Nah Tony played 13 games with Montreal the year before he became a Hawk.
- LAHawk

Magnuson played his whole career with the Blackhawks, but I would not call him a star player, although he did make two all star teams.

Magnuson played his whole career with the Blackhawks, but I would not call him a star player, although he did make two all star teams.
- Angotti

That’s a good one, same with Cliff Koroll.

Hypothetical situation - Let's say that after a dismal Hawk season, either Keith or Toews goes to management and tells them I am not waiving my NMC but I want to be exposed to the expansion draft so I can become the face of the Seattle franchise.

Do the Hawks take them up on their offer and lose him for nothing?
- boilermaker100

I say no. Bowman and staff need to make personnel decisions on what's best for the Blackhawks, not on what's best for a particular player.

Trade them to Seattle if that's what they care about the most in their careers but not sure if the Kraken will have sufficient assets to make any deal worthwhile.

If that's the case, try to ship them elsewhere assuming they approve of the team being traded to so they can waive their NMC.

#1 Hawks could only lose 1 player in the expansion draft
#2 Hawks protect both because they won t want to lose either for nothing. Looking at the end of the year, without taking on a big long term contract, Hawks do not have any cap issues.
- LAHawk

I'm aware of the losing only one player. I meant one OR the other wanting to be waived.

I say no. Bowman and staff need to make personnel decisions on what's best for the Blackhawks, not on what's best for a particular player.

Trade them to Seattle if that's what they care about the most in their careers but not sure if the Kraken will have sufficient assets to make any deal worthwhile.

If that's the case, try to ship them elsewhere assuming they approve of the team being traded to so they can waive their NMC.
- Theo Fox

Good answer Theo. Didn't think about the trade after the draft angle. Maybe Seattle would have some young assets after the draft in order to work out a trade.

Hypothetical situation - Let's say that after a dismal Hawk season, either Keith or Toews goes to management and tells them I am not waiving my NMC but I want to be exposed to the expansion draft so I can become the face of the Seattle franchise.

Do the Hawks take them up on their offer and lose him for nothing?
- boilermaker100

In order to be exposed, they have to waive their NMC. They could stipulate that it is only for the expansion draft like MAF did the last time.

In order to be exposed, they have to waive their NMC. They could stipulate that it is only for the expansion draft like MAF did the last time.
- Elbows15

If that would happen - after Seattle takes him - won’t the NMC come back on?

If that would happen - after Seattle takes him - won’t the NMC come back on?
- StLBravesFan

Yes. When the CBA was extended it was amended so that NMC/NTC stays with the player after a trade/movement.

If that would happen - after Seattle takes him - won’t the NMC come back on?
- StLBravesFan

I believe so with the new rule this year.

If that would happen - after Seattle takes him - won’t the NMC come back on?
- StLBravesFan

With MAF it did but I don't know if it was negotiated prior or not. It usually is up to the acquiring team to decide whether to reinstate the NMC or not in a trade.

EDIT: Guess not anymore.

I say no. Bowman and staff need to make personnel decisions on what's best for the Blackhawks, not on what's best for a particular player.

Trade them to Seattle if that's what they care about the most in their careers but not sure if the Kraken will have sufficient assets to make any deal worthwhile.

If that's the case, try to ship them elsewhere assuming they approve of the team being traded to so they can waive their NMC.
- Theo Fox

I’m not so quick to say no, in the case of Toews.

You’d get $10.5 off of the cap hit with no retention, enough cap space to go into the free agent market to get a couple of 27/28 year old $4 or $5 cap hit players with good history and experience - don’t ask me who, but in the market likely to be in place, there should be some good quality out there.

I’d agree on Keith - his contract isn’t so unmoveable, even at his age.

I’m not so quick to say no, in the case of Toews.

You’d get $10.5 off of the cap hit with no retention, enough cap space to go into the free agent market to get a couple of 27/28 year old $4 or $5 cap hit players with good history and experience - don’t ask me who, but in the market likely to be in place, there should be some good quality out there.

