2022 Blackhawks Trades/Signings

Granada

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 14, 2019
Posts:
11,439
Liked Posts:
2,751
Figured we should have a thread dedicated to this, especially with the deadline approaching, even though no one posts in here anymore, lol.

So, this is interesting, and if true, I think I'd pull the trigger, especially if it's multiple top picks and prospects. Mrazek is signed through 2024 with a 3.8 million salary. I like Fleury and would be okay keeping him, but if this haul is accurate, you have to do it (assuming Fleury wants to move). Mrazek isn't a world beater by any means, but he is a starting goalie.

However, adding Hagel to the mix? I'm not so certain about that, would be an incredibly tough pill to swallow. The haul would be have to be utterly massive.

 

ZOMBIE@CTESPN

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 19, 2012
Posts:
17,904
Liked Posts:
19,542
Location:
MICHIGAN
Kind of vague on what top prospects and picks are but sell sell sell is the right way to go
 

Savard18

Member
Joined:
Nov 25, 2021
Posts:
81
Liked Posts:
56
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Living in Toronto and hearing about the goalie problems daily, more media driven that anything else. I can tell you that Mrazek is a tandem goalie by no means a #1 heck I'd still take Lanks over him after seeing games he's pulled out for this bad Hawks team and is only in the deal convo because of the salary to offset(Leafs are right up against the cap with like 50K room) for MAF. (Which I see staying unless they can maybe (wink wink) work out a side agreement about bringing him back for next year to do them a solid?) But the Leafs are really looking for Dman and possibly that goalie. As for Dmen, I always thought CDH might end up there but I just don't see the Leafs going to him, They want a better guy that can fill top 4. CDH is barely a 2nd pair dman (more like a 3rd pair on a playoff contender), I know me and Granada kinda disagree on this LOL, The Leafs have been playing Nick Robertson (think their showcasing him?)on the 2nd line so I guess if they want Hagel (although don't want to see him go)go for Robertson and other pieces?

I still don't see a lot of movement by the Hawks, as I've said in past postings, Their a lot of better options in this sellers market for depth players not named Kane, Cat and Hagel.
 
Last edited:

LordKOTL

Scratched for Vorobiev
Joined:
Dec 8, 2014
Posts:
8,604
Liked Posts:
3,088
Location:
PacNW
My favorite teams
  1. Portland Timbers
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Figured we should have a thread dedicated to this, especially with the deadline approaching, even though no one posts in here anymore, lol.

So, this is interesting, and if true, I think I'd pull the trigger, especially if it's multiple top picks and prospects. Mrazek is signed through 2024 with a 3.8 million salary. I like Fleury and would be okay keeping him, but if this haul is accurate, you have to do it (assuming Fleury wants to move). Mrazek isn't a world beater by any means, but he is a starting goalie.

However, adding Hagel to the mix? I'm not so certain about that, would be an incredibly tough pill to swallow. The haul would be have to be utterly massive.

Fleury retained at 50% for Mrazek+ in and of itself seems fair.

Add in Hagel to the mix and there had better be a haul coming back.
 

Savard18

Member
Joined:
Nov 25, 2021
Posts:
81
Liked Posts:
56
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Fleury retained at 50% for Mrazek+ in and of itself seems fair.

Add in Hagel to the mix and there had better be a haul coming back.
your gonna want a high pick also for Fleury, straight up why would you do Toronto the Favour? Toronto won't do that plus a 1st Rd, their more pressing need is a/or Dmen.
 

LordKOTL

Scratched for Vorobiev
Joined:
Dec 8, 2014
Posts:
8,604
Liked Posts:
3,088
Location:
PacNW
My favorite teams
  1. Portland Timbers
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
your gonna want a high pick also for Fleury, straight up why would you do Toronto the Favour? Toronto won't do that plus a 1st Rd, their more pressing need is a/or Dmen.
It's why I said, "Mrazek+"

Besides, Fleaury is not guaranteed after this season. Hagel is.
 

Granada

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 14, 2019
Posts:
11,439
Liked Posts:
2,751
Living in Toronto and hearing about the goalie problems daily, more media driven that anything else. I can tell you that Mrazek is a tandem goalie by no means a #1 heck I'd still take Lanks over him after seeing games he's pulled out for this bad Hawks team and is only in the deal convo because of the salary to offset(Leafs are right up against the cap with like 50K room) for MAF. (Which I see staying unless they can maybe (wink wink) work out a side agreement about bringing him back for next year to do them a solid?) But the Leafs are really looking for Dman and possibly that goalie. As for Dmen, I always thought CDH might end up there but I just don't see the Leafs going to him, They want a better guy that can fill top 4. CDH is barely a 2nd pair dman (more like a 3rd pair on a playoff contender), I know me and Granada kinda disagree on this LOL, The Leafs have been playing Nick Robertson (think their showcasing him?)on the 2nd line so I guess if they want Hagel (although don't want to see him go)go for Robertson and other pieces?

