Thanks Corey for your past service with the Hawks and the fond memories of the two Cups and other great seasons. Wishing you and your family the best of health and well wishes regarding your future endeavors.

Most valuable trade chips: Murphy, Saad.

The Hawks dont have to trade either player though. Unless they're wow'd with an offer, they should wait until the TDL as BOTH are the types of players that will help a Stanley Cup run.

I got that but ask yourself this question. Do Kane, Keith and Toews strike you as that type of person? Kane, maybe. But I believe he is more loyal than we think. Plus, they are still getting paid.
- Elbows15

Kane puts in more time in and around this club and the rink than anyone else.

No offense, but none of us really have any idea what Rocky thinks about his money.

He has shown in the past to spend what it took to win, and believe he will again to
rebuild.

I understand its a down year or two for revenue, but honestly, it hasn't made a dent in his net worth.

Quicker the Hawks are back to being a consistent playoff team, the quicker all that money will roll in. He's been missing out on that for a few years now.
- vabeachbear

He was in a hard-cap environment - he spent to the max (the cap) but it was a cost-certain amount - knowing that with the franchise revenues guaranteed (or at least highly predictable) up front, and cost-certainty, too - he had a guaranteed profit every year.

Would he “spend what it took to win” in a free labor market? We’ll never know for sure.

The money ain’t gonna be rolling in for another season or two or three.

Most valuable trade chips: Murphy, Saad.

The Hawks dont have to trade either player though. Unless they're wow'd with an offer, they should wait until the TDL as BOTH are the types of players that will help a Stanley Cup run.
- Bjm84

That's true - unlike recent years, the Hawks are forced to make moves to get under the salary cap so they could hold on to Murphy and Saad. But should they?

Yes, Murphy and Saad are the types of players that will help a Stanley Cup run, but is that Stanley Cup run in 2021 or 2-3 years out? If realistically it's 2-3 years out, then is the better move to retain them and pay them during the "rebuild years" or leverage them now to help the rebuild?

I'm on the side that prefers to leverage them now at the cost of the present to expedite the rebuild into the future.

Detroit has had the worst record in the league over the combined past 2 seasons, and the best spot they have drafted is #4.
- LAHawk

i get the need to stop people from tanking on purpose IE the

I thought that money was not an issue according to Crawford. Apparently it is now.
Bowman is doing the right thing here. Corey turns 36 this December and the 2020-21 season may not even be started by then. Bowman maybe has learned something from the Seabrook situation.
With this suspension in play, can there be a better time for a rebuild?

Meh. They ain't dummies. The know and understand what is going on. I don't put much into what is said after game when guys are frustrated. I look at their effort on the ice. Aside from Kane, who always had games where he looks disinterested, the other vets are out there giving their best.
- Elbows15

Playoffs Toews is a different animal than regular season Toews. I don't think that is a bad thing he understands how to save it.

He was in a hard-cap environment - he spent to the max (the cap) but it was a cost-certain amount - knowing that with the franchise revenues guaranteed (or at least highly predictable) up front, and cost-certainty, too - he had a guaranteed profit every year.

Would he “spend what it took to win” in a free labor market? We’ll never know for sure.

The money ain’t gonna be rolling in for another season or two or three.
- StLBravesFan

He spent because the value of the Hawks franchise rose from $168 million in 2006 to $1.085 billion in 2019.

I'll bet you money that what you and a few others are talking about happening isn't what is going to happen. Integrating a few younger players into the lineup and trading off every vet on the team are two hugely different things and i doubt they can or try to trade the old core this off season.
- GPHawksfan

No team can trade away all of the veterans and go with too many kids in their stead. It is a recipe for loosing and looking quite bad. Kids need veterans to play along side so that they develop. Too many kids and playing with other kids just would not happen. Maybe in 2-3 years enough kids have progressed and a few veterans could have been dispatched......but not trading all those veterans in one big splash. You cannot bring in slugs or obviously worse players to substitute all the while waiting for kids to develop. To reiterate: Those kids will not develop well if they do not have some veterans
playing with them.