I’d agree on Keith - his contract isn’t so unloveable, even at his age.
- StLBravesFan

Let's carry this further. Toews is the player in question. He thinks Seattle will follow the las vegas model and be an immediate contender. He is unhappy with playing on a lottery team and has no more respect for Stan and JC and wants out. He figures Seattle will contend for a Cup before the Hawks so he makes it known that he wants to go there.

Rather than losing him for nothing Stan says we won't expose you but we'll trade you there.

Remember that Las Vegas obtained young talent like Tuch, Karlsson and Schmidt. Would you trade Toews for one of these type of players no salary retained and use the 10.5M in cap space to sign a big name free agent and another skater?

Hypothetical situation - Let's say that after a dismal Hawk season, either Keith or Toews goes to management and tells them I am not waiving my NMC but I want to be exposed to the expansion draft so I can become the face of the Seattle franchise.

Do the Hawks take them up on their offer and lose him for nothing?
- boilermaker100

Of all the hypotheticals this one sounds pointless to even consider lol

Let's carry this further. Toews is the player in question. He thinks Seattle will follow the las vegas model and be an immediate contender. He is unhappy with playing on a lottery team and has no more respect for Stan and JC and wants out. He figures Seattle will contend for a Cup before the Hawks so he makes it known that he wants to go there.

Rather than losing him for nothing Stan says we won't expose you but we'll trade you there.

Remember that Las Vegas obtained young talent like Tuch, Karlsson and Schmidt. Would you trade Toews for one of these type of players no salary retained and use the 10.5M in cap space to sign a big name free agent and another skater?
- boilermaker100

To me it's about whatever makes the Blackhawks better. If a move like that does than yes but...

I’m not so quick to say no, in the case of Toews.

You’d get $10.5 off of the cap hit with no retention, enough cap space to go into the free agent market to get a couple of 27/28 year old $4 or $5 cap hit players with good history and experience - don’t ask me who, but in the market likely to be in place, there should be some good quality out there.

I’d agree on Keith - his contract isn’t so unmoveable, even at his age.
- StLBravesFan

I’d argue that what makes Keith the MOST valuable/moveable is his 3 cups and extensive experience at $5.5m. Hard to get top pairing defensemen with his hardware at that price.

When i think about the Hawks this is such a daunting task to build a team to compete for the SC.

Man if the dmen are top 4 quality dmen that's a great start

To me it's about whatever makes the Blackhawks better. If a move like that does than yes but...
- BetweenTheDots

The return would be at least 3 decent players for a 33 year old Toews. Love the guy and his heart, desire and leadership that won 3 Cups, but i would make that move.

When i think about the Hawks this is such a daunting task to build a team to compete for the SC.

Man if the dmen are top 4 quality dmen that's a great start
- BetweenTheDots

Agree about the difficulty of the task ahead. However they do it, they need a championship level #1C and 1D to start with. Will Dach be one? Maybe. But there's no championship level 1D in the pipeline. Imo, they need to be awful this year to have a shot at one.

They also need several All-Star level guy to supplement the 1C and 1D. Are any in the system? I think the defense has exciting prospects to be darn good there, but they need one to become a Keith or Doughty or Hedman.

Agree about the difficulty of the task ahead. However they do it, they need a championship level #1C and 1D to start with. Will Dach be one? Maybe. But there's no championship level 1D in the pipeline. Imo, they need to be awful this year to have a shot at one.

They also need several All-Star level guy to supplement the 1C and 1D. Are any in the system? I think the defense has exciting prospects to be darn good there, but they need one to become a Keith or Doughty or Hedman.
- mohel

See your preceding post. My hypothetical Toews to Seattle is a good start, no?