I still don't see a lot of movement by the Hawks, as I've said in past postings, Their a lot of better options in this sellers market for depth players not named Kane, Cat and Hagel.
I wouldn't go with Lanks as a starter next season and I don't think I'd go with him over Mrazek either at this point. Lankinen had one strong stretch of games last season where he looked like a world-beater -- like many guys, including Kurashev, etc. -- but he's been underwhelming since. Mrazek fits the bill as a veteran goalie who has started multiple seasons in his career. For 3.8 million, that's a fair price. I've said it before and I'll say it again: the Hawks will need a veteran goalie next year, whether they're rebuilding or not. You can not rely on Lankinen for that role. And you also can't spend a ton on the position either. Mrazek is far from perfect - no argument there - but he is a logical choice for next season or two. Mrazek is just a stop-gap. I'm not proposing the guy is a stud or should be retained after his contract expires.
 

RacerX

Silicon Valley CA Bears H
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
9,853
Liked Posts:
9,908
Location:
Silicon Valley, CA
I have yet to hear any valid or legit reasons why this team would not trade Flower under the circumstances. None, zippo.

From strictly a business perspective, he better be gone.
 

hawkinmontreal

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 13, 2019
Posts:
10,715
Liked Posts:
1,815
Location:
Montreal
My favorite teams
  1. Oakland Athletics
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Duke Blue Devils
Figured we should have a thread dedicated to this, especially with the deadline approaching, even though no one posts in here anymore, lol.

So, this is interesting, and if true, I think I'd pull the trigger, especially if it's multiple top picks and prospects. Mrazek is signed through 2024 with a 3.8 million salary. I like Fleury and would be okay keeping him, but if this haul is accurate, you have to do it (assuming Fleury wants to move). Mrazek isn't a world beater by any means, but he is a starting goalie.

However, adding Hagel to the mix? I'm not so certain about that, would be an incredibly tough pill to swallow. The haul would be have to be utterly massive.

No to trading Hagel, and no to retaining any salary for Fluery. If Toronto want him, make them pay the price to acquire him. The Hawks have the leverage here, Toronto will not and can not win a championship with Campbell. If a trade is indeed made, this will give us an idea of what Davidson is all about. If Kane is not going to be moved, Hawks need to cash in on Fleury.
Everyone wants deals because there team is strapped against the cap, where the fuck was the help when the Hawks were in that predicament.
 

RacerX

Silicon Valley CA Bears H
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
9,853
Liked Posts:
9,908
Location:
Silicon Valley, CA
No to trading Hagel, and no to retaining any salary for Fluery. If Toronto want him, make them pay the price to acquire him.
Like everyone else here, I am a Hagel fan but, again, sorry for repeating this for the 100th time but: there is no such thing as "don't trade _____". Ever. This is transactional business, if you can get a positive ROI on moving anyone you do it. Holding on to someone for any other reason is fanboy.

As for not retaining salary for Flower, I may disagree, the question is which incremental picks/prospects are they willing to give up in exchange for us retaining the salary.

As we all recall all too well, when we were in Cap Hell we had to give up boatloads of picks/prospects in exchange for cap relief, time for us to profit from the other side of that equation.
 

blackpep72

Active member
Joined:
Nov 2, 2019
Posts:
201
Liked Posts:
187
I dont think they will get anything better in return if they trade Hagel. He is one of the few bright spots on the team and he is not expensive.
 
Last edited:

Granada

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 14, 2019
Posts:
11,439
Liked Posts:
2,751
No to trading Hagel, and no to retaining any salary for Fluery. If Toronto want him, make them pay the price to acquire him. The Hawks have the leverage here, Toronto will not and can not win a championship with Campbell. If a trade is indeed made, this will give us an idea of what Davidson is all about. If Kane is not going to be moved, Hawks need to cash in on Fleury.
Everyone wants deals because there team is strapped against the cap, where the fuck was the help when the Hawks were in that predicament.
That's the rub right there HIM. I love Hagel, I lean toward not trading him -- but, if you're going to rebuild, and Toronto will give you a ton of top picks and even top-end prospects, I think you have to do it if the haul is massive. You have to do it because, Hagel and Fleury are really the only two pieces that will net anything of value. If packaging them means retaining some salary back, I'm okay with it as long as the haul is massive.

