SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

Toews back now plenty of cap

Créé par: ChiHawk
Équipe: 2021-22 Blackhawks de Chicago
Date de création initiale: 30 juin 2021
Publié: 30 juin 2021
Mode - plafond salarial: Basique
Description
I think it's obvious with Toews back that he will take the helm again as 1C. Dach is likely the 2C and Suter has proven himself a worthy 3C. That leaves Strome either going to the wing or Suter going to the wing and Strome playing 3C. Given that Strome is not great as a winger and much better off as a center and ideally a 2C, it's time to move him IMO.

Nylander, Reichel, Borgstrom all need to earn their playing time at this point. If Hino doesn't produce, Reichel or Nylander step in. Don't love Kurashev on the 4th line but also think his defensive and speed add a dynamic to that line.

Hawks sign Saad; why? Because he's a great RW player as he showed in Colorado and the line of Kubalik - Toews - Saad was our best line and in the bubble. We simply don't have another two way winger in the top 6 if Reichel isn't ready. Nylander is a very different style and doubt he ever becomes as good as Saad at this point. If Reichel is ready, then we move Saad who is very attractive to any playoff team after how he produced with the Avs.
Signatures de joueurs autonomes
RFAANSCAP HIT
31 250 000 $
21 250 000 $
21 000 000 $
12 500 000 $
UFAANSCAP HIT
21 200 000 $
55 500 000 $
Transactions
1.
CHI
    These guys are gone
    2.
    CHI
    1. Choix de 2e ronde en 2022 (VAN)
    VAN
    1. Zadorov, Nikita [Droits de RFA]
    2. Choix de 4e ronde en 2021 (VAN)
    3.
    CHI
    1. Choix de 6e ronde en 2023 (TOR)
    Détails additionnels:
    I don't think Connolly is a bad piece for a playoff bound team, just overpaid and not much of any value coming back.
    TOR
    1. Connolly, Brett (1 000 000 $ retained)
    4.
    ANA
    1. Strome, Dylan
    2. Choix de 3e ronde en 2022 (VGK)
    Transactions impliquant une retenue de salaire
    Repêchage1e ronde2e ronde3e ronde4e ronde5e ronde6e ronde7e ronde
    2021
    Logo de CHI
    Logo de CHI
    Logo de VGK
    Logo de CHI
    Logo de CHI
    Logo de CHI
    Logo de FLA
    2022
    Logo de CHI
    Logo de CHI
    Logo de VAN
    Logo de CHI
    Logo de CHI
    Logo de CHI
    Logo de CHI
    2023
    Logo de CHI
    Logo de CHI
    Logo de CHI
    Logo de CHI
    Logo de CHI
    Logo de CHI
    Logo de TOR
    Logo de CHI
    TAILLE DE LA FORMATIONPLAFOND SALARIALCAP HITEXCÉDENTS Info-bulleBONISESPACE SOUS LE PLAFOND SALARIAL
    2381 500 000 $59 592 121 $452 439 $5 115 000 $21 907 879 $
    Ailier gaucheCentreAilier droit
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    3 700 000 $3 700 000 $
    AG, AD
    UFA - 1
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    10 500 000 $10 500 000 $
    C
    NMC
    UFA - 2
    5 500 000 $5 500 000 $
    AG, AD
    UFA - 5
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    6 400 000 $6 400 000 $
    AG, AD
    UFA - 2
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    925 000 $925 000 $ (Bonis de performance2 500 000 $$2M)
    C, AD
    RFA - 1
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    2 625 000 $2 625 000 $
    AD
    NMC
    UFA - 2
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    1 250 000 $1 250 000 $
    AG
    UFA - 3
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    2 500 000 $2 500 000 $
    C, AG
    UFA - 2
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    1 200 000 $1 200 000 $
    AD, AG
    UFA - 1
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    842 500 $842 500 $ (Bonis de performance32 500 $$32K)
    AG, C, AD
    RFA - 1
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    1 250 000 $1 250 000 $
    C
    UFA - 2
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    1 000 000 $1 000 000 $
    AD, C
    UFA - 1
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    811 667 $811 667 $ (Bonis de performance32 500 $$32K)
    AG, C
    RFA - 1
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    1 000 000 $1 000 000 $
    AD, AG
    RFA - 1
    Défenseur gaucherDéfenseur droitierGardien de but
    Logo de Ducks d'Anaheim
    2 602 778 $2 602 778 $
    DG
    UFA - 1
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    894 167 $894 167 $ (Bonis de performance850 000 $$850K)
    DD
    RFA - 1
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    800 000 $800 000 $
    G
    UFA - 1
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    5 538 462 $5 538 462 $
    DG
    NMC
    UFA - 2
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    3 850 000 $3 850 000 $
    DD
    UFA - 1
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    1 000 000 $1 000 000 $
    G
    UFA - 1
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    1 350 000 $1 350 000 $
    DG
    RFA - 3
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    925 000 $925 000 $ (Bonis de performance850 000 $$850K)
    DD
    RFA - 2
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    925 000 $925 000 $ (Bonis de performance850 000 $$850K)
    DG
    UFA - 1
    Laissés de côtéListe des blessés (IR)Liste des blessés à long terme (LTIR)
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    6 875 000 $6 875 000 $
    DD
    NMC
    UFA - 3
    Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
    3 900 000 $3 900 000 $
    C, AD
    UFA - 1

