Friedman: Chicago still interested in Faulk

Taytro

Registered User
Oct 22, 2014
2,999
2,350
Ottawa, Ontario
Feel like Faulk has been the odd man out for a while they just couldn't find the value. Seems like they aren't afraid to make a big deal anymore so I can definetely see Faulk being moved this off season.
 

HawkeyTalkMan

Registered User
Jun 23, 2015
6,271
3,445
I read this as Hawks still interested in faulk but rumor was the asking price was sky high. No need for a team to cave to over market demands now that Carolina created a logjam on the blue line
 
  • Like
Reactions: AnimalFear

Big Daddy Cane

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 8, 2010
13,229
31,416
Western PA
  • Like
Reactions: Unsustainable

CallMeShaft

Calder Bedard Fan
Apr 14, 2014
15,739
21,153
I don't like the idea of trading Saad for Faulk. The value might not be far off, and both may have had down years, but Carolina wants to rid themselves of Faulk. They can only have three guys playing the right side, and they have too many, making Faulk the odd man out. Because of that, it makes sense to trade him now, despite his value being lower because of a down season.

But the Hawks have spots for Saad. We don't have to sell low on him. If we want to go in a different direction, which I'm not sure I personally want, we could at least wait a year and trade him when his value is hopefully higher. Just seems like poor asset management to do that now, in his worst season since he was a rookie.
 

Section88

Kaner? I hardly know her
Jul 11, 2017
5,573
4,795
Dont want to give up saad for faulk. Even though i know that will probably be the price. Will be interesting to see how this plays out
 

u2wojo

Registered User
Dec 22, 2011
806
573
Only way I am interested in Saad for Faulk is if it expands into an extended Skinner for a top 10 protected Hawk's first and a prospect. It appears Skinner is on the block (I assume some combination of the Canes won't pay him what he wants to extend or he wants out).
 

Big Daddy Cane

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 8, 2010
13,229
31,416
Western PA
I don't like the idea of trading Saad for Faulk. The value might not be far off, and both may have had down years, but Carolina wants to rid themselves of Faulk. They can only have three guys playing the right side, and they have too many, making Faulk the odd man out. Because of that, it makes sense to trade him now, despite his value being lower because of a down season.

But the Hawks have spots for Saad. We don't have to sell low on him. If we want to go in a different direction, which I'm not sure I personally want, we could at least wait a year and trade him when his value is hopefully higher. Just seems like poor asset management to do that now, in his worst season since he was a rookie.

Where has this been reported?

There is value in keeping Faulk. Not only does that give Carolina a strong 3rd pairing option, but it gives the Canes legit scoring threats from the point on both PP units. The Canes haven't had an above-average PP at any point this decade. Winnipeg made Byfuglien/Trouba/Myers work for 3.5 years and counting; Carolina can make Pesce/Hamilton/Faulk work.

Not to say he isn't obtainable in a trade for something reasonable, but there's not much motivation to sell at the price the Hawks want to pay. If Carolina asking for Saad caused someone from the Hawks organization to leak to the media that the Canes were overrating their assets, I can only imagine what Chicago is offering.
 

migi

Registered User
Feb 25, 2015
4,418
2,917
So Carolina gives up the two best players in the deal?

Yes and dump the worst player also.

That said I dont think value is right here. Blackhawks need to add first and everybody knows it. And that may not be enough. And I dont see Hawks trading any of their firsts.

But basically: Skinner UFA + Darling cap dump for Saad for three years is pretty fair?

1st in strong draft, Anisimov and prospect like Hinostroza for Faulk.
 

Toews2Bickell

It's Showtime
Nov 24, 2013
23,373
23,282
Hawks can’t afford to trade the 2019 first in a deal for Faulk. If Crawford is not 100% then that pick might be top 3.
 

Spectra

Registered boozer
Aug 3, 2005
2,519
458
Skinner is worth that alone

Lol, wut? No GM would trade Saad for a player who can only score goals (20-30 per year) signed for one more year, so your valuation is preposterous.

AA has some value, Darling has negative value, Faulk has the most value. A good prospect added from the Hawks would balance out the overall value of the transaction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dan Kelly

GoldiFox

Registered User
Apr 21, 2014
13,287
32,030
This interesting new concept that Faulk’s value has somehow gone down because of Hamilton.....

Fascinating.

That is HF logic. Similar to “Oh Waddell is there? time to pillage Carolina of their best players for peanuts.”.

When 5+ GMs are all fighting for the same top-4 RHD then I’m not sure the argument of “But you already have Hamilton so I won’t pay fair value” is going to carry much water.
 

u2wojo

Registered User
Dec 22, 2011
806
573
Skinner is worth that alone
The Hawks (or any team with an asset similar to him) would never consider Saad for Skinner even straight up much less adding. Skinner is signed for a year and will be asking for what Evander Kane just got for the 2nd and third years you still have Saad under contract for 6. Come back in a week after you see the term and rate centers like Bozak, Riley Nash, and your very own Ryan get and contrast that to what Anisimov is worth as a 20 goal/40 point center owed 3 years @ 4.55 per. You guys just unloaded Lindholm because his ask of 5+ was to rich (and he has never sniffed 20 goals). Anisimov is worth a low first or solid second at worst.

Don't take a trade offer that is a bit light in value and swing it into something ludicrous the other end of the spectrum.
 

tony d

Registered User
Jun 23, 2007
76,590
4,550
Behind A Tree
Faulk would be a great add for Chicago IMO. Got to think it may cost more than Saad to get him to the Windy City though.
 

HawkeyTalkMan

Registered User
Jun 23, 2015
6,271
3,445
Skinner is not returning some haul without being extended so Carolina fans need to temper their expectations here. Skinner is a 1 year rental at this point, likely asking for a raise on his next contract as well
 

GoldiFox

Registered User
Apr 21, 2014
13,287
32,030
Skinner is not returning some haul without being extended so Carolina fans need to temper their expectations here. Skinner is a 1 year rental at this point, likely asking for a raise on his next contract as well

Skinner has a NMC and the indications are that he is unwilling to waive unless an extension is available with a destination he likes. It is speculated that a deal with the Blues already fell through due to extension talks breaking down.

I'd guess that either an extended Skinner will be moved or he will be on the Canes next year. The extension could increase his trade value, but his NMC limiting destinations could decrease the demand. I'm guessing that Free Agent options also play a large factor here. Maybe someone like the Blues (if reports were true) will meet Skinner's demands after they hear what everyone else is asking for. It is all a dance - especially with a NMC involved.
 

WreckingCrew

Registered User
Feb 4, 2015
12,059
37,075
Skinner is not returning some haul without being extended so Carolina fans need to temper their expectations here. Skinner is a 1 year rental at this point, likely asking for a raise on his next contract as well
That's fine, if we're lowballed, I don't think we have any problem keeping Skinner for the year. Flip him at deadline if we're out or keep him for the playoffs and maybe he's more likely to stay on with us. If he can net us an asset we NEED (help with a 1C, 1G, or "change of scenery") then we might trade him, otherwise I think most of us are fine with seeing how he does on a team with a new coach and better talent around him.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->