Gus is still out there. Hawks can sign him. Maybe he'll put up 40 points by the TDL and Stan flips him for a 1st.
- boilermaker100

On a more serious note, cheap forward additions that could be obtained and flipped at the TDL include Joakim Nordstrom and Kyle Clifford. Teams would want those 3rd/4th line types.

Thinking Simon, Kahun, and Vesey may be targets. Thinking Toffoli is out of the price range.
- ikeane

I’m guessing the Hawks sign one of those guys, hopefully Kahun. I suspect they’ll want to make room for the young forwards to step up..

Debrincat - Toews - Kane
Suter - Dach - Kubalik
Nylander - Strome - Shaw
Kahun - Kampf - Carpenter
Highmore
Smith (until he goes on LTIR)

On a more serious note, cheap forward additions that could be obtained and flipped at the TDL include Joakim Nordstrom and Kyle Clifford. Teams would want those 3rd/4th line types.
- boilermaker100

Nordstrom would be a good pick up.

Saad is generally overvalued by Hawk fans, agreed. He is a good player and can at times be very hard to play against. If he was money on breakaways, he'd have 40 goals a year.

But also agree that this trade makes little sense. Unless the Hawks think Zadorov can be a consistent top 4 defenseman. You don't deal Saad for a guy that gives you protection from the Seattle expansion draft as the primary motivation. If that is the primary motivation, we are way overvaluing the Hawk defense prospects.

Stan's track record on trades, thankfully unlike his draft record, is suspect at best. If we are relying on him to connect the dots on two or three other moves to justify this one, best of luck with that.

This is a head scratcher - rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. And I like Zadorov.

I also like Zadorov but agree that the trade is underwhelming. The rumors that the core are upset and confused about the direction of the team aren’t good either. The front office has methodically made a mess of things since that 3rd Cup. Sure there’s been some good decisions, but there’s been even more bad ones. Add it all up and over 5-6 years it’s taken it’s toll.

Fortunately I do believe we have plenty of young talent and a bright future is definitely possible, but it just sucks that we fell so far, and are in this position of having to rebuild on the fly just to fight our way back towards contention. Wish we could have kept things afloat so to speak. Hopefully the youth pans out in time, before 88 and 19 are gone.

Nordstrom would be a good pick up.
- rpeters01

Rather have him than Carpenter

The likely explanation was dropped in a while back...this is about dropping as much salary as possible IF they can find a taker. The team isn't going to be playoff competitive, COVID is going to continue to be a factor on allowing crowds (i.e. less incoming money and non concession sales at the games), etc. And that probably also means that President of Hockey Operations slot is going to be empty for some time.

Given what they just returned for Saad, prepare to be underwhelmed if they do the logical thing in a rebuild and move Murphy and deHaan.

Going the other direction, it could also be that they tested the tea leaves on Saad's next contract and knew it would be deja vu all over again.

I’m guessing the Hawks sign one of those guys, hopefully Kahun. I suspect they’ll want to make room for the young forwards to step up..

Debrincat - Toews - Kane
Suter - Dach - Kubalik
Nylander - Strome - Shaw
Kahun - Kampf - Carpenter
Highmore
Smith (until he goes on LTIR)
- DarthKane

They can punt Carpenter. He is not good.

They did not get as much as I expected, you are correct there, but they did get a proven NHL Dman that clears the front of the net. We’ll see what else they have up their sleeve.
- Angotti

I didn't say they got nothing. But a first and a kid like Jost was absurd is all I was saying

Obviously I have no idea what the Blackhawks plan is but after looking at their roster now, here's something random they could do:

Sign a couple skilled, younger players to 1-year deals to A) see if they fit on your team or B) flip for picks at TDL.

There is value out there right now and Stan has a little $ avail now.

You could get a steal on guys like Athanasiou, Vesey or Duclair. All young with potential to raise their stock with a good year.

There's room still after moving Saad and not signing Caggiula to insert a couple new faces at forward without blocking the younger players.

That is unless they actually think guys like Philipp Kurashev or Evan Barratt are ready for the NHL (which I really hope they don't rush).


For me... it's all about draft picks and top prospects. That's what Stan should be looking to build up.

