Theo Fox: Blaze of Glory
Will the Blackhawks core of Toews, Kane, Keith, and Seabrook add to their ring collection in Chicago? Or should they waive their NTCs to pursue the Cup with teams that are already contenders?
- Theo Fox

Well since the core have won cups i don't think the Hawks are under any obligation to trade any of them to a cup contending team.

Let's say the virus disappears who are the fans going to come and see. The core is still the face of the franchise. I believe the Hawks franchise pay a lot of the salary up front so they should be able to enjoy the savings on the back end.

It sucks, imho the franchise did everything they could so the team could win cups and get paid, i feel the core should embrace taking on the kids and being role models for the team.

Smith and Delia for MAF and Krebs. Git er’ dunn!
- Assman22

I was thinking along the same lines. MAF and Krebs, with Delia being the key pieces. I just wasn't sure Smith would do it....but maybe with him on LTIR Vegas could make it work.

I was thinking along the same lines. MAF and Krebs, with Delia being the key pieces. I just wasn't sure Smith would do it....but maybe with him on LTIR Vegas could make it work.
- powerenforcer

I can't see Colorado trading Krebs. He is their 1st round draft pick from last year and was considered a top-10 talent who they are probably counting on adding to their team next season or the one after.

Toews and Kane have 3 years left on their deals. The only way they leave Chicago is because they asked to be traded, and at that point, since they are both still effective players, the Hawks would need to maximize the return. Kane especially is still one of the elite in the league, there should be no retaining salary on any trade of him. In terms of Toews, he is also still effective, and salary retained on him would not exceed $2mil or so. With both of them the Hawks would need to get top prospects and/or first round picks. Seabrook on the other hand bar some miracle of a stupid GM, the Hawks will need to retain salary AND probably sweeten the deal with a pick or prospect.
- TheTrob

100% agree

I agree with you that he is tearing down what he can. The contacts of 19 and 88 are so large I don't see them going anywhere in this current cap landscape. Plus, I wonder if them being such a large part of the franchise marketing plan makes them untouchable? I could see a team picking up Keith at the TDL. He still plays at a high level and has a tolerable cap hit.

The only way to start a true rebuild is dealing one of the 2 poster boys, 19 or 88. The rebuild could take off very quickly if the Hawks had the stones to approach them about waiving their NMC’s. I don’t see the Hawks doing that though. Kane could bring back 3 very good young players. As for Toews, he is still very good, but no longer elite. You would have to retain some salary to shed the Captain, but I still think he can bring in quality as well. I think GM’s right now would take all of Kane’s salary as is, if they were adding a final piece like the Hawks did when they signed Hossa. You cannot tell me a team like Toronto wouldn’t be desperate enough to do this? How about Kane to Toronto for Nylander, Dermott and a 1st Round Pick if Kaner waived his NMC?

I can't see Colorado trading Krebs. He is their 1st round draft pick from last year and was considered a top-10 talent who they are probably counting on adding to their team next season or the one after.
- EbonyRaptor

Me either...it waste breath and finger punching effort to propose trades for guys not seen as actively on the market.

I agree with you that he is tearing down what he can. The contacts of 19 and 88 are so large I don't see them going anywhere in this current cap landscape. Plus, I wonder if them being such a large part of the franchise marketing plan makes them untouchable? I could see a team picking up Keith at the TDL. He still plays at a high level and has a tolerable cap hit.
- King Agler

Actually compared too so many of the pre-Covid-19 deals they have become less crazy to manage...if a team is looking for a headline grab, a way to sell tickets when the people can go to games again, these guys bring a floundering PR disaster team a good new spokesperson, leader and frontman.

I agree the hawks should fold and start the rebuild but I don't think Bowman will do it, they'll have to bring someone else in to do the dirty work.
- Udogs

You really think it would be Bowman's call trading one of those guys? I think not.

Tough to say cuz I'm looking at this possibility a year from now, but maybe David Gustafsson or possibly even Vesalainen and perhaps a couple of draft picks, one in '21 and another in '23. (?) The more salary Chicago retains, the higher the round of the '21 pick, while the "level" of the '23 pick could be conditional to Winnipeg's playoff success in either of the 2 years remaining on his contract (cuz let's face it, we want him for the playoffs! ) Just spit-balling! Thoughts?
- Quillanrocks

No reason to trade those guys without getting some kind of "sure thing" back. A known young player or what would be a late #1 pick.

So you're asking me which one rules - my head or my heart? I suppose my answer depends on which side of the pillow I happen to wake up on on any given day.

I think I would prefer to frame the question in something other than all or nothing. Rather than deciding whether to keep them all or trade them all, would this game allow me to keep one and trade the other three or is that against the spirit of the question? If it's not all or nothing - I would keep Kane and trade the other three mainly because I think Kane has more shelf life left then the others and he's the only true driver of offense between them.
- EbonyRaptor

Until he ran out of gas trying to drive an undermanned offense against the Knights Toews looked pretty good, dare I say better than Kane in the exhibition they called the Stanley Cup Playoffs last month.

