Confirmed with Link: Zadorov to Calgary for Toronto's 3rd round pick

[HLLYWD99]

This makes me hot and horny for a Strome dump!!!

 

[Brightwing]

Don't forget he retained salary on Saad to get Zadorov as well!

I think they liked Zadorov when they traded for him but it didn't end up being a good fit. They were hoping he could play with one of the young kids and it never worked.

 

[Hawkey]

Stan the genius is highlighted again. Could have kept Saad and traded him at the deadline with salary retention and got more than a 3rd.

This isnt the first time they have traded for a player they wanted and then given away a short time later. Something is wrong with the Hawks pro scout evaluation.

 

[SuterHaglshev]

Well I'm glad we recovered a 3rd round pick since Stan stupidly traded one for Harding.

My thoughts exactly, maybe Stan knew he could get a 3rd for Big Z...
And had a feeling it would be in 2022.

Stan, gets credit for his foresight, but not his forechecking. Ha-ha You never know Tyler Johnson is a reasonably qualified guy!

 

[ChiHawks10]

Stan the genius is highlighted again. Could have kept Saad and traded him at the deadline with salary retention and got more than a 3rd.

This isnt the first time they have traded for a player they wanted and then given away a short time later. Something is wrong with the Hawks pro scout evaluation.

This has been a general complaint of ours on here for a looooooong time now.

 

[ozzzie19]

They'll probably have to move him. They're going to sign McCabe (apparently), they still need to re-sign Hagel and Nylander. Even with Shaw going to LTIR, it'll be tight. Probably more tight than they'd like.

They have nearly 7.5m in cap space using Shaw's LTIR and including Hagel and Nylander and a 13/7/2 roster...before adding McCabe. They don't need to trade CdH or Strome from a cap perspective (from an on-ice/roster building perspective is very different).

 

[Kevin Musto]

My thoughts exactly, maybe Stan knew he could get a 3rd for Big Z...
And had a feeling it would be in 2022.

Stan, gets credit for his foresight, but not his forechecking. Ha-ha You never know Tyler Johnson is a reasonably qualified guy!

Trading a 3rd for Harding was still terrible value.

He was an unraked overager. Could have used a 4th on him which we already had.

 

[HockeySauce]

They have nearly 7.5m in cap space using Shaw's LTIR and including Hagel and Nylander and a 13/7/2 roster...before adding McCabe. They don't need to trade CdH or Strome from a cap perspective (from an on-ice/roster building perspective is very different).

They have 6.3M, if Shaw goes to LTIR. They're apparently signing McCabe, I'm just assuming he's going to cost around 3.5M. So now they're down to 2.8. Lets assume Nylander gets Gaudette money 998K and Hagel gets 1.5M. That leaves them with 300k in space.

 

[BHFAN92]

They'll probably have to move him. They're going to sign McCabe (apparently), they still need to re-sign Hagel and Nylander. Even with Shaw going to LTIR, it'll be tight. Probably more tight than they'd like.

this wouldn't even be really an issue if say we never acquired Connelly.

 

[ozzzie19]

They have 6.3M, if Shaw goes to LTIR. They're apparently signing McCabe, I'm just assuming he's going to cost around 3.5M. So now they're down to 2.8. Lets assume Nylander gets Gaudette money 998K and Hagel gets 1.5M. That leaves them with 300k in space.

Capfriendly currently has them at a 13 forwards (w/o Nylander and Hagel, but their deals won't be more than the who they'll bump so no real net change) and 7 defenseman (Mitchell will be replaced by McCabe) and 2 goalies with 2.47 m in cap space. Add Shaw's 3.9 and that gets you to the 6.37 you stated, but you also have to remove Mitchell if you're adding McCabe, so thats where the other .93 comes from for 7.4. I probably didn't explain properly in the first post that I was already removing Mitchell.

 

[HockeySauce]

this wouldn't even be really an issue if say we never acquired Connelly.

But we got Borgstrom, who... does he even project to be on the roster? He already bailed on Florida bc he wasn't in the NHL. Is he going to stick it out here if he doesn't make the team out of camp? Stillman is going to be our 6th/7th on the left side.

