bernmeister
Registered User
No, solidly.
Although both NY + CHI presumably have deep enough pockets to get thru the next 2 yrs, cap hit is a big deal.
STRUCTURAL cap where large salaries make flexibility all the more difficult and even if Black Hawks eat half, that is still 5m for extensive term.
That alone = no.
Second is return; understandably they would still want something signif even w/major retention, We are NOT moving any of our elite elcs for an older, pricier vet.
Third, even with substitution to bypass this, it still doesn't work. In other words, if Toews came at half and the exchange was something like Trouba full pop, then even w/w'out Strome as a legit add or Smith as a cap dump, NY still winds up keeping signif salary. NO we do not want this.
Tho we may not concur on every point, I believe @cwede and I are in agreement that this is a yr for us to move vets as much as makes sense so our new emerging core can get max mins and be ready to kick ass following season. As a rule adding vets is counterproductive to this.
Although both NY + CHI presumably have deep enough pockets to get thru the next 2 yrs, cap hit is a big deal.
STRUCTURAL cap where large salaries make flexibility all the more difficult and even if Black Hawks eat half, that is still 5m for extensive term.
That alone = no.
Second is return; understandably they would still want something signif even w/major retention, We are NOT moving any of our elite elcs for an older, pricier vet.
Third, even with substitution to bypass this, it still doesn't work. In other words, if Toews came at half and the exchange was something like Trouba full pop, then even w/w'out Strome as a legit add or Smith as a cap dump, NY still winds up keeping signif salary. NO we do not want this.
Tho we may not concur on every point, I believe @cwede and I are in agreement that this is a yr for us to move vets as much as makes sense so our new emerging core can get max mins and be ready to kick ass following season. As a rule adding vets is counterproductive to this.