I think 2 years at under 4 each if the next two years are similar statistic wise would be doable. Anything over 4 per or long term at this stage seems silly and I agree they have to let him walk or move for futures.

They have some goofy/bizarre money tied up in Oduya, Montador, Hammer and Frolik as well so it is anyone's guess what actually happens. Definitely movable pieces but they are going to need to be careful if the cap doesn't go up or if it regresses where they spend their money.

Plus Stalberg, Kruger and Bickell are all up for new deals after "this year" which could be problematic but all movable at a minimum at the drafts for futures I suppose.
- fattybeef

Bolland will want a 3-5 year deal. 3 years minimum. He will only be 28-29.

Of ALL the Hawk players with concussion histories, except probably Montador, Bolland's has been the worst. Plus the back. Even if he rips it up statistically, all that does is drive up his price but it doesn't make him any less likely to get injured. or more likely to stay healthy long-term.

It is the classic trade-off that every GM faces: deal a guy when his value is high and gamble on a guy you have being ready or close to ready to step in. Bottom line, with the progress made by Danault, McNeill and Kruger (collectively and individually), I say Bolland is very likely to be dealt before his deal is up. Because if he makes it healthy to that point, the price and term will likely be high.


As far as the Silly Money Brigade, the ones that are more silly are Montador and Frolik. Oduya (especially) and Hjalmarsson are very well-suited to what the Hawks want to do on defense— block shots, take away space positionally and transition fast out of their end. I don't have huge problems with the dollars for either of those guys, and I'm not sure there aren't other teams/GMs that wouldn't be comfortable with them at those salaries, though not all.

Bolland will want a 3-5 year deal. 3 years minimum. He will only be 28-29.

Of ALL the Hawk players with concussion histories, except probably Montador, Bolland's has been the worst. Plus the back. Even if he rips it up statistically, all that does is drive up his price but it doesn't make him any less likely to get injured. or more likely to stay healthy long-term.

It is the classic trade-off that every GM faces: deal a guy when his value is high and gamble on a guy you have being ready or close to ready to step in. Bottom line, with the progress made by Danault, McNeill and Kruger (collectively and individually), I say Bolland is very likely to be dealt before his deal is up. Because if he makes it healthy to that point, the price and term will likely be high.


As far as the Silly Money Brigade, the ones that are more silly are Montador and Frolik. Oduya (especially) and Hjalmarsson are very well-suited to what the Hawks want to do on defense— block shots, take away space positionally and transition fast out of their end. I don't have huge problems with the dollars for either of those guys, and I'm not sure there aren't other teams/GMs that wouldn't be comfortable with them at those salaries, though not all.
- John Jaeckel

I expect Frolik to be dealt shortly after the CBA is finalized. After this season he has only 1 more year left and he's an RFA. Montador we're stuck with unless he retires. If Monty can stay healthy he could be a decent 5-7 defenseman, albeit a very expensive one.

When Bolland's contract comes due the Hawks will also have the following contracts come due: Frolik (if he's not dealt), J Hayes, Carcillo, Bollig, Shaw, Olesz, Hjalmarsson, Brookbank and Crawford. Of this group Shaw will certainly be re-signed. Hayes and Hjalmarsson could be re-signed, and the others will walk. I think there could be some money available to keep Bolland on a 3-5 year deal.

1) I expect Frolik to be dealt shortly after the CBA is finalized. After this season he has only 1 more year left and he's an RFA. 2) Montador we're stuck with unless he retires. If Monty can stay healthy he could be a decent 5-7 defenseman, albeit a very expensive one.

When Bolland's contract comes due the Hawks will also have the following contracts come due: Frolik (if he's not dealt), J Hayes, Carcillo, Bollig, Shaw, Olesz, Hjalmarsson, Brookbank and Crawford. Of this group Shaw will certainly be re-signed. Hayes and Hjalmarsson could be re-signed, and the others will walk. I think there could be some money available to keep Bolland on a 3-5 year deal.
- DarthKane

1) If there are any takers. He's highly paid as a 3rd/4th line player.
2) Not necessarily. He could be buried in the minors or on LTIR.

