Rumor: Trade Deadline- What to Do?? Deals..Deals...Deals...

Status
Not open for further replies.

CallMeShaft

Calder Bedard Fan
Apr 14, 2014
15,739
21,151
It will be like the Catalina Wine Mixer scene from Step Brothers. There won't be a dry eye in the house.
Step Brothers reference?
giphy.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: RememberTheRoar

OTC

Registered User
Jul 11, 2018
416
112
IMO, Keith can still play. Unfortunately, that's the only reason his contract is somewhat moveable. Of course I'd rather have Keith. However, moving Seabrook is not realistic.
Keith doesn't like to shoot the puck. He did make a nice play on a near goal at the net. Seebrook likes to shoot
broke 3 sticks on 1 shift from the blue line the other night. We need more net presence.
 

Callidusblackhawk

Registered User
Feb 15, 2012
3,917
3,719
Downers Grove, Illinois
Keith doesn't like to shoot the puck. He did make a nice play on a near goal at the net. Seebrook likes to shoot
broke 3 sticks on 1 shift from the blue line the other night. We need more net presence.
Hayden has done fine as a net presence the rest of the power play can't get the puck to the net. Seabrook is especially bad at getting his shot on net. That game he kept breaking sticks he was 1 for 11 or something lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AmericanDream

LordKOTL

Abuse of Officials
Aug 15, 2014
3,525
768
Pacific NW
Really? So Seabrook can just retire and not cost the Hawks anything in regards to the cap? Can Rocky find Seabrook a job in the front office for lots of money?
Yes, *if* Seabrook retires.

Here's why I don't think that's likely":

If a player retires they don't get paid. If Hossa officially retired before last season he'd be walking away from 4M in in-pocket salary. His cap hit might be 5.25M/year, but the final 4 years he only makes 1M per year.

If Keith retires at the end of this year he'd be walking away from 9.75M total over 4 years. His salary goes down from 3.5M next year to 1.5 in his final year, so right now Keith would be waking away from a lot of money, but in the final years, he wouldn't be walking away from much.

Seabrook, if he retired at the end of the year, would be walking away from 28M. Since his deal was signed after the 2013 CBA there are restricktions like the minimum amount of in-pocket salary per year vs. cap hit and the amount in-pocket salary can vary per year. The *least* he gets paid is 4.5M in this final year.

Unfortunately, it's not that simple. It never is.
 

AmericanDream

Thank you Elon!
Oct 24, 2005
36,959
26,273
Chicago Manitoba
Seabs isn't retiring folks, he will be on LTIR like every other terrible long term contract will be - Weber, Price, Parise, Lucic, etc...all of these guys have had injuries and will be able to go on LTIR and not have any issues with it...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Toews2Bickell

hawksfan50

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
13,984
1,965
The eye test tells all..Seas cannot move his body to be competent anymore.You could make a medical case. .Old age and Hard Miles as a logical medical condition..muscles no longer Function well enough to pay professional hockey ..so qualifies as an LTIR ...maybe if they let him take some "sipplwments" but we all know the rounds are illegal ..are maybe there is a genetic solution to turn him back to a 23 yr old with more energy so he can move his frame around faster and the agility back?But if Bittman will not allow these "procedures" then by all that is right in heaven and earth he ought to claim a medical LTIR due to pre-mature aging !!!

Bettany can just watch any game.. see Seabrook can no longer pay competently cause he just cannot move fast anymore ..and for sure he would agree...pre-mature aging caused Incomprehensible to play at the NHL level anymore..they Must let him go LTIR because the reality is he can no longer fulfill his Contract which implies an Ability to play at an NHL level ..which clearly he no longer can.

So either LTIR as a remedy or let Hawks void Contract remainder bin grounds Seabrook can no longer do his duties. THIS would set a labour precedent. ..but similar to releasing any employee for cause of not being able anymore to do the job properly because of some incapacity whatever the cause ...In most employment cases that would be due a disability that manifested. ..The employee has disability insurance for that ..No disability insurer pays off if old age is the cause for this ...But the "effect"is the same. ..an inability to perform the job specified to a level it does not harm the company or in this case the team's operations. ..

The LTIR is a way to protect teams to get a replacement within the cap system for those Unable to perform any longer ..Arabs is Clearly in that category.

So no oops should complain if we Rightly put him on LTIR ..

Hecgetsvpaidvhud money ..but we can fibdcsonebidy else who can execute the job to a degree that is acceptable.

