Speculation: Sell , Sell , Sell

[Rick C137]

Chuck Fletcher and Paul Holmgren meeting today. Sounds like it’s Fletcher’s job to lose. Goalie and center will be among priority adds for the new GM when named.

Anisimov should be shopped, although I dont think he would waive to Philadelphia.

Remember Anismov loses his NTC after this season. Think he should be a lot more willing to waive to places he wouldn’t hate going rather than having absolutely zero control where he goes season.

 

[Bubba88]

1. Kane and Toews CAP HIT is $10.5mn vs. Keith at $5.5mn.
2. Kane and Toews are younger.
3. Does Keith want go through a potential long rebuilding process?

NO ONE wants to trade Keith. However, ask yourself what's best for both parties?
* Has the Hawks timeline for the rebuild changed? Will it take longer?
* How will Keith perform at 37, 38, and 39 years of age?
* Can the Hawks pay $12.3mn for a third line pairing for '21, '22, '23 seasons?

The issue with Duncan Keith is Brent Seabrook. Because of Seabrook's contract ... can we afford to keep Duncan Keith at the latter end of his contract? Unless there is an amnesty clause, we're not getting rid of Seabrook's contract. There's a chance we can move Duncan Keith's contract ... especially if the timeline for the rebuild has changed.

For every action, there is a reaction. For every bad contract there is a reaction. If we keep both Seabrook and Keith's contract, the Hawks will inevitably lose valuable younger pieces in the future.

Ironically, a lot of the fans who have animosity towards Stan Bowman ... are adamant about making the same mistakes that's haunted him. Unfortunately, fiscal responsibility matters in hard capped sports. Emotions make for bad business / hockey decisions.

No need to being up a Keith trade. Guy has already outplayed his contract. He signed a retirement contract.

Keith will not get traded.

 

[piteus]

No need to being up a Keith trade. Guy has already outplayed his contract. He signed a retirement contract.

Keith will not get traded.

What is a "retirement contract?" If Keith wants to stay, he won't be traded because of his NTC ... that is correct.

However, what does outplaying his contract have anything to do with this? Are you saying the Hawks should do the best for Duncan Keith rather than for the organization? That's how you end up with Brent Seabrook's contract.

Duncan Keith is going to get paid regardless.

This is an exercise on what's best for the Chicago Blackhawks IF the timeline of the rebuild shifted. This is NOT an exercise on what's best for Duncan Keith. I'm a big Keith fan too ... but I'm putting my emotions aside. In a healthy organization, the interests of both sides will be taken into consideration.

 

[ColdSteel2]

Posters who ask to temper the enthusiasm on Strome are right. I also jumped the gun after one game. We need a bigger sample size.

However, you can tell Strome's body hasn't fully matured. He still looks like a teenager. It will be interesting how much better he can get when his conditioning and strength improves. I think there is decent upside.

Yep, good upside. Like @BK, you and others have said, it’s not so much that he is painfully slow, he just runs out of gas quicker than other players.

Coach him up the rest of this year and let him build some chemistry with our players. Have him spend the summer with Paul Goodman to work on his strength and conditioning. And then next year, we should see him start realizing his full potential.

 

[RememberTheRoar]

What is a "retirement contract?" If Keith wants to stay, he won't be traded because of his NTC ... that is correct.

However, what does outplaying his contract have anything to do with this? Are you saying the Hawks should do the best for Duncan Keith rather than for the organization? That's how you end up with Brent Seabrook's contract.

Duncan Keith is going to get paid regardless.

This is an exercise on what's best for the Chicago Blackhawks IF the timeline of the rebuild shifted. This is NOT an exercise on what's best for Duncan Keith. I'm a big Keith fan too ... but I'm putting my emotions aside. In a healthy organization, the interests of both sides will be taken into consideration.

I agree with this. If a contending team is willing to give up their first and B level prospect, why wouldn't you consider that as the Hawks?

This team is 2-3 years away from doing anything significant (sure, may scrape into the playoffs before that then exit in the 1st round) and at that point you better hope that all of Boqvist, Beaudin, and Forsling are providing more than Keith.

I'd move Keith for a proper return and roll a defense of:

Forsling-Jokiharu
Gustafsson-Murphy
Manning/Rockford callup-Seabrook (unless someone is dumb enough to take Seabrook's contract)

Next season I'd bump Murphy down and Seabrook out for Mitchell. Let Beaudin and Boqvist develop another year instead of rushing them to the NHL, unless they show they're without a doubt ready.

 

[BK]

Yep, good upside. Like @BK, you and others have said, it’s not so much that he is painfully slow, he just runs out of gas quicker than other players.

