Kris Versteeg traded to Toronto Maple Leafs

ClydeLee

New member
Joined:
Jun 29, 2010
Posts:
14,829
Liked Posts:
4,113
Location:
The OP
Indeed, sadly if the Steeger incident didn't happen he wouldn't have to be traded but it can work out both ways. I liked him but he wasn't any of my favorite or that big of a peice to be untouchable.

They were already under the cap... but with multiple positions unfilled and the Huet cutting wouldn't be the end all be all move to help them out more. They want to still be a strong in depth team, keeping Steegers contract makes that harder because they can't fill those spots with talent. Even some of those rockford boys like Bickell and Skille are contractless at the moment.
 

CHAD0034

Cubs/Blackhawks
Joined:
May 28, 2010
Posts:
457
Liked Posts:
95
Location:
Chicago, IL
Son of a *****....this wreaks of Hawks going cheap and not buying out Huet. If thats the case, Im hugely disappointed in the franchise. I believe that they were already under the cap if they pulled the plug on Huet and ate the contract. With all the money they're taking in, this is a step back in time to the Dollar Bill era.

Buff trade=fully understandable

Steeger trade=mysteriously stupid
Haha I like the "mysteriously stupid" quote in this.

I find it somewhat understandable, but I dislike, currently, who they got back. hopefully I'll eat those words someday.

Read up on Paradis, he's probably going to end up as the best player we got out of this deal.
Hmmm will have to do. I've personally never heard of the guy. Than again, I hate Toronto hockey with a passion.
 

Severz

New member
Joined:
Jun 12, 2010
Posts:
81
Liked Posts:
30
Son of a *****....this wreaks of Hawks going cheap and not buying out Huet. If thats the case, Im hugely disappointed in the franchise. I believe that they were already under the cap if they pulled the plug on Huet and ate the contract. With all the money they're taking in, this is a step back in time to the Dollar Bill era.

I would almost guarantee that they do not buy out Huet for the fact that a percentage of his contract will still count against the cap. In fact Rocky will allow Stan to throw him in Rockford for the entire year and eat the 5+ million coming to him. Stan Bowman has already stated something will be done with Huet. Please read up on the issues before you wet yourself. Rocky has the highest paid front office and knows money invested into the Blackhawks returns itself 10-fold.
 

CHAD0034

Cubs/Blackhawks
Joined:
May 28, 2010
Posts:
457
Liked Posts:
95
Location:
Chicago, IL
I would almost guarantee that they do not buy out Huet for the fact that a percentage of his contract will still count against the cap. In fact Rocky will allow Stan to throw him in Rockford for the entire year and eat the 5+ million coming to him. Stan Bowman has already stated something will be done with Huet. Please read up on the issues before you wet yourself. Rocky has the highest paid front office and knows money invested into the Blackhawks returns itself 10-fold.
haha nice, and true. They have said that Huet will not be back in Chicago this season. Not meaning he won't sit his ass in Rockford the entire season.

That will be interesting though, being a Rockford resident. I used to have season tickets. I wish I still did, so I could remind Huet of how terrible a goalie he is in person.
 

Capt. Serious

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 17, 2010
Posts:
19,670
Liked Posts:
6,438
Location:
Chicago
Son of a *****....this wreaks of Hawks going cheap and not buying out Huet. If thats the case, Im hugely disappointed in the franchise. I believe that they were already under the cap if they pulled the plug on Huet and ate the contract. With all the money they're taking in, this is a step back in time to the Dollar Bill era.

Buff trade=fully understandable

Steeger trade=mysteriously stupid

It wouldn't be stupid if Steeger was traded for "established" NHLer's.
 

Captain Iago

Giver of Occular Proof
Donator
Joined:
May 24, 2010
Posts:
5,905
Liked Posts:
1,974
It wouldn't be stupid if Steeger was traded for "established" NHLer's.

Joe, take a step back and look a little more level headed at this. This was a move to free up some more money. The problem with "established" NHLers is that they make more money. I imagine this frees up around 2 more million as Stalberg might make around a million.

Bowman was bluffing when he announced that he didn't "need to make any more trades." It was his way of trying to drive up the price of Versteeg. Now that we're at the eleventh hour, maybe Bowman previously undervalued the true cost of Ladd, Niemi, and Hammer.
 

Severz

New member
Joined:
Jun 12, 2010
Posts:
81
Liked Posts:
30
It wouldn't be stupid if Steeger was traded for "established" NHLer's.

I think you're missing the point of this trade and our cap situation. Established NHL players cost money and the established NHL players still on entry level contracts are very hard to trade for (meaning you would have to trade more than Steeger and Sweatt for them).