    Code d'intégration

    • Pour afficher cette équipe sur un autre site Web ou blog, ajoutez ce iFrame à la page appropriée
    • Personnalisez les dimensions dans le code IFrame ci-dessous pour adapter votre site de manière appropriée. Minimum recommandé: 400px.

    Texte intégré

    Cliquer pour surligner
    30 juin 2021 à 12 h 2
    #1
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: avr. 2021
    Messages: 657
    Mentions "j'aime": 352
    Ducks easily decline that
    30 juin 2021 à 12 h 2
    #2
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: août 2020
    Messages: 3,892
    Mentions "j'aime": 2,794
    I think you’d have to make the Vegas 3rd the Chicago 2nd this year at minimum do Lindholm. Even then it’s hard to see ANA moving Lindholm.
    30 juin 2021 à 12 h 6
    #3
    exo2769
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: juill. 2015
    Messages: 15,629
    Mentions "j'aime": 9,729
    ANA can get more for Lindholm, but I do like idea of acquiring him.
    30 juin 2021 à 12 h 16
    #4
    Démarrer sujet
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: avr. 2017
    Messages: 19,026
    Mentions "j'aime": 9,322
    Quoting: QuackAttack
    Ducks easily decline that


    Quoting: jnowariak
    I think you’d have to make the Vegas 3rd the Chicago 2nd this year at minimum do Lindholm. Even then it’s hard to see ANA moving Lindholm.


    Quoting: exo2769
    ANA can get more for Lindholm, but I do like idea of acquiring him.



    Don't think they "easily decline" that. Lindholm is a rental, he's also not a top 20 defensive player in the NHL. He's good, but in a flat cap world, it's a lot of cap to take on and a lot of risk with him being a free agent. I bet the Ducks move him as it's also hard to imagine him in their rebuild plans.

    Strome conversely is not only a cost controlled, but being a young 24 year old RFA and a center which the Ducks need, his career is locked to the acquiring team or the Hawks if he stays.

    I'm looking at this trade based on draft value equally being a late 1st and a 3rd. Maybe remove the 3rd and include Beaudin, but I don't think it's that far off.
    exo2769 a aimé ceci.
    30 juin 2021 à 12 h 21
    #5
    exo2769
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: juill. 2015
    Messages: 15,629
    Mentions "j'aime": 9,729
    Quoting: ChiHawk
    Don't think they "easily decline" that. Lindholm is a rental, he's also not a top 20 defensive player in the NHL. He's good, but in a flat cap world, it's a lot of cap to take on and a lot of risk with him being a free agent. I bet the Ducks move him as it's also hard to imagine him in their rebuild plans.

