Maybe I'm missing it but what happened to Eli? I don't think I seen him much the last couple of Blogs

There is plenty of snark in yours and mexco's posts. Disagree with what Stan actually does tho, not dissect what he doesn't do per an Internet rumor
- Confederate

Snark is what makes it interesting! Just remember, YOU, ME & EVERYONE on this board can choose to respond or not respond to any other post/poster. There are certainly going to be disagreements, and a bit of snark makes things interesting. I see that you are a big fan of StanBo, and I am most of the time. However, if people think he waited too long? didnt wait long enough? shouldve done this. shouldve done that. They are entitled to their opinion and THIS is the forum/place for that that kind of opinion. If you dont agree, tell the poster in a civil way and offer the opposite opinion. This should be a place for debate and hockey convo. Not high school drama like we are in the movie Mean Girls.....

Personally, I think he waited too long. I like what Daley will bring next season but I hate that it means Rundblad is back into our top 6...

There is plenty of snark in yours and mexco's posts. Disagree with what Stan actually does tho, not dissect what he doesn't do per an Internet rumor
- Confederate

Bowman is a very good to excellent GM, pretty much EVERYONE on this board agrees with this...he has made a few bad decisions, but always under very difficult circumstances. His is one of the hardest jobs out there...sports or not...and he has the support of all Hawk fans!

If the Hawks trade Versteeg, it would give them close to$3 mil under the cap which would be plenty to sign Kruger. 21 players on the roster, don't have to trade Shaw one of my favorite players bu if he is starting to wear down from his tenacious style of play it might be what's for the best. Hold Bickell until trade dead line see if you can deal him if that is your true intentions if not you can buy him out next summer and now you have additional money for Seabrook and possibly can keep Crawford.

Wondering if Kruger goes with a Bickell deal? I only say that because the team seems really high on Danault.
- z1990z

They're virtually cap-compliant right now, but of course Kruger isn't signed. No doubt improving the bottom D pairing would be welcome, but by far the most compelling reason to move Bickell is to gain cap room to sign Kruger. That motivation disappears if Kruger is included in a Bickell trade. It wouldn't make any sense at all.

Maybe I'm missing it but what happened to Eli? I don't think I seen him much the last couple of Blogs
- ikeane

He got banned by UNS???

Why is everyone comparing the possible new roster to the roster of the playoffs?

If Kane doesn't go down two vital pieces do not fit under the cap. We should be comparing the new roster to the roster of game 1 last year, just saying.

[quote=Al]Today's interview...

Hawks talk with Paul Edmonds-Oduya signing-Seabrook extension, Saad and Sharp trades and more...
TSN 1290 Winnipeg @TSN1290Radio
Podcast: @AlCimaglia discussed the #Blackhawks off-season on today's #RonaRoundtable with
http://t.co/BLiD5YbRlw

Anyone else surprised Oduya didn't sign for more than 2 years and at least $4 mill per??
- Hank3Henshaw[/quote]

I don't think the Hawks really had a chance to resign him. I think he went to Dallas for less money because they have a better chance of making the playoffs and having a run more so than the Sabres. Don't get me wrong, the Sabres made some good moves, but Dallas is more poised to go somewhere out of the two. Oduya strikes me as kind of a no BS guy--he'd rather take less money and go to a team where he can contribute and have a chance fairly quickly to win again. He's 33 and I think he knew he might end up using up some of his remaining strong years with the Sabres. Not dogging BUF, but I my guess is he might have been thinking that.

Agree for the most part, although the lynch pin was the Sharp trade from the standpoint of the result being only about 1.7 mill in cap space created.

As far as Dallas....I had heard as did others Buffalo really wanted him but Dallas is a better team. I think Oduya could have made more in Buffalo but he probably was backstopped in a couple of places.

I agree...the following comes from an NHL executive who knows Stan very well..."Stan is stubborn, he'll prove to himself that Bickell's contract wasn't a mistake by trading it somewhere else". And I am sure he will, but at what cost?
- MexicoHawk

Yes Mex, he sure seems to be stubborn.
Why else, then, would a guy double down on an already bad bet in the form of David Rundblad by re-upping him for $1M on a 1-way???

To prove to himself that he was right in giving up a 2nd for him?
That $1M is precious and why throw it away on a player that should never see NHL ice ever again?

Could that same attitude have been the reason Stan turned down the 1st Dallas offer?

They're virtually cap-compliant right now, but of course Kruger isn't signed. No doubt improving the bottom D pairing would be welcome, but by far the most compelling reason to move Bickell is to gain cap room to sign Kruger. That motivation disappears if Kruger is included in a Bickell trade. It wouldn't make any sense at all.
- Volodya

That I know... but if moving Bickell requires either Shaw or Kruger? I love Shaw, but if the team has to chose?? Unless Stan relents and moves Danault in the deal. My guess is after moving Johns, Stan is not wanting to move any more highly rated prospects.