Look at those teams currently rebuilding properly:

* Ottawa had 14 or something crazy this year
* Detroit has been averaging 10-12 picks the last 4 years
* LA had 9 picks the last couple of year (with multiple in 1st, 2nd, 3rd rounds)



And yes, I know the Hawks don't have many tradeable assets to acquire a lot of picks and prospects, Stan needs to do what he can and get creative (like possible signing a guy like Athanasiou to a 1-year).

That's what's most frustrating about the Saad move. He was the most attractive asset in terms of skill and contract and Stan didn't get picks and/or high-end prospects (unless you are saying Lindholm is one).

Stan has little margin for error and he's already failing gloriously and this rebuild
has barely begun.


-- END SCENE --
- Tyler Cameron

Well you could offer guys like Athanasious as toss in when negotiating a trade with the Kraken expansion team. I don't know but it is going to be tough to determine whom isn't protected for The Expansion Draft. Saad is a tough call for protection. Nice player whom you want to keep but sort of a luxury because he has a high cap hit for a third line/sometimes second line young player.

So, Tyler, I view Saad for Zadorov as moving the furniture pieces. I feel it is more difficult for Bowman to latch on to a third or higher pair dman whom is the Zadorov style BUT Saad slot player is easier for Bowman to find in a trade

And BTW if you trade Murphy, whom is left to match with all the new age skill prospects at the defense position. Yep Carlsson and now Zadorov match by bringing the toughness/checking

Eventually it would be desirable to choose between those two (Zadorov, Carlsson) as one half of a third pair. Because you hope that somehow, somewhere we get a hard nosed dman for the first or second pair. Presently you would hope a few of our collegiate drafts might fill that void as in house. But that is a stretch as they are not close to NHL ready and may not exactly be the hard nosed type anyway

There are checking bottom line tough customers we might pry off other league rosters. One or two of them plus some of our AHL players give us that furniture for bottom lines. The problem is we are badly in need of grit/toughness on one or both of our top lines.

Saad is not going to get you a top prospect as stand alone in a trade. Maybe he could have brought a late teen but more in tune with a bit later slot first round 2020 pick. So instead of Zadorov this was an option

I just do not believe most criticism of Bowman rebuild on this blog is deep enough researched moreover analyzed. I bet he adds toughness to a top line. When? I wish it could be for next season. I hope a power forward results from a trade or 2021 draft.

As I predicted yesterday, Stan has lost the core. This is not how you treat future HOFers, who have made your franchise valuable. The Hawks did it to Bobby Hull, let's hope Wirtz is smart enough to not let it happen again.

From Lazerus in 'The Athletic':

The Blackhawks’ abrupt shift into a full-blown rebuild — kicking Corey Crawford to the curb, trading Brandon Saad to Colorado, not qualifying Drake Caggiula and Slater Koekkoek — has blindsided the final four members of the core.
And Toews, Patrick Kane, Duncan Keith and Brent Seabrook aren’t happy about it. As one source close to the veterans put it, “They’re pissed. The core guys have had enough.”

Toews took a far more measured — but still pointed — tack.
“Bottom line is, I want to win,” Toews told The Athletic on Saturday night. “The expectation for the other leaders on this team and myself is to come ready to training camp every year to be a playoff team. We prepare ourselves to win a Cup for our fans. I’ve never been told that we were going through a rebuild. That has never been communicated to me, for that matter. A lot of this comes as a shock because it’s a completely different direction than we expected.”

The negotiations — or lack thereof — with Crawford might have been a breaking point between the players and general manager Stan Bowman. After signing a two-year, $7.8 million deal with New Jersey, Crawford said on Saturday that the Blackhawks made one offer, for one year at around $3 million. The Blackhawks never budged and pulled the offer off the table before free agency began, choosing to give Malcolm Subban, Collin Delia and Kevin Lankinen a chance to show what they can be. Crawford said he was “devastated” and “shocked” after the phone call from Bowman.

The core was, too. They were also angry. Yes, Crawford is 35. But he’s still an elite goalie, with a .928 save percentage over the last three months of the season after taking the No. 1 job back from Robin Lehner.

Outside of the negotiated impacts of player unions, sports teams don't have shared governance so this is where I don't think it matters really what the players ultimately think. But they at least deserve to know.

Has the Blackhawks management done that with the players or even the coaches? Maybe, maybe not.