I was totally fine with that deal if their plan was to actually rebuild. It's dumbfounding now.

 

[SuterHaglshev]

Trading a 3rd for Harding was still terrible value.

He was an unraked overager. Could have used a 4th on him which we already had.

Im more mad about it than you. Stan, sent too many messages to Zadorov.
A few were good the Stillman signing for very reasonable, leaving Z. unprotected in expansion.

Our 1 & 3rd round picks were over compensation and also a message to Zadorov. We got the value of a 3rd & 5th rounder with what we used in draft capital. And Stillman already replaced Zadorov... Whatever, Stan do what Stan do, poor asset management and it's the first draft in maybe five years where I feel negative, negative about.

 

[HockeySauce]

Capfriendly currently has them at a 13 forwards (w/o Nylander and Hagel, but their deals won't be more than the who they'll bump so no real net change) and 7 defenseman (Mitchell will be replaced by McCabe) and 2 goalies with 2.47 m in cap space. Add Shaw's 3.9 and that gets you to the 6.37 you stated, but you also have to remove Mitchell if you're adding McCabe, so thats where the other .93 comes from for 7.4. I probably didn't explain properly in the first post that I was already removing Mitchell.

That makes sense but you don't add Mitchell's contract to the 6.3M in space to get to 7.4M first. You have to subtract McCabe's number from 6.3M first (and will see what he signs for soon) and then add Mitchell's back into it.

 

[BHFAN92]

But we got Borgstrom, who... does he even project to be on the roster? He already bailed on Florida bc he wasn't in the NHL. Is he going to stick it out here if he doesn't make the team out of camp? Stillman is going to be our 6th/7th on the left side.

I was totally fine with that deal if their plan was to actually rebuild. It's dumbfounding now.

Bowman will force Borgstrom on this roster as it was the driving decision for the trade..Still an awful trade in my books though to take on the Connolly contract and not get a 2nd or 3rd rd pick on top of it and praying that Borgstrom magically becomes player worthy of draft slotting.

 

[ozzzie19]

That makes sense but you don't add Mitchell's contract to the 6.3M in space to get to 7.4M first. You have to subtract McCabe's number from 6.3M first (and will see what he signs for soon) and then add Mitchell's back into it.

Hence the "before adding McCabe". So to be clear, we have 7.4m in space with Mitchell in Rockford but without adding the cost of his replacement in McCabe. In other words, unless we're all way off on McCabe's #, we still have plenty of room without having to subtract CdH or Strome.

 

[HockeySauce]

Hence the "before adding McCabe". So to be clear, we have 7.4m in space with Mitchell in Rockford but without adding the cost of his replacement in McCabe. In other words, unless we're all way off on McCabe's #, we still have plenty of room without having to subtract CdH or Strome.

But you're not going to operate the team with 6 dmen on the roster. So it's disingenuous to say the Hawks actually have 7.4M if you just remove Mitchell from the equation. Going into next year, as it stands, the Hawks will be carrying the 7 Dmen on their roster with capgeek right now. You could swap Mitchell with Beaudin or a cheap vet, but they'll carry 7 D. If McCabe signs, you add him to the equation and remove Mitchell/Beaudin barring any other trades.

 

[Muffinalt]

But you're not going to operate the team with 6 dmen on the roster. So it's disingenuous to say the Hawks actually have 7.4M if you just remove Mitchell from the equation. Going into next year, as it stands, the Hawks will be carrying the 7 Dmen on their roster with capgeek right now. You could swap Mitchell with Beaudin or a cheap vet, but they'll carry 7 D. If McCabe signs, you add him to the equation and remove Mitchell/Beaudin barring any other trades.

It matters if we still have Shaw in the roster. He goes on LTIR and then you bring up the extras, so we dont need to count with the 13th f or 7th d now.

