Speaking today would you swap out Panarin for one of the established core? Meaning move one of them to make room for Panarin?
- Mr Ricochet

No. Trading one hole for another.

Secondly, won't be able to dump a core guy without taking some combination of salary or lesser player back.

Speaking today would you swap out Panarin for one of the established core? Meaning move one of them to make room for Panarin?
- Mr Ricochet

I would trade Kane and keep Panarin.

Hard to say, I was able to watch a lot of Michigan games this year (just happened to be in my package). Really like Tyler Motte, he may need a year in Rockford, maybe not. I see him as a more discipline "Shaw" that can score, unselfish and seems drawn to where the puck is going to be.
- walleyeb1

I think it would be a lot to ask of a player out of college to be able to play up and down the lineup like Shaw.

All I know is in the Cup run the best forwards were Saad and Shaw. Last year in the playoffs Shaw was the best forward-That's saying something.


Shaw has kept his discipline for the most part-Hartman on the other hand I hear is more of a loose cannon, yet people see him as a Shaw replacement-I say no.

I think it would be a lot to ask of a player out of college to be able to play up and down the lineup like Shaw.

All I know is in the Cup run the best forwards were Saad and Shaw. Last year in the playoffs Shaw was the best forward-That's saying something.


Shaw has kept his discipline for the most part-Hartman on the other hand I hear is more of a loose cannon, yet people see him as a Shaw replacement-I say no.
- Al

Shaw plays with so much heart and determination that he almost makes it a measurable stat.

How the hell are the Hawks going to add a 1LW and some D help ??

Looking forward to July 1.

I thought Stan was brilliant at the trade deadline and Q franked it up with his stubborn bs.

A rule that at least one defenseman and two forwards who have played 40 games in a season or 70 games over two seasons must be left unprotected and must be under contract for the 2017-18 season.

That means the hawks are going to play Viktor Svedberg 43 times this season and he fits the criteria as he and TVR and the big three are signed...and he is actaully going to be exempt.

Or it is a player that they trade for who played a lot last year and gets in the games to get him to 70....and I just don't see that happening, unless they pawn Bickell off and are planning on a younger dee at the bottom end.

or it is TvR.

Remember, teams can send prospects to Las Vegas to not draft TvR...but you can only protect a certain number of players.
The league will hold an expansion draft next June in which Las Vegas will select one player from each team, according to multiple reports. The expansion club must draft a minimum of three goaltenders, nine defensemen and 14 forwards. The league wants Las Vegas to be more competitive than previous expansion clubs, so the rules regarding player protection will be more stringent.

The Hawks can protect seven forwards, three defensemen and one goalie, or an eight combination players and one goaltender. The second option is available for teams that are blue-line heavy and would rather expose extra forwards.

The big 3 defenders, Toews Kane Anisimov Shaw, TT or Kruger & Hossa is a required save -Panarin (exempt). So all of them go protected ...

If you take the other route, and save TVR you expose ONE of the forwards...plus the defender they acquire to fill the criteria if that is indeed the case...and the other forwards no listed above...

Remember, they only GET ONE Blackhawk...
- wiz1901

Why would you protect Hossa? Wouldn't this be an easy get-out-of-jail-free card? Not that anyone would take him at that contract at this point anyway.

Shaw plays with so much heart and determination that he almost makes it a measurable stat.

How the hell are the Hawks going to add a 1LW and some D help ??

Looking forward to July 1.

I thought Stan was brilliant at the trade deadline and Q franked it up with his stubborn bs.
- mrpaulish

There was nothing brilliant about what Bowman did. He dealt a top D spec and a first for a rental, that takes no brilliance. He traded a prospect and a #2 for a solid banger and a guy often scratched. He failed to add anything on the blueline even though he was giving away prospects and picks like chicklets.

That said, Q was pretty awful this year with his dog house shenanigans....

BOTH guys better pick it up, because relying on 88, 2, 7, 4, 19, 50, and 81 to bail you out of all your poor moves is asking too much.

Why would you protect Hossa? Wouldn't this be an easy get-out-of-jail-free card? Not that anyone would take him at that contract at this point anyway.
- busmaster

Have to protect all players with NMCs.

Have to protect all players with NMCs.
- Return of the Roar

Ah. Thanks.

I would trade Kane and keep Panarin.


