SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

If Stan wasnt an idiot

Created by: Wadejos123
Team: 2020-21 Chicago Blackhawks
Initial Creation Date: Sep. 9, 2020
Published: Sep. 9, 2020
Salary Cap Mode: Basic
Free Agent Signings
RFAYEARSCAP HIT
2$3,000,000
1$3,500,000
1$1,000,000
1$2,500,000
UFAYEARSCAP HIT
6$5,000,000
Trades
1.
CHI
  1. Panarin, Artemi ($1,642,857 retained)
NYR
2.
3.
4.
CHI
    lets him walk in 2016. Would have been controversial back then, but a genius move in hind site
    5.
    CHI
      not bad enough to draft. Who knows who we end up with so I won't find a replacement
      6.
      7.
      CHI
      1. 2020 2nd round pick (CHI)
      2. 2021 3rd round pick (CHI)
      8.
      9.
      Buyouts
      DraftRound 1Round 2Round 3Round 4Round 5Round 6Round 7
      2020
      Logo of the CHI
      Logo of the PIT
      Logo of the CHI
      Logo of the CHI
      Logo of the CGY
      Logo of the CHI
      Logo of the CHI
      Logo of the CHI
      2021
      Logo of the CHI
      Logo of the CHI
      Logo of the CHI
      Logo of the CHI
      Logo of the CHI
      Logo of the CHI
      Logo of the CHI
      Logo of the MTL
      2022
      Logo of the CHI
      Logo of the CHI
      Logo of the CHI
      Logo of the CHI
      Logo of the CHI
      Logo of the CHI
      Logo of the CHI
      ROSTER SIZESALARY CAPCAP HITOVERAGES TooltipBONUSESCAP SPACE
      22$81,500,000$72,160,372$1,090,244$2,420,000$9,339,628
      Left WingCentreRight Wing
      Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
      $3,500,000$3,500,000
      LW, RW
      UFA - 2
      Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
      $10,500,000$10,500,000
      C
      NMC
      UFA - 3
      Logo of the Carolina Hurricanes
      $5,400,000$5,400,000
      LW, RW
      UFA - 4
      Logo of the New York Rangers
      $10,000,000$10,000,000
      LW
      NMC
      UFA - 6
      Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
      $3,000,000$3,000,000
      C
      UFA - 2
      Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
      $2,625,000$2,625,000
      RW
      NMC
      UFA - 3
      Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
      $6,400,000$6,400,000
      LW, RW
      UFA - 3
      Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
      $925,000$925,000 (Performance Bonus$850,000$850K)
      C, LW
      UFA - 1
      $2,500,000$2,500,000
      LW, RW, C
      UFA - 1
      Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
      $1,000,000$1,000,000
      RW, C
      UFA - 2
      Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
      $725,000$725,000
      LW, RW
      UFA - 2
      Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
      $1,000,000$1,000,000
      C
      UFA - 1
      Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender
      Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
      $5,538,462$5,538,462
      LD
      NMC
      UFA - 3
      Logo of the Buffalo Sabres
      $925,000$925,000 (Performance Bonus$637,500$638K)
      RD
      RFA - 1
      $5,000,000$5,000,000
      G
      UFA - 5
      Logo of the Washington Capitals
      $2,500,000$2,500,000
      LD
      UFA - 2
      Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
      $3,850,000$3,850,000
      RD
      UFA - 2
      Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
      $1,000,000$1,000,000
      G
      UFA - 2
      Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
      $1,000,000$1,000,000
      LD/RD
      UFA - 1
      Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
      $925,000$925,000 (Performance Bonus$850,000$850K)
      RD
      RFA - 3
      ScratchesInjured Reserve (IR)Long Term IR (LTIR)
      Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
      $880,833$880,833
      LW
      UFA - 1
      Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
      $792,500$792,500 (Performance Bonus$82,500$82K)
      LD
      RFA - 1

      Embed Code

      • To display this team on another website or blog, add this iFrame to the appropriate page
      • Customize the height attribute in the iFrame code below to fit your website appropriately. Minimum recommended: 400px.

