It's cap hell, when you've missed the playoffs two straight years, you're considering a 22 man roster this year and most of the rest of the league doubts you will make the playoffs again. Let's hope they're wrong!
- rpeters01

It's not cap hell. Cap hell was when we had no expiring contracts and very good young players in need of contracts and had to trade useful talented guys to clear space just to resign a guy or two for pennies on the dollar while trying to account for roster bonuses for guys as well. The Hawks can find a way to manipulate the cap how they need to fill the roster out once they get the Perlini contract done. I'm not worried about it.

It's cap hell, when you've missed the playoffs two straight years, you're considering a 22 man roster this year and most of the rest of the league doubts you will make the playoffs again. Let's hope they're wrong!
- rpeters01

What’s wrong with a 22 man roster? That provides the team with an extra forward and defenseman.

When I think of cap hell I think the team needs to trade off assets or have the inability to re-sign players. Neither applies to the Hawks right now. The Hawks don’t have to make any trades and have no issues re-signing players. The Hawks had plenty of (glorious) cap space and they used it to improve the roster.

If Chicago needs more cap space for 20/21 there are still plenty of options. Non-key players can be dealt and there are buyout options (Smith). The team’s cap situation is nowhere near as bad as it was in previous years. But it could be in the future, it seems that successful teams have cap challenges.

I think you right about him . He does seem to take shift off, And for a big guy will need to up his Physical play more. the hawks paying him 2 million over 2 years seems right. They might end up settle on . 1.5 for year 1 and 1 on year 2

I don’t think the Hawks are in cap hell. The cap situation may be tight, but it’s just for one year. The Hawks can easily ice a 22 man roster with Perlini in the fold.

The limited cap ceiling increase hurt the Hawks and almost every other team.

I like the de Haan and Maatta acquisitions, the defense needed massive improvements and Stan did that. 3 years is long enough to let the current crop of D prospects develop without being rushed.
- DarthKane

I would guess that AdB and Strome get $6MM + $5MM (maybe more, but....).

Crawford off at $6, replaced by Delia at $1.

That's a net increase of (6+5+1-6) $6MM. If the cap goes up by the (now) expected $1.5, that gives a "net-net" increase of $4.5.

The only remaining contracts coming off are are around $1MM or less, which have to be replaced at about the same value.

Seems like some rostered player is going to have to be moved next summer.

Maybe not exactly "cap Hell", but certainly tight to the cap.

Nice blog TC, I hope you're relaxing & enjoying the cottage.

I won't lose any sleep if he doesn't sign. 1 good week doesn't necessitate a "big" bump in his contract imho. What about the rest when he was scratched or a ghost on skates? From what I see with my amateur eyes, he doesn't strike me as a player who will do more because he got more money or will work his ass off because of competition. I think he's more of a lost in the crowd type of player.

I'm honestly only mad about Arty for Smith. Ogi got ripped for it by some posters, but it's a valid complaint. I was mad when it happened & I still am.
- I Am The Breadman

I'm not mad and I'm willing to see what happens. But Anisimov was a heady steady player. This Smith dude better make a positive difference in some aspect or he and SB will get their assses roasted. Not likely, but imagine if Ott makes the playoffs and CHI doesn't. Might be a little blow back.

I don't think a one year deal makes sense, means he's probably finished with Chicago so what you are hoping for is one good cheap year. This is not the guy to do that with do it with an old guy.
- rpeters01

Yeah I agree I’d go with a two year one way contract for: 2019/20 $1,075,000 2020/21 $1,125,000.

What’s wrong with a 22 man roster? That provides the team with an extra forward and defenseman.

When I think of cap hell I think the team needs to trade off assets or have the inability to re-sign players. Neither applies to the Hawks right now. The Hawks don’t have to make any trades and have no issues re-signing players. The Hawks had plenty of (glorious) cap space and they used it to improve the roster.

If Chicago needs more cap space for 20/21 there are still plenty of options. Non-key players can be dealt and there are buyout options (Smith). The team’s cap situation is nowhere near as bad as it was in previous years. But it could be in the future, it seems that successful teams have cap challenges.
- DarthKane

Exactly, about 1/2 the teams in the league run with a 22 man roster. I don’t see the sense in sitting three players every night. Makes more sense to go with a 22 man roster and build cap space for the TDL.

It's not cap hell. Cap hell was when we had no expiring contracts and very good young players in need of contracts and had to trade useful talented guys to clear space just to resign a guy or two for pennies on the dollar while trying to account for roster bonuses for guys as well. The Hawks can find a way to manipulate the cap how they need to fill the roster out once they get the Perlini contract done. I'm not worried about it.
- Savetheembers33

I'm worried about using up all the cap next year and we still suck. Yes we have promising cheap players coming. So have Buffalo and Edmonton the last 10 years these cheap guys haven't won anything.

I would guess that AdB and Strome get $6MM + $5MM (maybe more, but....).

Crawford off at $6, replaced by Delia at $1.

That's a net increase of (6+5+1-6) $6MM. If the cap goes up by the (now) expected $1.5, that gives a "net-net" increase of $4.5.

The only remaining contracts coming off are are around $1MM or less, which have to be replaced at about the same value.

Seems like some rostered player is going to have to be moved next summer.

Maybe not exactly "cap Hell", but certainly tight to the cap.
- StLBravesFan

Agreed and to add, "tight to the cap and not in a cup conversation" is the definition of cap hell. I will agree there are varying degrees of cap hell but you are still hamstrung and not good enough.

I would guess that AdB and Strome get $6MM + $5MM (maybe more, but....).

