This cup team is going to have to be less Hagel because this doesn't do it according to whats been reported lately.

Eichel was gonna get 4 1st round picks too.

While I agree, the initial asking price is never met, the difference here is that Hagel isnt requesting out and is under contract for 2 more years, so its not like we are in a position where we have to trade him. Whether hes worth what the asking price is, is a different question entirely.

I think a 1st + good prospect is what he's gonna get. That's what Coleman got and I view them as similar players.

Eichel wanted out and that was public knowledge, the leverage is very much in CHI favour right now. He isn't on the block but if you want him, come pay up is essentially what their saying to the league.

The thing I think a lot of fans of other teams don't seem to get is that CHI isn't shopping Hagel. They probably aren't shopping anyone besides maybe De Haan and Carpenter. So, if CHI doesn't want to trade Hagel, but another team wants him, then they would have to make CHI an offer that outweighs keeping him around. This offer does not do that. So, the Hawks would just continue to have a great player on a an awesome contract. The end.

What is the value of Tuch? At minimum a 1st + same with Kreps and the 1st they got.

Hawks already have received multiple offers for Hagel including a 1st and good prospect and they've declined them all. Clearly, Hawks are in the drivers seat with no real reason to move a 23 year old on a fantastic contract with only 90 or so games under his belt and a team rebuilding/retooling. Hagel is going to be an overpay. There is no hockey trade, no fair trade, it will be an overpay to pry him out of the Hawks hands which is why A) it will never happen or B) the acquiring team's fans will be upset by the value. 1st + either Amirov, Robertson, or Niemela would probably get the Hawks talking to the Leafs IMO.

Eichel is irrelevant. A) He had to have major surgery which is a big risk for those that understand the surgery he had; B) Buffalo was not giving in and forcing a ACDF versus ACDR; C) Eichel was vocal he wanted out; D) He has a $10M cap hit that few teams can afford; E) He's a UFA in 4 years. None of this is relevant to the position with Hagel and the Hawks.

I think they are shopping Kubalik and the price will be much cheaper. If I were the Leafs, I wouldn't be opposed to Kubs at half retained for a 2nd which is probably his cost. Throw Kubs on the line with JT and Nylander and I'm willing to bet he lights up to the player we watched a the last couple seasons.

Right. I like Hagel, but if a team is offering this for him, I would hope theyll accept it. You dont rebuild around middle 6 players

It's not irrelevant. Asking price is always exaggerated. GMs aren't gonna sell low on a guy. NJ didn't have to move Coleman either, but where there's smoke. Similar contract & similar players.

I agree. His value is inflated because of his contract. They should take advantage of that and get a haul for him like the Devils did with Coleman.

Buffalo had to move Eichel, the entire league knew that, nothing good was going to come of that situation. Further, for all the points above, there was a lot more risk and very expensive so it's not relevant. Buffalo was on drugs with their asking price.

Coleman and Hagel are very different. Why would the Devils want to hang onto him during a rebuild and especially as a UFA? On the other hand, why wouldn't the Hawks want to hang on Hagel? You are trying to quantify what Hagel is worth based on his on-ice play, but the reality couldn't be further from the truth. The price is what teams are willing to pay while the Hawks have no reason to move him. Someone either is going to be dumb enough to vastly overpay for Hagel, or gladly stays a Hawk; Chicago is a win win situation no matter what.

And because of his age and RFA status and because the Hawks aren't shopping him and every team knows that have zero reason to shop him. Hawks will get more if they decide to move him. Hagel's age, contract (including being an RFA) are the biggest reasons why they can get more if they chose to move him.

I doubt they aren't shopping him. That sounds like a negotiation tactic. They are not going to sell him for cheap, but his value is clearly inflated right now because of his contract. Middle 6 guys are usually not worth 1st round picks + good prospects. His contract just makes him way more attractive to cap strapped contenders. Just like Blake Coleman & Barclay Goodrow. Neither of San Jose or New Jersey had to trade those guys either.

Why are you taking an example of asking price not matching actual return so literal? You can just use Blake Coleman & Barclay Goodrow as examples.

LMAO you can't use those two as good examples because they aren't. Both players were older players, both players were also UFAs in another year. You are completely ignoring age and contract differences between a RFA vs a UFA.