De Haan, assuming he's even movable, will net you what, a 2nd rounder at best but probably more like a 3rd? Does Strome net you a 1st -- doubtful, he's playing lights-out right now, but I wouldn't bet on that. Murphy, maybe a 2nd and a B/C prospect, and that's being generous. Toews and Kane seem like they're staying put. Can't see anyone taking Tyler Johnson after coming off major surgery and considering his contract.

To me, these are the only Hawks that would fetch a solid return for a rebuilding team: Fleury, Hagel, maybe Kubalik, and maybe Dach. Other than that, you'd only be getting 2nd and 3rd picks and b/c prospects from everyone else on this roster. There aren't a lot of pieces for the Hawks to move that would net a decent return at the end of the day. If you can get a good haul for Kubalik instead of Hagel, I'd be all for that.
 

HSBOB

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 15, 2019
Posts:
3,583
Liked Posts:
3,281
Location:
Campton Hills
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
We trade anybody if the return is right but this Hagel kid looks to be the kind of young player who can help a young team find their identity. His offensive production so far is no fluke,he had good numbers in the WHL and in his only shortened AHL season too. He'll continue to develop with only 105 games under his belt in every aspect because he has good instincts and a thorough understanding of the game. He was well coached up in Red Deer!
He already kills penalties and plays a responsible game with some snarl when needed but I'd rather he concentrate on hockey for two reasons.......he's real good when he does and willing or not,he's still small framed....with a BIG hart!
 

RacerX

Silicon Valley CA Bears H
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
9,853
Liked Posts:
9,908
Location:
Silicon Valley, CA
I dont think they will get anything better in return if they trade Hagel. He is one of the few bright spots on the team and he is not expensive.
I understand that perspective, but I think the decision is a bit more nuanced from a GM's standpoint.

To start, what do they view as Hagel's ceiling - has he reached it? How much further is he likely to develop? If he is at or near his ceiling then you have to consider swapping him out for a 1st + a solid prospect or similar value. If they think he still has lots of room to grow and improve, then yes, that changes the calculus.
 

LordKOTL

Scratched for Vorobiev
Joined:
Dec 8, 2014
Posts:
8,604
Liked Posts:
3,088
Location:
PacNW
My favorite teams
  1. Portland Timbers
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
I wouldn't go with Lanks as a starter next season and I don't think I'd go with him over Mrazek either at this point. Lankinen had one strong stretch of games last season where he looked like a world-beater -- like many guys, including Kurashev, etc. -- but he's been underwhelming since. Mrazek fits the bill as a veteran goalie who has started multiple seasons in his career. For 3.8 million, that's a fair price. I've said it before and I'll say it again: the Hawks will need a veteran goalie next year, whether they're rebuilding or not. You can not rely on Lankinen for that role. And you also can't spend a ton on the position either. Mrazek is far from perfect - no argument there - but he is a logical choice for next season or two. Mrazek is just a stop-gap. I'm not proposing the guy is a stud or should be retained after his contract expires.
I have no problem with Lankinen as the 1a next season, as long as there's a 1b who's a seasoned vet who can step in if Lanks craps the bed and take over the 1a role or even full #1--think Turco or Emery to Crawford. Mrazek might fit the bill on that but if we're sending Fleury out, especially retained, the return better be Mrazek+
Like everyone else here, I am a Hagel fan but, again, sorry for repeating this for the 100th time but: there is no such thing as "don't trade _____". Ever. This is transactional business, if you can get a positive ROI on moving anyone you do it. Holding on to someone for any other reason is fanboy.

As for not retaining salary for Flower, I may disagree, the question is which incremental picks/prospects are they willing to give up in exchange for us retaining the salary.

As we all recall all too well, when we were in Cap Hell we had to give up boatloads of picks/prospects in exchange for cap relief, time for us to profit from the other side of that equation.
Agreed, the problem though is getting positive value back, and since we know nothing much on Davidson except for him offloading that boatanchor Nylander for a decent 4th liner, we don't know if he can swing a deal like that--his predecessor certainly couldn't.

Hagel is one of our blue chips and as such this year and next likely will command a lot on the trade market, as such, if we trade him out that trade has to be a win, because if it's not we lost a player who had a ton of value we can't recoup off of it. Ergo, unless the part coming back from a potential Hagel trade is literally can't-miss in an area of concern (Goaltending, center, and of course defense), we should wait and hold off.

