Bowman deftly managing cap troubles

BiscuitintheBasket

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
May 15, 2010
Posts:
3,802
Liked Posts:
0
http://msn.foxsports.com/nhl/story/hock ... ure-070210



[quote name="Ken Campbell of The Hockey News"]

One of the things that became clear through the days leading up to free agency, and the first day of it, was that Stan Bowman gets it.



It might be years before we know whether the Chicago Blackhawks made a horrific mistake by firing Dale Tallon last summer. He’s a great guy and he made some very good moves in building the Blackhawks' roster, but let’s face it: Chicago accelerated the building program by getting star players, at No. 1 and No. 3, in two successive drafts. And they only did that because they were lucky enough and bad enough to be in that position.



However, Blackhawks fans can take comfort in the fact that the team’s ownership made a terrific choice in Bowman, who has earned his stripes as GM with his handling of the Blackhawks as they waded through their salary cap problems.



(By the way, the Blackhawks are not victims of the salary cap, as they’ve been portrayed in some corners. To suggest the Blackhawks are victims of an economic system to which all 30 teams are subject is preposterous. If the Blackhawks are victims of anything, it’s long-term, big-money contracts they had the freedom not to give. The salary cap in the NHL is victimizing nobody. The teams wanted it, they got it.)



Has Bowman traded away good players? Of course he has. And they were the kind of depth players who often provide the difference in a playoff series. But Bowman had no choice in the matter. There was absolutely no doubt he was going to have to subtract from his roster, something that was made even more pressing when Jonathan Toews won the Conn Smythe Trophy as playoff MVP and his $1.3 million bonus had to be carried over to next season.



But perhaps by necessity, Bowman has come to realize that cap space is an asset that can be just as valuable as a scoring winger. You could argue that Bowman got almost nothing in return for Dustin Byfuglien, Brent Sopel, Ben Eager, Andrew Ladd, Colin Fraser and Kris Versteeg — and that wouldn’t exactly be true — but what Bowman got was some breathing room with his cap situation. What he acquired in return were assets that, with the exception of Marty Reasoner and Viktor Stalberg, won’t cost him anything in the short term.



Bowman wasn’t forced to take anyone’s junk or a bad contract in return. He made the best of an impossible situation and managed to get a lot more in return than expected, while hardly dealing from a position of strength. Let’s not forget that Jeremy Morin, who was part of the Byfuglien deal, scored 47 goals for the Kitchener Rangers last season. Chris DiDomenico, part of the Versteeg deal with the Toronto Maple Leafs, was an integral member of Canada’s gold medal-winning world junior team in 2009 and, despite having last season derailed by a gruesome broken leg, scored 22 points in 12 regular-season games before adding 21 in 14 playoff games in the Quebec League.



And the best part is that both are probably at least a year from being factors in the Blackhawks' salary cap situation.



There is still work to do in Chicago, but Bowman’s calm and effective handling of the situation leaves little doubt he’ll do the right things and the Blackhawks will be fine. And the sooner teams come to grips with this reality, the better off they will be.



For years now, NFL teams have been cutting star players loose and nobody bats an eye. That’s because doing that is a reality in the NFL, something the NHL is starting to grasp. When the Tampa Bay Lightning was exploring trading Vincent Lecavalier, people seemed to get hung up on the fact that the Lightning wasn’t getting equal value in return. But what it would have received was some relief from a long-term, big-money contract that its business model couldn’t support.



Stan Bowman gets that.

[/quote]
 

Guest

Guest
I have to agree and say so far Stan has done a very good job. Those assets could be integral in the future success of the Blackhawks. What he does from here until Oct 7th will be interesting.



He still needs to come to agreement with Niemi and Hjarlmarsson, while now needing to either use one or two of these new "assets" along with those already here, or decide if there are lesser expensive, better options, available still at UFA.



I'm kind of surprised how well hes done so far.
 

Chief Walking Stick

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
May 12, 2010
Posts:
47,886
Liked Posts:
26,375
[quote name="R K"]I have to agree and say so far Stan has done a very good job. Those assets could be integral in the future success of the Blackhawks. What he does from here until Oct 7th will be interesting.



He still needs to come to agreement with Niemi and Hjarlmarsson, while now needing to either use one or two of these new "assets" along with those already here, or decide if there are lesser expensive, better options, available still at UFA.



I'm kind of surprised how well hes done so far.[/quote]



Do you think there is any chance either of them could go? I don't know enough about RFAs.
 

Guest

Guest
To be honest I think if either were getting offers they'd already have them. It would surprise me if they did actually have offers and the media has not had a wiff of it. Like Rozner shooting some long and drawn out argument blaming Tallon or something.



I'm pretty confident and going to trust Bowman in what he says. He's been pretty straight forward so far. He said, "Neither are going anywhere". Now at what cost is the question. I'm quite sure both players would like to remain in Chicago and defend their title, or have a chance to win it again. Verses going to a team that may or may not have a legit shot at being successful.
 