Coach him up the rest of this year and let him build some chemistry with our players. Have him spend the summer with Paul Goodman to work on his strength and conditioning. And then next year, we should see him start realizing his full potential.

I would send him to Gary Roberts personally.

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

I agree with this. If a contending team is willing to give up their first and B level prospect, why wouldn't you consider that as the Hawks?

Keith has to want to go. It's not the Hawks decision.

 

[ColdSteel2]

I would send him to Gary Roberts personally.

It would be nice to know what he’s been doing in the offseasons up to this point. You would think with his older brother, he’s had good exposure to training opportunities.

 

[RememberTheRoar]

Keith has to want to go. It's not the Hawks decision.

Everything everyone says about a potential Keith is under the assumption he would be willing to waive.

Everyone understands he can't be moved without his consent.

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

Everything everyone says about a potential Keith is under the assumption he would be willing to waive.

Everyone understands he can't be moved without his consent.

And that is a huge assumption that has nothing to support it at this time, which is why it's not worth discussing. He holds all the cards. He is a legend in this town and has won 3 times.

If we are just speculating, I speculate that playing his whole career with one team would mean more to him than trying to chase a 4th ring. The guys that ring chase are guys that haven't won.

 

[piteus]

Keith has to want to go. It's not the Hawks decision.

That is correct. Hence, it's only a question posed IF our timeline of the rebuild changed. Let's say it's going to take 2-3 years for the Hawks to seriously contend again. Does an older Keith want to go through another rebuild? Would he take a trade to Toronto (where he played in Juniors) or Boston (his favorite childhood team)? Are there other teams?

If the Hawks can be legitimate contenders in 2019-2020, of course you keep Duncan Keith. However, my concern is that it might take longer. That's why the Hawks might want to explore a potential Keith trade.

I'm just being realistic. Of course no one wants to trade Duncan Keith. Of the larger contracts on the team, Kane is untouchable. Toews at $10.5mn will not be easy to trade. Seabrook at $6.8mn is impossible. That leaves Anisimov, Saad, Keith, Crow, and Murphy.

I think it's consensus Anisimov is on the trading block. Who knows about Saad and Murphy? That leaves Crow and Keith.

 

[RememberTheRoar]

And that is a huge assumption that has nothing to support it at this time, which is why it's not worth discussing. He holds all the cards. He is a legend in this town and has won 3 times.

If we are just speculating, I speculate that playing his whole career with one team would mean more to him than trying to chase a 4th ring. The guys that ring chase are guys that haven't won.

Okay, I'm not going to get involved in another speculative conversation about Keith's personal value system and his internal desires.

The Keith conversations are being had here under a big, giant, bold, underlined IF he were willing to waive it. If you don't want to be involved in that conversation, then don't.

I'm not sure why it bothers you.

 

[Toews2Bickell]

 

[piteus]

And that is a huge assumption that has nothing to support it at this time, which is why it's not worth discussing. He holds all the cards. He is a legend in this town and has won 3 times.

If we are just speculating, I speculate that playing his whole career with one team would mean more to him than trying to chase a 4th ring. The guys that ring chase are guys that haven't won.

Who knows? Even Michael Jordan played in Washington.

Duncan might never want to leave Chicago. A competitor like Duncan might want to compete for more Cups. It's his call.

That's why I ask the question ... would you trade Keith if given a chance with the rebuild being pushed out.

 

[Toews2Bickell]

Love this idea. Lets lock up 10mil in net when the UFA class is loaded next summer.

 

[RememberTheRoar]

Love this idea. Lets lock up 10mil in net when the UFA class is loaded next summer.

How the hell does doing this help? What a dumb idea.

 

[Rick C137]

Chief is quickly sliding close to the ignore list

 

[LordKOTL]

Nashville traded Weber, but the deal was do good and his retire likelyhood was so far away it was a worthy move.

But I think Keith would not want to hurt the hawks and retire on his own accord unless he really gets to a point he's not playing much or getting scratched/3rd pair rolls. That might be a case where he might retire. Trade him to a team Q winds up coaching and maybe you can bank on that not happening.

Maybe, maybe not. My point was that, like @b1e9a8r5s said, Keith holds all the cards, not just because of an ironclad NMC, but because if the 'hawks brass piss him off he can really hurt their cap moving forward.

And I think the Weber/Subban deal has some kind of tacit handshake agreement that Weber would not outright retire. If the 'hawks were looking to explore that option the same would need to be done for Keith. Plus, consider Weber--he was still in his prime. Keith is about 3 years past his prime and not getting any younger. Assuming the issues Keith has now don't go away because it's just who he is--would he be getting the time he wants elsewhere or would he be passed up for younger, better personnel? Further, if he is in and out of the pressbox be it with the 'hawks or someone else, like you said, maybe incentive for him to retire. But at least if the 'hawks keep him happy he can Pronger himself. That means though it's what Keith wants...not what Stan, JC, McDonut, or the fans want.

