Seabrook

Guest

Guest
Per Kuc, talking with Stan--



#Blackhawks GM Stan Bowman said team will "start to look at" signing defenseman Brent Seabrook to new contract.
 

Tater

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
May 15, 2010
Posts:
13,392
Liked Posts:
5,654
Git 'er done!



Multi year please.
 

bri

New member
Joined:
May 14, 2010
Posts:
4,797
Liked Posts:
1
And they better not try to screw him either.
 

JOVE23

New member
Joined:
Jun 15, 2010
Posts:
2,458
Liked Posts:
0
[quote name="bri"]And they better not try to screw him either.[/quote]



I think everyone knows you have dibs on screwing Seabrook :D
 

Guest

Guest
[quote name="JOVE23"]



I think everyone knows you have dibs on screwing Seabrook :D[/quote]





I think that would be Dayna, but what do I know.
 

supraman

New member
Joined:
May 16, 2010
Posts:
8,024
Liked Posts:
196
Location:
St.Pete, FL
Sign him to infinite years and infinite dollars. Let Buttman figure out how that goes against the cap.
 

tvltre

New member
Joined:
May 14, 2010
Posts:
621
Liked Posts:
0
[quote name="supraman"]Sign him to infinite years and infinite dollars. Let Buttman figure out how that goes against the cap.[/quote]



What a Dumbass he is

gary-bettman-2.jpg




Seabs needs to be signed to a long term deal here to keep him and Keith together!
 

Jeremy02

New member
Joined:
Aug 3, 2010
Posts:
7
Liked Posts:
0
[quote name="Tater"]Git 'er done!



Multi year please.[/quote]



I thought I told you to wait in the truck.



Get this done now!!!
 

Guest

Guest
[quote name="E Runs"]Wonder what he'd fetch on the trade market?[/quote]



Hope they don't find out.
 

Variable

New member
Joined:
Jul 24, 2010
Posts:
3,023
Liked Posts:
122
Man, maybe it's just me, but I hope they don't sign Seabrook to the kind of contract length Keith has. Guys with his kind of size, once that skating speed/ability starts to decline, it ain't too pretty. Hopefully it's something like a 5 year extension and then see where they stand from that point on.
 

E Runs

New member
Joined:
May 15, 2010
Posts:
658
Liked Posts:
0
[quote name="R K"]



Hope they don't find out.[/quote]

Same here but for some reason I got a crazy notion they will.
 

Guest

Guest
[quote name="E Runs"]

Same here but for some reason I got a crazy notion they will.[/quote]





I don't think so. They'll sign him and keep the best D pair in the NHL.
 

whalerhawk

New member
Joined:
May 15, 2010
Posts:
302
Liked Posts:
0
[quote name="E Runs"]

Same here but for some reason I got a crazy notion they will.[/quote]

Its widely speculated that they will explore their options on Seabrook come trade deadline time if his demands are unreasonable.



Personally, the Hjarmarsson offer sheet put Seabs in a bad spot. He's certainly going to want (and deserve) more than what Hammer got, but if you give him a lot more than that, he becomes prohibitively expensive. When you look at the comparable contracts (namely Dan Hamhuis, who Seabrook is better than), you are looking in the neighborhood of $5.0 million per year.



I don't think the Hawks view Seabrook in that stratosphere and may want to capitalize on his trade value at some point this year if they can get decent return.



This also has as much to say about their viewpoints on the potential of Lalonde, Leddy and Olsen as it does about Seabrook, in my opinion. These guys are going to need roster spots to open up before they will develop as players and the Hawks may want to see that happen sooner rather than later.



Again, this is just a hunch on my part. I don't want to see Seabrook go.
 

Guest

Guest
[quote name="whalerhawk"]

Its widely speculated that they will explore their options on Seabrook come trade deadline time if his demands are unreasonable.



Personally, the Hjarmarsson offer sheet put Seabs in a bad spot. He's certainly going to want (and deserve) more than what Hammer got, but if you give him a lot more than that, he becomes prohibitively expensive. When you look at the comparable contracts (namely Dan Hamhuis, who Seabrook is better than), you are looking in the neighborhood of $5.0 million per year.



I don't think the Hawks view Seabrook in that stratosphere and may want to capitalize on his trade value at some point this year if they can get decent return.