      Text-Embed

      Click to Highlight
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:01 p.m.
      #1
      Habs for 25
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: Feb. 2017
      Posts: 1,626
      Likes: 526
      Forget about Phil Danault?
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:01 p.m.
      #2
      exo2769
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: Jul. 2015
      Posts: 15,532
      Likes: 9,572
      Quoting: BrandonMcD11
      Forget about Phil Danault?


      Nah, didn't forget. Debrincat > Danault
      Wadejos123 liked this.
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:02 p.m.
      #3
      Thread Starter
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: May 2017
      Posts: 8,184
      Likes: 4,786
      Quoting: BrandonMcD11
      Forget about Phil Danault?


      didn't forget. Debrincat is better. Plus, some moves just wouldn't be possible with the salary cap
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:03 p.m.
      #4
      Banned
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: Aug. 2020
      Posts: 1,180
      Likes: 664
      the danault trade is really important

      chicago gave up danault and a pick that became Romanov
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:03 p.m.
      #5
      Thread Starter
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: May 2017
      Posts: 8,184
      Likes: 4,786
      Quoting: lebronisdagoat
      the danault trade is really important

      chicago gave up danault and a pick that became Romanov


      hawks got DeBrincat in the end from a pick that was from MTL. Seperte moves obviously but Danault and Debricat would not both fit under the cap
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:04 p.m.
      #6
      exo2769
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: Jul. 2015
      Posts: 15,532
      Likes: 9,572
      Every GM in the world can be on this list. I like the Kempny trade....he was literally a healthy scratch for nearly half his games. If anything that's a Q thing. DeHaan had nothing to do with Turbo. That was Bickell's cap hit. Which again...why wasn't his MS diagnosed??? He only played 11 games for CAR. We also would never have been able to keep Panarin. "That's business baby"
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:04 p.m.
      #7
      Banned
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: Aug. 2020
      Posts: 1,180
      Likes: 664
      Quoting: Wadejos123
      hawks got DeBrincat


      not in the danault trade

      it was danault and a 2nd rd pick for weise and fleischmann

      debrincat was in the first andrew shaw trade

      danault has nothin to do with debrincat
      GMs liked this.
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:08 p.m.
      #8
      Thread Starter
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: May 2017
      Posts: 8,184
      Likes: 4,786
      Quoting: exo2769
      Every GM in the world can be on this list. I like the Kempny trade....he was literally a healthy scratch for nearly half his games. If anything that's a Q thing. DeHaan had nothing to do with Turbo. That was Bickell's cap hit. Which again...why wasn't his MS diagnosed??? He only played 11 games for CAR. We also would never have been able to keep Panarin. "That's business baby"


      Dehaan and Turbo we're senate deals and yes I realize that, I just swapped them here because they both were involving CAR.

      I refuse to believe that we could have not kept Panarin. We pay 18 mil to Seabrook, Dehaan, Maata, smith who effectively do just about nothing for our roster. that's not including the 6 mil from saad that would not be here had that trade not happened. We 100% could have made Panarin work.

      The three most bone headed moves of Stans career in order:
      #1- Panarin for Saad
      #2- Not extending Lehner
      #3- Turbo to dump bickell
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:09 p.m.
      #9
      LongtimeLeafsufferer
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: Jul. 2015
      Posts: 59,065
      Likes: 22,462
      You can't really say Panarin was a mistake....it was more a cap issue problem at the time. You would have to post roster year by year to make a logical analysis. Admitting I think Seabrook and DeHaan were mistakes and even the return of Shaw.
      exo2769 liked this.
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:09 p.m.
      #10
      exo2769
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: Jul. 2015
      Posts: 15,532
      Likes: 9,572
      Edited Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:23 p.m.
      Quoting: lebronisdagoat
      the danault trade is really important

      chicago gave up danault and a pick that became Romanov


      We'll see what Romanov does. This trade is an odd situation for EITHER side to say in the moment that they won. Or heck even now. Romanov hasn't played a game yet. He's a promising prospect for sure, but so are lots of kids. Danault was also and I'm dead seious when I saw this.......a TERRIBLE player for the Hawks and Hogs. So...A.) give credit to Danault for the turn around, but he SUCKED. I don't blame Bowman for trading away a 22 year old center that got 5 points in 32 NHL games and couldn't even crack a .5ppg in the AHL. Seemed like he was the definition of needed a change of scenery and he took FULL advantage of it.
      Wadejos123, mhockey91 and GMs liked this.
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:10 p.m.
      #11
      Thread Starter
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: May 2017
      Posts: 8,184
      Likes: 4,786
      Quoting: lebronisdagoat
      not in the danault trade

