He and Malkin are going to light it up with the Hawks

The Hawks will need him after they trade Kane to the Yotes
- PatShart

I guess I missed the news that Tanner is GM of the Yotes.

Ok regarding the Ian Mitchell stuff...

I asked around a bit and based on what I'm hearing and what makes sense is this:

* Hawks to discuss contract this week. Mitchell's camp seems pleased that his path has a clearer lane with the Joki departure.

* Mitchell has already committed to Univ. of Denver which, sure, he can go back on... but all I've heard is this kid is a pure team player and a man of his word. He chose to go back to NCAA to Captain his team and take that next step to being a dominant player.

* The meeting this week will surely be about his future with the team and any word of a contract would be be more to get him playing in Chicago in the spring, not at the start of the season.

... that's what I have on the Mitchell situation.

All that said, he's an exciting prospect and if he takes the next step this year, the Joki sting will go away a bit.

Mitchell looks pretty ordinary and small playing against his peers. I don't see him standing out much, I'm beginning to think Boqvist playing in the AHL to start the season, Gus traded at the deadline possibly Murphy, Boqvist coming up.
- BetweenTheDots

With the improved depth in Rockford with many high end prospects complementing the large collection of role players, the Blackhawks should be able to do call-ups based on skill and need.

For example, in the past at forward, they would have to call up 4th liners like Kero, Highmore, and Nilsson which is good for space filling but does't really improve the overall depth on the big club, i.e. players get miscast above their water levels.

Now they have better options to call up more skilled players who can play 200-foot games like Kurashev, Entwistle, and Hagel. Not right away but later in the season once they develop more in the AHL.

If a goal scorer is needed and playing defense isn't necessarily a priority, then Saarela may be your man.

Or if a bottom 6 forward or depth defenseman is needed, by all means call up a Highmore, Nilsson, Wedin, Carlsson, or Gilbert.

But let's say Gustafsson goes down, then Boqvist should be considered. Or if Keith goes down, then consider Beaudin or Krys. They're not going to perfectly replace the Hawks top players, of course, but their skill sets and potential mirror those of the Hawks players who they need to sub in for.

FWIW, Eklund reporting that the Hawks are one of 2 teams heavily pursuing Rantanen, possibly an offer sheet. Many teams in on Rantanen otherwise.
- AEL_Fox

Eklund = Tanner

There's no way the Hawks are in on Rantanen, if the Avs don't sign him Sakic wil be gone

Let's say this happens and Mitchell makes the team.

Keith - Mitchell
DeHaan/Maata - Murphy
DeHaan/Maatta - Gus

Seabs as 7th D? or does maybe Murphy or Gus go

What about Koekkoek and Dahlstrom?

Maybe Gus, Koekkoek or Dahlstrom to Vegas for Cody Eakin. Vegas saves about 2.5-3M in cap space.

Then AA to someone for a pick or two to help replenish what was traded away in the Shaw deal. Hawks gain 750K in cap space.
- boilermaker100

I don’t see Mitchell making the team, I know there’s talk about him changing his plans because Jokiharju is gone. I don’t see that happening, even if he did I’d see it more for a chance to play a full season in Rockford.

I could buy the idea that playing a full season in Rockford could be better for his long term development than returning to college.

Although I agree with Tyler, I think he’s going to want to keep his commitment to his college.

Eklund = Tanner

There's no way the Hawks are in on Rantanen, if the Avs don't sign him Sakic wil be gone
- BetweenTheDots

The Hawks can't afford Rantanen either unless there's a major trade or two in the hopper to unload salary. Rantanen would be at least $7.5M per year. Wild summer could get wilder if this rumor comes true.

The Hawks can't afford Rantanen either unless there's a major trade or two in the hopper to unload salary. Rantanen would be at least $7.5M per year. Wild summer could get wilder if this rumor comes true.
- AEL_Fox

No 2nd round pick either of it was an offer sheet

Reports on Gusev trade rumors are reportedly underwhelming to Vegas. Trade offers have included a 2nd round pick + a low-end prospect or a lower draft pick.

