Thanks for the information.

I know he was stuck in the Islanders organization at the worst of times. Maybe Father and Son Bowman had their Euro spies telling them they should insist on him being part of the trade. Do you think he has NHL capability?
- RickJ

Hard to say. Predicting goalies is never easy but why not? He is only 24 years old which is quite young age for a goalie. I believe when you are goalie the biggest thing is mentality and who can handle the pressure best will make it. And of course you have to be in the right place in the right time too. Can´t say Hawks are best fit for him right now but things can change pretty quickly.

well I think when you're looking at the best team in the league, you refer to the standings to see who it is, wouldn't that make sense?

maybe not right now, but at the end of the year I look to see whose in 1st place in the standings and that's the best team in the league, right?

and then of course you get into playoffs, and whoever raises the cup would then become the best team in the league

If the Edmonton Oilers were smart, which they clearly are not, they would do whatever it takes after this season to bring Seabrook in, make him their captain and then extend him for $8M + on a long deal the Hawks can't afford and start building from there.

But they won't because they think Andrew Ference is good enough.
- RickJ

The only thing the Oilers have that would even be considered for Seabrook is their draft choice in this year's draft. That's it.

I know you like Johnny O and so do I, but they aren't giving him $4M + on a multi year deal this summer. Excluding Rosy, he is the oldest of the defence group and in the NHL you don't want 3 rearguards to be in their 30's on long deals.
- RickJ

Exactly. Which is why it makes more sense to keep Oduya on a short term deal for middling cap hit than Seabrook on a long term deal (which I know I would insist on if I were his agent) for significant cap hit. If you're playing the money game, you basically have to decide whether Oduya + age decline + Seabrook replacement is more effective than Seabrook + age decline + Oduya replacement. The former will most certainly be the cheaper option.

I thought JJ asked a good question supported by some solid ideas.

My response was not intended to slag the Hawks. Essentially I think they are at the top of their game. But like a lot of teams that are recent Stanley Cup or PresidentCup winners they may find that these heights can be precarious. Fall off can be dramatic. The Hawks should shoot for the moon this year because we are on the edge of the next power shift in the NHL. A reduction in cap means even more talent shifting towards the young up and coming teams (eg. Islanders, have you noticed how little the Islanders pay their top player Tavares).

Last year Boston had a phenomenal regular season. They struggled in the playoffs and they thought they could fix everything with a few cosmetic changes. Great teams tend to top out with a great season, stumble and never get back to the top of their game.

I think the Hawks may have hit their peak in last year's Conference Final. Teams must improve upon themselves in order to win. Is this a better Hawk team than last year? Are they more suited for the 7 games of each playoff series? I wonder.
- spatso

This is a better team then last year , they have 4 lines rolling .All doing things a little different . They have also introduced some young hungry players , who may or may not be a factor this year . But will be ready to chip in next year . As was mentioned Stan has not mortgaged his future , but always makes deal with a eye to the future ..

FYI guys. spatso thinks Erik Karlsson is the best player in the league.

*orders another barge of salt*

FYI guys. spatso thinks Erik Karlsson is the best player in the league.

*orders another barge of salt*
- Elbows15

Heresy - we all know it is Oliver Ekman-Larsson....

Do yourselves a favor and go look at the rosters of other teams around the league.

Now ask yourselves these questions. What team is Seabrook NOT a top pairing guy? What teams is Seabrook their best Dman?


You don't get rid of top pairing D-men who are in the prime of their career for a bunch of hope.

Heresy - we all know it is Oliver Ekman-Larsson....
- mohel

James Tanner, is that you?

Do yourselves a favor and go look at the rosters of other teams around the league.

Now ask yourselves these questions. What team is Seabrook NOT a top pairing guy? What teams is Seabrook their best Dman?


You don't get rid of top pairing D-men who are in the prime of their career for a bunch of hope.
- Elbows15

(frank)ing A, bubba.

