Time To Move On

The primary issue with trading Seabrook is the contract of course. It's a lot of years at a fairly big cap hit for a player already at 32. The GM trading for him would have to believe that Seabrook is the missing piece to a Stanley Cup, and think the window will be open for a few years for them. Otherwise, why take on this potentially bad contract when one can make an equally bad contract on a younger player next off-season?
The secondary issue is, and this might be why Stan signed him to the deal, who else do they have to take on Seabrook's role as the big Dman (6'3", 220, 100+ hits & blocks)? It's great to think the contract is the problem, but isn't the real problem they're thin at the blue line?

RD, I absolutely agree with what you said in regards to Seabrook. He, like several other Hawks, has an unmovable contract for his worth. That is why the only GM who might trade for him would be Tallon. I said this at the time on another site, Seabrook would have been a better guy to trade than Sharp in '15. Stephen Johns could be a comparable defensively to Seabrook right now and at a fraction of his hit. This season, Rutta and Franson are better offensively than Seabrook, and also at a fraction of his hit. The only other recourse Chicago has now, is buying out Brent Seabrook because he will never waive NMC or retire early so the Hawks can move on from his declined performance.