- Joined:
- May 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 13,392
- Liked Posts:
- 5,207
Yeah, I wish they'd just make the guy a decent offer. He's earned it.
Yeah, I wish they'd just make the guy a decent offer. He's earned it.
HawkWriter
New member
- Joined:
- Aug 18, 2011
- Posts:
- 3,491
- Liked Posts:
- 1,341
As I stated, just about 5 or so posts before this one, the Blackhawks and Kruger have a deal in place but have to wait for things to sort out. So, there is no reason to worry about making a decent offer or an offer sheet. There is a reason why he hasn't accepted an offer sheet and why he didn't go to arbitration. Kruger is doing the Blackhawks a huge favor here by waiting to secure his future.
- Joined:
- May 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 13,392
- Liked Posts:
- 5,207
Sorry, I missed that post.
HawkWriter
New member
- Joined:
- Aug 18, 2011
- Posts:
- 3,491
- Liked Posts:
- 1,341
No worries. Unfortunately, with the Kane situation, this may play out longer than the Blackhawks want it to. Luckily, I believe that Kruger will be able to attend camp with the Blackhawks, even if the deal isn't official by then. I could be wrong on that, but the Blackhawks still currently have his "rights" basically. Less than 30 days left before the Blackhawks have to figure out this mess, one way or another.
ClydeLee
New member
- Joined:
- Jun 29, 2010
- Posts:
- 14,829
- Liked Posts:
- 4,113
- Location:
- The OP
They were a month or more back but the reports were the Hawks had a tentative deal with Kruger done... but they were waiting to see if they could move future cap space.
I think it pretty much summed up to, can we move Bickell and what/how much in return would we have to take the subsequent year? If Bickell is moved I think Kruger re-signs the multiple year deal. If they can't move Bickell but have to just move Steeger or Shaw, something like that. Then I think it'll just be a 1 year deal because they don't want to lock up more salary for that point so they can re-sign Seabrook.
I think it pretty much summed up to, can we move Bickell and what/how much in return would we have to take the subsequent year? If Bickell is moved I think Kruger re-signs the multiple year deal. If they can't move Bickell but have to just move Steeger or Shaw, something like that. Then I think it'll just be a 1 year deal because they don't want to lock up more salary for that point so they can re-sign Seabrook.
DMelt36
Bolland > You
- Joined:
- May 27, 2010
- Posts:
- 13,969
- Liked Posts:
- 8,434
May get some more clarity on the Kruger situation this weekend, if Zawaski's source is right.
- Joined:
- Jun 6, 2010
- Posts:
- 15,741
- Liked Posts:
- 7,308
- Location:
- NW Burbs
If they are able to trade Bigfoot or Versteeg, something shitty will be coming back.
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 8,781
- Liked Posts:
- 5,604
Bro I don't want to go to a different team.
DMelt36
Bolland > You
- Joined:
- May 27, 2010
- Posts:
- 13,969
- Liked Posts:
- 8,434
At this point, I'd rather have the salary cap space than either of those two players.
ClydeLee
New member
- Joined:
- Jun 29, 2010
- Posts:
- 14,829
- Liked Posts:
- 4,113
- Location:
- The OP
There are some teams that need forwards and can easily take them cap wise still with their roster. The Devils are a particularly well fitting case of this.
But I might think it could be Shaw if it really is a pure salary move. But him being replaced by Hartman is merely a 1.1Mil cap save and not nearly as significant if they can ship Steeger.
- Joined:
- Jun 6, 2010
- Posts:
- 15,741
- Liked Posts:
- 7,308
- Location:
- NW Burbs
I don't see Shaw going anywhere.
- Joined:
- Aug 23, 2012
- Posts:
- 22,527
- Liked Posts:
- 7,553
- Location:
- Enemy Territory via southern C
The other two deals were disguised salary dumps, though we got valuable stuff back for Saad we still had to pay to make the deal happen.
I don't think we even can expect something shitty if Bickell or Versteeg go...in essence someone from the farm must be used to PAY teams to take our deal.
With Sharp it was Johns that was needed to balance the deal. The young defenseman we sent with Saad was also payment to swing the deal and get Dano back. They needed to dump Anisimov due to center depth anyway.
I don't think we even can expect something shitty if Bickell or Versteeg go...in essence someone from the farm must be used to PAY teams to take our deal.
With Sharp it was Johns that was needed to balance the deal. The young defenseman we sent with Saad was also payment to swing the deal and get Dano back. They needed to dump Anisimov due to center depth anyway.
HawkWriter
New member
- Joined:
- Aug 18, 2011
- Posts:
- 3,491
- Liked Posts:
- 1,341
The only pure salary dump that makes sense, in my eyes, is Bickell and his $4m cap hit. I would roll the dice on Versteeg at $2.2mil caphit since you will have replace him with a below average player that is making around $1mil anyways and Versteeg has shown that he can play top 6 and an effective top 9 role at times. Of course, he does have a tendency to disappear at times but with the makeup of the team and the cap crunch, I think he is worth the risk.
I'm against getting rid of Shaw ($2m cap hit) in anything that isn't a "hockey" trade and Hartman definitely needs some time in the AHL. I know he had an exciting first shift and first game, but after that he was badly overmatched when it came to speed/size. If he keeps playing his game though he can certainly be a guy that the Blackhawks look to down the line.
I'm against getting rid of Shaw ($2m cap hit) in anything that isn't a "hockey" trade and Hartman definitely needs some time in the AHL. I know he had an exciting first shift and first game, but after that he was badly overmatched when it came to speed/size. If he keeps playing his game though he can certainly be a guy that the Blackhawks look to down the line.
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 8,781
- Liked Posts:
- 5,604
If I had my choice it would be Steeger. Would not get rid of Shaw.
ClydeLee
New member
- Joined:
- Jun 29, 2010
- Posts:
- 14,829
- Liked Posts:
- 4,113
- Location:
- The OP
Other people brought up it could be multiple pieces like one of Morin/Tropp as well. I almost forgot they existed and there is several guys in that bottom range. I could see getting rid of Versteeg and it helping Morin actually get a 2nd shot for legitimately playing on the roster as a 13th forward type.
DMelt36
Bolland > You
- Joined:
- May 27, 2010
- Posts:
- 13,969
- Liked Posts:
- 8,434
Steeger's gone, as is Nordstrom.
DMelt36
Bolland > You
- Joined:
- May 27, 2010
- Posts:
- 13,969
- Liked Posts:
- 8,434
Per General Fanager, this gives the Hawks $4.6 million in cap space now.
- Joined:
- Jun 6, 2010
- Posts:
- 15,741
- Liked Posts:
- 7,308
- Location:
- NW Burbs
So Kruger should be signing in the very near future.
- Joined:
- Dec 9, 2013
- Posts:
- 13,107
- Liked Posts:
- 4,276
I like this move. Got rid of some dead weight (face it, Nordstrom did very little here and Versteeg in his 2nd stint here wasn't much better), cleared some salary cap room and got a draft pick and a couple of prospects.
HawkWriter
New member
- Joined:
- Aug 18, 2011
- Posts:
- 3,491
- Liked Posts:
- 1,341
They got a 5th round draft pick after giving up a 3rd though, so hard to say it is a positive that they got a draft pick. Not the greatest hockey deal here as both prospects aren't close to NHL ready and probably a good chance that they may never be, but obviously one that had to be made in order to clear some cap space. Very surprised that Bickell couldn't be dealt in some way, but maybe teams just wanted the Blackhawks to add in too much. Hopefully Bickell can have a real nice bounce back season...it will be needed.