The Panarin hate in this thread is weird...
He was better in his rookie season, sure, but he was still a good player for us. His defense didn't get worse last season. The only thing that became worse was his creativity in the offensive zone (he spent too much time waiting in the left circle for a one timer). But he was still a damn fine player.
I will miss him next year. And I'm man enough to admit as much. I think Saad is a better fit with what the Hawks need than Panarin, but that shouldn't mean we should turn on him.
I think his biggest issue is needing to be so damn sheltered, which having the defensively inept Kane by his side didn't help matters. But if that's the way Q would've used him for the next two seasons, I'm happy we could swap him for Saad.
I don't see anyone turning on Panarin. Personally, I loved him, and wished it made more sense to keep him as a Hawk. But the Hawks had a Panarin in Kane, already. They didn't need another guy playing lackadaisical D, floating constantly, and sitting around as a one-dimensional player waiting for his one-timer opportunity from the top of the circles. And say what you want about his D, CMS, but it definitely took a drop from year 1 to year 2. There's no doubt about it. The effort on D wasn't there like it was in year 1, and prior to the contract. I'll miss him too. He was fun to watch. But Saad fills a much bigger hole in comparison to Panarin. As far as Kane goes... he's not defensively inept. He's A. Not asked to play D. His purpose is to setup goals and bury the puck. Period. Two things he's better at than the vast majority of the NHL. B. Chooses not to play hard on both sides of the ice, reserving his energy for odd-man breaks, and dominating in the offensive zone. I mean, he's given an outrageous amount of O zone starts for a reason. When he wants to, he can be solid enough defensively. We've seen it time and time again. He's a significantly different defensive player in the playoffs, as well. But they put defensively responsible players on his lines, in order to free him up to use his skills/talents where they're best served. In the offensive zone. Because he's better than pretty much anyone in the game when it comes to what he does. No need for him to be strapped down by playing hard two-way hockey.
If Panarin "played for the money first," he probably would have not signed an extension during the season. He would have waited, played hardball with demanding an offer the cap-strapped Hawks couldn't afford, and then probably have been traded due to the threat of an offer sheet. Sort of like, I don't know.... what happened to Saad?
Panarin could have gotten more than 6 million from another team if he really wanted to play hardball, that's for damn sure.
I understand the reasons the Hawks made the swap but this turning on the player as soon as he is traded thing is not a good look. He was very much a fan favorite in Chicago prior to the trade, and was hardly the only player who didn't produce in the playoffs.
I'm not turning on the player. See above response to CMS. People can criticize a player and explain how he's not as good a fit on this team as Saad, but still like the player... I still like Panarin. But his entire game took a dip in year two, and more specifically, his defensive play fell off hard compared to year one. And with the loss of Hossa, a very good, two-way player was needed to fill that huge hole. Enter Saad. Exit Panarin. It's only logical that it would happen. What would you rather have? Two Kanes and no Hossa? Or one Kane, and one Hossa-lite? I know what I'd pick.
The Big Question...Why??? Because they are not TRUE fans, they are fairweather fans who flock to the next big thing when they start winning...when the hawks get bad again,and they will, those same fans will be Penguin fans or Oiler fans or whoever is the flavor of the month.
Kinda like the fools who have to have the newest and best Iphone so they can be part of the IN crowd. I'm sure you know someone who is like that right? BTW I'm not nor are my friends hawk fans...we revile the team for reasons to long to type. And yes the old man is part of that.
Dude... this is so outrageous to me. You think that local Chicago fans will flock to another city's team because the Hawks get bad? You think that all those millions of people in Chicago wearing Hawks gear are going to start wearing Penguins gear, or Oilers gear now that they're winning again? Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds? Do you think that's why the Hawks fans stopped supporting the team and organization in the past? Because they were bad?
Do you see the White Sox fans the past handful of years cheering on other teams? With the exception of the Cubs, no. You don't. I'm a southsider, and a diehard Sox fan, but I've watched more and more of the Cubs the past few years, and very little of the Sox, because I have friends that are Cubs fans, my GF is a Cubs fan, and the Sox just haven't been a watchable product. Whereas the Cubs have been fun and exciting, with a lot of young, amazing talent. Baseball is already tough to watch, IMO. Really bad baseball... is impossible to watch. So am I a bandwagoner for the Cubs? By your definition, I probably would be. Which couldn't be farther from the truth. I even bought a damn Cubs official World Series hat. Just to have one, as it was an absolutely historic moment in sports history. Now that the Sox have made moves to bring in some exciting young talent, I'll be watching them more, as they have players that I want to keep up with, and watch develop, just like I watched Hawks players develop over the past 10 years. I know a ton of people who love specific players, and own 3-4 jerseys for different teams for said player because they just love that player, no matter what team they're on. I suppose they're a bandwagon fan, also, because they own another team's jersey?
As for your iPhone reference... it's different than a loyalty to a sports team. Your scenario is not in any way close to being the same as what you're describing with the sports teams/bandwagon fans. If you were to say that they always have to have the newest and best, regardless of the brand, then it would be more accurate. Like they switch from Android to iPhone back and forth every time the newest and best device comes out. That would be an accurate comparison scenario. And that's just not true. There's brand loyalty. ESPECIALLY with sports teams in a city. Yes, I have friends and relatives that always have to have the newest device... but it's always specific to their brand loyalty. I don't know anyone who gets the brand new iPhone, then when the newest Android device comes out they go and get that, then the new iPhone comes out, and they go back and get that instead. It's just not how it works.
Now are there some people out there like that? Yeah, obviously. There are. Many of them are younger kids who don't understand the concept of that loyalty, yet. And many are people who follow some of their favorite players from team to team, again, many of them being kids. But the vast majority are not FotM fans moving from one team to the next based on whoever is good. That's a very small minority, not the majority.
I think you need to come down off your high horse and embrace the fact that there are always going to be new fans of your favorite teams, especially when they're winning, and there's a ton of exposure to them. It's good for the team, and good for the game. Period. What gives you the right to say "You're not a true fan!" Who are you to judge other people? Maybe if the world had less of that judgmental attitude in the world, we'd all be living in a better place. Some advice for you. "Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."
As I said... baseball is tough to watch as it is. Watching very bad baseball is next to impossible to tolerate. More power to you for being able to tolerate that trash for 52 years... 
