2022 Blackhawks Trades/Signings

Diehardfan

Well-known member
Joined:
Jun 10, 2010
Posts:
8,463
Liked Posts:
5,707
Location:
Western Burbs
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
I doubt the return for Kubalik is very exciting. Maybe they can get a decent 25yo or younger Dman instead of 2nd/3rd round type of picks!
Typical Hawks front office maneuver....decide to trade someone when his value is at it's lowest.
 

hawkinmontreal

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 13, 2019
Posts:
10,676
Liked Posts:
1,781
Location:
Montreal
My favorite teams
  1. Oakland Athletics
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Duke Blue Devils
I don't think the guy who puts butts in the seats is going to take a pay-cut. more like 12,000,000
I am with you on this, Kane is not taking less than 9, 12 not so much, but I certainly don’t see him taking a drastic pay cut.
 

hawkinmontreal

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 13, 2019
Posts:
10,676
Liked Posts:
1,781
Location:
Montreal
My favorite teams
  1. Oakland Athletics
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Duke Blue Devils
Pat Kane holds all the cards, if he wants to stay, he will stay, if he wants to cash in again, the Hawks will pay him what he wants. He has cemented his legacy with the Hawks, and quit frankly he is probably the only player on this franchise that brings attendance to the United Center.
I am ok with whatever he chooses, besides him and the Cat this team has nothing to cheer for, or even a reason to watch.
 

KBIB

CCS Hockey Icon while hated at HF
Joined:
Apr 26, 2013
Posts:
2,009
Liked Posts:
1,026
This is fair enough, although I disagree that Kane will get 11 million "for as long as he wants." That's doubtful; or at the very least, it should be. If he wants anything in the 4-6 year range, he's going to have to take a discount. What that discount will be is debatable.

The comparison to Jones is a bit of a false equivalence. You're comparing a player in his prime to a player who is on the tail end of his career, perspective matters here.
Yeah well….

Kane’s tail end is better then most players primes. The guy has a 6.2 point share on one the the shittiest teams in the league and would be hovering around McDavid in point share on a 500 team. You could argue he’s still a top ten player in the league and is easily top 20. Seth Jones, in his prime, at 9.5 is an over pay while Kane at 9.5 right now would be a bargain.

He’s not taking less then ten, and if he is, it’s a contract that keeps him in the Indian head until he’s 40, which would be three years too long. I’m sorry, but you don’t let players like Kane “just walk” away for nothing when his value right now to the Hawks is a hell of a lot more then it would be to another team. The guy is the franchise right now and is the only player who puts asses in seats and sells merch. Letting him go before he breaks that damn record would be the biggest failure this team ever committed outside of some nobody getting his dick sucked by one of the coaches.

I’m all for the rebuild. I’m all for trading Kane if there’s an offer you can’t pass up. But I’m realistic in Kane’s chase being worth keeping him just from a business standpoint .When you can make a cute photoshop every game with a number tracking Kane is X amount of points away from breaking a long standing record with an original six franchise, that’s worth a hell of a lot more in ticket sales then whatever value the Hawks would get in a trade unless they were getting a younger version of the guy and quite honestly they won’t. Your not selling low on that unless Kane’s agent is a complete idiot
 

Granada

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 14, 2019
Posts:
11,167
Liked Posts:
2,452
Yeah well….

Kane’s tail end is better then most players primes. The guy has a 6.2 point share on one the the shittiest teams in the league and would be hovering around McDavid in point share on a 500 team. You could argue he’s still a top ten player in the league and is easily top 20. Seth Jones, in his prime, at 9.5 is an over pay while Kane at 9.5 right now would be a bargain.

He’s not taking less then ten, and if he is, it’s a contract that keeps him in the Indian head until he’s 40, which would be three years too long. I’m sorry, but you don’t let players like Kane “just walk” away for nothing when his value right now to the Hawks is a hell of a lot more then it would be to another team. The guy is the franchise right now and is the only player who puts asses in seats and sells merch. Letting him go before he breaks that damn record would be the biggest failure this team ever committed outside of some nobody getting his dick sucked by one of the coaches.

I’m all for the rebuild. I’m all for trading Kane if there’s an offer you can’t pass up. But I’m realistic in Kane’s chase being worth keeping him just from a business standpoint .When you can make a cute photoshop every game with a number tracking Kane is X amount of points away from breaking a long standing record with an original six franchise, that’s worth a hell of a lot more in ticket sales then whatever value the Hawks would get in a trade unless they were getting a younger version of the guy and quite honestly they won’t. Your not selling low on that unless Kane’s agent is a complete idiot
Okay, but that still doesn't change the fact that he's clearly at the tail-end of his career. That's being realistic.