    Strome conversely is not only a cost controlled, but being a young 24 year old RFA and a center which the Ducks need, his career is locked to the acquiring team or the Hawks if he stays.

    I'm looking at this trade based on draft value equally being a late 1st and a 3rd. Maybe remove the 3rd and include Beaudin, but I don't think it's that far off.


    A couple of points. I do agree that Strome has more value than most people on Capfriendly give him. With that said, ANA can maximize value at the TDL and retain 50% of the cap. They'll get a haul back. a 1st plus a prospect IMO. With that said. I'd be willing to send Strome and Vlasic. I think both CHI and ANA would prefer Vlasic over Beaudin. Vlasic being a large body defensive dman would be a great fit long term next to Drysdale.
    30 juin 2021 à 12 h 25
    #6
    Démarrer sujet
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: avr. 2017
    Messages: 19,026
    Mentions "j'aime": 9,322
    Quoting: exo2769
    A couple of points. I do agree that Strome has more value than most people on Capfriendly give him. With that said, ANA can maximize value at the TDL and retain 50% of the cap. They'll get a haul back. a 1st plus a prospect IMO. With that said. I'd be willing to send Strome and Vlasic. I think both CHI and ANA would prefer Vlasic over Beaudin. Vlasic being a large body defensive dman would be a great fit long term next to Drysdale.


    Vlasic could be a good option for the Ducks as well. I also think Kurashev could be in the deal but his value IMO is more given he's only 21 years old and his first season showed he's going to be a good 2 way player. Players that could be included; Kurashev, Nylander, Beaudin, Vlassic, Gaudette, Borgstrom all realistically are options but with varying degree of value of course.
    exo2769 a aimé ceci.
    30 juin 2021 à 12 h 41
    #7
    BRUCE THERE IT IS
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: nov. 2020
    Messages: 1,646
    Mentions "j'aime": 1,183
    Canucks say yes!
    30 juin 2021 à 13 h 22
    #8
    Chicago
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: juin 2015
    Messages: 6,997
    Mentions "j'aime": 2,843
    Definitely going to have to add in the Anaheim trade, but it's the direction the team should be taking.
    30 juin 2021 à 14 h 2
    #9
    Chicago Blackhawks
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: août 2017
    Messages: 1,026
    Mentions "j'aime": 408
    Quoting: ChiHawk
    Vlasic could be a good option for the Ducks as well. I also think Kurashev could be in the deal but his value IMO is more given he's only 21 years old and his first season showed he's going to be a good 2 way player. Players that could be included; Kurashev, Nylander, Beaudin, Vlassic, Gaudette, Borgstrom all realistically are options but with varying degree of value of course.


    I think Exo makes the most important point here, which is that Lindholm's value is greater to Anaheim than any other team currently. Without him, what are they left with? Cam Fowler, and the grossly overpaid ghost of Kevin Shattenkirk? Everyone loves Josh Manson because he lays the body, but he isn't all that great a defenseman...

    On the flip side, they have a ton of RFAs to sign, Max Comtois, Jones, Steel, Lundestrom, and that's minimum requirements. There's four others they may or may not sign. And then Baldy, his big contract just ended, so he'll likely be taking another one with them, for less yeah, but probably in the 4-5 range. And they're still carrying Kesler's dead weight, as well as 2 mil of Perry's contract.

    So it would seem more likely that if they can get a good return for Lindholm, they'll send him off to make room for signings. But that return has to be better than what he's worth, optically, for even someone as dumb as Bob Murray. So I agree that you've got to put a better offer forward, but it isn't like you are wildly off.
    30 juin 2021 à 14 h 14
    #10
    Démarrer sujet
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: avr. 2017
    Messages: 19,026
    Mentions "j'aime": 9,322
    Quoting: JackBurton
    I think Exo makes the most important point here, which is that Lindholm's value is greater to Anaheim than any other team currently. Without him, what are they left with? Cam Fowler, and the grossly overpaid ghost of Kevin Shattenkirk? Everyone loves Josh Manson because he lays the body, but he isn't all that great a defenseman...

