Not sure why the Hawks would ever make this trade. In fact, if you took Panarin and Bickell out, I still wouldn't do it. There are ways to get under the cap, but this is not it. Seabrook brings so much to this team with not only his on-ice play, but his leadership on and off the ice. Seabrook also brings a big, physical presence on Chicago's back end, which outside of Hjalmarsson, there's not much else. Panarin has the potential to be a difference-maker, and Shaw is one of the only guys on the team with a willingness to go the greasy areas. The Hawks lose way more than they gain in this deal, despite the freed-up cap space.

At the end of the day, I wouldn't be surprised to see Seabrook retire a Hawk. But in the event that this team is so cap-strapped that he has to be dealt, I expect the return would be greater than what you're offering on Boston's end, and probably wouldn't include so many other integral pieces from Chicago's end.

That trade is absolutely brutal

Hawks are getting screwed over big time.

Thanks for the responses so far. Prior to this armchair team, several others proposed the Bruins signing UFA Franson. However, he does not seem to be a prototypical top 4 defenseman.

Knowing the Hawks are already very close to the cap ceiling as well as Seabrook needing a new deal for next year, this summer is the time to consider the future as far as all parties are concerned. Can the Hawks re-sign him? At what term and yearly cost? The longer they wait, the less likely full value will come in return. Boston desires a RH shot with all of the said qualities Seabrook brings. He would be a great fit on their blue line. However, would he be a one and done guy or could the B's extend him?

Concerning other components, Marchant is an upgrade to Shaw albeit at a higher cap hit. Bickell is, well, Bickell. Freeing up his $4M would be well worth it but he has to be part of a package at this point. I think his size would be a good fit for the Bruins. He does have potential but has never quite justified his big raise. Perhaps a change of scenery would be the ticket. Panarin is a wildcard. He could be great but the Hawks already have Kane and Teravainen who play similar games from the wing. Between him and Bickell, at least one of them should be able to help shore up the LW for Boston. Recently re-signed, the big bodied RH McQuaid comes at less than half the cost of Seabrook, and could play well with Daley on the Hawks third pair. (I also meant to include Boston's 2nd pick in '16 or '17 as well.)

I absolutely agree that Seabrook is great Chicago Blackhawk. Losing him would be huge. So it is imperative Bowman has a plan as well as a backup while he considers the future. The bottom line is the hard cap. It has become apparent the Hawks seem to "lose" whenever a noteworthy trade is made recently. Other GMs know the Hawks situation and can get away with low balling a deal. An exception may be the Saad/Columbus trade although losing Paliotta (and subsequently Johns to Dallas) has thinned out that type of dman considerably. This is one reason why I suggest trading Seabs because I simply do not think he can be re-signed.

Making a substantial trade includes a very small window of opportunity in many cases. It should work for both teams. It may not make sense or be popular at the time but sometimes a trade like this just needs to be completed, like it or not.

So was the Sharp-Johns trade.

I agree with your sentiment that a big contract needs to be moved sooner rather than later, but I think the Hawks will do everything in their power to re-sign Seabrook to a reasonable deal that will keep him in the Indianhead for life (i.e. Keith, Toews, Hossa, etc.). I'm not the type of Hawk fan that has blinders on and I completely understand the difficult situation they are currently in with the cap, but I find it very hard to believe that Seabrook would be a trade candidate moving forward.

I'd imagine if they were having a good season, and really pushing the envelope come deadline time, that Seabrook would not be moved prior to another playoff run. At that point, you're looking at moving his rights before July 1, in which most cases, teams get a much lesser return, as there's no guarantee they will sign with the acquiring team. I have a hard time believing that happens.

If Bickell can't be moved, and the cap doesn't go up by a fair amount next offseason, then I'd look to Bowman moving another big contract: Corey Crawford. I'll be the first one to admit how stellar Crawford has been for this team over the last several seasons. His value, right now, has to be the highest it'll ever be, and a good season next year will only solidify that. If the Blackhawks brass sees improvement out of Scott Darling, on top of what he already showed in glimpses last year, then I could definitely see Crawford being near the top of Stan's list of possible contracts to be dealt.

Moving Crawford now would be a mistake, but if Darling convinces Hawks management that he can be a #1 NHL goaltender, I wouldn't be surprised to see it happen after next year. In my opinion, that would be the more likely scenario if a big contract were to be moved.

Obviously a lot can change between now and then, and while I agree inevitably a big contract will be moved, something tells me that Bowman and Co. will do whatever it takes to lock up #7.

As of right now, the Hawks have 23 guys signed (15 forwards -- no Kruger, 6 dmen and 2 goalies) yet are $1.15M over the cap limit. The same boat as they were in last off season when SB finally dealt Leddy for next to nothing besides compliance. Most everybody here buries Tropp and Morin which frees up about $1.4M but still doesn't allow for a 7th dman to be on the active roster. Bowman will most likely trade Shaw before October and call up perhaps Svedberg or Pokka. Hartman could fill Shinpads role effectively this season, and then deal with Seabrook one way or another at some point.

At 31 years old, does Seabrook take a long term (5-8 years) at his current rate or below? Is that really what is best for the team going forward? You mention Crawford and his value being at its highest with a very strong season as a trade candidate. That is where they were with Sharp last summer yet chose to keep him for one more year. Had they found a suitor then, most likely Saad is still a Hawk. Honestly, I can't really see a team Crow would waive his NMC for and leave Chicago. When I suggest trading number seven, it is because he actually could be, clause-wise, not to mention other teams would actually give full return if such a deal was completed now. Again, he is very special and even unique to the Hawks.

Saying all this, the decision could go either way.

I don't think the Bruins are taking on that kind of salary. They just got out of a cap hell of their own.

And good for them for being proactive.