Speculation: Gustafsson

[HawksBeerFan]

I’m beating a dead horse at this point, but I believe our only chance to compete in the next 3 seasons is to trade roster players for picks and prospects, then be very active in free agency to replace the lost NHL talent. We’d be a cap team with even more quality cheap young talent on the way. We’ll see what happens.

The flaw in your plan is very very few NHL draftees impact the team they are drafted by 2-3 years after they are drafted, EVEN if they end up being good players.

 

[ColdSteel2]

if you trade Gus then tack on another 2-3 years after your at least 2 years estimation.

I do not get why anyone is suggesting to trade Gus then say our defense needs improving lol...it makes no logical sense to trade away the best thing we have on the point right now, it only sets us back even further...you keep Gus over a 25% chance of a late 1st round pick possibly being Ryan Hartman...come on guys!

I’m open to holding onto Gus until this time next year and re-evaluating. But Saad and Anisimov are a different story, I’d move them for younger and cheaper players, preferably on defense.

 

[ChiHawks10]

I’m beating a dead horse at this point, but I believe our only chance to compete in the next 3 seasons is to trade roster players for picks and prospects, then be very active in free agency to replace the lost NHL talent. We’d be a cap team with even more quality cheap young talent on the way. We’ll see what happens.

So sign UFAs to what are regularly bloated contracts, rather than keep the talent we have who are on solid contracts? Then expect a bunch of kids to come up and be the difference in the team contending for a Cup? I'll have to disagree that this is the way to do it.

 

[LDF]

Keith is movable. His cap hit is 5.5m. He has to waive his NMC, though.

and until he does i will look at it being unmovable. no offense intended.

 

[ChiHawks10]

and until he does i will look at it being unmovable. no offense intended.

Well yeah, because he has a no movement clause. I just mean it's not a bad contract like Seabrook's is.

 

[LDF]

Well yeah, because he has a no movement clause. I just mean it's not a bad contract like Seabrook's is.

and with in this post, i totally agree with your thought process.... i really am.

it is just me and me being sooooo pessimistic in everything.

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

I’m open to holding onto Gus until this time next year and re-evaluating. But Saad and Anisimov are a different story, I’d move them for younger and cheaper players, preferably on defense.

Anisimov is for sure. Saad, I'm less sure about. I feel like I'm in the minority on him, but I think he still helps the team. I get that he's a little overpaid and he is what he is, but he's a solid middle 6 forward. I don't think his market would be all that strong right now, so I'd probably just keep him.

 

[AmericanDream]

I’m open to holding onto Gus until this time next year and re-evaluating. But Saad and Anisimov are a different story, I’d move them for younger and cheaper players, preferably on defense.

and I think that is where Most of us should be - cautiously optimistic with Gus, but he has to prove it again next year. I don't think he is going to forget what made him successful this season and turn into Rutta next year, but he most certainly can cool off and hit a road block or two, it happens. But even if that happens he is still easily moveable, and maybe you lose the 1st you would have gotten this year for him and instead get a 2nd for next year....or by hanging on to him, he turns into John Klingberg??? I would much rather hang tight and see if we can get that type of player vs a late 1st round pick.

As for AA and Saad, I think right now they better play their balls off if they want to stay here at least this season. With the Hawks in a playoff hunt, though unlikely, not sure selling these guys off is going to happen unless they are once again making hockey smart trades and getting younger guys back that can contribute right away. I am more for that than just getting picks back, especially for Saad as if we move him we need something back in the lineup, less with AA of course.

 

[ColdSteel2]

So sign UFAs to what are regularly bloated contracts, rather than keep the talent we have who are on solid contracts? Then expect a bunch of kids to come up and be the difference in the team contending for a Cup? I'll have to disagree that this is the way to do it.

I wouldn’t advocate they sign bad contracts. But for me, I am ok waiting to go on Cup runs with Kane and Toews at age 33 instead of age 31. Obviously, they’ll try to do it as quickly as possible. But these guys aren’t at the end of their careers by any means.

 

[LDF]

and I think that is where Most of us should be - cautiously optimistic with Gus, but he has to prove it again next year. I don't think he is going to forget what made him successful this season and turn into Rutta next year, but he most certainly can cool off and hit a road block or two, it happens. But even if that happens he is still easily moveable, and maybe you lose the 1st you would have gotten this year for him and instead get a 2nd for next year....or by hanging on to him, he turns into John Klingberg??? I would much rather hang tight and see if we can get that type of player vs a late 1st round pick.

As for AA and Saad, I think right now they better play their balls off if they want to stay here at least this season. With the Hawks in a playoff hunt, though unlikely, not sure selling these guys off is going to happen unless they are once again making hockey smart trades and getting younger guys back that can contribute right away. I am more for that than just getting picks back, especially for Saad as if we move him we need something back in the lineup, less with AA of course.

i really hate comparing other org to the Bhawks org esp with our fan base.

a lot of team will like to have a problem with Saad and his age and regretfully saying with his salary.

but i have this feeling in the last yr or so, if you are on the Bhawks, the feeling is, "you better produce or else" there is no middle ground.

with this i am at an impasse.

 

[HawksBeerFan]

I wouldn’t advocate they sign bad contracts. But for me, I am ok waiting to go on Cup runs with Kane and Toews at age 33 instead of age 31. Obviously, they’ll try to do it as quickly as possible. But these guys aren’t at the end of their careers by any means.

How scoring rates change as players age

Odds are they will be moving out of their primes by the time your plan is ready for the Hawks to compete. Sure, both could end up being exceptions, but I'd rather not bank on that.

Plus, as I pointed out, your plan also relies on prospects developing way faster than normal and becoming NHL contributors much faster than normal.

Lots of things you are hoping for in your approach.

 

[ColdSteel2]

How scoring rates change as players age

Odds are they will be moving out of their primes by the time your plan is ready for the Hawks to compete. Sure, both could end up being exceptions, but I'd rather not bank on that.

Plus, as I pointed out, your plan also relies on prospects developing way faster than normal and becoming NHL contributors much faster than normal.

Lots of things you are hoping for in your approach.

That’s even more true if you want to compete in the next couple years. I’m at least giving all of these guys a couple years to develop. And as I’ve said, we can make hockey trades to get younger NHL ready talent too.

Where I’m lost is what is the plan to compete even sooner?

 

[ChiHawks10]

That’s even more true if you want to compete in the next couple years. I’m at least giving all of these guys a couple years to develop. And as I’ve said, we can make hockey trades to get younger NHL ready talent too.

Where I’m lost is what is the plan to compete even sooner?

Continue with what they're currently doing?

 

[HawksBeerFan]

That’s even more true if you want to compete in the next couple years. I’m at least giving all of these guys a couple years to develop. And as I’ve said, we can make hockey trades to get younger NHL ready talent too.

Where I’m lost is what is the plan to compete even sooner?

1. Sign one of the big FAs this year to plug into the top 6, say Panarin, and you have a really good top 6...

Panarin - Toews - Kane
DeBrincat - Strome - Kahun

2. Hope and pray that 1-2 of the "big 3" D prospects develop and area ready to play next year and are impact players the year after that so your D core is...

-Keith (likely in a mid-pairing role)
-Joker (likely in a mid-pairing role)
-Murphy (shut down role)
-Dahlstrom (shut down role)
-Gus (offense first, PP role)
-high end prospect developing (likely either Boqvist or Mitchell)
-Seabrook

There's room for failure in that plan as well, Murphy and Dahlstrom look like the shut down pairing of the future, but if Dahlstrom regresses then you have Boqvist or Mitchell developing to offset that. The only real problem is Seabrook's roster spot.

3. Hope a Crawford/Delia tandem is viable. We need Delia to continue to look good. Crawford is likely done as a full time NHL starter but I could see him being very good in a 30ish game role.

4. Hope you get something in the way of depth from your current prospects. With the top 6 set, we just need a couple of our young players to be solid scoring contributors.

I know the D hasn't been good this year but there's a real path for it to get significantly better in the next 1-2 years. The biggest risk is goaltending but Delia looks very solid there so far.

 

[LDF]

1. Sign one of the big FAs this year to plug into the top 6, say Panarin, and you have a really good top 6...

Panarin - Toews - Kane
DeBrincat - Strome - Kahun

2. Hope and pray that 1-2 of the "big 3" D prospects develop and area ready to play next year and are impact players the year after that so your D core is...

-Keith (likely in a mid-pairing role)
-Joker (likely in a mid-pairing role)
-Murphy (shut down role)
-Dahlstrom (shut down role)
-Gus (offense first, PP role)
-high end prospect developing (likely either Boqvist or Mitchell)
-Seabrook

There's room for failure in that plan as well, Murphy and Dahlstrom look like the shut down pairing of the future, but if Dahlstrom regresses then you have Boqvist or Mitchell developing to offset that. The only real problem is Seabrook's roster spot.

3. Hope a Crawford/Delia tandem is viable. We need Delia to continue to look good. Crawford is likely done as a full time NHL starter but I could see him being very good in a 30ish game role.

4. Hope you get something in the way of depth from your current prospects. With the top 6 set, we just need a couple of our young players to be solid scoring contributors.

I know the D hasn't been good this year but there's a real path for it to get significantly better in the next 1-2 years. The biggest risk is goaltending but Delia looks very solid there so far.

imho you point has a lot of moving parts that needs to gel and become a reality.

but i am not critiquing your post but i am here is say i really like your post.

 

[HawksBeerFan]

imho you point has a lot of moving parts that needs to gel and become a reality.

but i am not critiquing your post but i am here is say i really like your post.

There absolutely are. My point is they have less than trading our NHL assets right now for future picks in the hopes those players will develop into NHL players in 3+ years.

 

[Pez68]

I’m beating a dead horse at this point, but I believe our only chance to compete in the next 3 seasons is to trade roster players for picks and prospects, then be very active in free agency to replace the lost NHL talent. We’d be a cap team with even more quality cheap young talent on the way. We’ll see what happens.

You do realize that most picks and prospects take 2-4 seasons to make the NHL, right? If they even make the NHL... Chances are, ANYONE you draft this season isn't contributing until AT LEAST 2021-2022....

Your suggestion pushes the plan back years.... Toews' and Kane are signed until 2022-2023...

 

[Hawkaholic]

People are forgetting about the expansion draft here I think.

We can only protect 3 Dmen.
Keith, Seabrook, and Jokiharju/Murphy/Gus.

We can't hold onto all these guys, one of the 3 guys are going to have to be traded, unless Keith and Seabs do the Hawks a huge solid and waive their NMC for the draft.

 

[HawksBeerFan]

People are forgetting about the expansion draft here I think.

We can only protect 3 Dmen.
Keith, Seabrook, and Jokiharju/Murphy/Gus.

We can't hold onto all these guys, one of the 3 guys are going to have to be traded, unless Keith and Seabs do the Hawks a huge solid and waive their NMC for the draft.

If you believe the Hawks can compete in 19-20 and 20-21, then worry about the expansion draft later.

 

[ChiHawks10]

People are forgetting about the expansion draft here I think.

We can only protect 3 Dmen.
Keith, Seabrook, and Jokiharju/Murphy/Gus.

We can't hold onto all these guys, one of the 3 guys are going to have to be traded, unless Keith and Seabs do the Hawks a huge solid and waive their NMC for the draft.

You can basically pay them not to take guys, also...

"Hey... we'll throw ya a 3rd rounder if you take this guy, and not this guy. Whadda ya say?"

 

[Hawkaholic]

If you believe the Hawks can compete in 19-20 and 20-21, then worry about the expansion draft later.

I don't believe they can next year, MAYBE the year after.

 

[Hawkaholic]

You can pay teams not to take guys, also...

"Hey... we'll throw ya a 3rd rounder if you take this guy, and not this guy." What ya say?

That hasn't worked at all for the teams that have done that for Vegas. Very risky, and the other team has to agree to it as well.

 

[HawksBeerFan]

I don't believe they can next year, MAYBE the year after.

This again gets back to what's been discussed elsewhere in this thread. If you don't think they win a Cup in the two years after this one, then you probably need to commit to a full rebuild.

 

[ChiHawks10]

That hasn't worked at all for the teams that have done that for Vegas. Very risky, and the other team has to agree to it as well.

What do you mean it hasn't worked? Multiple teams did it with Vegas, IIRC. That it hasn't worked in their favor as far as retaining the player? As long as the two teams agree to it, then it can be done.

 

[Hawkaholic]

What do you mean it hasn't worked? Multiple teams did it with Vegas, IIRC. That it hasn't worked in their favor as far as retaining the player? As long as the two teams agree to it, then it can be done.

Florida gave them Riley Smith in order for them to take Marsechault (sp?) and not a Dman. That was awful.
Columbus gave them William Karlsson to take Clarksons contract, and not Josh Anderson.

It just doesn't seem like a good idea to start doing that.

And what would it take for Seattle to not take Murphy or Gus? Here, take Jokiharju instead? Boqvist, Mitchell?