Bolland will want a 3-5 year deal. 3 years minimum. He will only be 28-29.

Of ALL the Hawk players with concussion histories, except probably Montador, Bolland's has been the worst. Plus the back. Even if he rips it up statistically, all that does is drive up his price but it doesn't make him any less likely to get injured. or more likely to stay healthy long-term.

It is the classic trade-off that every GM faces: deal a guy when his value is high and gamble on a guy you have being ready or close to ready to step in. Bottom line, with the progress made by Danault, McNeill and Kruger (collectively and individually), I say Bolland is very likely to be dealt before his deal is up. Because if he makes it healthy to that point, the price and term will likely be high.


As far as the Silly Money Brigade, the ones that are more silly are Montador and Frolik. Oduya (especially) and Hjalmarsson are very well-suited to what the Hawks want to do on defense— block shots, take away space positionally and transition fast out of their end. I don't have huge problems with the dollars for either of those guys, and I'm not sure there aren't other teams/GMs that wouldn't be comfortable with them at those salaries, though not all.
- John Jaeckel

Well I think if he tears it up then they won't be able to pay him anyways (so agreement there). The whole injury thing doesn't really bother me if they get a deal preferably for 2 years to protect themselves/allow talent to maturate if necessary. One of the next guys could be ready next year or in 3 years time or never.

Kane is really the only one out of their "elite" forward group to have shown any consistent durability which kind of defies logic. The one issue I have with Kruger is how he skates and his overall awareness and propensity to get absolutely railed even at the AHL level.

Either way I think a compressed schedule would help them tremendously this year (assuming there is a season) and with Crawford version year one they could have a shot. Next year could see a lot of kids and maybe the year after another shot at something until all those ELC's are up again. The whole cap uncertainty thing makes it a little hard to predict how much $ they will have to spend down the line and what the market will look like.

Being able to build around / retain / keep fit Toews, Kane, Keith and Seabrook is all that really matters past this season IMO unless they strike gold with one of their picks.

Haha, put into that context yes you are correct. The though not all part is what I was getting at.

Pirri is prime trade bait. A relatively highly rated prospect by scouts, still some "bloom" on his rose. But his overall game, especially defensive deficiencies, does not suit Quenneville. Also a tiny player with an NHL roster that is clearly already too small and non-physical overall.
- John Jaeckel

Reminds me a lot of the PA Parenteau situation here...

Bolland will want a 3-5 year deal. 3 years minimum. He will only be 28-29.

Of ALL the Hawk players with concussion histories, except probably Montador, Bolland's has been the worst. Plus the back. Even if he rips it up statistically, all that does is drive up his price but it doesn't make him any less likely to get injured. or more likely to stay healthy long-term.

It is the classic trade-off that every GM faces: deal a guy when his value is high and gamble on a guy you have being ready or close to ready to step in. Bottom line, with the progress made by Danault, McNeill and Kruger (collectively and individually), I say Bolland is very likely to be dealt before his deal is up. Because if he makes it healthy to that point, the price and term will likely be high.


As far as the Silly Money Brigade, the ones that are more silly are Montador and Frolik. Oduya (especially) and Hjalmarsson are very well-suited to what the Hawks want to do on defense— block shots, take away space positionally and transition fast out of their end. I don't have huge problems with the dollars for either of those guys, and I'm not sure there aren't other teams/GMs that wouldn't be comfortable with them at those salaries, though not all.
- John Jaeckel

The last contract before a player turns 30, except for some defensmen, is when they want to really ring the bell....Bolland will want at least a 4 year deal.

Well I think if he tears it up then they won't be able to pay him anyways (so agreement there). The whole injury thing doesn't really bother me if they get a deal preferably for 2 years to protect themselves/allow talent to maturate if necessary. One of the next guys could be ready next year or in 3 years time or never.

Kane is really the only one out of their "elite" forward group to have shown any consistent durability which kind of defies logic. The one issue I have with Kruger is how he skates and his overall awareness and propensity to get absolutely railed even at the AHL level.

Either way I think a compressed schedule would help them tremendously this year (assuming there is a season) and with Crawford version year one they could have a shot. Next year could see a lot of kids and maybe the year after another shot at something until all those ELC's are up again. The whole cap uncertainty thing makes it a little hard to predict how much $ they will have to spend down the line and what the market will look like.

