Proposal: Using Schmaltz to move Saad?

[x Tame Impala]

We should always be looking to improve in any area. It all depends on how much a guy like Duchene is looking for. Do I want to go after a #2C that may prevent us from improving the Blueline? No. But if we can make it work and keep young guys like Debrincat and Schmaltz, I'm for it. I don't think we should sacrifice either of those players to bring in a top forward, nor should we bring in another top forward at the expense of the D.

The D will be improved internally IMHO

 

[x Tame Impala]

Wouldn't it be easier to just coach Schmaltz into shooting more instead of trading him and Saad?

Also, his contract isn't guaranteed. They don't have to give him a 6x$6 deal, especially if his play is slipping. Bridge deals are still a thing. Give him a 2x$4 and see if he improves at being a more capable offensive threat

 

[Kevin Musto]

Wouldn't it be easier to just coach Schmaltz into shooting more instead of trading him and Saad?

Also, his contract isn't guaranteed. They don't have to give him a 6x$6 deal, especially if his play is slipping. Bridge deals are still a thing. Give him a 2x$4 and see if he improves at being a more capable offensive threat

Schmaltz has played this way his entire career, even before the NHL. I don't think you can just untrain that part of his brain. That's just how he thinks the game. But I agree about the 2x4. Instead of Larkin being a comparable, it's now Sam Reinhart.

 

[RememberTheRoar]

We should always be looking to improve in any area. It all depends on how much a guy like Duchene is looking for. Do I want to go after a #2C that may prevent us from improving the Blueline? No. But if we can make it work and keep young guys like Debrincat and Schmaltz, I'm for it. I don't think we should sacrifice either of those players to bring in a top forward, nor should we bring in another top forward at the expense of the D.

I think we’re in complete agreement on this issue.

 

[RememberTheRoar]

Wouldn't it be easier to just coach Schmaltz into shooting more instead of trading him and Saad?

Also, his contract isn't guaranteed. They don't have to give him a 6x$6 deal, especially if his play is slipping. Bridge deals are still a thing. Give him a 2x$4 and see if he improves at being a more capable offensive threat

I think going 2 years at $4 million is a good idea at this point

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Wouldn't it be easier to just coach Schmaltz into shooting more instead of trading him and Saad?

Also, his contract isn't guaranteed. They don't have to give him a 6x$6 deal, especially if his play is slipping. Bridge deals are still a thing. Give him a 2x$4 and see if he improves at being a more capable offensive threat

You can’t coach the pass first out of some guys. It’s like coaching the dice roll out of Gus.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

I’ll also say people down on Schmaltz right now will be far more agreeable about locking him up long term when he finishes the year with 55+ points.

That’s his current pace playing bad hockey.

 

[Kevin Musto]

I’ll also say people down on Schmaltz right now will be far more agreeable about locking him up long term when he finishes the year with 55+ points.

That’s his current pace playing bad hockey.

It depends on his role with the team moving forward. He's not good enough to be a 2C and playing with Kane has a negative effect on both of them. So unless Schmaltz can play 1RW, Kane moves to 1RW or Schmaltz is fine with being paid 3C money, he doesn't fit in the system.

 

[Hawkaholic]

A really good hockey player doesn't fit the system? Put him on #2LW if it doesn't work out as a C. The last thing this team needs is to lose offensive talent up front. We need to add, and not subtract.

 

[Esq]

What a terrible idea.

 

[Kevin Musto]

A really good hockey player doesn't fit the system? Put him on #2LW if it doesn't work out as a C. The last thing this team needs is to lose offensive talent up front. We need to add, and not subtract.

Trading for an equally talented player that's a better fit is not subtracting. I'm not suggesting trading Schmaltz for nothing.

 

[x Tame Impala]

You can’t coach the pass first out of some guys. It’s like coaching the dice roll out of Gus.

Fair enough.

To the OP...This whole scenario just seems like a solution that's way more complicated than it needs to be. Schmaltz is still a good player. Tossing him in the trade bin because he isn't as aggressive as he should be would be a big mistake IMO. That means that since the 2015 Cup, the Hawks will have traded away Saad (good Saad), Tuevo, Panarin, Schmaltz, and bad Saad. That'd be an ugly trend that screams horrible player evaluation, cap management, and asset management.

Patience with Schmaltz and probably Saad will pay off. Duchene isn't the answer

 

[CallMeShaft]

Just want to point out that Schmaltz now is a better player than TT when he was still here. About the same age too.

TT continued to grow as a player, and Hawks fans have had to deal with seeing him in a different team's jersey. We should not be so quick to doing the same with Schmaltz.

 

[Hawkaholic]

Trading for an equally talented player that's a better fit is not subtracting. I'm not suggesting trading Schmaltz for nothing.

But you are suggesting trading him, so we will still only have 4 top 6 forwards if we trade him. (5 if Kahun keeps playing well)

 

[Kevin Musto]

But you are suggesting trading him, so we will still only have 4 top 6 forwards if we trade him. (5 if Kahun keeps playing well)

Yeah looking at a potentially better fit. It's not subtracting and it's not really adding. Just complimenting better.

 

[Pez68]

It depends on his role with the team moving forward. He's not good enough to be a 2C and playing with Kane has a negative effect on both of them. So unless Schmaltz can play 1RW, Kane moves to 1RW or Schmaltz is fine with being paid 3C money, he doesn't fit in the system.

Your hot takes are fridgid.

 

[Hawkaholic]

Yeah looking at a potentially better fit. It's not subtracting and it's not really adding. Just complimenting better.

And I'm saying you don't bring someone in that is expensive like that at the expense of Schmaltz.

 

[Kevin Musto]

And I'm saying you don't bring someone in that is expensive like that at the expense of Schmaltz.

Maybe not this season. But it should be an option on the table for the future.

Saad on the other hand shouldn't be with the team next season.

 

[BK]

Anyone who says Schmaltz doesn't fit the system...haha.

 

[Hawkaholic]

Maybe not this season. But it should be an option on the table for the future.

Saad on the other hand shouldn't be with the team next season.

So you want to keep rolling with 4 top 6 forwards and no depth?

 

[Kevin Musto]

So you want to keep rolling with 4 top 6 forwards and no depth?

There's a good FA class for forwards coming up

 

[LDF]

There's a good FA class for forwards coming up

well how will the salary cap situation will be looking like ??

 

[BobbyJet]

Anyone who says Schmaltz doesn't fit the system...haha.

/\ You mean Schmaltz fits a system that's broke. Hmmm.I see.

 

[Toews2Bickell]

I’d retain 50% on Saad before I used Schmaltz to move his contract. He only has two years left on his deal and some GM would bite if they shop him around. Hawks are in the driver seat when it comes to this situation unlike the past when they had to lose a player like TT to move a contract.

 

[RememberTheRoar]

I’d retain 50% on Saad before I used Schmaltz to move his contract. He only has two years left on his deal and some GM would bite if they shop him around. Hawks are in the driver seat when it comes to this situation unlike the past when they had to lose a player like TT to move a contract.

Saad at 50% for an expiring like Skinner or Hoffman or a top-4 d-man.

I don’t know whether any other GM does that, but I’d do it from the Hawks perspective.