James Tanner, is that you?
- Elbows15

You are sharp.

You are sharp.
- mohel

So Elbows is Sharp? See ya.

So Elbows is Sharp? See ya.
- powerenforcer

NMC baby. I am going nowhere unless I want to.


This also explains a lot of things about Ogie's attitude toward me.

Do yourselves a favor and go look at the rosters of other teams around the league.

Now ask yourselves these questions. What team is Seabrook NOT a top pairing guy? What teams is Seabrook their best Dman?


You don't get rid of top pairing D-men who are in the prime of their career for a bunch of hope.
- Elbows15

Again this boils down to the argument people had about Patrick Sharp. What constitutes the prime of a player's career and when is it over? At what point does decline outweigh his projected performance based on career numbers? Some guys just fall off the map.

Look two pages ago at the disgust of anyone even mentioning Marty Havlat. Four years ago we all looked and said he was still a high quality player and the Hawks were taking a risk letting him go. Four years later and he's all but washed up. The parallel? Seabrook is the same age now as Havlat was then. You just never know when a career will take a downswing or not.

Edit: meant to say 5 years.

Exactly. Which is why it makes more sense to keep Oduya on a short term deal for middling cap hit than Seabrook on a long term deal (which I know I would insist on if I were his agent) for significant cap hit. If you're playing the money game, you basically have to decide whether Oduya + age decline + Seabrook replacement is more effective than Seabrook + age decline + Oduya replacement. The former will most certainly be the cheaper option.
- Sandus

Again, I like Johnny O alot but unless Bowman completely loses his mind he will let him walk if he needs the $ to retain Seabrook.

And the other thing is that if you total the current NHL salaries of Clendening, Dahlbeck, TVR and Rundblad that's $500K less than what Oduya makes now without a raise. With that in mind, seems to me that Johnny and his agent doesn't have as much leverage with the Hawks as he has with the other 29 NHL teams.

Again, I like Johnny O alot but unless Bowman completely loses his mind he will let him walk if he needs the $ to retain Seabrook.

And the other thing is that if you total the current NHL salaries of Clendening, Dahlbeck, TVR and Rundblad that's $500K less than what Oduya makes now without a raise. With that in mind, seems to me that Johnny and his agent doesn't have as much leverage with the Hawks as he has with the other 29 NHL teams.
- RickJ

He also has 130 more points, 10 full seasons, and one Stanley Cup ring more than all four of those guys combined. He had more points last season than all four of those players have in their combined careers. Known quantities vs unknown quantities.

And guess what. All four of those guys plus Johnny Oduya will cost less next year than Brent Seabrook.

He also has 130 more points, 10 full seasons, and one Stanley Cup ring more than all four of those guys combined. He had more points last season than all four of those players have in their combined careers. Known quantities vs unknown quantities.

And guess what. All four of those guys plus Johnny Oduya will cost less next year than Brent Seabrook.
- Sandus

And Seabrook is better than all of them. Also. pretty hard to say that considering Oduya is an UFA after this season.

Again this boils down to the argument people had about Patrick Sharp. What constitutes the prime of a player's career and when is it over? At what point does decline outweigh his projected performance based on career numbers? Some guys just fall off the map.

Look two pages ago at the disgust of anyone even mentioning Marty Havlat. Four years ago we all looked and said he was still a high quality player and the Hawks were taking a risk letting him go. Four years later and he's all but washed up. The parallel? Seabrook is the same age now as Havlat was then. You just never know when a career will take a downswing or not.

Edit: meant to say 5 years.
- Sandus

this is an apple to orange argument.

He also has 130 more points, 10 full seasons, and one Stanley Cup ring more than all four of those guys combined. He had more points last season than all four of those players have in their combined careers. Known quantities vs unknown quantities.

And guess what. All four of those guys plus Johnny Oduya will cost less next year than Brent Seabrook.
- Sandus

I concede to all of these Johnny O stats you are throwing at me.