Being able to build around / retain / keep fit Toews, Kane, Keith and Seabrook is all that really matters past this season IMO unless they strike gold with one of their picks.

Haha, put into that context yes you are correct. The though not all part is what I was getting at.
- fattybeef

I admire Kruger's toughness/guts but he is not as aware as he should be...

That needs to change in a big way or he won't last in the NHL.

Reminds me a lot of the PA Parenteau situation here...
- Al

With the number of centers likely to find their way to Rockford next season I would assume that this has to be the year Pirri gets a shot and 'sticks' (to a certain degree) or gets traded (especially if the Hogs are on the outside looking in near the AHL trade deadline). Pirri's biggest problem (which in prospect terms shouldn't be a problem) is that he is the ONLY center in the system projected to no. 2 status. If the brass doesn't feel like he is it then he has to go in a trade that acquires 'it'. When you look up and down the Hawks' roster and depth chart the biggest hole yet addressed is the 2C position (save goaltending, but that is a philosophical decision on the Bowmans' behalf)

1) If there are any takers. He's highly paid as a 3rd/4th line player.
2) Not necessarily. He could be buried in the minors or on LTIR.
- John Jaeckel

That will depend on the new CBA, hiding bad contracts in the minors may not be allowed. I doubt he'd stay on LTIR for the duration of his contract, but you never know. For his sake I hope his injury isn't that bad.

The last contract before a player turns 30, except for some defensmen, is when they want to really ring the bell....Bolland will want at least a 4 year deal.
- Al

Ew. Really like the player. Wouldn't give him 4 years. At least today for sure. Maybe back to back 82 game seasons would change my mind. But since 82 games is unlikely this year doubt that would happen.

With the number of centers likely to find their way to Rockford next season I would assume that this has to be the year Pirri gets a shot and 'sticks' (to a certain degree) or gets traded (especially if the Hogs are on the outside looking in near the AHL trade deadline). Pirri's biggest problem (which in prospect terms shouldn't be a problem) is that he is the ONLY center in the system projected to no. 2 status. If the brass doesn't feel like he is it then he has to go in a trade that acquires 'it'. When you look up and down the Hawks' roster and depth chart the biggest hole yet addressed is the 2C position (save goaltending, but that is a philosophical decision on the Bowmans' behalf)
- nathanjf

By now the Organization should know if Pirri will fit in...

As far as trading Pirri...He had an All Star season and last summer would have been a good time to deal him.

The longer players we think are bonafide prospects stay in Rockford the more doubts enter the mind of potential suitors...

Not to mention the many scouts that are paid to seperate the pretenders from legit NHL players have more time to scrutinize.

On Twitter@AlCimaglia

By now the Organization should know if Pirri will fit in...

As far as trading Pirri...He had an All Star season and last summer would have been a good time to deal him.

The longer players we think are bonafide prospects stay in Rockford the more doubts enter the mind of potential suitors...

Not to mention the many scouts that are paid to seperate the pretenders from legit NHL players have more time to scrutinize.

On Twitter@AlCimaglia
- Al

That being said. What do you think the Hawks could get for Pirri? Or would be just be a throw-in for a bigger deal?

The Bears are playing like pussies. Just like the Hawks wod be getting pushed around if they were playing. Getting oit coached just like the Hawks get out coached.....

The Bears are playing like pussies. Just like the Hawks wod be getting pushed around if they were playing. Getting oit coached just like the Hawks get out coached.....
- mrpaulish

To quote our good friend Philco, "Fking Pretenders"..

By now the Organization should know if Pirri will fit in...

As far as trading Pirri...He had an All Star season and last summer would have been a good time to deal him.

The longer players we think are bonafide prospects stay in Rockford the more doubts enter the mind of potential suitors...

Not to mention the many scouts that are paid to seperate the pretenders from legit NHL players have more time to scrutinize.

On Twitter@AlCimaglia
- Al

Maybe not in Chicago, but Pirri will be an NHL player somewhere. He's 21, never played major Junior, one year of college hockey, 1-1/2 years of AHL experience. Puts points up in every league he plays in and has been injury free as far as I know. In his salary bracket, somebody is going to give him an NHL job.