He was in a hard-cap environment - he spent to the max (the cap) but it was a cost-certain amount - knowing that with the franchise revenues guaranteed (or at least highly predictable) up front, and cost-certainty, too - he had a guaranteed profit every year.

Would he “spend what it took to win” in a free labor market? We’ll never know for sure.

The money ain’t gonna be rolling in for another season or two or three.
- StLBravesFan

Several pages ago a wise poster, describing the low probabilities of 3-7 round picks of making the team, said why fret about the selections?

Likewise I would like to question why any of us worry about Rocky's spending habits. If he wants to spend to the cap with no ticket revenue coming in, let him. If he doesn't want to spend to the cap, let him.

All I want is for the franchise to pick a new lane. No more of this partial rebuild stuff augmenting the core with veterans . Let's go young and give the kids a chance. It will be difficult to move some of tbe veteran contracts, but do what you can Stan and build for the future.

Several pages ago a wise poster, describing the low probabilities of 3-7 round picks of making the team, said why fret about the selections?

Likewise I would like to question why any of us worry about Rocky's spending habits. If he wants to spend to the cap with no ticket revenue coming in, let him. If he doesn't want to spend to the cap, let him.

All I want is for the franchise to pick a new lane. No more of this partial rebuild stuff augmenting the core with veterans . Let's go young and give the kids a chance. It will be difficult to move some of tbe veteran contracts, but do what you can Stan and build for the future.
- boilermaker100

On defense you cannot push too many veterans out the door and go with an overabundance of kids. Not in one season. Maybe 4-5 dmen can be replaced over the course of three seasons but there would need to be some of the newbie kids establishing themselves as pretty darn good. Everyone knows a defense without a true #1 pair means the entire set of dmen are in a funk. There is going to be a lack of confidence because the dmen do not know how to play and have not performed well enough. Loosing a lot, to be victimized a lot by smarter experienced opponent.....is not the way to go.

Champions want to compete, and have a chance to win. While we don't know the final roster yet, I'd give the Hawks a 50/50 chance of even making the playoffs next season. They clearly wouldn't have made it without the interruption this year.

Any of the 3 could be what a team on the cusp needs to get them over the hump. You could probably add Saad to that list as well.
- scottak

Really? Cause Toews and Kane signing for 10.5M each doesn't scream we want to compete to me. Those contracts are a large part of why the demise may have been quicker.

You are a very generous GM, willing to pay him more than Pastrnak and some other very good wingers.

I say $4 - $4.5 per for 2 yrs.
- RickJ

(frank). I stated that wrong. I meant 6-7M total. So, 3-3.5M AAV.

Your right, stan failed in 5hat regard to lock in a proven young goalie. Lehner is 28 yes old and signed for 5x5 that shows imo that stan is utterly useless.


I'll miss crow , but the writing was on the wall he was never coming back for various reasons and chicago never had any intention of going higher that 3.5 for 1 year.


That was a smart move by stan but stan should have went with lehner
- Taylorst1

FFS Taylor, you seem to have no comprehension of timelines. Yes Stan may prove to ultimately be puntable but at least have a (frank)ing clue.

Here let me lay it out for you...

Prior to suspension of season = Lehner's nut > $7M

After Covid Lehner's nut = $5M (which yes is less than $7M)

On defense you cannot push too many veterans out the door and go with an overabundance of kids. Not in one season. Maybe 4-5 dmen can be replaced over the course of three seasons but there would need to be some if the newbie kids establishing themselves as pretty darn good. Everyone knows a defense without a true #1 pair means the entire set of dmen are in a funk. There is going ti be a lack of confidence because the dmen do not know how to play and have not performed well enough. Loosing a lot, to be victimized a lot by smarter experienced opponent.....is not the way to go.
- jhawk59

Well Seabs and Keith were thrown in the fire 12-15 years ago played on some terrible teams and gained the experience and fortitude to go on to win 3 Cups.