I can't see Colorado trading Krebs. He is their 1st round draft pick from last year and was considered a top-10 talent who they are probably counting on adding to their team next season or the one after.
- EbonyRaptor

I could see Colorado trading a Vegas player. Wouldn't that be fun if teams could trade players on other teams?

Toews and Kane have 3 years left on their deals. The only way they leave Chicago is because they asked to be traded, and at that point, since they are both still effective players, the Hawks would need to maximize the return. Kane especially is still one of the elite in the league, there should be no retaining salary on any trade of him. In terms of Toews, he is also still effective, and salary retained on him would not exceed $2mil or so. With both of them the Hawks would need to get top prospects and/or first round picks. Seabrook on the other hand bar some miracle of a stupid GM, the Hawks will need to retain salary AND probably sweeten the deal with a pick or prospect.
- TheTrob

That was the premise of Theo's article wasn't it? That if the Hawk's core players are willing to move because of the direction the team is taking, should it be now rather than later. (?) Yes, they are still effective players (3 of the 4, anyhow), and trading them should definitely provide the Hawks some assets going forward. But cap flexibility is almost as valuable a commodity in the NHL, especially in these challenging times, and unless the Hawks retain varying amounts of salary, the return your hoping for will not be as grand, IMO. Kane may be an exception, but still . . .

Toews is being paid 10.5 million because he helped Chicago take home 3 Stanley Cups. Well deserved. But if Chicago and Toews agree it's time to part ways based on the new direction of the team, no disrespect to team or player, then the Hawks should continue paying Toews for 3 Stanley Cups, and let another team pay for the player he is now. And while Kane may be the lone exception from this, I will add that chugger38's proposal from Buffalo is that they offer "Sam Reinhart, Montour or Risto, Mittlestadt, and '21 1st", I'm sorry, that is a rich price to pay for a player--while still elite--who is on the down side of his career AND making north of 10 million.

Of course, it goes without saying that none of this comes close, in any way, shape or form, unless these players want it to, but it's fun to speculate and debate!

You really think it would be Bowman's call trading one of those guys? I think not.
- rpeters01

I think it would be Bowman’s call, with the advice and consent of Danny and Rocky.

I would also assume they would give their consent (no McConnels they) - it would save a lot of cash in a time of trouble, and wouldn’t have much of a marketing effect in a time of...uhhh...trouble.

Tough to say cuz I'm looking at this possibility a year from now, but maybe David Gustafsson or possibly even Vesalainen and perhaps a couple of draft picks, one in '21 and another in '23. (?) The more salary Chicago retains, the higher the round of the '21 pick, while the "level" of the '23 pick could be conditional to Winnipeg's playoff success in either of the 2 years remaining on his contract (cuz let's face it, we want him for the playoffs! ) Just spit-balling! Thoughts?
- Quillanrocks

A trade proposal like that sounds reasonable with conditions to vary the rounds of the draft picks.

Don't mind Vesalainen, I believe he has top 6 upside but Gustafsson seems to be more of a bottom 6 center who the Blackhawks have plenty of in the system already.

Then again, as far as redundant assets, I could see Bowman asking for Heinola as a puck-moving defender who has high hockey IQ and ability to flip the ice with evasive moves down low.

Question: Do they (any combination) - have no movement clauses?

If so - it is academic - it would be up to them, and not the team although the team could ask any to waive - in the end, it still is the players' choice (assuming NMC) - so not entirely clear that is even a thing.
- SC116

Yes, all 4 of Toews, Kane, Keith, and Seabrook have NMCs. So I stand corrected that they have NMCs rather than NTCs as there is a difference.

So you're asking me which one rules - my head or my heart? I suppose my answer depends on which side of the pillow I happen to wake up on on any given day.

I think I would prefer to frame the question in something other than all or nothing. Rather than deciding whether to keep them all or trade them all, would this game allow me to keep one and trade the other three or is that against the spirit of the question? If it's not all or nothing - I would keep Kane and trade the other three mainly because I think Kane has more shelf life left then the others and he's the only true driver of offense between them.
- EbonyRaptor

The suggestion to move the core isn't all or nothing. Trade one, some, or all.

I know somebody has a meme that would recommend we trade them all...

A trade proposal like that sounds reasonable with conditions to vary the rounds of the draft picks.

Don't mind Vesalainen, I believe he has top 6 upside but Gustafsson seems to be more of a bottom 6 center who the Blackhawks have plenty of in the system already.