Watching the Seabrook horror show every game now is Unacceptable as it is very sad ..Bit even kindergarten kids can see thus house just cannot do it anymore.

Not being cruel..but it is what it is..
 

piteus

Registered User
Dec 20, 2015
12,115
3,356
NYC
The eye test tells all..Seas cannot move his body to be competent anymore.You could make a medical case. .Old age and Hard Miles as a logical medical condition..muscles no longer Function well enough to pay professional hockey ..so qualifies as an LTIR ...maybe if they let him take some "sipplwments" but we all know the rounds are illegal ..are maybe there is a genetic solution to turn him back to a 23 yr old with more energy so he can move his frame around faster and the agility back?But if Bittman will not allow these "procedures" then by all that is right in heaven and earth he ought to claim a medical LTIR due to pre-mature aging !!!

Bettany can just watch any game.. see Seabrook can no longer pay competently cause he just cannot move fast anymore ..and for sure he would agree...pre-mature aging caused Incomprehensible to play at the NHL level anymore..they Must let him go LTIR because the reality is he can no longer fulfill his Contract which implies an Ability to play at an NHL level ..which clearly he no longer can.

So either LTIR as a remedy or let Hawks void Contract remainder bin grounds Seabrook can no longer do his duties. THIS would set a labour precedent. ..but similar to releasing any employee for cause of not being able anymore to do the job properly because of some incapacity whatever the cause ...In most employment cases that would be due a disability that manifested. ..The employee has disability insurance for that ..No disability insurer pays off if old age is the cause for this ...But the "effect"is the same. ..an inability to perform the job specified to a level it does not harm the company or in this case the team's operations. ..

The LTIR is a way to protect teams to get a replacement within the cap system for those Unable to perform any longer ..Arabs is Clearly in that category.

So no oops should complain if we Rightly put him on LTIR ..

Hecgetsvpaidvhud money ..but we can fibdcsonebidy else who can execute the job to a degree that is acceptable.

Watching the Seabrook horror show every game now is Unacceptable as it is very sad ..Bit even kindergarten kids can see thus house just cannot do it anymore.

Not being cruel..but it is what it is..
Come on Fiddy. Seabrook is STRUGGLING, but what you are describing is Parkinson's.
 

SotasicA

Registered User
Aug 25, 2014
8,489
6,402
Kruger for a 3rd or 4th. I know he hasn't been great, but contenders will have interest in a 4th line checker who can win a faceoff
Huh?

I say no to trading Manning. Hawks don't need cap space, and the Hawks ain't winning the Cup. Why waste an asset to get rid of him when you can just absorb his contract?

Same goes for other negative assets. In fact, the Hawks could acquire some bad contracts. Get a nice prospect or a high pick by absorbing a bad player on a bad deal.

As for who to trade, I've said it before: Kane. He gives you the best return. You get some young building blocks, and you can keep Toews and Keith as vets and let them retire as Hawks. Neither would net much in return anyway.

Panarin ain't signing with the Hawks anyway if they suck this much. You can forget about that. Next season is lost, you just rebuild and come back in 2020-21 with a new look. No point in doing the rebuild half-assed.
 

LDF

Registered User
Sep 28, 2016
11,778
1,172
Huh?

I say no to trading Manning. Hawks don't need cap space, and the Hawks ain't winning the Cup. Why waste an asset to get rid of him when you can just absorb his contract?

Same goes for other negative assets. In fact, the Hawks could acquire some bad contracts. Get a nice prospect or a high pick by absorbing a bad player on a bad deal.

As for who to trade, I've said it before: Kane. He gives you the best return. You get some young building blocks, and you can keep Toews and Keith as vets and let them retire as Hawks. Neither would net much in return anyway.

Panarin ain't signing with the Hawks anyway if they suck this much. You can forget about that. Next season is lost, you just rebuild and come back in 2020-21 with a new look. No point in doing the rebuild half-assed.
with ref to bold, i say yes the club needs not only his salary off the books, but as well his position. btw, manning has a 2 yr contract.

Brandon Manning - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps
 

CallMeShaft

Calder Bedard Fan
Apr 14, 2014
15,739
21,151
His numbers are down a bit, but he's had a history of being a good faceoff guy and most of his draws occur in the defensive zone, where the faceoff rules changed a year ago so that a defending team's player needs to have his stick down first, which makes it harder for the defending team to win a faceoff in their own zone (one of the leagues more subtle changes to try to increase scoring).
 