If Stan (hypothetically) *really* pisses Keith off Keith can fire one hell of a parting shot...and that is a risk. Be it Stan or the next GM no team would want a Artem Anisimov-sized cap hole when you have guys like Debrincat, Jokiharju, Boqvist, etc. looking for a contract soon. Either you can't sign one of them or it further hampers the ability to sign depth. That's not a smart move in the best interests of the club.

 

[LDF]

Who knows? Even Michael Jordan played in Washington.

Duncan might never want to leave Chicago. A competitor like Duncan might want to compete for more Cups. It's his call.

That's why I ask the question ... would you trade Keith if given a chance with the rebuild being pushed out.

for me, everyone is tradeable..... so what is the rtn that will help in my idea for trading.

 

[piteus]

Anisimov and Keith for Nylander?

We can even take a crappy contract back like Nathan Horton (which lasts until the 2019-2020 season).

 

[LordKOTL]

Who knows? Even Michael Jordan played in Washington.

Duncan might never want to leave Chicago. A competitor like Duncan might want to compete for more Cups. It's his call.

That's why I ask the question ... would you trade Keith if given a chance with the rebuild being pushed out.

On the assumption that:

1. Keith wants out.
2. There's a tacit agreement that Keith will Pronger himself and not retire.
3. That Keith will not invoke his Recapture penalty no matter what.

Yeah, if the piece coming back helps the club in the grand scheme-of-things.

The problem is we don't know if he wants out. We don't know if he's willing to play for another club, and hell, we (the fans) don't even know if asking him to waive his NMC & be traded is enough to sour/insult him into taking the Prongering option off the table.

IMHO that's enough to consider the likleyhood of Keith being traded as far-fetched and not a piece that can/should be speculated on being able to moveable. Hell, I'd argue that jettisoning Seabrook is more likely.

 

[LDF]

And that is a huge assumption that has nothing to support it at this time, which is why it's not worth discussing. He holds all the cards. He is a legend in this town and has won 3 times.

If we are just speculating, I speculate that playing his whole career with one team would mean more to him than trying to chase a 4th ring. The guys that ring chase are guys that haven't won.

what i find troubling is Keith has a lot invested in the Chi are but as i said i would trade Seabs, and he too have a lot invested here. i should be equal is accepting Keith as trade bait. this is cold and harsh, but hockey is a business as well.

 

[BK]

Anisimov and Keith for Nylander?

We can even take a crappy contract back like Nathan Horton (which lasts until the 2019-2020 season).

HF boards would meltdown.

 

[piteus]

On the assumption that:

1. Keith wants out.
2. There's a tacit agreement that Keith will Pronger himself and not retire.
3. That Keith will not invoke his Recapture penalty no matter what.

Yeah, if the piece coming back helps the club in the grand scheme-of-things.

The problem is we don't know if he wants out. We don't know if he's willing to play for another club, and hell, we (the fans) don't even know if asking him to waive his NMC & be traded is enough to sour/insult him into taking the Prongering option off the table.

IMHO that's enough to consider the likleyhood of Keith being traded as far-fetched and not a piece that can/should be speculated on being able to moveable. Hell, I'd argue that jettisoning Seabrook is more likely.

That's all fair points. My exercise was pure speculation that Keith might be willing to waive his NTC now ... since our rebuild might take longer than expected. That also means only a limited markets would be available.

So how about:

Chicago trades Anismov / Keith for Toronto's Nylander and Horton.

Chicago gets Nylander. Toronto gets a replacement center and a first pairing DMen. The Hawks also give the Leafs cap relief by taking Horton's contract. The Hawks will also have enough cap space for a major UFA next summer.

 

[LDF]

What you're both missing is the recapture penalty:
If we trade Keith now and he retires at the end of this season, the 'hawks are on the hook for 3.1M in cap penalty until 2023.
If he retires in the summer of 2020, the cap penalty is 3.46M until 2023.
If he retires in the summer of 2021, the cap penalty is 3.74M until 2023.
If he retires in the summer of 2022, the cap penalty is 4.04M for the following season.

Any GM would have to be a special kind of stupid to expose the 'hawks to that level of cap liability.

That's not "emotional". That's not about whether or not Keith can help or hurt the team. It's the same as Hossa: Neither the 'hawks nor any other team is going to trade a recapture-risk contract until/unless the player pulls a Pronger/Hossa, or there's some kind of agreement in place that they will not officially retire.

Keith is with the 'hawks for the duration unless he wants out.

totally agree.