- gifman

Trade your best and most productive player? Smart

Mike Augello's blog says the Leafs are buying out Cowen. Wonder if Hawks can get him on a one year prove it deal

Compare to the NBA - last 11 seasons (including this year):

9 teams have made the finals
6 teams have won the championship (assuming Golden State closes it out this year).
- StLBravesFan

Basketball is such a statistical game, though. There is no equivalent to "puck luck" because there are so many shots taken over the course of a game that the law of averages has time to play out. So the individual series are more one-sided (think LeBron starting the playoffs 10-0 this year). And it is not nearly as physically demanding as hockey, since the star players routinely play around, what, 40 of the 48 minutes a game? The championship-winning teams have been able to assemble a star trio, while the other playoff teams have usually a star duo, and the non-playoff teams might have only one star or a "star on the rise." I think that's why you don't see any Cinderella runs in the pros. The teams who should win usually do win.

Hockey's law of averages seems to take a whole series to play out, and since it's a much more demanding game, you need so much more depth beyond a star trio, who can only play as much of 20 of the 60 minutes of the game. But if a goalie gets hot or there are a few funny bounces, suddenly a team who should be winning is down 2-0 in a series and eventually gets eliminated. So you can have Cinderella runs --- hell, 2006 between the Hurricanes and the Oilers was sort of a double Cinderella run. Still, if you can assemble a Toews-Kane-Keith combo with good to excellent depth (or Datsyuk-Zetterberg-Lidstrom or Crosby-Malkin-Letang or Kopitar-Carter-Doughty), then the team who should win also does win.

There was nothing brilliant about what Bowman did. He dealt a top D spec and a first for a rental, that takes no brilliance. He traded a prospect and a #2 for a solid banger and a guy often scratched. He failed to add anything on the blueline even though he was giving away prospects and picks like chicklets.

That said, Q was pretty awful this year with his dog house shenanigans....

BOTH guys better pick it up, because relying on 88, 2, 7, 4, 19, 50, and 81 to bail you out of all your poor moves is asking too much.
- kwolf68

Unfortunately, I like this post. I think it should be pointed out that Bowman is under a lot of pressure internally and externally. And when under pressure with no leverage it's tough to excel. But ya, for the team to be successful he has to get better results. And I'll do everyone a favor and not even start on Quenville. Good post Kwolf

Unfortunately, I like this post. I think it should be pointed out that Bowman is under a lot of pressure internally and externally. And when under pressure with no leverage it's tough to excel. And let's also remember 90% of fans were calling for the team to go for the repeat and worry about next year next year and I think the front office got caught up in that. I said months ago to those making the demand that the bad has to be taken with the good. But ya, for the team to be successful he has to get better results. And I'll do everyone a favor and not even start on Quenville. Good post Kwolf
- 6628

There was nothing brilliant about what Bowman did. He dealt a top D spec and a first for a rental, that takes no brilliance. He traded a prospect and a #2 for a solid banger and a guy often scratched. He failed to add anything on the blueline even though he was giving away prospects and picks like chicklets.

That said, Q was pretty awful this year with his dog house shenanigans....

BOTH guys better pick it up, because relying on 88, 2, 7, 4, 19, 50, and 81 to bail you out of all your poor moves is asking too much.
- kwolf68

The Hawks tried 4-5-6 guys at 1LW up to the TDL. Were thought to be short forwards and a 4D. Dano was yanked up and down the lineup, was often a healthy scratch and seemingly not a Q guy.

So for Denault (young bottom 6/9 guy), Dano (Q don't dig him), a 1st (towards the end of the round), 2nd and 3rd he got Ladd to fill the 1LW, vets Weise and Fleishman to fill the bottom 6 for a cup run. ...... StanBowPops&McD filled a lot of holes for Q at the TDL when you're gonna have to over pay. Taking all this in context I think he gave his coach some solid pieces for a cup run at a pretty reasonable TDL price.

Now we can get into Q not using those pieces and what Mash brings or that when he did late in the STL series the team hit another gear and took the series to a 7th game.

Whether StanBowPops&McD's TDL moves were brilliant or just solid they gave the coach some very good pieces that when used showed they were good additions.

Finals tv ratings toothless: http://adage.com/article/media/puck/304511/

Found this interesting. We complain that two games are on cable channel 2751 (NBCSN) but NBC seemingly had a plan (justify their raise in usage/carriage fee) even though the sport was seen by fewer fans doing so........Also looks as though hockey has fallen behind soccer as a #4 major sport.


While shifting games to cable would appear to be a recipe for diminishing returns, NBC has scheduled a pair of non-broadcast Stanley Cup matches since it re-acquired the NHL media rights more than a decade ago. If nothing else, the heightened exposure helps justify NBCSN's $0.31 per sub per month carriage fee; this year's two cable games averaged around 1.27 million viewers in the core demo, which is an elevenfold improvement over the 119,000 adults 18-to-49 NBCSN averaged during the first quarter.