See your preceding post. My hypothetical Toews to Seattle is a good start, no?
- boilermaker100

If Seabrook's contract to seattle so they can get to the floor obviously other pieces would have to be added for them to take Seabrook plus Seabrook would have to approve the trade.
Seabrook's contract strome/ nylander and 2nd could perhaps work. What would come back who knows maybe something like could happen at the expansion draft. I m sure other teams would thinking along the same lines.

Agree about the difficulty of the task ahead. However they do it, they need a championship level #1C and 1D to start with. Will Dach be one? Maybe. But there's no championship level 1D in the pipeline. Imo, they need to be awful this year to have a shot at one.

They also need several All-Star level guy to supplement the 1C and 1D. Are any in the system? I think the defense has exciting prospects to be darn good there, but they need one to become a Keith or Doughty or Hedman.
- mohel

I don't know, but the only we'll find out if we play the kids. What if Mitchell and Boqvist are? That changes everything but for now they are teens so time will tell.

See your preceding post. My hypothetical Toews to Seattle is a good start, no?
- boilermaker100

Yep. If they wanted to maximize the assets that are Kane, Toews and Keith, they should have traded them two years ago. Trouble is, that you only get a championship level 1C and 1D at the very top of the draft (generally); and those guys wouldn't go for a trade to a team that will finish with a lottery record.

I don't know, but the only we'll find out if we play the kids. What if Mitchell and Boqvist are? That changes everything but for now they are teens so time will tell.
- BetweenTheDots

Yep, could be with those guys. We'll see. Play the kids.

In my puttering around time today I gave some more thought to Theo's question - should the Hawks trade 2/7/19/88 or not? My previous response was keep 88 and trade 2/7/19. I started thinking about what the Hawks could realistically get in return for those players and the realistic impact it could have on the rebuild. I came to the conclusion their cap hits would minimize the return to the point that they would be almost cap dumps versus prospect cupboard restocking. Now, gaining cap space is a good thing and can be used to acquire players but those players would probably be veteran free agents which would not be in line with the youth rebuild.

But what if the Hawks retained 50% - that would mean a better return of either prospects or draft picks who could be part of the rebuild - BUT - that would mean carrying 50% on the books for 3 more years (4 in the case of Seabrook) - how would that impact the rebuild. Right off the bat it would probably mean the first season the Hawks could realistically be contenders would be the year the retained cap hits of 2/19/88 come off the books - 2023/24. Would Rocky allow a 3-year rebuild instead of a 1 or 2 year rebuild? It might end up taking that long or longer anyway but trading 2/7/19/88 would almost guarantee it's a few years out before the young players we have mature and the young players we will acquire over the next 2-3 years get their NHL sea legs.

Kane is still an elite player who isn't slowing down. Getting him for 3 years at $5.25M AAV would be very attractive and could probably get at least a 1st round pick and a top prospect. Toews has slowed down a bit but at $5.25M AAV would pull in a good haul and same with Keith who is no longer a #1 but at $2.75M AAV for 3 more years is a bargain. That roughly $13M cap space cleared out over the next 3 years should be enough to pay 2nd contracts for Dach/Boqvist/Kubalik as they come off their ELC's during those 3 years. Then those retained salaries come off going into the 2024 season which opens up another 13M.

The Hawks will have their own draft picks which should be at least top-10, if not top-5 which means some of those draft pick should be ready to be in the NHL by 2024 to be added to the young players we already have and the prospects we acquired in the trades of 2/19/88.

Yep. If they wanted to maximize the assets that are Kane, Toews and Keith, they should have traded them two years ago. Trouble is, that you only get a championship level 1C and 1D at the very top of the draft (generally); and those guys wouldn't go for a trade to a team that will finish with a lottery record.
- mohel

If the Hawks can get a good goalie in here or if our young goalies are actually good, I dont think we will be that bad. However, maybe the Hawks are willing to gamble on unreliable goaltending for a season to get that one more high draft choice. Ownership probably is saying why bother paying up when they are going to be losing tons of money this year anyways.