Maiden

New member
Joined:
May 15, 2010
Posts:
1,148
Liked Posts:
0
[quote name="R K"]To be honest I think if either were getting offers they'd already have them. It would surprise me if they did actually have offers and the media has not had a wiff of it. Like Rozner shooting some long and drawn out argument blaming Tallon or something.



I'm pretty confident and going to trust Bowman in what he says. He's been pretty straight forward so far. He said, "Neither are going anywhere". Now at what cost is the question. I'm quite sure both players would like to remain in Chicago and defend their title, or have a chance to win it again. Verses going to a team that may or may not have a legit shot at being successful.[/quote]



The way teams are throwing around money for defensemen who have less ability that #4 I'm starting to wonder what the number will be. Luckily for the Hawks Hammer has no arbitration rights so its either the Hawks offer, another teams offer we have to match or take the picks, or he sits out.
 

MassHavoc

Moderator
Staff member
Joined:
May 14, 2010
Posts:
17,840
Liked Posts:
2,547
I think that one minor problem around here is that some people construe the love for Tallon as hatred for Bowman. I don't think to many people actually hate bowman (except maybe the die hards who see his stabbing Tallon in the back as solely his doing) and wish for him to fail. In the end he is the GM and we all hope that he quickly proves himself to be a top five GM in the league. He's got the pedigree, let's hope he shows it. So far, I'll give him a "not horrible" and that's only because it's too soon to tell how any of the players he got back will turn out.
 

Guest

Guest
I dislike him because I feel he stabbed Dale in the back at the hand of Mcdonough, but that in no way correlates to wanting him to fail. I hope he has complete success. So far he's gotten huge return in a time other teams/GM's knew we were Cap screwed.



Not to mention shedding Barker and getting return for him earlier in anticipation of what was to come.
 

fanof19

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
May 15, 2010
Posts:
801
Liked Posts:
0
I don't think anyone sees his stabbing Tallon in the back as solely his doing. Only time will tell if he is a good GM. Just because his father was a good coach doesn't mean he will be a good GM. The lucky sperm club doesn't work that way. On a personal level, I think he's a piece of shit. That doesn't mean I hate him nor want to see him fail...but if he does, I hope he takes McDonough down with him.
 

Guest

Guest
[quote name="fanof19"]I don't think anyone sees his stabbing Tallon in the back as solely his doing. Only time will tell if he is a good GM. Just because his father was a good coach doesn't mean he will be a good GM. The lucky sperm club doesn't work that way. On a personal level, I think he's a piece of shit. That doesn't mean I hate him nor want to see him fail...but if he does, I hope he takes McDonough down with him.[/quote]





You should know better than that by now. Mcdonough will insulate himself in some way, protecting his down fall or blame for anything.



When the 300 level posted Dudley's comments on Mcdonough the other day, implying he was directly responsible for spending what ever money the Hawks had someone posted they wanted to see another link or proof of the statement elsewhere. I just chuckled and thought to myself aren't there TWO perfect examples a little North right now. Soriano and Fuckudome?? Examples of making the "splash" when in reality it cost instead of helped?



Personally I think the Campbell signing was good and that he was coming PRE Mcdonough. The Huet signing on the other hand, not so much.
 

Larmer83

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
May 15, 2010
Posts:
991
Liked Posts:
0
Location:
Not far from 127th and Archer
Hindsight is always 20/20 when evaluating the moves of a GM. I'll look in the past and to the future with several qualifiers noted.



The acquistion of Stalberg seems decent enough. However, in a relatively short NHL career he missed 2 games in October with a concussion and 4 in December with the dreaded "upper body" injury. Does the upper body injury translate into a concussion? I'd like to think not especially when the GM was on the receiving end of Kim Johnsson.



Speaking of Johnsson, at the time of the deal I was surprised the Hawks were able to acquire a 4.8 million contract while dumping Barker's 3.1 million. At face value the deal made sense in the short run(Acquiring a UFA contract/Position upgrade) and long run(Leddy). However, there were other soon to be UFA dmen available that would have been less costly than Johnsson. Seidenburg and Leopold come to mind.



We may never know the exact breakdowns of the Kane and Toews bonus monies(Other than the 1.3 Conn Smythe) but the GM should and some of those "A" and "B" bonus amounts should be understood to be attainable at some point in the regular season. Like the fucking trade deadline.



The Hawks were on the hook for 1.48 million of Johnsson's dissapearing act. If that amount were not on the books the carryover penalty is 2.8 instead of 4.2 million. Or if a cheaper player like Seidenburg were acquired, the carryover penalty is 3.2.



Am I nitpicking? Sure. But some on this board would have torn Tallon a new asshole if he made the Johnsson deal-especially in retrospection. I'm just not quite ready to annoint Bowman the king of all salary cap knowledge.



Keep your head up Stalberg.
 

Guest

Guest
But some on this board would have torn Tallon a new asshole if he made the Johnsson deal-especially in retrospection.





I don't agree with that at all. It was a pure Salary dump and clear they were after Leddy, not Johnsson. Like you said hind sight is 20-20 so how were they supposed to know he'd suffer a concussion and not be able to play the rest of the season. I wouldn't slam Stan on that just as I wouldn't slam Bowman. Barker and his 3 mil per year were gone one way or another.