And what ever happened to the Detroit Red Wing patience model - let your kids grow up and develop for a few years in the minors playing in a tough competitive league?

Pirri will play in the NHL (somewhere) before Jeremy Morin or Kyle Beach ever do.

Maybe not in Chicago, but Pirri will be an NHL player somewhere. He's 21, never played major Junior, one year of college hockey, 1-1/2 years of AHL experience. Puts points up in every league he plays in and has been injury free as far as I know. In his salary bracket, somebody is going to give him an NHL job.

And what ever happened to the Detroit Red Wing patience model - let your kids grow up and develop for a few years in the minors playing in a tough competitive league?

Pirri will play in the NHL (somewhere) before Jeremy Morin or Kyle Beach ever do.
- RickJ

First off patience is pretty much a thing of the past because every good team needs a few of contributors who are cheap....ie young.

I have a one sided view on this one....There was no better time than last season to bring Pirri up while his confidence was sky hgh and a 1st/2nd line center was needed.

Someone here is not in his corner...So in my view sell high.
Like I said earlier....Similar to PA Parenteau who has proven to be a NHL player

As far as your last comment on Beach and Morin...I won't bet against you.

On Twitter@AlCimaglia

That being said. What do you think the Hawks could get for Pirri? Or would be just be a throw-in for a bigger deal?
- DarthKane

.....As part of a bigger deal to a team looking to become a playoff contender. Whereby Pirri will get minutes on the top two lines.

First off patience is pretty much a thing of the past because every good team needs a few of contributors who are cheap....ie young.

I have a one sided view on this one....There was no better time than last season to bring Pirri up while his confidence was sky hgh and a 1st/2nd line center was needed.

Someone here is not in his corner...So in my view sell high.
Like I said earlier....Similar to PA Parenteau who has proven to be a NHL player

As far as your last comment on Beach and Morin...I won't bet against you.

On Twitter@AlCimaglia
- Al

Does your angle on Pirri come soley from the way the organization has handled him? Because, most aspects of his game are +.

As for patience - there are plenty of cheap (young) players the organization is going to lean on in the bottom 6.

Does your angle on Pirri come soley from the way the organization has handled him? Because, most aspects of his game are +.

As for patience - there are plenty of cheap (young) players the organization is going to lean on in the bottom 6.
- nathanjf

Yes and from what I have heard...
But there doesn't need to be any inside info on this one...only hockey logic.

Pirri was a true AHL All Star on a bad team in Rockford and ....

The Hawks had injury issues at center on a few ocassions, yet he did not get a sniff in Chicago.

Bottom six players are readily available...

Pirri's road to the NHL is as a top six player, if not he could wind up in Europe is my guess.

But I think he has a shot to play in the NHL but unless there is an epihany by Q. or the front office it won't be here.

Yes and from what I have heard...
But there doesn't need to be any inside info on this one...only hockey logic.

Pirri was a true AHL All Star on a bad team in Rockford and ....

The Hawks had injury issues at center on a few ocassions, yet he did not get a sniff in Chicago.

Bottom six players are readily available...

Pirri's road to the NHL is as a top six player, if not he could wind up in Europe is my guess.

But I think he has a shot to play in the NHL but unless there is an epihany by Q. or the front office it won't be here.
- Al

Can't really argue with the logic. Time will tell.

First off patience is pretty much a thing of the past because every good team needs a few of contributors who are cheap....ie young.

I have a one sided view on this one....There was no better time than last season to bring Pirri up while his confidence was sky hgh and a 1st/2nd line center was needed.

Someone here is not in his corner...So in my view sell high.
Like I said earlier....Similar to PA Parenteau who has proven to be a NHL player

As far as your last comment on Beach and Morin...I won't bet against you.

On Twitter@AlCimaglia
- Al

You touched on it yesterday - it's Coach Q who isn't a supporter. Clearly he likes Kruger better and probably for good reasons. But this is the same guy who wasn't a Brouwer fan; despised the Finnish defenceman last year and refused to play him; brought in washed up Andrew Brunette and Jamal Mayers; played John Scott until that toy was taken away from him. And I submit he got outcoached by Dave Tippett in the playoffs last year.