The Hawks can't afford Rantanen either unless there's a major trade or two in the hopper to unload salary. Rantanen would be at least $7.5M per year. Wild summer could get wilder if this rumor comes true.
- AEL_Fox

the daze of july so lets make things up...hawks interest in rantanen....sure...

to make room for him even if it was successful offer sheet...2-3 guys gotta go..

the daze of july so lets make things up...hawks interest in rantanen....sure...

to make room for him even if it was successful offer sheet...2-3 guys gotta go..
- bogiedoc

And we have to give up assets.... impossible.

Reports on Gusev trade rumors are reportedly underwhelming to Vegas. Trade offers have included a 2nd round pick + a low-end prospect or a lower draft pick.
- AEL_Fox

Funny how short the list gets post FA market. Also believe these rumors are manufactured by the team trying to low ball their own RFA

It's great to see all these teams sweating the cap.

The Hawks can't afford Rantanen either unless there's a major trade or two in the hopper to unload salary. Rantanen would be at least $7.5M per year. Wild summer could get wilder if this rumor comes true.
- AEL_Fox

Be careful about believing all the rumours you hear. There are all kinds of people making poop up.

Be careful about believing all the rumours you hear. There are all kinds of people making poop up.
- paulr

Yeah, I take most rumors with a grain of salt. Just posting them here for message board fodder. If there are rumors being verified across different sources, then they may gain more weight.

Be careful about believing all the rumours you hear. There are all kinds of people making poop up.
- paulr

BREAKING! Hawks one of two teams in on Mick David.

Yeah, I take most rumors with a grain of salt. Just posting them here for message board fodder. If there are rumors being verified across different sources, then they may gain more weight.
- AEL_Fox

I have seen one BS rumour verified by another source.

With the improved depth in Rockford with many high end prospects complementing the large collection of role players, the Blackhawks should be able to do call-ups based on skill and need.

For example, in the past at forward, they would have to call up 4th liners like Kero, Highmore, and Nilsson which is good for space filling but does't really improve the overall depth on the big club, i.e. players get miscast above their water levels.

Now they have better options to call up more skilled players who can play 200-foot games like Kurashev, Entwistle, and Hagel. Not right away but later in the season once they develop more in the AHL.

If a goal scorer is needed and playing defense isn't necessarily a priority, then Saarela may be your man.

Or if a bottom 6 forward or depth defenseman is needed, by all means call up a Highmore, Nilsson, Wedin, Carlsson, or Gilbert.
- AEL_Fox

It is difficult to argue against the fact that the IF a team goes to the playoffs, their success is strengthened if their roster of black aces are ready and willing to join the fray and contribute at a high pace.

But you have to look at the entire canvass on the call-ups (or at least the ones that weren't trade deadline boosts) the guys from the "system"- they were bashful or unable or ignorant of the team's style, their roles on the lines and they KNEW their new line mates...somehow...either with film study, understanding of the philopshy and concepts so that they KNEW what to to do, where to be...

and I agree.
But first you make sure your Gm gets you the pieces to get a chance to get in,
your coach gets his players to get themselves into the post season, and THEN,
your entire farm has each and every type add you might need, ready and willing to tom through a wall with the guys they are now playing with and FOR.

I am answering your post from pages back...
I was talking about the loophole in the collective bargaining agreement that allows the kids who choose college to become free agents after Aug 15th of the their senior year.

I am not sure it can be closed....
- wiz1901

Why not? If it's part of the collective bargaining agreement - then it can be changed. It's not a matter of law. In fact, without a collective bargaining agreement the practice of a draft where the team "owns" the rights to a player would not be in keeping with individual rights as it would limit a persons right to choose where they work. Obviously the players understand the viability of the league is dependent of the draft and other provisions in the agreement - but any part of the ifagreement is negotiable.
- EbonyRaptor

I am NOT sure it is part of thewagreement, the loophole was legal action,


To those that aren’t yet familiar, August 15th is a specific date established within the NHL’s Collective Bargaining Agreement. Under certain circumstances within the CBA, after this date is when drafted prospects playing in the NCAA are able to evade the NHL team that originally selected them and hit the open free agency market.
Players drafted out of college have their rights retained by their drafting teams for four years, after which time – if a deal is not reached – they can become unrestricted free agents. That affords NCAA players a desirable route to choosing the club with which they may start their career – an option not given to young players coming out of major junior hockey.