Move Murphy who has the most value of any D. The team record at the end of the year won't be much difference with or without him. Plus a young D gets a season of experience under his belt.

Well Seabs and Keith were thrown in the fire 12-15 years ago played on some terrible teams and gained the experience and fortitude to go on to win 3 Cups.

Move Murphy who has the most value of any D. The team record at the end of the year won't be much difference with or without him. Plus a young D gets a season of experience under his belt.
- boilermaker100

If JC cant figure out a D zone system that actually works??? Wont matter who is on the blue line.

On defense you cannot push too many veterans out the door and go with an overabundance of kids. Not in one season. Maybe 4-5 dmen can be replaced over the course of three seasons but there would need to be some of the newbie kids establishing themselves as pretty darn good. Everyone knows a defense without a true #1 pair means the entire set of dmen are in a funk. There is going to be a lack of confidence because the dmen do not know how to play and have not performed well enough. Loosing a lot, to be victimized a lot by smarter experienced opponent.....is not the way to go.
- jhawk59

If you can have one prospect with one veteran on each pair...ok ....go for it....but that is really pushing it. Maybe by year two you have that scenario. Maybe due to injuries another prospect is recalled and gets a good chunk of games played. HOWEVER You are needing Boqvist to become descent, defensively, because you cannot have three pairs each treading water at times. It helps that both Mitchell and Kaylnuk might be on fast track. And Carlsson could step in and become a reasonably good defender. But if all the while Boqvist continues to have issues, then you are just employing too much youth too soon. It is wishful thinking ON DEFENSE too much youth too soon. Darn it, as I would be ecstatic if it could be pulled off. I like Beaudun too but adding him to the mix with all the other ptospects at defense is just not happening. At least one of them is needing to wait

Rick on this blog once said, take D Keith out and see hiw fast the other team.piles up goals. You may think Keith is on decline and Murohy could skate better. But take away those two and you have an AHL defense. It takes how many games they say to acquire that experience..ike 250 -300. And we won't have a full season next year. Fast tracking is ok if it can be worked out. But too much youth served on defense is pushing too hard too fast

(frank). I stated that wrong. I meant 6-7M total. So, 3-3.5M AAV.
- Elbows15

How years? I say 2

Well if anyone wants to know deHaan's trade value. Ottawa just picked up 28 year old RD Gunbradsun 1 year left at 4M from Anaheim for a 5th round pick.

Well Seabs and Keith were thrown in the fire 12-15 years ago played on some terrible teams and gained the experience and fortitude to go on to win 3 Cups.

Move Murphy who has the most value of any D. The team record at the end of the year won't be much difference with or without him. Plus a young D gets a season of experience under his belt.
- boilermaker100

I counter that you need Murphy physical play, so move another veteran out if they go heavy on the youth. And yes you did say they had some horrible teams. Perhaps others can add in here, how much Tr Yawney instruction meant to the development

I counter that you need Murphy physical play, so move another veteran out if they go heavy on the youth. And yes you did say they had some horrible teams. Perhaps others can add in here, how much Tr Yawney instruction meant to the development
- jhawk59

Keith too valuable to the team per your earlier post plus a NMC

Seabs has an untradeable contract and a NMC.

DeHaan gets you a 4th or 5th.

Keep the most valuable D trade chip Murphy if you want, but you delay the start of a young D beginning to gain that 250 games experience you mentioned.

Homemade gravlax.

Yummm....

(frank). I stated that wrong. I meant 6-7M total. So, 3-3.5M AAV.
- Elbows15

Oh no you can't pull back now, his agent already promised the kid the deal. He's Slovakian, he doesn't understand a Tallon clerical error.

According to The Fourth Period (whatever that's worth) teams have kicked the tires on Scott Darling to see if he'd come back to the NHL in a back-up role.