I'm not nominating Pirri for an award, I just think he has done enough in Rockford to deserve an NHL chance and if he gets close to making it with Chicago his trade value becomes higher. Teams like Calgary, NYI, Montreal, Winnipeg, Toronto and Dallas would all have some interest.

You touched on it yesterday - it's Coach Q who isn't a supporter. Clearly he likes Kruger better and probably for good reasons. But this is the same guy who wasn't a Brouwer fan; despised the Finnish defenceman last year and refused to play him; brought in washed up Andrew Brunette and Jamal Mayers; played John Scott until that toy was taken away from him. And I submit he got outcoached by Dave Tippett in the playoffs last year.

I'm not nominating Pirri for an award, I just think he has done enough in Rockford to deserve an NHL chance and if he gets close to making it with Chicago his trade value becomes higher. Teams like Calgary, NYI, Montreal, Winnipeg, Toronto and Dallas would all have some interest.
- RickJ

DING-DING

Yep and unfortunately the past two years there is more than enough blame to pass around.

Can't really argue with the logic. Time will tell.
- nathanjf

Except that the team was trying to play a tighter style of hockey with Toews out. If I recall correctly there was a long stretch when Toews was out where the team seemed more capable than they had all year at playing total team defense. I can't see how Pirri would have fit into that. I wonder if the Hawks were floundering in 11th place if Pirri would have played.

Just to be clear, since words are often taken out of context here... Not backing Pirri... just spit balling.

Always liked Chris Versteeg!!

http://prohockeytalk.nbcs...nce-a-new-cba-is-reached/



slip sliden away......

Always liked Chris Versteeg!!

http://prohockeytalk.nbcs...nce-a-new-cba-is-reached/



slip sliden away......
- bogiedoc

Meh. Bettman is just the face of 28 other people.

Sure he is paid to negotiate but realistically he reports to the other 28 owners and they tell him what to say/do.

If anything his job probably sucks as he has to manage the ego's of people like the Jacobs (Delaware north.. Boston) and Wirtz and their irritation at having to give away money to the lesser teams. Plus dealing with owners who want handouts. Though being a millionaire babysitter I'm sure has its perks.

Boston, Buffalo, Chicago, Detroit, Toronto, Montreal, Philly, Pittsburgh, San Jose, Vancouver and Washington would spend ridiculous amounts of money without thinking twice.

Part of the problem is teams like Dallas or Phoenix don't want to spend the scratch and probably cant sustain a payroll of that size every year. To a certain extent they probably expect to make money just for being in the league and if they can't get it at the door then obviously it needs to be subsidized because things aren't "fair" and they are "disadvantaged" and blah blah blah... Then don't own a team? Don't expand to places that can't be sold out? Don't be surprised when teams that have money manipulate the accounting to pay the best players a cap friendly number? Half of this nonsense is so silly it is borderline hilarious. A real life lesson in market manipulation and the free lunch myth.

To think that it is just the players vs the owners is preposterous. I promise you there are at least 8 teams that could care less about a cap or player payment restrictions because they want people in the door (and fans will pay), they have a rabid base that buys jerseys and merch and enough people will watch it regionally to make it worth their while.

If the lower revenue teams can't get money from the owners that are by circumstance in better locations or run their business more effectively or all the above... then they will expect that money to come from the players as they cannot stand on their own two feet otherwise when spending gets out of control. Again, free lunch, easy money, over spending, kind of neat when micro matches macro.

What would be neat is if there was a balanced books rule where salaries could not exceed "hockey related revenue" wouldn't that be a fun one. It would limit spending to what everyone could afford and probably provide a more even playing field to compete as everyone has to adhere to the same standards and subsidizing through other corporations would not be as easy.

That way salaries are limited, everyone has the same rules in terms of what they can pay and it should be sustainable. Everyone makes money and gets paid appropriately. OR they could subsidize it further, make more ambiguous rules that owners of the better off organizations will circumvent and end up in this same mess 5-10 years down the line.