If hockey may no longer be considered a "Core Four" sport in the U.S. -- the Nielsen data and youth participation stats strongly suggest that soccer has supplanted what has become an increasingly regional phenomenon -- there are still plenty of marketers looking to reach the sport's biggest boosters. According to iSpot.tv estimates, NBC Sports booked approximately $45.8 million in ad sales revenue over the course of the Stanley Cup Final, with a good chunk of those dollars coming from auto, studios, insurance, financial services and quick-service restaurants.

Finals tv ratings toothless: http://adage.com/article/media/puck/304511/

Found this interesting. We complain that two games are on cable channel 2751 (NBCSN) but NBC seemingly had a plan (justify their raise in usage/carriage fee) even though the sport was seen by fewer fans doing so........Also looks as though hockey has fallen behind soccer as a #4 major sport.


While shifting games to cable would appear to be a recipe for diminishing returns, NBC has scheduled a pair of non-broadcast Stanley Cup matches since it re-acquired the NHL media rights more than a decade ago. If nothing else, the heightened exposure helps justify NBCSN's $0.31 per sub per month carriage fee; this year's two cable games averaged around 1.27 million viewers in the core demo, which is an elevenfold improvement over the 119,000 adults 18-to-49 NBCSN averaged during the first quarter.

If hockey may no longer be considered a "Core Four" sport in the U.S. -- the Nielsen data and youth participation stats strongly suggest that soccer has supplanted what has become an increasingly regional phenomenon -- there are still plenty of marketers looking to reach the sport's biggest boosters. According to iSpot.tv estimates, NBC Sports booked approximately $45.8 million in ad sales revenue over the course of the Stanley Cup Final, with a good chunk of those dollars coming from auto, studios, insurance, financial services and quick-service restaurants.
- Mr Ricochet

THIS is where Bettman FAILS. The entire marketing dept of the NHL fails.

Happy Bickell Buyout Day everyone!

Happy Bickell Buyout Day everyone!
- DarthKane

This could be a description of every day until June 30.

I think that Stan will use every day between now and then to trade Bickell, and then buy him out only if he has failed to trade him. A buyout is still the most like course of action though.

Finals tv ratings toothless: http://adage.com/article/media/puck/304511/

Found this interesting. We complain that two games are on cable channel 2751 (NBCSN) but NBC seemingly had a plan (justify their raise in usage/carriage fee) even though the sport was seen by fewer fans doing so........Also looks as though hockey has fallen behind soccer as a #4 major sport.


While shifting games to cable would appear to be a recipe for diminishing returns, NBC has scheduled a pair of non-broadcast Stanley Cup matches since it re-acquired the NHL media rights more than a decade ago. If nothing else, the heightened exposure helps justify NBCSN's $0.31 per sub per month carriage fee; this year's two cable games averaged around 1.27 million viewers in the core demo, which is an elevenfold improvement over the 119,000 adults 18-to-49 NBCSN averaged during the first quarter.

If hockey may no longer be considered a "Core Four" sport in the U.S. -- the Nielsen data and youth participation stats strongly suggest that soccer has supplanted what has become an increasingly regional phenomenon -- there are still plenty of marketers looking to reach the sport's biggest boosters. According to iSpot.tv estimates, NBC Sports booked approximately $45.8 million in ad sales revenue over the course of the Stanley Cup Final, with a good chunk of those dollars coming from auto, studios, insurance, financial services and quick-service restaurants.
- Mr Ricochet

Nine times as many viewers of basketball as hockey, five times as many households....

The NHL is not in competition with the NBA (or any of the other professional sports, except maybe soccer) for viewers or TV dollars.

The league should recognize this and figure out what's best for the league - which might include giving up its national US strategy, abandoning the southwest (including Las Vegas) and the southeast, concentrating on traditional US hockey markets, and growing into Canada (Quebec, Toronto....). Look to Europe somehow, where there is more support for the support than in Phoenix or Charlotte or Miami.

Happy Bickell Buyout Day everyone!
- DarthKane

How can you do a buy-out before you know the final cap number and how it might affect a possible Bickell deal?

This league too often forces its franchises to make decisions with either no information or incomplete information.

This could be a description of every day until June 30.

I think that Stan will use every day between now and then to trade Bickell, and then buy him out only if he has failed to trade him. A buyout is still the most like course of action though.
- hpk90

On the first day of Bickell Buyout Day Stan Bowman gave to us.......an over the hill d-man.

