He's 36. Under contract until he's 40. He's declining. But after what I just saw from your PK offer, I guess there's just no point.

This trade was also just a joke just like pk subban trade.

Disagree that he is declining... but most people only look at his age and assume so whatever.

The team declined by a 58 goal differential from 16-17 to 17-18
Keith declined by a + - of 51 in that span.
Seabrook for example declined by 8

So either Keith was on the ice for 60 min a game and Seabrook didn't play. (obviously not true)
+ - is an incorrect stat. (it is, but only when compared with people on other teams in other systems, not internally)
Or you're wrong.

Chicago got bad, it doesn’t all fall on one player. Every single player from Chicago’s core took a dip in +- when we started sucking.

I’m not sure I’m understanding your argument as well, your comparing stats from 16-17 and 17-18 when there have been two additional seasons since those stats were relevant. In those two seasons he was +13 in the first season and +1 in this past one. (Again on really bad teams where he hadn’t had a stable partner since hammer)

You also are discounting the ATOI of Keith and Seabrook, which makes a big difference in +-… mainly Keith playing almost 5 more minutes per game.

I won’t pretend to be an advanced stats expert, but his normal stats look fine, still putting up decent offensive numbers and has had a - plus minus twice in his career. (The dark days and 2017-18)

Again, I don’t think he has/ or is declining (in a significant way to make him a cap dump for example), but keep looking at 2 year old stats I guess?

Chicago got bad. which I referenced. It doesnt fall on one player. Which is why I used another player for reference. Everyone took a dip. Which is why I used a comparable. If you think 5 min more a game equates to -51 vs -8 difference, you're an idiot.

There have been two seasons since which are fine in comparison to 17-18 but show a SIGNIFICANT DROP from their good seasons. But I didn't know you needed all three seasons or you would try to invalidate.

I will pretend to be an advanced stat expert and the more advanced you get it does get slightly better for Keith but it doesn't catch back up to his previous numbers. He declined more than the team did on average from 16-17 through the last three years.

I also don't think he's a cap dump. I'm not comparing him to PK. The poster was just such an idiot I decided not to bother. Keith is fine, but I do not compare Keith now to Keith from 5 years ago because there is a decline. Decent Keith instead of stud Keith is not worth this package in the slightest. but keep ignoring trends I guess?

I will go ahead and reiterate (and elaborate) my previous posts because you seem to be misunderstanding what I am saying. This will be my last word on this, because frankly I don’t think it’s worth the effort, when you are probably going to keep pulling things out of your arse to argue about. (See random plus minus comparison, only pulling stats from one bad season, and general hubris on your part with the name calling)
I don’t disagree with you that his trade value is anywhere near the hypothetical value of the proposed WPG trade. I did however say that I disagreed with the idea that he was declining, at least in the traditional sense that most people mean when they say this . This is not to say that he hasn’t declined since the Blackhawks cup winning days of course, just that he isnt declining currently... At least in the seasons after the bottom fell out. (He has been pretty consistent and good in those seasons)

Part of the teams fall from grace can be attributed to his inability to carry the scrubs we put out with him during the past couple of years... and the inability of the Blackhawks to produce solid goaltending in 2017-18 (Anton Forsburg & JF Berube we’re our starters for most of the year HA!) or a solid D partner since Hjalmarsson are primary factors that contributed to his stats also decreasing.

In your initial post, which again I agree with for the most part, it appeared that you gave his age and contract status as a primary reason why he was declining. For the reasons I have stated I don’t believe this is the case, and do think he would be an effective number 3/4 d-man on a decent team.

In your second post you compared Keith and Seabrooks stats from a couple years ago, and In all honesty I’m not sure why. Other than them being big names in Chicago’s cup runs, both being defenseman, and both playing under Q they are not similar players in usage or play style.

Again, Keith playing first pairing minutes against the other teams best players while Seabrook plays third pair minutes against the other teams lesser players (and Seabrooks more defensive play style) I do think Keith’s - 29 vs Seabrooks -3 in those games are accounted for.

Again, my point is that context is important, and looking at only his age, contract status, and seasons with a bad chicago team does not tell the full story.

I think most teams in the league would love to have a player like Keith on their team, and he would probably make top four on a lot of them

I started reading. Then I stopped. You're a troll anyway. B- attempts.