    On the flip side, they have a ton of RFAs to sign, Max Comtois, Jones, Steel, Lundestrom, and that's minimum requirements. There's four others they may or may not sign. And then Baldy, his big contract just ended, so he'll likely be taking another one with them, for less yeah, but probably in the 4-5 range. And they're still carrying Kesler's dead weight, as well as 2 mil of Perry's contract.

    So it would seem more likely that if they can get a good return for Lindholm, they'll send him off to make room for signings. But that return has to be better than what he's worth, optically, for even someone as dumb as Bob Murray. So I agree that you've got to put a better offer forward, but it isn't like you are wildly off.


    Most importantly, Ducks are at the bottom of the rebuild process and about to start their climb. Lindholm and or Manson both are 1 year UFAs and can't see why either player at their age wants to wait around another 5 years to become a contender. In the same breathe, why wouldn't the Ducks move at least 1 or both to help accelerate their rebuild? They have to be thinking 4 to 6 years out which means going after players 25 years and younger.

    They have a pretty good prospect pool/young guys and the 3rd pick OA this year will only add to that with a player like Hughes, Evidsson, Clarke being options if they don't get Beniers. Notably, outside of Zegras, they don't necessarily have another top 6 center save for Lundestrom being a surprise. Strome fills a hole for sure.

    On D, they have notable young prospect/players such as...
    Drysdale, Mahura, Thrun, LaCombe

    Manson and Lindholm are just not the right timetable for their rebuild IMO. That doesn't mean they will sell cheap, but I think Lindholm is very good, but overrated here. He's worth a late 1st and a good (not great) prospect IMO. So Strome + Kurashev or Beaudin or Vlasic or Nylander should get a deal done IMO and a good move for both teams.
    JackBurton a aimé ceci.
    30 juin 2021 à 14 h 27
    #11
    Chicago Blackhawks
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: août 2017
    Messages: 1,026
    Mentions "j'aime": 408
    Quoting: ChiHawk
    Most importantly, Ducks are at the bottom of the rebuild process and about to start their climb. Lindholm and or Manson both are 1 year UFAs and can't see why either player at their age wants to wait around another 5 years to become a contender. In the same breathe, why wouldn't the Ducks move at least 1 or both to help accelerate their rebuild? They have to be thinking 4 to 6 years out which means going after players 25 years and younger.

    They have a pretty good prospect pool/young guys and the 3rd pick OA this year will only add to that with a player like Hughes, Evidsson, Clarke being options if they don't get Beniers. Notably, outside of Zegras, they don't necessarily have another top 6 center save for Lundestrom being a surprise. Strome fills a hole for sure.

    On D, they have notable young prospect/players such as...
    Drysdale, Mahura, Thrun, LaCombe

    Manson and Lindholm are just not the right timetable for their rebuild IMO. That doesn't mean they will sell cheap, but I think Lindholm is very good, but overrated here. He's worth a late 1st and a good (not great) prospect IMO. So Strome + Kurashev or Beaudin or Vlasic or Nylander should get a deal done IMO and a good move for both teams.


    I'm down with your evaluation, I just don't think Bob Murray would be. They chose to keep Lindholm over Vatenen back when the discussion was "who's our real 1D and who is going to falter?" They chose Lindholm wisely, and I just don't think GMBM wants to move on from his current #1D and turn their team into a complete and total clown car until they have to. The TDL seems like a far more viable time for him to part with Lindholm, and get a better return.
    30 juin 2021 à 14 h 35
    #12
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: nov. 2017
    Messages: 3,222
    Mentions "j'aime": 2,162
    Quoting: JackBurton
    I think Exo makes the most important point here, which is that Lindholm's value is greater to Anaheim than any other team currently. Without him, what are they left with? Cam Fowler, and the grossly overpaid ghost of Kevin Shattenkirk? Everyone loves Josh Manson because he lays the body, but he isn't all that great a defenseman...