Plenty of college players have utilized this option in recent years, most notably Pittsburgh Penguins defender Justin Schultz, who walked away from the Anaheim Ducks before signing with the Edmonton Oilers in 2012.
Kevin Hayes did this in 2014, signing with the New York Rangers on August 20th of that year after being initially chosen by the Chicago Blackhawks in 2010. Jimmy Vesey did it in 2016, also signing with the Rangers on the day of August 20th, despite being chosen by the Nashville Predators in 2012.

The new collective bargaining agreement that will govern NHL-NHLPA CBA matters for the next decade is out for your viewing pleasure (get it from the NHLPA here, or direct PDF link here). The infamous "loophole" for draft picks who leave college early appears to have ... well not quite closed, but it's been clarified and addressed a little bit.

Call it the "Blake Wheeler Loophole," or for Islanders fans it could have been the Anders Lee Loophole before the Notre Dame star signed this past spring. Whatever you call it, the new CBA has much more clarity and limits how a draft pick can get most of a college education and then declare himself open to any bidder heading into free agency the fourth summer after he's drafted.

(Mind you, an NCAA-enrolled prospect can still decline to sign with his drafting team, just as any junior player or European player in a transfer agreement country can decline to sign after two years. But the incentive for a serious degree-seeking college student to do so is now even smaller.)

ew CBA: The same, but slightly different

The rule in (iii) -- for traditional college players who do not play in the USHL after being drafted -- remains the same in the new CBA. But here is how the new CBA treats the next section (emphasis and line breaks mine, in a futile attempt at clarity):

8.6 (c) (iv)

If a Player drafted at age 18 or 19, who had received a Bona Fide Offer in accordance with Section 8.6(a)(ii) above, becomes a bona fide college student prior to the second June 1 following his selection in the Entry Draft and does not remain a bona fide college student through the graduation of his college class, his drafting Club shall retain exclusive rights for the negotiation of his services until the later of:

(a) the fourth June 1 following his selection in the Entry Draft,

or (b) thirty (30) days after NHL Central Registry receives notice that the Player is no longer a bona fide college student;

provided that **IF** the Player ceases to be a bona fide college student on or after January 1 of an academic year and the Player:

(1) is in his fourth year of college and has commenced his fourth year of NCAA eligibility,

or (2) is in his fourth year of college and is scheduled to graduate from college at the end of his fourth year, then in the circumstances described in (1) or (2), the Club shall retain the exclusive right of negotiation for such Player's services through and including the August 15 following the date on which he ceases to be a bona fide college student.
(The 30 days point is interesting, because you used to hear media refer to a 30-day notice under the old CBA, but that was not actually in the CBA. If it was a rule before, it wasn't written in the published document.)

Anyway, if I'm reading this right -- and Bossy knows that's always iffy when dealing with CBA-ese -- the CBA ensures that if a prospect legitimately wants to leave college in his third college year (if he did a post-draft USHL year, thus making his third college year his "fourth" June 1) -- or even in his fourth year if he quits college before January 1 -- to start his career, he can still do so and, if not signed by his drafting club by June 1, he is free to shop his services.

It is difficult to argue against the fact that the IF a team goes to the playoffs, their success is strengthened if their roster of black aces are ready and willing to join the fray and contribute at a high pace.

But you have to look at the entire canvass on the call-ups (or at least the ones that weren't trade deadline boosts) the guys from the "system"- they were bashful or unable or ignorant of the team's style, their roles on the lines and they KNEW their new line mates...somehow...either with film study, understanding of the philopshy and concepts so that they KNEW what to to do, where to be...

and I agree.
But first you make sure your Gm gets you the pieces to get a chance to get in,
your coach gets his players to get themselves into the post season, and THEN,
your entire farm has each and every type add you might need, ready and willing to tom through a wall with the guys they are now playing with and FOR.
- wiz1901

I agree Wiz ton to learn, develop for these kids, over half of them will only make it to the AHL, might get some call ups but short lived. You get lucky you might get some role players make your team and so on. If a team can get 2 impactful NHL players a draft they are way ahead of so many teams in the league.