Then again, as far as redundant assets, I could see Bowman asking for Heinola as a puck-moving defender who has high hockey IQ and ability to flip the ice with evasive moves down low.
- Theo Fox

Perhaps Bowman asks for Heinola out of some subconscious regret for the Jokiharju / Nylander trade. Just an outsider here, but that deal was a real head scratcher.

Great post. Pat Kane grew up in my neighborhood in South Buffalo (though I am 47). Bringing him home would be a PR and on ice homerun for Buffalo. What would it take to move one of the very best American born players ever? I'll start with Sam Reinhart, Montour or Risto, Mittlestadt, and '21 1st.
- chugger38

If the Blackhawks traded Kane to the Sabres, I would start with Reinhart of those roster players you mentioned plus at least one 1st round pick.

Sorry, I'm greedy, I believe Kane is worth multiple 1st rounders or at least a 1st rounder and a high-end prospect like Cozens.

That was the premise of Theo's article wasn't it? That if the Hawk's core players are willing to move because of the direction the team is taking, should it be now rather than later. (?) Yes, they are still effective players (3 of the 4, anyhow), and trading them should definitely provide the Hawks some assets going forward. But cap flexibility is almost as valuable a commodity in the NHL, especially in these challenging times, and unless the Hawks retain varying amounts of salary, the return your hoping for will not be as grand, IMO. Kane may be an exception, but still . . .

Toews is being paid 10.5 million because he helped Chicago take home 3 Stanley Cups. Well deserved. But if Chicago and Toews agree it's time to part ways based on the new direction of the team, no disrespect to team or player, then the Hawks should paying Toews for 3 Stanley Cups, and let another team pay for the player he is now. And while Kane may be the lone exception from this, I will add that chugger38's proposal from Buffalo is that they offer "Sam Reinhart, Montour or Risto, Mittlestadt, and '21 1st", I'm sorry, that is a rich price to pay for a player--while still elite--who is on the down side of his career AND making north of 10 million.

Of course, it goes without saying that none of this comes close, in any way, shape or form, unless thes players want it to, but it's fun to speculate and debate!
- Quillanrocks

The bolded is a creative way to describe salary retention on a star player. It's debatable how much to actually retain but the concept makes sense to me.

Perhaps Bowman asks for Heinola out of some subconscious regret for the Jokiharju / Nylander trade. Just an outsider here, but that deal was a real head scratcher.
- Quillanrocks

Based on the theory of trading one of the perceived excess of D prospects with top 4 potential for a prospect with top 6 potential, the jokiharju for Nylander trade makes sense.

But when you factor in compete level, I still hate that trade. Jokiharju may not be a top pair defender but has the makings of a solid 2nd pair defender as his floor.

Nylander has the tools but needs to amp up his compete level and consistency. Skill doesn't matter much if you disappear for long stretches.

If the Blackhawks traded Kane to the Sabres, I would start with Reinhart of those roster players you mentioned plus at least one 1st round pick.

Sorry, I'm greedy, I believe Kane is worth multiple 1st rounders or at least a 1st rounder and a high-end prospect like Cozens.
- Theo Fox

Strome is the kind of player you trade for Reinhart - 2 RFA's and under achievers to date.

Dylan Cozens would have to be in any deal that involves Kane to the Sabres.

The bolded is a creative way to describe salary retention on a star player. It's debatable how much to actually retain but the concept makes sense to me.
- Theo Fox

It's more than the three cups. It's Bowman trying to correct the horrible habit of Dollar Bill Wirtz running fan favorites out of town (Hull, Esposito, Roenick, etc...)

It's not that I can't envison Toews or Kane being traded, I just think the request has to come from the player(s) and it has to be publicly known - Toews wants to go home to Winnipeg, Kane wants to go home to Buffalo scenario.

I don't think they would be able to get nearly enough to replace Kane. You might get one decent current player, a middle-tier player, and a pick. I don't think other teams would mortgage their future for an unknown number of years of elite Kane. If Kane regresses, then you are paying 10m for a 20 goal scorer. Unless they are trying to sell tickets and jerseys, then maybe. They would be better off trading Toews. They could probably get a more equal return. Toews at the very least will still win faceoffs, be a leader, and kill penalties even if he doesn't score 30 goals. Seabrook will be with this team at least 2 more years. Maybe they can find somebody to take his contract for 2 years, but not 4. I also doubt anybody would take 3 years of Keith's contract.

Based on the theory of trading one of the perceived excess of D prospects with top 4 potential for a prospect with top 6 potential, the jokiharju for Nylander trade makes sense.

But when you factor in compete level, I still hate that trade. Jokiharju may not be a top pair defender but has the makings of a solid 2nd pair defender as his floor.

Nylander has the tools but needs to amp up his compete level and consistency. Skill doesn't matter much if you disappear for long stretches.
- Theo Fox

As a Jets fan, don't I know it! (see one Patrik Laine!)