Just saying that good organizations open up channels to communicate changes or else dysfunction and disenfranchisement can occur.
- Theo Fox

Veteran players like Toews know damn well they are not as able to GM or coach as well as the GM's or coaches do but they still have opinions and are the leaders in the room, they set the tone.

Players wanna be coached. They want structure, they know that's the only way to be consistent and win. They wanna know there's a plan, they wanna buy in, they wanna execute the plan.

But if they don't respect the coach or plan makers the buy in, if any, is 1/2 assed and so is the tone. ........... It's up to management to be clear with out ceding decision making to players.

A good manager will make you understand your opinion matters but my decisions aren't negotiable. Communicating is not caving.

Trying to make sense of the big picture, think of it this way.

The salary cap is likely flat or minimal increase for two to three years. After that, if things break positively, could increase considerably with new TV deal and expansion.

The general uncertainty due to the pandemic is likely to continue at least in 20-21 and maybe in 21-22.

Other than the Core Four and ADB, the Hawks have $0 committed beyond the next two seasons. And only Seabrook beyond the third season.

The likelihood of retooling on the fly and catching up to the handful of teams poised to contend over the next two or three seasons is minimal.

So, it would seem to make sense for the Hawks to:

A. Position themselves for maximal financial flexibility when the cap eventually pops.

B. Use that time to evaluate what you have in the system and whether they can be part of the next core.

C. Improve odds to draft an elite player or two during the next three drafts.

That said, I cannot fully make sense of the Saad trade in terms of what it accomplishes, as others have pointed out.

I've speculated previously, and it seems more likely now, that the Hawks have been posturing for Keith and Seabrook to ask to be moved.
- gmurban

Good perspective. I'm writing a blog for tomorrow that touches on this and a lot of other thoughts shared throughout the weekend on not just the Saad trade but also the Maatta trade and hopefully future transactions.

I keep hoping this trade was a way for Bowman to be a middle man in some trades to pick up draft choices. Take on some salary for picks.
- Elbows15

We’ve hoped before that his head-scratching trades were leading to something.

They only lead to disappointment.

Why the hell didn't the hawks qualify drake?

It’s not blaming Kane and Toews, but I wouldn’t feel sorry for them either. They’ve been the faces of an enviable franchise, won multiple Stanley Cups and are multi-millionaires.

Turnover is part of the business in hockey and many other industries (including where I work). Truly successful organizations learn to embrace it and deal with it productively. We’ve all seen the need to a rebuild (to varying degrees), is it reasonable to think the players (like 2, 19 and 88) didn’t see this coming?
- DarthKane

Also there shouldn't be a problem with Toews being upset. It would be much more disturbing if he wasnt upset.

I’m guessing the Hawks sign one of those guys, hopefully Kahun. I suspect they’ll want to make room for the young forwards to step up..

Debrincat - Cheap FA center -Cheap FA wing
Suter - Dach - Kubalik
Nylander - Strome - Shaw
Kahun - Kampf - Carpenter
Highmore
Smith (until he goes on LTIR)
- DarthKane

I corrected it for you.

Rather have him than Carpenter
- Elbows15

I think he's harder to play against than Carpenter. Does he kill penalties?

You know what I think the deal with Matt Murray was - Bowman phoned Rutherford and asked him what he wanted in exchange for Murray. Asking price was probably acceptable so he then asked if they could talk to the player's agent. Half a minute into the conversation with the agent laying out the how many $ and years they were looking for the line went dead. That's the extent to which the Hawks tried to 'acquire' Matt Murray.

And no, I don't think Stan is the guy to do a rebuild.
- RickJ

So Stan thought cuz Lehner signed for 5 x 5, Murray, a much much lesser goalie, would sign for 4 x 4? Even wanting Murray reinforces how poorly the organIzation evaluates the position and explains why they drafted a horrid Wouter Peeters in the 3rd a few yrs back.

An even bigger question, and worry, is how can they try and bring in Murray and when that fails go with Subban, Delia and Lankanin. That's two different lanes all within a few days!!

I am one of those that would disagree, to an extent.

Do most of you who think this way, think that other GMs around the league are phoning the highest paid players to tell them about trades they are contemplating or about to go down???

Maybe I'm just naïve, but don't think that is happening, not in the NHL, not in the NFL. You think Theo calls and lets Rizzo, Baez, or Bryant know what they are doing?

Maybe NBA but who watches any of that anymore.

