Discussion in 'Chicago Blackhawks' started by IceManCat, Nov 7, 2018.
Did coach Q want Saad back ? Or was it a management decision to trade Panarin ? Thanks -
bit of both IMO, Saad was viewed as a replacement for Hossa in some respects that combined with the past chemistry between Toews was the main reason for bringing him back in addition to be cost controlled for a number of years longer than Panarin.
Turned out to be a terrible trade
my guess is that Bowman looked at Panarin as a free find and a guy that they could not likely resign and Q likely looked at Q as a saviour for Toews and as somewhat a replacement for Hossa
This topic has been beaten to death, resurrected, and then beaten again. But if you must ask it has been said that both Kane and Toews wanted Saad back. At the time they might not have known it would have cost Panarin though. The loss of Hossa that off season also made it more palatable to get a player like Saad back to try and replace him. Lastly, Saad was more cost controlled at the time and signed for 2 more years which was a key asset for the Hawks cap situation going forward. All of this doesn't matter though because I had a dream last week that Panarin told me he was coming back so it's all going to be water under the bridge. Come July 1st we will have both Saad and Panarin on the team and we will no longer need to discuss this topic anymore.
A Freudian slip.
Some men dream of their hot ex-girlfriend. Some men dream of young sweaty muscular Russian men.
Since it didn't work out, it's clearly a Q move.
Stan made the trade. The credit/blame lies at his feet.
As somebody who is more "Team Stan": This. All signings/trades are his call ultimately. Manning/Panarin get laid at his feet.
It was reported by Scott Powers (one of the better Chicago beats) that both Kane and Toews told Stan they'd like Saad back, that the team was missing the speed/size he brought.
It's doubtful either said 'oh, and trade Panarin for him'.
Ultimately, the players' desire for Saad, the loss of Hossa, combined with the organization's aligned belief that the team got pushed around by Nashville in the playoff sweep (that's not actually what happened, but whatever, perception is reality when you're the ones with the hand on the wheel), combined with the price-tag that Panarin was inevitably going to demand resulted in the trade.
That’s for the responses folks would any of you make any assumptions that Panarin and Q have a rift.
I have not heard that Q and Panarin had a rift, in fact I read on many occasions that Q liked Panarin, now perhaps the feeling was not mutual...
First time I am hearing of this but with the internetz anything is possible. Just tweet it out and you can bet someone will roll with it for a story.
Do you have the link? It’s hard to imagine that Kane and Toews collectively walking in and telling Stan what to do, that just seems really odd to me. Did Stan come to them and ask them if they would be cool with Saad coming back? How was it exactly? It’s just strange to think that such scenario actually happened. It’s most likely after the trade had been made he talked to them and they said ofcoure we want him back and that’s what all players say for cliche purposes. Kane seemed pretty sad in the one interview he had after the trade and I am really sure he was mad when he heard of that trade.
I like to lay the blame completely on Stan, he traded Saad to begin with when he was the great Saad and that line of Saad-Toews-Hossa was just crushing. Then he traded Panarin which was an amazing find which apparently now looks like was not even because of him why he came here, and he traded him to fix the initial mistake that he made based on trying to revive Toews which anyone with any hockey knowledge could tell you he can only fix himself and it’s not the players around him. I just don’t take this trade as lightly as others, this trade should have got him canned immediately.
I don't think that was the case.
Panarin and Saad with the same price tag. Difference was the length of the contracts each. Hawks haven't had much to give to get Saad.
It was a solid deal when it was made and it turned out horrible so far
I doubt many people thought it was a solid deal. On paper we got ripped off and that's been the reality of the deal so far. I thought it was an absolute joke to trade a likely top ten forward in the league for Saad. It's turned out about like I thought it would. Saad will never be close to what Panarin is.
No... it was a Cap trade and we all thought Saad would play better. If he would have played like he did in his 1st stint here we wouldn't have this discussion.
2 years younger with 2 more years on the contract for a bit of a downgrade at LW. We did not know Saad would turn out as bad as he does.
I thought the trade was fine at the time, mainly because I didn't think Panarin could play as well (even better) without Kane beside him.
Turns out Panarin could, and Saad regressed hard, so it made the trade far worse. If you told me Panarin would play as good or better without Kane, and Saad would be the same player he was when he left, I wouldn't have liked the deal.
Separate names with a comma.