And I have to completely disagree with this sentiment: "his value right now to the Hawks is a hell of a lot more than it would be to another team." No. That's looking at it from a purely homer perspective. There are teams that will kill for just one Cup before a franchise record, and Kane alone could be the difference between that and nothing. Let's be honest here: this team is shit and Kane would have much more value on almost every other team in the league right now, particularly those gunning for a Cup.
 
Last edited:

LordKOTL

Scratched for Vorobiev
Joined:
Dec 8, 2014
Posts:
8,400
Liked Posts:
2,877
Location:
PacNW
My favorite teams
  1. Portland Timbers
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Exactly. Jones is immovable, and giving Kane 11-12 million for an infinity or even the next 3-4 years would essentially be giving him Debrincat's money for his next contract, which expires in 2 years. With the cap rising every year, and assuming he doesn't slow down, Debrincat will be getting a huge fucking pay-day. And assuming Hagel is retained, and also doesn't slow down, his contract will be up at the same time as Debrincat's.
Exactly. Like it or not it's inevitable that Kane is going to be a depreciating asset if he's not already. Even if he's depreciating from the stratosphere, it's depreciating nonetheless and that has to be taken into account by the 'hawks moving forward, especially since it is fully 100% possible that his production can be around what it is now, and then one year just falls off the table completely.

Another issue is the aftereffects of the new plague--even though they are projecting a possible 1M increase to the cap ceiling next year, it's not much; costs are going to have to be controlled across the board. Further, a lot of teams that would be contending already have a lot of long-term high salary taken up over multiple year deals, and Kane would just be another one of those players.

Thus, It makes little sense for the 'hawks to commit a lot of money over multiple years towards Kane; they would be opening themselves up to another Seabrook situation, and LTIRetirment does have consequences. Further, since Kane is a risk of having his production fall completely off, signing him to an expensive multi-year deal makes it that much more risk for any other team which might want him as part of a cup run--especially moving forward. If Kane is on an expiring contract any team looking to make a run might consider a move for him. The risk to them is low. But, hypothetically, if Kane is signed at 5 years for 10.5M dollars before 2023/2024, why would any club risk taking him on at the TDL is, say 2025 knowing full well that they'd have to pay him 10.5M dollars through 2029 knowing full well that in any of those seasons he could stop producing? Ditto with the 'hawks keeping him on. If Kane falls off in 2026 in the same scenario, the 'hawks would have all of those years owing a shit-tonne of money to him while they are rebuilding. Only an accountant would make that move.😏

I would think Kane knows this as well. Unless Kane takes a pay cut for duration (I don't see any team paying over 10M for him over multiple seasons right now), it might almost be in he and the 'hawks best interest to do contracts which are short term, but commensurate with his on-ice performance.
Typical Hawks front office maneuver....decide to trade someone when his value is at it's lowest.
Can't really fault Davidson for that. Bowman the Beancounter signed him to the 2yr deal and has been in decline since. The only way Davidson could have possibly traded him out which his value was the highest under his watch was once he took over and was interim--and even that value was in the crapper.

The real question is whether or not whatever Koob could possibly get in arbitration be worth more than what he could fetch on the trade market. I don't think it is. I think the 'hawks should just cut their losses on him since he seems to be following a Frolik career projection--or worse.
 

Diehardfan

Well-known member
Joined:
Jun 10, 2010
Posts:
8,463
Liked Posts:
5,707
Location:
Western Burbs
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Okay, but that still doesn't change the fact that he's clearly at the tail-end of his career. That's being realistic.

And I have to completely disagree with this sentiment: "his value right now to the Hawks is a hell of a lot more than it would be to another team." No. That's looking at it from a purely homer perspective. There are teams that will kill for just one Cup before a franchise record, and Kane alone could be the difference between that and nothing. Let's be honest here: this team is shit and Kane would have much more value on almost every other team in the league right now, particularly those gunning for a Cup.
OMG....that is so spot on. I've been saying this for two years and I love Kaner. @hawkinmontreal was correct in that he holds all the cards so it all depends on what he wants to do. Does going to a contender and winning another Cup out weigh the life he's used to in Chicago? It's easy for us to say but we're not the ones that have to uproot our family and move to another state or country for that matter. He's gonna get paid either way....I'm not sure what I would do if I was in his shoes.

I just know if it's gonna happen, it better be soon. While his skills are still top drawer, his skating has definitely lost a bit.

The Blackhawks archiac way of doing business is killing them. Pro sports is a tough business.....good teams know that it will always be age and production oriented. No matter how good you've been over the years...time marches on. Teams that consistently stay on top, know when to pull the trigger.

Chicago is not one of those teams.....
 