LDF

Registered User
Sep 28, 2016
11,778
1,172
Seabs isn't retiring folks, he will be on LTIR like every other terrible long term contract will be - Weber, Price, Parise, Lucic, etc...all of these guys have had injuries and will be able to go on LTIR and not have any issues with it...
the best one to use as an example is Christopher Pronger contract and the yrs he spent on the LTIR or Bolland.
 

b1e9a8r5s

Registered User
Feb 16, 2015
12,904
4,039
Chicago, IL
I say no to trading Manning. Hawks don't need cap space, and the Hawks ain't winning the Cup. Why waste an asset to get rid of him when you can just absorb his contract?

While I hate Manning as much as the next poster on here, I think you might be right. I'd probably rather just bury him in Rockford than pay for someone to take him. Hawks can carry a 1.2 mil hit for a year or whatever it is.
 

Kaners Bald Spot

Registered User
Dec 6, 2011
22,704
10,812
Kane County, IL
Like it or not, absent a compliance buyout option in the next CBA, 19/88/2/7 are finishing their current contracts with the Hawks. 2/7 will retire, and idk what will happen to 19/88. Rocky can't afford to trade them.
I do think if CC will approve of a trade, doing so is a good idea.
Tradeable assets:
50
15
and that is about it.
The rest of the guys need to be given a shot to show what they can do.
You only trade 19/88/2 if they ask to be traded. I wouldn't put it out of the realm of possibility for Kane to ask to be traded.
 
Last edited:

CallMeShaft

Calder Bedard Fan
Apr 14, 2014
15,739
21,151
Like it or not,19/88/2/7 are finishing their current contracts with the Hawks. 2/7 will retire, and idk what will happen to 19/88. Rocky can't afford to trade them.
I do think if CC will approve of a trade, doing so is a good idea.
Tradeable assets:
50
15
and that is about it.
The rest of the guys need to be given a shot to show what they can do.
You only trade 19/88/2 if they ask to be traded. I wouldn't put it out of the realm of possibility for Kane to ask to be traded.
I don't know about Seabs retiring here. A compliance buyout is absolutely a possibility in the near future, and I could see Seabs getting a small contract to be a bottom pairing guy with experience for a playoff team. He could effectively try to pull a Brad Richards to keep his career going a little bit longer.
 

Kaners Bald Spot

Registered User
Dec 6, 2011
22,704
10,812
Kane County, IL
I don't know about Seabs retiring here. A compliance buyout is absolutely a possibility in the near future, and I could see Seabs getting a small contract to be a bottom pairing guy with experience for a playoff team. He could effectively try to pull a Brad Richards to keep his career going a little bit longer.
Well yeah, if there is a CBO they'd use it on him, and if there are two I'd imagine they'd be used on both 2 and 7. I'll edit the previous post accordingly. I just don't think they'll negotiate a get out of jail free card again.
 

migi

Registered User
Feb 25, 2015
4,418
2,917
Can't read it, can you tell what they said? Just a tl;dr

Couple guys just gave their take what the Hawks should do. Imo the LeBrun take was spot on.

Most of the context is about those NMC's, core guys and the next generation of our young Dmen with potentially drafting high. They are referring to Bruins who did the retool quite fast. And pointed out it's very rare.

Basically they said Hawks need top picks to develop fast so Kane and Toews can be the older while still effective guys in next run.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bubba88

AmericanDream

Thank you Elon!
Oct 24, 2005
36,959
26,273
Chicago Manitoba
think about this situation right now..

apparently the gap between the Blue Jackets and Bob is very wide, meaning it seems as if there is no chance he stays there. the Jackets are obviously a playoff team and losing Bob for peanuts would be such a hard pill to swallow..trading him away for anything but another goalie hurts too..

what if....and I say what if...the Hawks were to step in and make a move for Bob trading Crow in a package there?? now think about this for a minute- the Blue Jackets get Crow to keep their playoff hopes a float, they THEN have Crow for next year as well giving them time to figure out their goaltending situation.

for the Hawks we get Bob, negotiate on a contract with him, and keep him here long term...now I understand that Bob has struggled in the playoffs, but the man is a Vezina winner, and IF we can swing that deal, imagine how much more attractive we look to Panarin??????

I would have to see the numbers for what Bob is rumored to be asking, but it would be one interesting scenario that I really never thought of before...what do you all think???
 
  • Like
Reactions: bwana63 and LDF
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->