CDH to the expansion draft and one of the prospects step in to their place. The Hawks have opportunities to remain flexible to the cap over the next few years, even with Seabrook. They should do so and let the years burn off of Seabrook’s deal. Seabrook with 2 years left costs a lot less to trade than Seabrook with 5 years left. Besides, there’s always the longshot chance that he’ll retire. It’s just not worth giving up a blue chip prospect.

 

[wahsnairb]

WHY would we get rid of Boqvist just to move Seabrook?!?!?!??!?!
That is insanity. He is our only D prospect with 1D potential right now having not taken Byram.

Seabrook can potentially be moved for a team okay with his cap hit that wants to pay low actual dollars, can eventually be bought out, LTIR, compliance buy out with the new CBA, other pieces could be moved.

Boqvist is worth way too much even for that disgusting contract (especially this year while we aren't even up against the cap).

 

[wahsnairb]

I don't agree that our window is closed. The Hawks are back to being a playoff team and anything can happen once you get there (i.e. St. Louis Blues).

 

[BK]

No.

 

[bernmeister]

like Lucic, term is a killer

a taker, assuming no other variables in the equation, would want AT LEAST a 2nd round pick for EACH year of that contract it is being asked to swallow, ON TOP OF a significant down payment.
That 'want' will be a require they will get, or no deal.

cap is a premium in a hard cap league, what can I say.
It was a wonderful, feel good moment to reward this player, but now the piper has to be paid.

In order for Rangers to EVEN THINK about this, there would have to an understanding as to mutual back scratching where both sides win and lose. Something where the CHI unloads the larger structural burden and in exchange, on top of an asset premium, accepts a comparable amount in cap dumps, but which being separate multiple pieces, are easier to manage and take off roster.

Again, I am NOT saying either side does this.
I'm willing to kill a coupla mins as a courtesy to the OP asking a serious question, and deserving a serious answer.

look at some ballpark #s, no time to hard crunch exact math

Seabs + Anisimov + Boqvist + 2020 and 2021 1sts, both top 7 protected
is ballpark a shade over 12m
vs
Staal 2 yrs at half = 2.85
+ expiring Strome 3.1 + Namest 4 + Belesky 1.9
+ Lias Andersson elc
=ballpark 12m

rationale:
not counting draft picks, 3 bodies are swapped for 5, but Belesky is holdover I think from the Nash deal and can be buried in the A, so it is really 3 for 4.

Rangers have added Trouba + Fox, but while we have nice RD in the pipeline, we could use Boqvist as a more immediately ready option. We are hoping Shattenkirk will be over injury and shine, but can't be sure atm. Hopefully if he produces we get value out of him, if not he retires once we have enough RD depth kickin it.

Blackhawks don't have D up the wazu like Canes, but have enough.
Andersson helps at rejuvenating pivot, which CHI needs. Lias was an abomination all but the last 3 wks of the season, but that is significant cause at that point he demonstrated ability to skate at NHL level. He has enough of the rest needed to succeed. This is a guy who was rated 12OA or a little better, and Rangers reached b'c at the time they did not have Chytil/Howden. Cross needs satisfied w/swap of elcs.

Forgetting the dump Belesky, that leaves
Staal - now cheap to buy out if nec, not what he once was before injuries but useful as stay at home LD short term at least this yr
Strome - righty shot fits like glove, dibs on extending or not
Namest - overpriced but expiring, can get a taker at some pt for 2m if nec but prob ok for depth for this yr

Rangers have to swallow term, and don't really have RD room for Seabs at present, tho I could see perhaps Shatty crossing to LD so BS can take 3RD.
It is unlikely he stays length of the deal, and NY will not suffer cap hit to buy out, will instead minimize playing time but once IF compliance buyout(s) are available, then may be bought out.
AA can be used or swapped for future(s).

I understand reluctance at forking over even protected high picks [two 1sts in lieu of more 2nds], but there is no way NY takes on the albatross of the uber-toxic structural term of Seabs without pick inclusion.

I think only NMCs here are Seabs and Staal. Marc can read the handwriting on the wall, and we should be looking at moving Skjei also once Hajek/Lindgren/Rykov prove ready as expected. Hawks are competing, are ballpark close to where Staals grew up, and a fit for the team. I think he waives.

Seabs who knows, but NYR is a first class organization, we get Panarin, one or more good breaks and we are on our way, hopefully he would ok.

 

[wahsnairb]

like Lucic, term is a killer

a taker, assuming no other variables in the equation, would want AT LEAST a 2nd round pick for EACH year of that contract it is being asked to swallow, ON TOP OF a significant down payment.
That 'want' will be a require they will get, or no deal.

cap is a premium in a hard cap league, what can I say.
It was a wonderful, feel good moment to reward this player, but now the piper has to be paid.