The last think the 'hawks need to do with Hagel, Debrincat, or any other blue-chip asset is pull another Panarin-for-Saad deal or Joker for Nylander where they end up losing long-term. So yeah, even though from a fan's perspective I want to keep Hagel, from the business perspective he could be moved but he should only be moved if the RoI is guaren-fucking-teed. No more of this project player bullshit.
during a rebuild you get rid of old talented players not young ones. Hagel is only 23, thats the kind of player you are trying to get to build for the future, trading Hagel seems counter productive for a rebuild
Not necessarily. FWDs tend to mature a lot faster than centers, goalies, and defensemen. Consider this: Keith went about 8 years from draft to cup. Seabrook 7, Crawford 9. Meanwhile Toews was very fast at 4, while Kane was 3.

Hagel, being a FWD, hit his stride quickly and as such could command a decent paycheck as early as 2023-2024. When it comes to center depth going forward we have...Strome. Dach isn't playing center right now. Lankinen and maybe Soderblom are what we have in the goalie cupboards, but nether of them have shown much as being at least an average NHL starter. On defense, the prospect pool is about as barren as the surface of Mars. We got zilch.

If Hagel could bring in a good quality defenseman that could actually speed up the rebuild. IF. If he can't bring in a can't-miss prospect for defense, goaltending, or a center we should in all rights keep him. However, if we assume it'll be about 8 years between getting a 1-2 D prospect and them getting a cup, Hagel will be in his 30's by that time--and that's assuming we acquire one this year. Moving Hagel for the right prospect coming back could fast-track that.

And this coming from a guy who loves what Hagel brings to the ice.
 

hawkinmontreal

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 13, 2019
Posts:
10,715
Liked Posts:
1,815
Location:
Montreal
My favorite teams
  1. Oakland Athletics
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Duke Blue Devils
Like everyone else here, I am a Hagel fan but, again, sorry for repeating this for the 100th time but: there is no such thing as "don't trade _____". Ever. This is transactional business, if you can get a positive ROI on moving anyone you do it. Holding on to someone for any other reason is fanboy.

As for not retaining salary for Flower, I may disagree, the question is which incremental picks/prospects are they willing to give up in exchange for us retaining the salary.

As we all recall all too well, when we were in Cap Hell we had to give up boatloads of picks/prospects in exchange for cap relief, time for us to profit from the other side of that equation.
I get what your saying and I am not In disagreement, however, I do have hesitation in trading Hagel for the sole purpose that this team has failed on every level in the past 7 years when trading something of value. Yes, it was Bowman, but what do we know about Davidson, nothing, so, in relation to such, if the Hawks can secure a boatload for Fleury and Hagel, I am all for it, but you can’t feel some trepidation with this team and it’s history of trading value for value, because it has been a complete disappointment on all levels.
 

MassHavoc

Moderator
Staff member
Joined:
May 14, 2010
Posts:
17,576
Liked Posts:
2,626
I don't think anyone will give you what hagel is worth on his future potential only what you have from him so far. So that makes him a no trade because you'll never get what he's actually worth. It will always be a steal for the other team. And all those picks and such you're trying to rebuild with need solid pieces to build around.
 

RacerX

Silicon Valley CA Bears H
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
9,853
Liked Posts:
9,908
Location:
Silicon Valley, CA
I don't think anyone will give you what hagel is worth on his future potential only what you have from him so far. So that makes him a no trade because you'll never get what he's actually worth. It will always be a steal for the other team. And all those picks and such you're trying to rebuild with need solid pieces to build around.
Soooo, that begs the question: what is his ceiling, what do you believe is his untapped potential and how much better can he get?

Do you consider it possible that this is as good as he can be?

Personally, Idk, I really like him but his current level of performance may be all he can ever be, and therefore he is at max trade value right now.
 

Granada

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 14, 2019
Posts:
11,439
Liked Posts:
2,751
Soooo, that begs the question: what is his ceiling, what do you believe is his untapped potential and how much better can he get?

Do you consider it possible that this is as good as he can be?

Personally, Idk, I really like him but his current level of performance may be all he can ever be, and therefore he is at max trade value right now.
His ceiling is a stud 3rd liner. I'm not saying that to disrespect him, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that, and I stress the word "stud" 3rd liner. Maybe he's on a second line on an unbelievably stacked team that has essentially a 2B line as their 3rd line. Like a Kopecky when he was here.

I agree, his trade value is sky high right now. I love the guy, but honestly, it'll sting a bit but I'd be okay if he's moved (assuming the return is right). It's like I said before: if you want a rebuild, you have to move pieces that will actually fetch you valuable rebuilding pieces. If you're just going to acquire 2nd and 3rd round picks, you're not going to rebuild.

It's reported that the asking price by the Hawks is extremely high for Hagel. I'm okay with that too. If Davidson doesn't get the asking price he's demanding, then you keep him. It'll hurt the rebuild, but it's preferable to moving him for anything less.
 

Top