One year ago today...

So it looks like ELC will not be exempt on the EXP draft. Plus you need at least 2 forwards and 1 d that played 70 games over 2 years and 40 games last year and they also have to be signed for 1 more year. Players can waive there NMC to put on the EXP draft. I wonder if guys like Seabs might do this so we can keep a younger player like TVR. Would a EXP team want Seabs and his 10 mil salary and 7 more years at 6.875 AAV and a Full NMC. I know as a EXP I would not.
- kmw4631

In most of the past expansions drafts deals were made to the newbies to bypass picking certain "available" players with the agreement being we send you longer term prospects (and the Hawks have shown mastery at developing mid-level prospects) and you have a built in minor league support for the period where the guys Las Vegas takes in the 2018 draft actually get to a closer to NHL without rushing them, which will be the case.

The question is more why would the Hawks make Seabrook available over TVR?
That contract might be a deterrent but whta you just gifted Las Vegas was a top NHL golatender over a cap friendly improving TVR, and that makes little sense over TRADING Seabrook for REAL VALUE (which I am not advocating!).

There are going to be goalies available with big contracts, and I would have to think Las Vegas would be interested in to veterans who might have a year or two left on deals so that they go off the books if they decline rapidly.

The point is TVR is the only available signed hawk defender they would be even close to willing to put up for adoption.
Making a deal with Las Vegas to "take another speciifc player at forward" and future considerations, is the type of agreement you want to attempt to hammer out.

It is clear they don't want to lose their back-up or TVR; it is just a matter of negotiating a suitable agreement.
A lot may have to do with exactly who is the GM in Las Vegas...

The hawks could make a deadline deth deal for a NHL veteran defender with one year left on his deal (2 yrs at this moment) and offer him up and throw in a Icehogs.

Some GMs are going to look at like this: It IS JUST ONE Player, and our team isn't defined by one player.
I really wouldn't be surprised if the signings and their camp performances might be auditions for Las Vegas to see what they can get to be competitve in younger new Cap hits, because no matter the place expansion teams HAVE to maintain a "slow profile" and manage Cap $, expectations, and still get to pick early and build.
Is TVR a high end building block for an expansion team?
You would have to filter through the team support system and his pairings to make that assessment.
Is Seabrook? (yes).
He would get picked over anybody else were leave unprotected.

Las Vegas will feel comfortable they can sell tickets and not need to win now, so they may have the benefit of entirely difffernet perspective of building a team longer term than all the others have had to...

Nine times as many viewers of basketball as hockey, five times as many households....

The NHL is not in competition with the NBA (or any of the other professional sports, except maybe soccer) for viewers or TV dollars.

- StLBravesFan

And there was a time in the 1970's when the numbers were relatively equal.

The TV numbers equal.

NHL didn't curb the Flyer style of beatem up...and kids everywhere had garage
b-ball hoops.

Basketball is such a statistical game, though. There is no equivalent to "puck luck" because there are so many shots taken over the course of a game that the law of averages has time to play out. So the individual series are more one-sided (think LeBron starting the playoffs 10-0 this year). And it is not nearly as physically demanding as hockey, since the star players routinely play around, what, 40 of the 48 minutes a game? The championship-winning teams have been able to assemble a star trio, while the other playoff teams have usually a star duo, and the non-playoff teams might have only one star or a "star on the rise." I think that's why you don't see any Cinderella runs in the pros. The teams who should win usually do win.

Hockey's law of averages seems to take a whole series to play out, and since it's a much more demanding game, you need so much more depth beyond a star trio, who can only play as much of 20 of the 60 minutes of the game. But if a goalie gets hot or there are a few funny bounces, suddenly a team who should be winning is down 2-0 in a series and eventually gets eliminated. So you can have Cinderella runs --- hell, 2006 between the Hurricanes and the Oilers was sort of a double Cinderella run. Still, if you can assemble a Toews-Kane-Keith combo with good to excellent depth (or Datsyuk-Zetterberg-Lidstrom or Crosby-Malkin-Letang or Kopitar-Carter-Doughty), then the team who should win also does win.
- DMChi2010

Puck luck, randomness-when analytics done hold true, or whatever else you would want to call it....Main point as you mentioned is the best team almost always wins. I can't recall many times where I didn't feel that way in the end....And once again the team with the best bottom 6 forwards won the Cup.

Unlike basketball there is not the predictability, but hockey is not only a lot different from basketball but every other sport. Many more variables and players are interchanged every 35-40 seconds throughout the game, which doesn't happen elsewhere.