 

[u2wojo]

But you're not going to operate the team with 6 dmen on the roster. So it's disingenuous to say the Hawks actually have 7.4M if you just remove Mitchell from the equation. Going into next year, as it stands, the Hawks will be carrying the 7 Dmen on their roster with capgeek right now. You could swap Mitchell with Beaudin or a cheap vet, but they'll carry 7 D. If McCabe signs, you add him to the equation and remove Mitchell/Beaudin barring any other trades.

you are correct on not operating with 6 dman....but...you certainly can start with 6, LTIR Shaw and bring back the 7th on day 1 of the league calander.

 

[ozzzie19]

But you're not going to operate the team with 6 dmen on the roster. So it's disingenuous to say the Hawks actually have 7.4M if you just remove Mitchell from the equation. Going into next year, as it stands, the Hawks will be carrying the 7 Dmen on their roster with capgeek right now. You could swap Mitchell with Beaudin or a cheap vet, but they'll carry 7 D. If McCabe signs, you add him to the equation and remove Mitchell/Beaudin barring any other trades.

So the last two sentences completely conflict with the first two. What part of the roster currently has 7 d man on it, you remove Mitchell and add McCabe do you not understand?
7-1+1=7. The Hawks have 7.4M in cap space which is to be decreased by McCabe's cap it whenever it is announced.

I get its a message board and you are just here to pick fights, but maybe actually read the posts you are trying to pick fights with?

 

[HockeySauce]

So the last two sentences completely conflict with the first two. What part of the roster currently has 7 d man on it, you remove Mitchell and add McCabe do you not understand?
7-1+1=7. The Hawks have 7.4M in cap space which is to be decreased by McCabe's cap it whenever it is announced.

I get its a message board and you are just here to pick fights, but maybe actually read the posts you are trying to pick fights with?

It's 7. The +1 necessitates the corresponding -1. It's not 7-1+1. It's 7+1-1.

All of this, so you can claim CHI will actually have 7.4M instead of 6.3? And I'm picking fights? You responded to me lmao.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Okay, enough of that.

 

[ozzzie19]

It's 7. The +1 necessitates the corresponding -1. It's not 7-1+1. It's 7+1-1.

All of this, so you can claim CHI will actually have 7.4M instead of 6.3? And I'm picking fights? You responded to me lmao.

My man, you are just really terrible at arguing.
Who responded to who? Originally you said they'd have to move CdH because they didn't have cap room. I responded that they did have cap room and then you responded with this.
Just give this one up and move on. They don't have to move CdH due to the cap. You goofed, it's fine. Digging in with "7-1+1<>7+1-1" just makes you look worse.

 

[HockeySauce]

My man, you are just really terrible at arguing.
Who responded to who? Originally you said they'd have to move CdH because they didn't have cap room. I responded that they did have cap room and then you responded with this.
Just give this one up and move on. They don't have to move CdH due to the cap. You goofed, it's fine. Digging in with "7-1+1<>7+1-1" just makes you look worse.
View attachment 457093

Ah my bad, it's hard to keep track with you ozzzie. Of course, who responded to who bears no weight on the arguments presented, so that's kind of an odd conclusion to draw.

As to the bolded. Then why are the Hawks trying to trade CdH and why haven't they signed anyone yet? Seems like there could be some cap implications.

 

[Pez68]

Ah my bad, it's hard to keep track with you ozzzie. Of course, who responded to who bears no weight on the arguments presented, so that's kind of an odd conclusion to draw.

As to the bolded. Then why are the Hawks trying to trade CdH and why haven't they signed anyone yet? Seems like there could be some cap implications.

Because CDH sucks, and it's easier to trade a guy BEFORE you're up against the cap, and basically have to move him?

This salary cap shit really isn't that difficult to grasp. Hawks can spend up to $89M during the off-season. $93M if you include Shaw's LTIR. They have cap space.

 

[HockeySauce]

Because CDH sucks, and it's easier to trade a guy BEFORE you're up against the cap, and basically have to move him?

This salary cap shit really isn't that difficult to grasp. Hawks can spend up to $89M during the off-season. $93M if you include Shaw's LTIR. They have cap space.

Yes, it's definitely easier to operate within the parameters of the cap instead of being over and backing yourself into a corner. How does that not align with cap implications? Just because you can go over the cap, doesn't mean that's the position you want to be in.