Hagel is basically a proven high end prospect with only 90 games under his belt, 23 years old, signed for 2 more seasons and a RFA following that. Unlike Goodrow who was 26 years old, signed for 1 more season then a UFA. Coleman was 28 years old, signed for 1 more year, then a UFA. Not sure how you don't understand a 23 year old, signed for two more seasons on a cheap contract and an RFA after that isn't more valuable...pretty basic.

Hawks have zero reason to move Hagel unless it's an overpay. They have had at least 3 offers of a 1st and good prospect and have declined. Why would the Hawks move Hagel, a sure bet young player on a team friendly contract, for a couple assets which are gambles? A late 1st rounder statistically speaking has less then a 30% chance of becoming a NHL player let alone one as good as hagel. Robertson, Amirov, etc. aren't sure bets either. If Hagel was 26 or 28 years old like Goodrow or Coleman and a UFA in another year, then move him by all means, but doesn't make any sense in the case of Hagel and the Hawks unless it's a big overpay.

Nobody is ignoring anything. You are just taking examples way too literal. Their first names aren't Brandon either. All 3 are middle 6 guys on great contracts that makes them attractive to cap strapped contenders.

Hagel isn't a prospect. Coleman also had a better history of production. He was also better defensively. Goodrow is also a center that was good at faceoffs. Hagel isn't. There are pros and cons to all players. I think they will get similar value of a 1st + decent prospect.

A 1st round pick + a decent prospect is already an overpay. Teams usually don't offer that for 40ish point middle 6 guys. That's why they'd move him. His value is inflated. Take advantage of that. Or keep him on the team that's not contending and inevitably overpay him in a few years.

You're ignoring the age and contract status. That sometimes has more importance then the player on the ice; it's extremely important in a cap world. A 23 year old, with 2 years left on his current contract, and a RFA after that, is SUBSTANTIALLY more valuable then the same 23 year old with 1 year on his contract and a UFA after that. The important thing is the gap in value is WIDE, not narrow. Now throw in 23 versus 26 or 28 years old and it's simply apples and oranges; not literal or not...just unrelated.

Hawks have already been offered a 1st and good prospect by several teams according to multiple reports and have declined. Having a really have a hard times understanding why you think the Hawks should take a 1st and decent prospect?

No, the Hawks absolutely shouldn't be taking a late first (odds are won't be a career NHL player) and a decent prospect (odds are wont be a career NHL player) while giving up a 23 year old with two more years left and an RFA after that for one of the youngest teams in the NHL; makes no sense. They need a prospect who has a 90% change of being Hagel or better; the late 1st is another casino chip in case the 90% doesn't pan out otherwise, don't play the odds and keep the bird in hand which it appears is exactly what they are doing and rightfully so.

I'm not ignoring his age or his contract status. He's just not as good as you think he is. Hagel is a 3rd line winger. You're acting like he's a top line guy at a PPG pace that would be worth 2 1st round picks and a blue chip prospect. If he was at that level, then I'd agree with you. He's not though. He's not going to get all that because he's not that good.

If the Hawks have actually been offered a 1st & a good prospect like a Robertson/Amirov and they haven't taken that the future of the franchise is doomed.

Yes, if that's what they are actually getting they should take it and run. He's not someone you build around. He's a complimentary piece. if the Hawks were actually a good team I'd say keep him. They're not though. Your contending window has passed. Unless, you want to become the new Vancouver. It does seem like that's the team's trajectory based on recent moves though.

@DongLord23
I do not want to think about Hagel as he was drafted by the Sabres, then they let him get away for nothing.
IMO Karmanos would accept that trade for Miller and Anderson.

There isn't an actual solidified asking price. There is only speculation by people that don't work for the Hawks on what kind of offer would be too good to refuse. Coleman and Goodrow were being actively shopped, Hagel is not. He is not on the block. Teams want him and so they are asking about him. Every player has a price. They would be stupid not to listen to offers. But if you want him you're probably gonna have to over pay and hope for the best. Otherwise the hawks have no reason to move him.

I agree. This isn't a case of just Kubalik playing bad. This whole team is playing bad and there are a number of reasons why. Put him on another team with high end players that compliment his skill set better, and he would be right back to what we know he can be. This roster is just a mess of poor chemistry, too many redundancies, and a collective consciousness that is in turmoil because of all the crap surrounding the club.

Nobody knows that though. Teams always say, "player X is not being shopped" as a negotiation tactic to drive up the price.