    On the flip side, they have a ton of RFAs to sign, Max Comtois, Jones, Steel, Lundestrom, and that's minimum requirements. There's four others they may or may not sign. And then Baldy, his big contract just ended, so he'll likely be taking another one with them, for less yeah, but probably in the 4-5 range. And they're still carrying Kesler's dead weight, as well as 2 mil of Perry's contract.

    So it would seem more likely that if they can get a good return for Lindholm, they'll send him off to make room for signings. But that return has to be better than what he's worth, optically, for even someone as dumb as Bob Murray. So I agree that you've got to put a better offer forward, but it isn't like you are wildly off.


    Without Lindholm they are... a strong candidate for Shane Wright and Brad Lambert!
    JackBurton a aimé ceci.
    30 juin 2021 à 16 h 1
    #13
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: mai 2017
    Messages: 8,279
    Mentions "j'aime": 4,924
    Many have commented on the Lindholm deal at the time i'm seeing this and you have already responded to them, so i'll set that one aside. The rest of the moves look good to me. I am in favor of a Saad reunion pt 3 but I think it's unlikley. I also think if we want to compete we need a better 3rd line, but we are probably better off using next year to asses what we have so i'm alright with not bringing anyone in there
    JackBurton et ChiHawk a aimé ceci.
    30 juin 2021 à 18 h 3
    #14
    Chicago Blackhawks
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: août 2017
    Messages: 1,026
    Mentions "j'aime": 408
    Quoting: SlickWilly
    Without Lindholm they are... a strong candidate for Shane Wright and Brad Lambert!


    Are those the big shot names for '22? I really don't look into that at all until the current draft is over. Insufficient headspace.
    SlickWilly a aimé ceci.
    30 juin 2021 à 18 h 4
    #15
    Chicago Blackhawks
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: août 2017
    Messages: 1,026
    Mentions "j'aime": 408
    Quoting: Wadejos123
    Many have commented on the Lindholm deal at the time i'm seeing this and you have already responded to them, so i'll set that one aside. The rest of the moves look good to me. I am in favor of a Saad reunion pt 3 but I think it's unlikley. I also think if we want to compete we need a better 3rd line, but we are probably better off using next year to asses what we have so i'm alright with not bringing anyone in there


    I'm still pissed that Stan did that ****, and I think there is literally no chance in hell Saad ever chooses to come to Chicago again. And who can blame him?
    ChiHawk et Wadejos123 a aimé ceci.
    30 juin 2021 à 18 h 16
    #16
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: nov. 2017
    Messages: 3,222
    Mentions "j'aime": 2,162
    Quoting: JackBurton
    Are those the big shot names for '22? I really don't look into that at all until the current draft is over. Insufficient headspace.


    Yes. I myself am inclined to tank for the next two years because the top of the 1st round is supposed to be between franchise and generational talents for 2022 and 2023. I don't really see the point in toiling in the middle any longer because most upgrades we make are going to make us 3 seeds at best. But thats an entirely different subject. If Anaheim is inclined on selling, then 2022 and 2023 are pretty golden opportunities to do so.
    30 juin 2021 à 18 h 19
    #17
    Démarrer sujet
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: avr. 2017
    Messages: 19,026
    Mentions "j'aime": 9,322
    Quoting: JackBurton
    I'm down with your evaluation, I just don't think Bob Murray would be. They chose to keep Lindholm over Vatenen back when the discussion was "who's our real 1D and who is going to falter?" They chose Lindholm wisely, and I just don't think GMBM wants to move on from his current #1D and turn their team into a complete and total clown car until they have to. The TDL seems like a far more viable time for him to part with Lindholm, and get a better return.


    Yeah, I don't think lindhom hangs around in Anaheim though; why would he? Anaheim is 4 to 6 years away from competing, isn't a huge hockey market, and their stadium is not in a great area and most of the big contract players live in better parts of OC and have to deal with an hour plus commute to get to the stadium...minor but matters. Lindholm probably walks to get a bigger contract with a bigger hockey town with a team that is closer to competing.
     
    Répondre
    To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
    Question:
    Options:
    Ajouter une option
    Soumettre le sondage