That was a very good move in getting back what could most certainly be NHL talent in Leddy. Johnsson was the by product and unfortunately couldn't even ride the bike without falling off after that game in Philly.



Johnsson in no way hurt this team cap wise as he was out. I also don't know how the LTIE stuff works and or what penalties or relief a team would get using it. I do know the Hawks did NOT use LTIE for some reason.



As far as who was available at the time it's rather easy for people to sit in their Chair and say this guy is available verses that guy, ect ect. You need the OTHER GM to trade. Also they really wanted Leddy and said he was on the radar from draft time.
 

Larmer83

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
May 15, 2010
Posts:
991
Liked Posts:
0
Location:
Not far from 127th and Archer
[quote name="R K"]But some on this board would have torn Tallon a new asshole if he made the Johnsson deal-especially in retrospection.





I don't agree with that at all. It was a pure Salary dump and clear they were after Leddy, not Johnsson. Like you said hind sight is 20-20 so how were they supposed to know he'd suffer a concussion and not be able to play the rest of the season. I wouldn't slam Stan on that just as I wouldn't slam Bowman. Barker and his 3 mil per year were gone one way or another.



That was a very good move in getting back what could most certainly be NHL talent in Leddy. Johnsson was the by product and unfortunately couldn't even ride the bike without falling off after that game in Philly.



Johnsson in no way hurt this team cap wise as he was out. I also don't know how the LTIE stuff works and or what penalties or relief a team would get using it. I do know the Hawks did NOT use LTIE for some reason.[/quote]

The Hawks could not know with certainty that Johnsson would get concussed in Philly. They did know with certainty that he had a long history of concussion issues.

http://tsn.ca/nhl/teams/players/bio/?id ... ubname=nhl

To say that in no way did he hurt the Hawks capwise is not true. With the Hawks having only 300K in actual salary space available under the cap in 2009-10, any bonus over the 300K is deducted the following year.
 

Guest

Guest
[quote name="Larmer83"]

The Hawks could not know with certainty that Johnsson would get concussed in Philly. They did know with certainty that he had a long history of concussion issues.

http://tsn.ca/nhl/teams/players/bio/?id ... ubname=nhl

To say that in no way did he hurt the Hawks capwise is not true. With the Hawks having only 300K in actual salary space available under the cap in 2009-10, any bonus over the 300K is deducted the following year.[/quote]



But you are looking at this after the fact aren't you? It's pretty easy to do that isn't it? You can't just throw out other options, not knowing if they were actually viable or not. Again the LTIE issue is in there some where as well.



As critical as I am I wouldn't have slammed either Dale or Stan for that deal. Also not knowing what "other" GMs would have offered in trade for Barker I wouldn't even go down that route because it's just not viable, rather MOOT!



I'm still not sure how it hurt cap wise either. Go to what was left on his salary, not what it was the entire year.



As for the Concussion issue, the only word you have to use is Eager.
 

Larmer83

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
May 15, 2010
Posts:
991
Liked Posts:
0
Location:
Not far from 127th and Archer
[quote name="R K"]



But you are looking at this after the fact aren't you? It's pretty easy to do that isn't it? You can't just throw out other options, not knowing if they were actually viable or not. Again the LTIE issue is in there some where as well.



As critical as I am I wouldn't have slammed either Dale or Stan for that deal. Also not knowing what "other" GMs would have offered in trade for Barker I wouldn't even go down that route because it's just not viable, rather MOOT!



I'm still not sure how it hurt cap wise either. Go to what was left on his salary, not what it was the entire year.



As for the Concussion issue, the only word you have to use is Eager.[/quote]

All of this is easy after the fact. My point is that the article used to start the thread is getting ahead of the curve with statement such as...

However, Blackhawks fans can take comfort in the fact that the team’s ownership made a terrific choice in Bowman, who has earned his stripes as GM with his handling of the Blackhawks as they waded through their salary cap problems.
 

Guest

Guest
I think the article is pointing out that he did not get strong armed, by other teams knowing what dire straights the Hawks were in, and could have possibly gotten some great return.



Going in there were quotes out there from other GM's stating the Hawks were asking far to much for their players. Well, I'm pretty satisfied with the return in players and picks that came flowing back.



I feel safe in saying "so far" Stan has done a pretty good job. Far to early to say what type of GM he'll be, but I didn't get that out of the article myself.
 

fanof19

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
May 15, 2010
Posts:
801
Liked Posts:
0
the jury is out on Bowman's ability for a while. why don't we all take a breath and watch how/what he does.
 

Guest

Guest
By far it's out, but he's done a good job so far. Long way to go for the guy that walked up coat tails to get his job. You have to earn respect from your peers and I'm not sure how long that will take due to the way he attained is position. What transpired before him taking the job is most certainly known by the rest of the GM Brotherhood. No doubt about it.



And Tallons legacy will pan out here soon with these draft picks up to this point. Lalonde, Beach, Olson, Carlson, Kruguer. Next couple of years are still Talons draft wise. Least until Bowmans class is ready down the road.
 

Top