Crawford off at $6, replaced by Delia at $1.

That's a net increase of (6+5+1-6) $6MM. If the cap goes up by the (now) expected $1.5, that gives a "net-net" increase of $4.5.

The only remaining contracts coming off are are around $1MM or less, which have to be replaced at about the same value.

Seems like some rostered player is going to have to be moved next summer.

Maybe not exactly "cap Hell", but certainly tight to the cap.
- StLBravesFan

Wait what!?!?!?! The Cat had 40 goals last year. He is going to make 9+

I agree with an earlier post questioning the rationale of a 1-year deal. A 1-year deal would essentially be a "show us" deal which has two possible outcomes. The first, if he plays well enough so the Hawks want to re-sign him, then he will probably be too expensive to re-sign, and the second, if he doesn't play well then he didn't contribute enough to be worth signing him. It's kind of a damned if you do - damned if you don't situation. At this point I think the best case scenario would be that he agrees to a cheap one year deal and hopefully he plays well enough to help the Hawks make the playoffs this season and then let the chips fall where they will next summer.

We don't know how the goaltending will turn out this season - let alone how things will play out next summer. Probably the best case is Lehner plays well enough this season and the Hawks sign him to a long term deal and say goodbye to Crawford. But, that probably means Lehner will get more than the $5M AAV he's getting this season so the combined goaltending cap hit isn't going to be $6M + $1M - probably more like $8M + $1M.

It works out to an impressive 5.3478 over a full 82-game season. Now that’s putting up a crooked number.

It works out to an impressive 5.3478 over a full 82-game season. Now that’s putting up a crooked number.
- Spec41971

What's up, Spec? How have u been?

Wait what!?!?!?! The Cat had 40 goals last year. He is going to make 9+
- nickmo2699

Another 30+ goal season, close to 80 points will put him at least $8x8...

Wait what!?!?!?! The Cat had 40 goals last year. He is going to make 9+
- nickmo2699

Patrik Laine scored 36, 44 and 30. Even he won´t make 9+. Maybe if Cat scores 50 next season.

Another 30+ goal season, close to 80 points will put him at least $8x8...
- rpeters01

Just to get the temp of the room, if we could guarantee lower cap numbers, would anyone be open to 3 year deals for Cat and Strome? Something like 3X5, and 3X4 respectively (assuming that they both would perform the same as last year).

Just to get the temp of the room, if we could guarantee lower cap numbers, would anyone be open to 3 year deals for Cat and Strome? Something like 3X5, and 3X4 respectively (assuming that they both would perform the same as last year).
- Chunk

Three years gets you to new a new TV contract - perhaps multiple contracts - and perhaps a more dramatic increase in the cap than we've seen recently.

Absent any dramatic change in the CBA coming up in a year or two (and based on what I've read, I don't expect any).

Boiler, this question isn't just for you but for anyone who regularly uses Capfriendly: is there a way to create a 2019-20 roster then be able to use that roster to create future rosters for 2020-21, 2021-22, etc. so they're based on your past projections?

I may not be doing things right but it seems like you have to re-create a new roster for each season. Not hard to do, of course, but it still takes time. Not a big deal in the grand scheme of things.
- AEL_Fox

AEL, Here's a response from yesterday's blog. I haven't been able to do that on capfriendly. Seems as it is designed to build one roster at a time, then you have to publish it and start over.

I was able to copy the team roster info from cap friendly to an excel spreadsheet, but then had to manipulate the spreadsheet to get it into a decent format and add formulas to calculate the total cap hit. If you do it that way, once the spreadsheet is properly formatted, it would be easy to make different iterations of the roster.

Just to get the temp of the room, if we could guarantee lower cap numbers, would anyone be open to 3 year deals for Cat and Strome? Something like 3X5, and 3X4 respectively (assuming that they both would perform the same as last year).
- Chunk

Why would their agents agree to that?

$1.5M is splitting the difference. From Powers in The Athletic:

Evolving-Hockey released contract projections before the offseason began, and they’ve been pretty dead on. Perlini’s projection was a two-year contract with a $2,056,017 cap hit. Chris Watkins has a model that calculates players’ values based on an assortment of variables, and the model has Perlini worth $4,674,151. That’s obviously not what Perlni will get paid, but it’s what the model says Perlini’s production is actually worth.

The Blackhawks have some leverage because Perlini isn’t arbitration eligible yet. If he had been, he’d probably be looking at something closer to $2 million. Considering he needs another season to be eligible, it’s possible he agrees to a one-year contract and aims for a large deal next summer.

what do people think of a PUJU for Perlini trade. Perlini has put up slightly better numbers, but he has gotten quite a bit more ice time. Perlini gets about 3 more Mins a game so that tend to mean he probably gets some minutes higher up in the lineup. Puj is slightly over 2 years younger. He just turned 21 after the season. he is 5 days younger then Nylander. I think it would seem like a good fit maybe. would he agree to a 2 year 1.1 deal? he would then get every opt to play in the top 9.

Why would their agents agree to that?
- rpeters01

Get to UFA earlier with the opportunity for an even bigger payday (assuming continued performance).

Get to UFA earlier with the opportunity for an even bigger payday (assuming continued performance).
- Chunk

Maybe at $7x3 and $5x3... Otherwise giving up all their upside.

Maybe at $7x3 and $5x3... Otherwise giving up all their upside.
- rpeters01

If they were UFA's I would agree, but they will be RFA. Just a thought. I've been pushing for shorter contracts for everyone for a while now. I just think it allows for better roster flexibility. It requires that you have a much better scouting staff, but I think it is a better way to run the team.