Tanev has value with a solid contract. Seabrook has negative value with an awful contract. The gap in value is too much to even overcome with anything. You're looking at attaching Panarin to that deal
Seabrook doesn't have "negative" value.... Seabrook can justify his cap hit for the next couple of years (maybe longer) but that isn't certain.... The issue with Seabrooks contract isn't the "hit" it's the term.
That doesn't make him have negative value.. Any team would love to have him on the ice but if a deal was to happen the Hawks would have to take salary back and Seabrook would have to agree to move his NMC.
Bowman would have to find the right team.
1. Seabrook has to waive.
2. Seabrook's contract would need to not cripple that teams future plans.
3. Seabrook would need to fit into that teams plans. They would need to need a guy like Seabrook.
Many teams meet #3 but #1 & #2 are the issue..... I mean there are probably some teams that will give up quality players to take his contract but Seabrook wouldn't waive his NMC to go to those teams and there are teams that would love to have Seabrook but just cant financially do it without crippling their future because they're on the upswing and they know their young guys (their core) will need raises in the future and know Seabrook will inhibit that.
The only logical way a team that is on the upswing could justify bringing Seabrook in (such as Toronto or Edmonton for example) would be to trade for him, then use him for the next couple of years and then take a loss in dumping him somewhere when he is done, but that would be a difficult gamble considering he has a NMC...
Seabrook doesn't have "negative value" what he has is a tricky contract...... No, a guy like Bickell had negative value, however Seabrook is a different situation.