Look at it like this people, we have a very good core team that will be in place for a long time and is talented enough to keep us competitive. Along side that we have a ton of highly picked prospects and more than likely at least a few of them will work out and become essential parts of this team in the future. Most teams that win the Stanley Cup traded there prospects for established players to get to that point, we a lucky enough to be good now with a great future.
 

Diehardfan

Well-known member
Joined:
Jun 10, 2010
Posts:
9,601
Liked Posts:
6,984
Location:
Western Burbs
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
It wouldn't be stupid if Steeger was traded for "established" NHLer's.

Yeah, between a rock and a hard place there, Joe. Any NHLer will be a cap hit, Im guessing these players will be Rockford bound. Its just bothersome that if they buried Huet in Rockford thereby eating his salary, that should have given them the room to sign Ladd and still keep a usuable player in Versteeg. But who knows? Maybe they want to sign a free agent. If thats the case, it changes things but keeping Huet with the team would be inexcusable under any circumstances.
 

Captain Iago

Giver of Occular Proof
Donator
Joined:
May 24, 2010
Posts:
5,905
Liked Posts:
1,974
Read up on Paradis, he's probably going to end up as the best player we got out of this deal.

Time will tell.

I'm not monster high on Versteeg, as I was in the trade him before Buff camp, but he already is the best player in this deal and could very well continue to be the best player in this deal.
 

Captain Iago

Giver of Occular Proof
Donator
Joined:
May 24, 2010
Posts:
5,905
Liked Posts:
1,974
Oh, and these three 'spects are better than a 2nd round pick previously rumored to net Versteeg.
 

ClydeLee

New member
Joined:
Jun 29, 2010
Posts:
14,829
Liked Posts:
4,113
Location:
The OP
Time will tell.

I'm not monster high on Versteeg, as I was in the trade him before Buff camp, but he already is the best player in this deal and could very well continue to be the best player in this deal.

That is highly likely to happen. Even if Steeger is the best player in this trade, it doesn't mean it's a bad trade.

Despite what Bowman was saying, they needed more room to be able to fill out that roster with respectable parts like having a 5th or 6th Dman other than possibly LaLonde.
 

Capt. Serious

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 17, 2010
Posts:
19,670
Liked Posts:
6,438
Location:
Chicago
Yeah, between a rock and a hard place there, Joe. Any NHLer will be a cap hit, Im guessing these players will be Rockford bound. Its just bothersome that if they buried Huet in Rockford thereby eating his salary, that should have given them the room to sign Ladd and still keep a usuable player in Versteeg. But who knows? Maybe they want to sign a free agent. If thats the case, it changes things but keeping Huet with the team would be inexcusable under any circumstances.

Mind me i've had a few beers in me. :smoke:
 

southern_cross_116

New member
Joined:
May 24, 2010
Posts:
1,748
Liked Posts:
1,012
Location:
Australia
But he did it on the 3rd line!!!!1111!!11!! :D

Jeez you're right ... the second I care about a third liner's fate ... I'll start worrying about caring about a 4th liner's fate or even a guy that is a semi-regular healthy scratch's fate.... or maybe the 7th defenseman's - or possibly the water-boy's

Damn - it just seems like I have started out way too far up the expectation scale. :dunno:

___

You know - I remember a kid I knew in KC who was all gushy about their IHL team --- he thought this defenseman who played all of a year and a half or maybe it wasn't even a full season there (think his name was Berger - maybe Mike Berger) -- should have had his number retired --- seriously .... considering that this player did not die in any freak accident -it struck me as a pretty damned odd to say the least.

At any rate -all I am saying is -- perspective, is really everything. EoS.


Edited to add: It was what -- Bochenski or someone for Versteeg wasn't it? No idea... trades involving 3rd liners aren't really that exciting then or now.
 
Last edited:

BigP50

04-21-2012
Joined:
Apr 17, 2010
Posts:
7,856
Liked Posts:
548
Location:
Lincoln, Nebraska
love me some Steeger but I guess it had to happen :(
 

tbo41fan

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 26, 2010
Posts:
15,922
Liked Posts:
2,701
Location:
Chicago, IL
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Fire
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Arizona Wildcats
Bowman is not dumb....

As previously stated he was bluffing when he said they are done...

Teams knew this offseason that we were in salary cap trouble, we were at their mercy. The fact that Bowman has been able to shed the salary and receive MULTIPLE promising prospects is great. We could have gotten alot less, but Bowman not only shed salary but rebuilt the farm. He very quietly made this team alot better in the long run, he knows what it takes to be good for a very long time, not a 1 and done.
 

Top