I am answering your post from pages back...
I was talking about the loophole in the collective bargaining agreement that allows the kids who choose college to become free agents after Aug 15th of the their senior year.

I am not sure it can be closed....
- wiz1901



Anyway, if I'm reading this right -- and Bossy knows that's always iffy when dealing with CBA-ese -- the CBA ensures that if a prospect legitimately wants to leave college in his third college year (if he did a post-draft USHL year, thus making his third college year his "fourth" June 1) -- or even in his fourth year if he quits college before January 1 -- to start his career, he can still do so and, if not signed by his drafting club by June 1, he is free to shop his services.
- wiz1901

I'm not very well versed in the CBA nor legalese in general - so after reading what you posted (twice) - I'm still not sure what the rule is.

I thought all these professional sports and player union agreements go back to the lawsuit that Curt Flood brought against MLB way back in the 70's. From there the precedent was set that teams would have a limited number of years to control the rights to a player they drafted until that player has enough service to gain free agent status. The NFL, NBA and NHL adopted the same legal framework and was agreed upon by the players through their union. But - the parameters within that framework were negotiable and hence my understanding that the "college 4-year" rule would be negotiable too ... but maybe I'm wrong on that.

I agree Wiz ton to learn, develop for these kids, over half of them will only make it to the AHL, might get some call ups but short lived. You get lucky you might get some role players make your team and so on. If a team can get 2 impactful NHL players a draft they are way ahead of so many teams in the league.
- BetweenTheDots

A part of this article by Eric Duhatschek is devoted in general to time on developing prospects
-

https://theathletic.com/1...e-and-preaching-patience/

I'm not very well versed in the CBA nor legalese in general - so after reading what you posted (twice) - I'm still not sure what the rule is.

I thought all these professional sports and player union agreements go back to the lawsuit that Curt Flood brought against MLB way back in the 70's. From there the precedent was set that teams would have a limited number of years to control the rights to a player they drafted until that player has enough service to gain free agent status. The NFL, NBA and NHL adopted the same legal framework and was agreed upon by the players through their union. But - the parameters within that framework were negotiable and hence my understanding that the "college 4-year" rule would be negotiable too ... but maybe I'm wrong on that.
- EbonyRaptor

Me either....but IF a kid gets drafted in the first round from the OHL, he CAN sit in Europe and wait until he is old enough and then sign anywhere no longer a slave?

I think not, right?

That's Nalimov's 7th team in 6 seasons. Job hopper.
- AEL_Fox

Maybe but St Petersburg is sort of like the New York Yankees, money-wise, when it comes to getting whoever they want, whenever they want ... otoh, they have a championship success record that is a bit better than the New York Rangers ... (so it sort of works out like how the Rangers chuck money around ... worked once ... 1994 -then that was it. )

I don't think anyone ever actually goes to SKA unless they are targeting the guy - so it isn't probably a bad sign at all -they see something in the guy ... otoh they also saw something in Runblad and Yakopov ... so it sort of is relative...

The Hawks can't afford Rantanen either unless there's a major trade or two in the hopper to unload salary. Rantanen would be at least $7.5M per year. Wild summer could get wilder if this rumor comes true.
- AEL_Fox

... they can - as I hear Arizona needs to target Patrick Kane ... essentially a contract dump - so once that slacker Kane is out of the way .... makes perfect sense


It's all tooooo easy...

I have seen one BS rumour verified by another BS source.
- paulr

Now fixed.

Eklund tossing out rumors that have virtually no possibility of happening (many times a lack of homework on his part) really does a disservice to his site. It makes him look unprofessional, leading to HockeyBuzz overall having a lower view from those on the outside.


Now Tanner... when I do read his blogs, I constantly get this image of a small Chihuahua dog, constantly barking/yapping away, partially to get attention due to its insecurities, partly to make sure the big dogs around him don't step on and hurt him.