Again, maybe I wrong, just don't see it. I'm mid to upper level in my company, and I can tell you, no one calls to let me know what they decisions they are making.
- vabeachbear

Those are fair points.

Just a few other considerations. Communication to the players don't have to be one-on-one between the GM and each player.

One method organizations use is an organization-wide town hall but that depends on how large or small the organization is. Likely doesn't work for a sports franchise that must also factor in all personnel including those in ticketing, ad sales, community development, arena experience, etc.

Another method is communicating to department or unit heads who then pass the updates and plan to their people. In this case, Colliton as head coach could be charged to have that conversation via a team meeting. Or Bowman could have held a players and coaches meeting, then likewise with other areas of the franchise.

Management doesn't have to tell players jack squat if they so chose. But by making that choice, they can hurt relationships that can create more problems than what they reckoned for.

I know many on these boards aren't going to like this perspective but there is something to be said about the concept of change management.

All organizations change whether because of natural evolution or abrupt shocks to the system such as the pandemic, depressions, etc.

Part of change management is making sure all stakeholders are aware of the changes. They don't have to agree with them but at least need to know that changes are being made and what the plan is.

Another angle is shared governance. Some organizations have avenues for stakeholders to participate in decision making to some degree or other.

Outside of the negotiated impacts of player unions, sports teams don't have shared governance so this is where I don't think it matters really what the players ultimately think. But they at least deserve to know.

Has the Blackhawks management done that with the players or even the coaches? Maybe, maybe not.

Just saying that good organizations open up channels to communicate changes or else dysfunction and disenfranchisement can occur.
- Theo Fox

Theo, I've worked for one of the 10 largest companies in the world for the last 31 years. One of our guiding principles is 'Respect for people'. That goes for both our customers, and our associates.

Another pillar is communication. I know EXACTLY what our company is doing, and why we are doing it. I may not always agree, but there is mutual respect. Gone is the day when employees can be treated like mushrooms, kept in the dark and covered in sh8t.

You don't treat people like the core is being treated. Not if you want your organization to be respected around the league. I thought that's what Rocky was interested in. I may have been wrong.

For me... it's all about draft picks and top prospects. That's what Stan should be looking to build up.

Of course we are assuming the organIzation has a plan and that plan is to rebuild, yes picks and or prospects must come back. I'd add utilization of cap space will bring back futures too.

And as Laz said the Hawks got worse on the ice after the Saad trade and they didn't get any futures. They did however gain 1.8 in cap space.

I didn't say they got nothing. But a first and a kid like Jost was absurd is all I was saying
- GPHawksfan

Especially dealing with Joe Sakic. If Rocky ever wants to replace Stan Joe is the guy to go buy.

Lady B, please post that chart again that shows Zadorov is not very good on the PK
- Elbows15

He's actually fine on the PK in the role he's played as #4 d-man. His defensive impact at 5v5 is a bigger issue - he's generally good as a bottom pairing d-man but not when he was played in the top 4.

He is also a black hole in offense and tends to drag others down with him. I know some think maybe he'd be good with Boqvist or another more offensive minded d-man but I'd be hesitant because he's been more of an anchor for the Avs d-men than not. But then, Koekkoek was better with Maatta than anyone else who the (frank) thought that on paper would be good?

Veteran players like Toews know damn well they are not as able to GM or coach as well as the GM's or coaches do but they still have opinions and are the leaders in the room, they set the tone.

Players wanna be coached. They want structure, they know that's the only way to be consistent and win. They wanna know there's a plan, they wanna buy in, they wanna execute the plan.

But if they don't respect the coach or plan makers the buy in, if any, is 1/2 assed and so is the tone. ........... It's up to management to be clear with out ceding decision making to players.

A good manager will make you understand your opinion matters but my decisions aren't negotiable. Communicating is not caving.
- Mr Ricochet

That last part is key. It's not about making sure the players get their way. Rather, it's about making sure they know what's going on now and in the future (i.e. a plan) so they're not blindsided.

The players, coaches, or whoever don't need to agree and many are naturally going to dissent. If management doesn't expect that fact, then they are naive.

And it's not that you have to ask every single player "Is it okay if we trade Saad?" but more so letting them know before the trades happen that changes are on the way and this is the reasoning.

Again, did this happen? Maybe, maybe not. Doesn't sound like they did according to what the core, especially Toews, had to say.