KBIB

CCS Hockey Icon while hated at HF
Joined:
Apr 26, 2013
Posts:
2,009
Liked Posts:
1,026
Okay, but that still doesn't change the fact that he's clearly at the tail-end of his career. That's being realistic.

And I have to completely disagree with this sentiment: "his value right now to the Hawks is a hell of a lot more than it would be to another team." No. That's looking at it from a purely homer perspective. There are teams that will kill for just one Cup before a franchise record, and Kane alone could be the difference between that and nothing. Let's be honest here: this team is shit and Kane would have much more value on almost every other team in the league right now, particularly those gunning for a Cup.
First he’s in his”tail end” but has value to a Cup team?

You are all over the place here. If you think he’s in his tail end of his career, wouldn’t GM’s think the same thing? And if they did, he would have minimal value outside of a first and a prospect if the Hawks retained.

If you are saying the Hawks can get a haul for a Kane in the “tail end” of his career, you aren’t making any sense. And I’m sorry, having the reason to go to games with ticket prices thru a drizzling shits period sure as shit means he has more value to the Hawks then a contender. And honestly, why would a contender trade for a guy with his cap hit if he’s on the “tail end” of his career?
 

Granada

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 14, 2019
Posts:
11,167
Liked Posts:
2,452
First he’s in his”tail end” but has value to a Cup team?

You are all over the place here. If you think he’s in his tail end of his career, wouldn’t GM’s think the same thing? And if they did, he would have minimal value outside of a first and a prospect if the Hawks retained.

If you are saying the Hawks can get a haul for a Kane in the “tail end” of his career, you aren’t making any sense. And I’m sorry, having the reason to go to games with ticket prices thru a drizzling shits period sure as shit means he has more value to the Hawks then a contender. And honestly, why would a contender trade for a guy with his cap hit if he’s on the “tail end” of his career?
Yup, it's really not that complicated. There is no contradiction here, although you're desperate to think there is, lol.

Being in the tail-end of one's career and being of high value to a Cup team are not mutually exclusive.

Also, your argument that Kane will drive fans to the seats is anecdotal. If the team plays as badly or even worse over the next few years, the only fans that will care about the record will be the die-hards. That alone will not sustain a wider fan-base.
 

KBIB

CCS Hockey Icon while hated at HF
Joined:
Apr 26, 2013
Posts:
2,009
Liked Posts:
1,026
Exactly. Like it or not it's inevitable that Kane is going to be a depreciating asset if he's not already. Even if he's depreciating from the stratosphere, it's depreciating nonetheless and that has to be taken into account by the 'hawks moving forward, especially since it is fully 100% possible that his production can be around what it is now, and then one year just falls off the table completely.

Another issue is the aftereffects of the new plague--even though they are projecting a possible 1M increase to the cap ceiling next year, it's not much; costs are going to have to be controlled across the board. Further, a lot of teams that would be contending already have a lot of long-term high salary taken up over multiple year deals, and Kane would just be another one of those players.

Thus, It makes little sense for the 'hawks to commit a lot of money over multiple years towards Kane; they would be opening themselves up to another Seabrook situation, and LTIRetirment does have consequences. Further, since Kane is a risk of having his production fall completely off, signing him to an expensive multi-year deal makes it that much more risk for any other team which might want him as part of a cup run--especially moving forward. If Kane is on an expiring contract any team looking to make a run might consider a move for him. The risk to them is low. But, hypothetically, if Kane is signed at 5 years for 10.5M dollars before 2023/2024, why would any club risk taking him on at the TDL is, say 2025 knowing full well that they'd have to pay him 10.5M dollars through 2029 knowing full well that in any of those seasons he could stop producing? Ditto with the 'hawks keeping him on. If Kane falls off in 2026 in the same scenario, the 'hawks would have all of those years owing a shit-tonne of money to him while they are rebuilding. Only an accountant would make that move.😏

I would think Kane knows this as well. Unless Kane takes a pay cut for duration (I don't see any team paying over 10M for him over multiple seasons right now), it might almost be in he and the 'hawks best interest to do contracts which are short term, but commensurate with his on-ice performance.

Can't really fault Davidson for that. Bowman the Beancounter signed him to the 2yr deal and has been in decline since. The only way Davidson could have possibly traded him out which his value was the highest under his watch was once he took over and was interim--and even that value was in the crapper.

The real question is whether or not whatever Koob could possibly get in arbitration be worth more than what he could fetch on the trade market. I don't think it is. I think the 'hawks should just cut their losses on him since he seems to be following a Frolik career projection--or worse.
A) Comparing Kane to Seabrook isn’t a good comparison. Seabrooks body was shot from years of physicality where as Kane is pretty protected by the refs. You are talking about a player who’s game is slowing the pace down and methodically finding an open man where as Seabs used his body as a weapon. Two different styles.