In order for Rangers to EVEN THINK about this, there would have to an understanding as to mutual back scratching where both sides win and lose. Something where the CHI unloads the larger structural burden and in exchange, on top of an asset premium, accepts a comparable amount in cap dumps, but which being separate multiple pieces, are easier to manage and take off roster.

Again, I am NOT saying either side does this.
I'm willing to kill a coupla mins as a courtesy to the OP asking a serious question, and deserving a serious answer.

look at some ballpark #s, no time to hard crunch exact math

Seabs + Anisimov + Boqvist + 2020 and 2021 1sts, both top 7 protected
is ballpark a shade over 12m
vs
Staal 2 yrs at half = 2.85
+ expiring Strome 3.1 + Namest 4 + Belesky 1.9
+ Lias Andersson elc
=ballpark 12m

rationale:
not counting draft picks, 3 bodies are swapped for 5, but Belesky is holdover I think from the Nash deal and can be buried in the A, so it is really 3 for 4.

Rangers have added Trouba + Fox, but while we have nice RD in the pipeline, we could use Boqvist as a more immediately ready option. We are hoping Shattenkirk will be over injury and shine, but can't be sure atm. Hopefully if he produces we get value out of him, if not he retires once we have enough RD depth kickin it.

Blackhawks don't have D up the wazu like Canes, but have enough.
Andersson helps at rejuvenating pivot, which CHI needs. Lias was an abomination all but the last 3 wks of the season, but that is significant cause at that point he demonstrated ability to skate at NHL level. He has enough of the rest needed to succeed. This is a guy who was rated 12OA or a little better, and Rangers reached b'c at the time they did not have Chytil/Howden. Cross needs satisfied w/swap of elcs.

Forgetting the dump Belesky, that leaves
Staal - now cheap to buy out if nec, not what he once was before injuries but useful as stay at home LD short term at least this yr
Strome - righty shot fits like glove, dibs on extending or not
Namest - overpriced but expiring, can get a taker at some pt for 2m if nec but prob ok for depth for this yr

Rangers have to swallow term, and don't really have RD room for Seabs at present, tho I could see perhaps Shatty crossing to LD so BS can take 3RD.
It is unlikely he stays length of the deal, and NY will not suffer cap hit to buy out, will instead minimize playing time but once IF compliance buyout(s) are available, then may be bought out.
AA can be used or swapped for future(s).

I understand reluctance at forking over even protected high picks [two 1sts in lieu of more 2nds], but there is no way NY takes on the albatross of the uber-toxic structural term of Seabs without pick inclusion.

I think only NMCs here are Seabs and Staal. Marc can read the handwriting on the wall, and we should be looking at moving Skjei also once Hajek/Lindgren/Rykov prove ready as expected. Hawks are competing, are ballpark close to where Staals grew up, and a fit for the team. I think he waives.

Seabs who knows, but NYR is a first class organization, we get Panarin, one or more good breaks and we are on our way, hopefully he would ok.

wait, that was a mess of a post, but are you saying:

Seabrook + Boqvist + AA + 2 1st's
for
Staal + Namestikov + Strome + Belesky + Andersson

??????????????????????

That is far and away the worst proposal I have ever seen on here. Impressive.

Chicago gets NO RELIEF (the point of trading Seabrook), and moves the 4 best pieces in the deal, including 3 1st round picks (Boqvist worth a very high 1st).

Are you able to block users?

 

[Rico Suave]

keep Boqvist kid will be a stud

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

Seabs + Anisimov + Boqvist + 2020 and 2021 1sts, both top 7 protected
is ballpark a shade over 12m
vs
Staal 2 yrs at half = 2.85
+ expiring Strome 3.1 + Namest 4 + Belesky 1.9
+ Lias Andersson elc
=ballpark 12m

 

[Taylorst]

I do believe Seabrook gets moved . The fact that it was on the down low him going to Vancouver tells me that a long conversation has been had with Seabrook already.


Now maybe Vancouver was his first choice and if any new deal arises Seabrook will have a say, but I believe he is more open now than he was in February.


Adding Olli and Calvin limit Chicago's ability to protect them next year with expansion, that means Keith, Seabrook one or both need to go if Chicago likes those 2 players to protect them

 

[Taylorst]

I don't agree that our window is closed. The Hawks are back to being a playoff team and anything can happen once you get there (i.e. St. Louis Blues).

I think Chicago's defense just became a lot better.

If Stan can add a few more pieces , center , winger and maybe another RHD

Then I like Chicago chances next season with a healthy Crawford , and huge upgrade in defense and more forward depth things look good

 

[LDF]

I do believe Seabrook gets moved . The fact that it was on the down low him going to Vancouver tells me that a long conversation has been had with Seabrook already.


Now maybe Vancouver was his first choice and if any new deal arises Seabrook will have a say, but I believe he is more open now than he was in February.


Adding Olli and Calvin limit Chicago's ability to protect them next year with expansion, that means Keith, Seabrook one or both need to go if Chicago likes those 2 players to protect them

Bravo !!!!!

best laid plans of mice and men.