This also has as much to say about their viewpoints on the potential of Lalonde, Leddy and Olsen as it does about Seabrook, in my opinion. These guys are going to need roster spots to open up before they will develop as players and the Hawks may want to see that happen sooner rather than later.



Again, this is just a hunch on my part. I don't want to see Seabrook go.[/quote]





Link? Any Link?



And you are wrong on what the Hawk think about Seabrook. I suggest the next time you have a chance you speak with Stan or Scotty on that one.



Seabrook will probably get about 4.5 per year. Hawks will have more than enough money going into next year.



Widely speculated by who again??
 

whalerhawk

New member
Joined:
May 15, 2010
Posts:
302
Liked Posts:
0
Ron,



I love how you immediately jump in when anyone has anything negative to say about Seabrook. It's like he's your love child or something.



I never said the Hawks brass didn't like him as a player. I'm sure they liked Versteeg and Byfuglien too. This isn't personal.



Money isn't endless. You have to make some hard choices. You can't sit there and talk up all the great prospects in the Hawks organization and then keep them buried in the minors forever. Sooner or later they are going to want to open spots for these kids. You strike while the iron is hot and Seabrook is in his prime.



It would take me a while to come up with links, but I've read it in numerous blogs over the summer that were speaking about the Hawks salary cap issues and some of the decisions they will have to make in 10-11. Unfortunately I don't bookmark every article I read. Besides, I freely stated in my post above that THIS IS MY OPINION. What? I'm not entitled to that on this board? What part of "this is just a hunch on my part" didn't you understand?
 

supraman

New member
Joined:
May 16, 2010
Posts:
8,024
Liked Posts:
196
Location:
St.Pete, FL
If I were the hawks I would see what he wants and if they can't afford it then certainly trade him because he's worth a small fortune. Keith doesn't win Norris without Seabrook's help. I think the hawks will make a seabrook signing happen as long he's salary demands are fair since well it's the fucking Keith and Seabs show on the blueline and has been that way for years. I can't think of a better pairing in the entire league. Lidstrom and Cheli in their primes I don't think were as good.
 

puckjim

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
May 14, 2010
Posts:
1,460
Liked Posts:
47
Location:
Section 325 - Row 12
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Fire
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
[quote name="R K"]





Link? Any Link?



And you are wrong on what the Hawk think about Seabrook. I suggest the next time you have a chance you speak with Stan or Scotty on that one.



Seabrook will probably get about 4.5 per year. Hawks will have more than enough money going into next year.



Widely speculated by who again??[/quote]



I don't remember reading anything anywhere about trading Seabrook, other than that silly-ass thread at Stuy's boards.
 

Guest

Guest
[quote name="whalerhawk"]Ron,



I love how you immediately jump in when anyone has anything negative to say about Seabrook. It's like he's your love child or something.



I never said the Hawks brass didn't like him as a player. I'm sure they liked Versteeg and Byfuglien too. This isn't personal.



Money isn't endless. You have to make some hard choices. You can't sit there and talk up all the great prospects in the Hawks organization and then keep them buried in the minors forever. Sooner or later they are going to want to open spots for these kids. You strike while the iron is hot and Seabrook is in his prime.



It would take me a while to come up with links, but I've read it in numerous blogs over the summer that were speaking about the Hawks salary cap issues and some of the decisions they will have to make in 10-11. Unfortunately I don't bookmark every article I read. Besides, I freely stated in my post above that THIS IS MY OPINION. What? I'm not entitled to that on this board? What part of "this is just a hunch on my part" didn't you understand?[/quote]





I asked for you to post where it's been "widely speculated" Seabrook would be traded if a contract was not agreed on by the dead line.



That's all. You said it was Widely Speculated which would tend someone RATIONAL to think you meant more than by just you. I read most blogs and have NEVER read ANYTHING suggesting Seabrook was expedable due to the Salary Cap. Ever.



When you can explain the Salary Cap next year, let me know. Because the NUMEROUS blogs I've read have all stated there is plenty of money for Seabrook. Even Chris at Stuys, the most comprehedible Cap Guy has stated this.



I didn't even begin to say your post or thoughts were assinine like I was going to origionally. THere is not a D man in this system that can replace the tangible Seabrook brings. Not even one REMOTELY CLOSE, and the closest, Ohlson, is no where near ready.
 

Top