B) If Kubalik became Frolik that wouldn’t be a bad thing. He would need to work on his own zone presence tho
 

KBIB

CCS Hockey Icon while hated at HF
Joined:
Apr 26, 2013
Posts:
2,009
Liked Posts:
1,026
Yup, it's really not that complicated. There is no contradiction here, although you're desperate to think there is, lol.

Being in the tail-end of one's career and being of high value to a Cup team are not mutually exclusive.
Ok, show me one Cup team that has cap room to take on Kane’s hit now that the Av’s said no to the price.

I’ll hang up and listen
 

Granada

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 14, 2019
Posts:
11,167
Liked Posts:
2,452
Ok, show me one Cup team that has cap room to take on Kane’s hit now that the Av’s said no to the price.

I’ll hang up and listen
That's a separate argument.
 

Raskolnikov

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 23, 2012
Posts:
21,236
Liked Posts:
7,393
Location:
Enemy Territory via southern C
Okay, but that still doesn't change the fact that he's clearly at the tail-end of his career. That's being realistic.

And I have to completely disagree with this sentiment: "his value right now to the Hawks is a hell of a lot more than it would be to another team." No. That's looking at it from a purely homer perspective. There are teams that will kill for just one Cup before a franchise record, and Kane alone could be the difference between that and nothing. Let's be honest here: this team is shit and Kane would have much more value on almost every other team in the league right now, particularly those gunning for a Cup.

On this point we agree. But to get full leverage the Hawks should sign kane for 11,000,000/per on 3 year extension and then offer to eat half the salary, so that other teams will be getting Kane at 5.5 for three years at next years trade deadline or halfway point. Costing only 5.5 for half of the first year. And 5.5 for the years the Hawks could eat, maybe one year at the end he might be retired for anyway.
 

LordKOTL

Scratched for Vorobiev
Joined:
Dec 8, 2014
Posts:
8,400
Liked Posts:
2,877
Location:
PacNW
My favorite teams
  1. Portland Timbers
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
A) Comparing Kane to Seabrook isn’t a good comparison. Seabrooks body was shot from years of physicality where as Kane is pretty protected by the refs. You are talking about a player who’s game is slowing the pace down and methodically finding an open man where as Seabs used his body as a weapon. Two different styles.

B) If Kubalik became Frolik that wouldn’t be a bad thing. He would need to work on his own zone presence tho
As I mentioned previously, Mikita--a better comparable, had his numbers completely fall off the table. Different styles, sure, but the risk is still there. Father Time always wins out.

Also, Frolik was a highly-touted prospect when he entered the league, and he went from top-line talent projection to support 3rd line. While that's not bad for his career, that's certainly not what the 'hawks need at this point. There's also a risk that Kubalik also becomes a Sergei Samsonov--but for his sake I hope not.
 

Diehardfan

Well-known member
Joined:
Jun 10, 2010
Posts:
8,463
Liked Posts:
5,707
Location:
Western Burbs
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Yup, it's really not that complicated. There is no contradiction here, although you're desperate to think there is, lol.

Being in the tail-end of one's career and being of high value to a Cup team are not mutually exclusive.

Also, your argument that Kane will drive fans to the seats is anecdotal. If the team plays as badly or even worse over the next few years, the only fans that will care about the record will be the die-hards. That alone will not sustain a wider fan-base.
It's already started. The Hawks haven't had a sellout in weeks. It's a boring team that even Kaner's skills can't overcome.

And it's going to get worse before it gets better.......
 

LordKOTL

Scratched for Vorobiev
Joined:
Dec 8, 2014
Posts:
8,400
Liked Posts:
2,877
Location:
PacNW
My favorite teams
  1. Portland Timbers
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
It's already started. The Hawks haven't had a sellout in weeks. It's a boring team that even Kaner's skills can't overcome.

And it's going to get worse before it gets better.......
To be honest, I can accept that the team is likely goung to crash harder and we might be trading out favorite players as long as they are comitted to the rebuild.

Trying to "get one more run" for the old core has crippled any chance for the team to get better over the past 5 seasons, and that falls soley on the ex-accountant's shoulders.
 

Granada

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 14, 2019
Posts:
11,167
Liked Posts:
2,452
It's already started. The Hawks haven't had a sellout in weeks. It's a boring team that even Kaner's skills can't overcome.

And it's going to get worse before it gets better.......
Yup.
 

Granada

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 14, 2019
Posts:
11,167
Liked Posts:
2,452
Fuck, Jack McBain got traded to the Yotes. I read somewhere that the Hawks were trying to get him from Minnesota for Fleury. Wonder if Minny is still the front-runner now.
 

Top