Toggle sidebar

Proposal: CHI-NJ - Hall?

echlfreak

Registered User
Aug 1, 2003
1,955
456
Chicago gets:

Hall

NJ gets:

Lehner
Gus

NJ needs a goalie big time. Lehner has a ton of value as a trade chip. Maybe more to a contender than to a bottom place team?

Would you rather Lehner or Hall long term? Fire away!
Click to read more...
 

LDF

Registered User
Sep 28, 2016
11,778
1,172
ahhh there is nothing more to add that hasn't been mention. excellent work guys !!
 
Hawkaholic

Hawkaholic

Registered User
Dec 19, 2006
31,545
10,875
London, Ont.
If Lehner says no, I'm not signing here. I would absolutely do this, then flip Hall for an even bigger return than what Gus and Lehner could get at the TD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LDF

echlfreak

Registered User
Aug 1, 2003
1,955
456
If CHI can't afford Hall then they can't afford Lehner. Both will command 8-10M AAV. I would rather spend that on goal scorer than a goalie.
 
ChiHawks10

ChiHawks10

Registered User
Jul 7, 2009
28,031
21,320
Chicago 'Burbs
echlfreak said:
If CHI can't afford Hall then they can't afford Lehner. Both will command 8-10M AAV. I would rather spend that on goal scorer than a goalie.
Click to expand...

What? Who plays goalie then? Crawford's contract expires after this season. They can't afford both Hall, and Lehner, but they can afford one of them. Who is your solution at goalie, then? Crawford, at almost 36 years old at that point, with a long injury history?

And who in their right mind would rather spend cap dollars on a "goal scorer" that has scored over 30 goals once in his career, who is going to be 29 years old, instead of the most important position in the sport? Particularly when said goalie is showing to be a top 3 goalie in the NHL for two years running? I just... I can't anymore. :shakehead
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Blackhawks26, CourtneyDagger50 and jls24
No Fun Shogun

No Fun Shogun

34-38-61-10-13-15
May 1, 2011
56,264
13,064
Illinois
echlfreak said:
If CHI can't afford Hall then they can't afford Lehner. Both will command 8-10M AAV. I would rather spend that on goal scorer than a goalie.
Click to expand...

Only three goalies have that kind of cap hit, and they're Price, Lundqvist, and Bob. I would be utterly astonished if Lehner got anything much above $7m per even recognizing how great he's been the past couple years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jls24 and RememberTheRoar

LDF

Registered User
Sep 28, 2016
11,778
1,172
echlfreak said:
If CHI can't afford Hall then they can't afford Lehner. Both will command 8-10M AAV. I would rather spend that on goal scorer than a goalie.
Click to expand...
your argument is good but the numbers are wrong.

a really nice try.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ColdSteel2
ColdSteel2

ColdSteel2

Registered User
Aug 27, 2010
34,759
3,578
LDF said:
your argument is good but the numbers are wrong.

a really nice try.
Click to expand...

Right. Players like Hall don’t reach the open market as often as top end goalies. Not all teams are willing to pay top dollar for an elite goalie. That’s why they reach UFA more often. However, all teams are willing to pay top dollar for an elite forward or defenseman.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LDF

LDF

Registered User
Sep 28, 2016
11,778
1,172
ColdSteel2 said:
Right. Players like Hall don’t reach the open market as often as top end goalies. Not all teams are willing to pay top dollar for an elite goalie. That’s why they reach UFA more often. However, all teams are willing to pay top dollar for an elite forward or defenseman.
Click to expand...
a whole total different pov of your definition which i would never thought of. damn that was a good pov.
 
coolhand

coolhand

Registered User
Jan 20, 2016
2,624
1,937
Streamwood, IL
No way. Lehner has to be our future goalie, unless there is a surprise in the minors we don't know about. On a team with such poor defense we need a top goalie. Crawford is done and I'm not seeing a Belfour in Rockford.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OTC
Brightwing

Brightwing

Registered User
Oct 1, 2019
2,401
3,657
RememberTheRoar said:
So basically a taller, faster, lower-scoring Kane?
Click to expand...

No way. The Athletic had a story today quoting NHL execs assessing Hall. Basically they started off saying that to build a franchise around a winger they have to be special and one guy said he didn't think Hall thought the game at that level. Here's the follow up section:

So if Hall is an outlier as a winger – like an Ovechkin or a Patrick Kane – OK, pay him. But some whether Hall is that kind of outlier. “I’ve never had him in the superstar category,” added another longtime NHL executive and former player. “There’s just something missing for him. Does he put you over top? I don’t know.”
Another longtime executive and scout said Hall’s game is more straight line, up and down as opposed to wildly creative like Kane. And when you’re thinking long-term at a six-, seven- or eight-year deal, what invariably diminishes over time? Speed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: x Tame Impala, Crow, d rake and 1 other person
ChiTownPhilly

ChiTownPhilly

Not Too Soft
Feb 23, 2010
2,102
1,391
AnyWorld/I'mWelcomeTo
clydesdale line said:
If I'm trading Lehner or Gus, I'd want young assets and/or picks back. None of this "retool" B.S.
Click to expand...
Yeah- I think that's right. If you think you can re-sign Lehner, you re-sign that badboy and not look back. If you know you can't, you take appreciating assets (rather than depreciating ones) in return for them.

Okay, now let me look at this from NJ's perspective...

Since we know we can't re-sign Hall, we trade him to the highest bidder. But for the trade to make sense for us, we should receive appreciating assets, rather than depreciating ones. It's not like we're one experienced player away from contending.

So- this move doesn't make sense for either team. Basement-dwelling neighbors don't make good trading partners.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom