Kaners Bald Spot
Registered User
Isn't there an 8 skaters and a goalie option? If so:
Toews
Kane
Strome
DeBrincat
Keith
Seabs
Murphy
Joki
Delia
Problem solved
Toews
Kane
Strome
DeBrincat
Keith
Seabs
Murphy
Joki
Delia
Problem solved
Speculation: Gustafsson
- Thread starter echlfreak
- Start date
Toews2Bickell
It's Showtime
- Nov 24, 2013
- 23,384
- 23,297
ColdSteel2
Registered User
- Aug 27, 2010
- 34,759
- 3,578
That works assuming we don’t sign any free agents. I didn’t realize it before, but even middle 6 guys are going to get NMCs with the expansion draft looming. So cross guys like Dzingel and Silfverberg of your lists. They are going to go to a team that does the 7-3-1 setup and get their NMC through the expansion draft year.
Hawkaholic
Registered User
Possible, I guess. I'm assuming we are signing a decent free agent forward this year, or next. We'd probably still lose Gus in that situation, so still best to trade him or Murph before it to get assets out of it instead of losing them for nothing.
Styles
No Light, No Signal
- Apr 6, 2017
- 8,190
- 13,253
Making your team worse because of an expansion draft in two years is silly.
Kaners Bald Spot
Registered User
Agreed. I really don't want to lose Murphy and I'd almost rather trade Joki for a similarly talented young F. The Hawks have nobody that brings what Murphy does in the system.
Hawkaholic
Registered User
Losing guys for nothing when you aren't a Cup contender is silly.
Styles
No Light, No Signal
- Apr 6, 2017
- 8,190
- 13,253
Hawkaholic
Registered User
So people can't have a different opinion on where this team will be in two years?
If this team shows a lot more next year, I may change my opinion on the matter.
But as of right now, you have to look ahead to the expansion draft and have a Plan B if this team isn't competing for a Cup next year.
I think the point people have made time and time again is if you don't think the team can compete in the next 2-3 years, then you have to commit to a full rebuild. Gus should go in that case, but so should a ton of other guys, so focusing on Gus becomes a bit silly.
Hawkaholic
Registered User
Who else should go? Toews? no, Kane? no. Cat? No, Strome? no. Basically everyone else on this roster I could careless about.
Styles
No Light, No Signal
- Apr 6, 2017
- 8,190
- 13,253
You can have whatever opinion you want. It’s just very hard to know what the roster will be that far out is all I’m saying. I wouldn’t not sign a free agent just because of the expansion draft or trade someone because of it. I’d rather pay to keep guys because I think we will be competing. A guy like Murphy might not even be here considering what we have in the pipeline.
Hawkaholic
Registered User
Of course it is, but it's a discussion board. And GMs absolutely are trading or signing guys with the expansion draft in mind. I'd rather keep a Murphy over a Gus, so it's a discussion point where you have to keep the expansion draft in mind.
Why wouldn't you consider trading some of those guys if you don't believe the team can compete in the next 2-3 years?
ColdSteel2
Registered User
- Aug 27, 2010
- 34,759
- 3,578
The idea that this team can compete in the next 2 years is predicated on getting Panarin or Stone.
Conservative estimates:
Panarin 10M
Debrincat 7.5M
Strome 6M
Gustafsson 4.5M
Now, I’m not saying I think we will get these guys that cheap, but if we somehow could, do we have room for another 28M in salary after next year?
Hawkaholic
Registered User
I think Strome and Cat are self explanatory. Kane will still be a world class player in 3-4 years. Toews probably will still be very good, and would be the best mentor for the young guys coming in. Toews is really the only one you could realistically trade, but it won't happen, ever.
Chicago Blackhawks - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps
It's not incredibly unrealistic given the current salary cap structure.
ColdSteel2
Registered User
- Aug 27, 2010
- 34,759
- 3,578
It’s incredibly rare for someone to sign an extension with a year left on their ELC, let alone a bridge. I’m not even sure Cat would take a long term deal now.
Strome has every reason to play a full year here next year then cash in.
At the start of the 21-22 season, Toews will be 33 and Kane will be 32. As I have shown previously, players performance tends to decline significantly in their early 30s. Maybe both Kane and Toews will continue to be elite players, but it's a major risk. How much more with Keith and Seabrook have declined by then?
Sure you could lock up Strome and Cat, but what are you accomplishing if you do that? They are great players but they are, IMO, not the types of guys who LEAD you to Cups. Basically, they are not a Toews/Kane level combo, even if they are both really really good.
So what are you hoping for? Realistically, with you plan, your only window is when Toews and Kane are still viable with would be 21-22 and 22-23. You are hoping they have not declined to where they are no longer elite players, you are hoping Keith and Seabrook have not declined.
It's just really not a very good plan.
Styles
No Light, No Signal
- Apr 6, 2017
- 8,190
- 13,253
I wouldn’t say it’s rare. A lot of guys do it for the security.
Styles
No Light, No Signal
- Apr 6, 2017
- 8,190
- 13,253
ColdSteel2
Registered User
- Aug 27, 2010
- 34,759
- 3,578
Kevin Musto
Hard for Bedard
- Feb 16, 2018
- 20,938
- 27,228
Cat and Strome taking 3 year bridge deals would be interesting.
It would take them to free agency, however those deals would expire at the same time as the Toews and Kane contracts so there'd be a lot more space to lock Strome and Cat up long term.
It would take them to free agency, however those deals would expire at the same time as the Toews and Kane contracts so there'd be a lot more space to lock Strome and Cat up long term.