THANK YOU! I agree completely. I've frankly been astonished how ready some posters here are to view Shaw as an easily replaced "depth player" and move him in exchange for a modest amount of cap space. Hopefully Bowman understands Shaw's importance the same way you do.
- Volodya

Don't agree. Shaw is a solid depth player who plays a good role on this team but he is replacable. Moreover, his style of play does not bode well for the longevity of his career.

If it takes Shaw to move Bickell, you pull the trigger.

At this stage.....seeing what has, and hasn't transpired....I fully expect to See Crawford dealt. I just don't see how else we will get under the Cap. We took back too much salary on Sharp. Seems Bickel will net us little cap relief....I think Crawford is the only logical move left.
- hawk35

Again with the trade Crawford chatter.

No way Q and the front office enter next season with the following goal tenders at the top of the depth chart...

Darling
Leighton
Visentin

Only way CC is traded is if the return includes a very good NHL calibre goaler, but how much will he be compensated?

And how many teams want, or can afford a 6M cap hit?

Agreed, and I would love to see him stick around.

Of course, Adam Burish is looking for somewhere to play....
- hpk90

I'm sure that was just a joke but...

Shaw >>>>> Burish


we can always keep car bomb around too!

And what was he willing to take here? Another miss based on lack of decisiveness from this front office. Take a lower return or buyout Bickell a few weeks ago and even with the trade Sharp for the same return and cap hit Oduya still could have been here.
- tredbrta

No clue but like I said today the Sharp trade turned into a hockey deal rather than a pure salary bump probably because Bowman made the most out of tough situation.

Today's interview
Podcast: @AlCimaglia discussed the #Blackhawks off-season on today's #RonaRoundtable with @UtilityVoice http://www.tsn.ca/radio/winnipeg-1290

That I know... but if moving Bickell requires either Shaw or Kruger? I love Shaw, but if the team has to chose?? Unless Stan relents and moves Danault in the deal. My guess is after moving Johns, Stan is not wanting to move any more highly rated prospects.
- z1990z

If they absolutely had to choose, I agree, I would keep Kruger and part with Shaw. I don't think they have to make that choice though. I would trade Danault and keep both Kruger and Shaw.

He just signed for a very reasonable cap hit with a lesser team in Dallas. IDK how that equates to him jumping ship for a higher AAV?

I suspect, given the already absurd demands for dumping salary, Bowman did not want to go over the cap by signing Oduya. He could have signed him, been less than 10% over the cap, and REALLY been up against the wall in terms of shedding salary...AGAIN. This, ultimately, comes down to Bickell's immovable contract and the negotiating position Stan has, currently, still under the cap...Signing Oduya prior to shedding Bickel+ would have been bad news for StanBo, IMO.
- EnzoD

If Bickell's contract could not be moved then management should bitten the bullet and bought him out.

If they absolutely had to choose, I agree, I would keep Kruger and part with Shaw. I don't think they have to make that choice though. I would trade Danault and keep both Kruger and Shaw.
- Volodya

I agree I would trade Danault in a second if that would allow the Hawks to keep Shaw and Kruger

If Bickell's contract could not be moved then management should bitten the bullet and bought him out.
- tredbrta

That window closed June 30th. Other than moving him, it's LTIR.

Why is everyone comparing the possible new roster to the roster of the playoffs?

If Kane doesn't go down two vital pieces do not fit under the cap. We should be comparing the new roster to the roster of game 1 last year, just saying.
- waitforawhistle

Don't think that's true. Hardly a mention of 44, 80 & 91.

If Bickell's contract could not be moved then management should bitten the bullet and bought him out.
- tredbrta

They could still technically do that next off season to make room for Seabrook to extend.

So, JJ said that a possible trade Stan could have gotten rid of Bickell would be to package him with Danault. I will admit that I have not see much of Danault other than his cup of coffee this season with the Hawks and his hard hit on the Devils Zubrus in his first shift as a pro. However, would being able to keep Shaw and Oduya be worth giving up on Danault or this there more upside to him that I may have saw when he was up with the Hawks for a few games? Again, I am not sure what if potential upside is so I would like to see what Danault could be in a couple years.

That window closed June 30th. Other than moving him, it's LTIR.
- blackhawk24

Doesn't Philly owe us one? Send Bicks to Phi and he takes Prongers spot.

THANK YOU! I agree completely. I've frankly been astonished how ready some posters here are to view Shaw as an easily replaced "depth player" and move him in exchange for a modest amount of cap space. Hopefully Bowman understands Shaw's importance the same way you do.
- Volodya

Every time I see it I wonder if the poster actually watched the playoffs. Shaw is all heart.

If Bickell's contract could not be moved then management should bitten the bullet and bought him out.
- tredbrta

Preaching to the choir my friend!

Speaking of the Stars, does anyone know the outcome with Richard Peverley and what he is up to since his heart issue?