• Sparky_The_Barbarian

    If I were Stan, I’d be leery of trading prospects. We have some damned good ones and the return just isn’t there unless we traded for a big name, and then we couldn’t fit him under the cap. Standing pat may be the best strategy.

    • Preacher

      I like trading future draft picks rather than current players. But then I suppose you can only expect getting back guys who are older and in the last year of their contracts and probably not the biggest names. You know, like Handzus.

    • zacked

      I think all GM’s should be leary of trading prospects. The way many GMs treat all prospects as fungible is a classic sign of terrible management. You treat each prospect on his own merits, and where he fits in your team.

      Thaaaat said, I think Stan is going to have to move some pieces this summer. From the second they re-signed Sharp, the ‘hawks have had zero roster flexibility, with basically the entire team locked up for years. Unless roster players are moved before then, they have only 2 3rd line and 2 4th line spots opening up in the next two years, and only 1 D-man. There just isn’t anywhere to play for most of the prospects, so you shouldn’t hoard them until their value is all gone.

      I’m gonna miss Bickell and his 50 cent contract. But he deserves to get paid.

      • MySpoonIsTooBig

        Handzus is above 50% at the dot for his career. Bolland, Shaw, and Kruger are all below 46% for the season (Shaw and Kruger don’t really have past performances to draw from, but that number isn’t exactly abnormally low for Bolland’s career). Patrick Sharp can win draws but Q has seemed reluctant to use him at the dot, and the only other ‘Hawk who can win even close to half of his draws is Mayers but he can’t actually play hockey otherwise at this point in his career. If you don’t think that, right now, Handzus is a considerable upgrade over Mayers at all facets of the game you’re nuts.

        • zacked

          Let’s say Handzus is a true-talent 51% faceoff guy, which is optimistic, and Shaw is 43%. Shaw gets about 10 FOs a game. Give Handzus all Shaw’s draws and the hawks win 1 more draw a game (really 0.8).

          All I’m saying is IF they got him for his FO ability, like is mentioned in most of the news articles, that’s a really dumb move, it’s not like he’s Toews at the dot, he’s just a guy. And if he’s a replacement for Mayers, well he’s significantly worse as a FOGO, and Mayers should be cut.

          • MySpoonIsTooBig

            Mayers could be waived with the acquisition of Handzus, but he won’t be because at this point in time it would be pointless. They don’t need the salary cap space – they’ve got plenty, and his cap hit is so small anyways – and post trade deadline there is no longer a 23-man roster limit.

            And it’s not just Shaw’s draws that will get handed over. The acquisition of Handzus means that the only reason that Shaw, Kruger, or Bolland should have to take a d-zone draw again this season is if they’re out there for an icing. That will have a bigger impact than you’re giving it credit for, IMO

      • lizmcneill

        We have a 2C spot!! Ahem.

        Bolly and Carbomb are UFAs next year, Fro and Shaw are RFAs, and a couple of months ago no one knew Saad had a LW spot on the roster sewn up. So we might have more roster spots than it looks like, but in the main I agree. We have more potential 3rd and 4th liners in Rockford than we have space to play them. Some of those kids are 22 or 23 (not much younger than Toews and Kane), they could see NHL time on a less deep team, is it fair to them either to hang on to them just in case?

        • MySpoonIsTooBig

          To be fair, virtually every team other than the Penguins would like an upgrade at 2C

          • lizmcneill

            This is true. The Pens actually have two 1Cs and their 2C was playing on the third line until he went to the Hurricanes. Imagine if they’d picked the actual best center in the 2006 draft…

    • MySpoonIsTooBig

      Leddy will get paid, but there is very little (if any) worry that it won’t be by the ‘Hawks. He’ll be RFA, not UFA, and I’m pretty sure he’s not experienced enough to have arbitration rights (the team could still request arbitration, but he can’t). I would expect him to get a contract similar to Subban’s – a healthy, but not unreasonable, raise on a bridge contract that only goes for 2-4 years so that he’s still RFA when it expires.

      • Country_Bumpkin

        I can’t fathom how the Hawks won’t resign Leddy long-term. Eventually the veteran D-men will begin to age and will need to be replaced. Keeping Leddy to anchor the defense of the future is very important.

        • MySpoonIsTooBig

          long-term will be waaaaaay to expensive with the cap coming down next season. A 2-4 year contract, where he’s still RFA when it expires, makes the most sense. It’s a “show-me” contract to ensure that the improvement he’s shown this year has been no flash-in-the-pan, and the cap should go up enough in the ensuing years that (assuming he earns it) the ‘Hawks can sign him to a real long-term contract extension at its end without having to worry about his testing the market since he’ll be RFA not UFA

          • Country_Bumpkin

            I would agree with a 2-4 year contract. There does need to be a larger sample size, but from what I have seen this season is impressive.

          • MySpoonIsTooBig

            Completely agree, kid skates like the wind and you just can’t teach that

          • lizmcneill

            I think he’ll be a UFA after 2016-7, so 2 or 3 years makes sense, as long as his agent doesn’t go for broke now. Even in that case I could see the hawks signing him for slightly longer and dealing with the UFA when it happens (it’s what they did with Toews and Kane, after all).

          • MySpoonIsTooBig

            I believe you are correct. A player goes from restricted to unrestricted after either 7 years in the NHL or at age 27, whichever comes first. Leddy won’t be 27 until 2018, but this is his 3rd season in the NHL which means that after 4 more seasons (after the 2016-17 season as you point out) he’ll be UFA and not RFA at the end of any contract. So scratch my “2-4″ year contract idea and make it 2-3 years if they want him to still be RFA when his next contract is up. It’s possible that they could sign him for slightly longer and take him into UFA, particularly if that brings the price tag down a bit, but who knows

        • Waylon

          That kid ain’t going nowhere – he’s still a textbook example of Stan’s larceny via trade so far, and Stan knew about him way back when.

        • Tyler Simmons

          If they can get him for anything better than 2 years, $2.5m cap hit, it’s a win for the Hawks

  • Preacher

    Ah, that Hawks team from the first lockout season…..I was at Eric Daze’s first NHL game. In fact, it was MY first live game, having only watched the Hawks on TV before that. My girlfriend was wearing the brand new Chelios jersey I gave her for her birthday and on the first Hawks’ goal, the guy next to her spilled beer on her jersey. It was like being baptized into Hawks’ fandom. I’ve got the Blue Line and a game program from that game. That jersey still hangs in my closet. And the girl is still around too. She’s now mother to our six children. Ah, the sweet memories. Here’s looking to more to come at the end of THIS season!

    • Paul the Fossil

      Will you bring little Stanley to the parade?