But you missed one - he will be 34 when the 2015 season opens. the better, albeit more expensive player will be just 30.

Just a brief note. 4 years ago there were many on this board that want Nick Hjarmelson ran out of town on the first greyhound bus available. Now he is considered one of the best in the league.

My point is this. We all love the team and this is a business. Stan has a very difficult decision to make on the back end. the good news is the team has quality D-men in the pipeline. Lets hope Stan makes the correct decision .

IMO I keep Seabrook...Leadership, Physicality, 1st pair defenseman, and you need to be loyal to a player that is a cornerstone of the franchise....
just my take

Regarding Seabrook I think he either signs a team friendly extension this offseason or is dealt. No way the Hawks let him go into his final year without an extension and risk losing him for nothing.

I am certain my words will get taken out of context and blasted all over twitter by some children who are apparently poorly supervised by their parents.

But I am of the belief, as I always have been, that goalies are made by this defense, not the other way around. The goalies themselves admit it

So that said, assuming you had to move Sharp and Bickell and say another $6 million, do you keep this defense intact , deal Crawford (when his value will never be higher) and roll with Darling and Raanta?

Or do you lose Seabrook and keep Crawford?

The good news is, they have pretty much a full season and playoffs left to find out what they really have with these two guys. And my point is, they have to look at ALL their big deals, if the cap goes down.

Plus, if Saad keeps playing like he has the last few games, cha-ching
- John Jaeckel

Let's not forget Seabs impact on Duncs play. I contend Duncs has two Norris cuz Seabs is his D-partner. I'd approach a Seabs/Crow question the same way SB did in July 2010 with the Hammer/Nemo question; different circumstances of course.

Nothing again Crow, but him, Bucks and Sharp will be the first three (guys under a 15-16 contract) the 'Hawks will consider moving should the cap stagnates.
Just hope the Canook dollar gets back up over US $0.92 by April.

Again, I like Johnny O alot but unless Bowman completely loses his mind he will let him walk if he needs the $ to retain Seabrook.

And the other thing is that if you total the current NHL salaries of Clendening, Dahlbeck, TVR and Rundblad that's $500K less than what Oduya makes now without a raise. With that in mind, seems to me that Johnny and his agent doesn't have as much leverage with the Hawks as he has with the other 29 NHL teams.
- RickJ

Johnny and his agent should also remember how Johnny played before he came to the Hawks. He may not be the fit with many of those 29 teams that he is with the Hawks.

this is an apple to orange argument.
- Elbows15

On the contrary, I think comparing any two players as examples when it comes to age is valid. For every Nik Lidstrom or Teemu Selanne there is a Dany Heatley or Martin Havlat. The fact is, once a player hits 30 years old, there is no telling how long his career will continue at a high level. Could Seabrook be Chris Chelios and play for another 7-8 years at top line caliber and then another 2-3 at Top 4 level? Absolutely. But he could also go the Wade Redden route and take a sharp downturn.

I know I'm talking in extremes here and reality is likely to be somewhere between the two, but the fact remains that the only real certainty you have about Brent Seabrook is his present day value and capabilities. If I'm being practical, giving Johnny Oduya 4 years $16 million works out better and is easier to stomach if Oduya turns to garbage (plus any assets you could acquire from a Seabrook deal prior to next season) than 7 years $49M does if Seabrook starts to decline in 2-3 years.

So if you're sure that Seabs has lots left in the tank, then give him 6-7 more. If you're not, I'm in favor of Oduya for the next couple years and trading Seabrook at the peak of his value.

I'm sticking to my stance that Seabrook will be the core guy dealt this Summer. Probably sometime near the draft or right before UFA. I don't see the Hawks offering him a 7-8 year deal and I think that's something he wants. Plus the rumor I've read is that he's looking for about $8 mil a year. That's a bit much in my world.