      it was danault and a 2nd rd pick for weise and fleischmann

      debrincat was in the first andrew shaw trade

      danault has nothin to do with debrincat


      yes I realize, I edited my comment to elaborate on that, you just beat me to the response. Point was that they were both trades made with MTL, and I can live with us getting ripped off in the daunt trade because we ended up winning big in shaw trade #1, and realistically we can't fit daunt under the cap with DeBrincat, Panarin, Turbo, etc. anyways
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:10 p.m.
      #12
      exo2769
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: Jul. 2015
      Posts: 15,532
      Likes: 9,572
      Quoting: Wadejos123
      Dehaan and Turbo we're senate deals and yes I realize that, I just swapped them here because they both were involving CAR.

      I refuse to believe that we could have not kept Panarin. We pay 18 mil to Seabrook, Dehaan, Maata, smith who effectively do just about nothing for our roster. that's not including the 6 mil from saad that would not be here had that trade not happened. We 100% could have made Panarin work.

      The three most bone headed moves of Stans career in order:
      #1- Panarin for Saad
      #2- Not extending Lehner
      #3- Turbo to dump bickell


      Disagree. #1 is Seabs contract. #2 is Bickells contract. #3 is trading Panarin for Saad.
      Wadejos123 liked this.
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:11 p.m.
      #13
      Thread Starter
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: May 2017
      Posts: 8,184
      Likes: 4,786
      Quoting: palhal
      You can't really say Panarin was a mistake....it was more a cap issue problem at the time. You would have to post roster year by year to make a logical analysis. Admitting I think Seabrook and DeHaan were mistakes and even the return of Shaw.


      I refuse to believe that we could have not kept Panarin. We pay 18 mil to Seabrook, Dehaan, Maata, smith who effectively do just about nothing for our roster. that's not including the 6 mil from saad that would not be here had that trade not happened. We 100% could have made Panarin work.
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:11 p.m.
      #14
      Good Opinion Haver
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: Jun. 2018
      Posts: 1,823
      Likes: 926
      Quoting: Wadejos123
      yes I realize, I edited my comment to elaborate on that, you just beat me to the response. Point was that they were both trades made with MTL, and I can live with us getting ripped off in the daunt trade because we ended up winning big in shaw trade #1, and realistically we can't fit daunt under the cap with DeBrincat, Panarin, Turbo, etc. anyways


      I think you don't get DeBrincat in this situation though. He was a high second round pick, which Chicago only had because they were bad that year. Unless you draft him with your first rounder, does he fall all the way to where Chicago is if they were more of a contender?
      exo2769 liked this.
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:13 p.m.
      #15
      Good Opinion Haver
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: Jun. 2018
      Posts: 1,823
      Likes: 926
      Quoting: exo2769
      Every GM in the world can be on this list. I like the Kempny trade....he was literally a healthy scratch for nearly half his games. If anything that's a Q thing. DeHaan had nothing to do with Turbo. That was Bickell's cap hit. Which again...why wasn't his MS diagnosed??? He only played 11 games for CAR. We also would never have been able to keep Panarin. "That's business baby"


      Considering Chicago was a player for Panarin last year, I don't think that's true. But even if you can't keep Panarin, why do you trade him with two years left on his contract for a worse player at the same cap hit? I get that Saad had more term but that's the definition of trying to solve a problem before it's a problem yet. You don't actively weaken your roster when you're a contender.
      exo2769 liked this.
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:15 p.m.
      #16
      Thread Starter
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: May 2017
      Posts: 8,184
      Likes: 4,786
      Quoting: TheEarthmaster
      I think you don't get DeBrincat in this situation though. He was a high second round pick, which Chicago only had because they were bad that year. Unless you draft him with your first rounder, does he fall all the way to where Chicago is if they were more of a contender?


      the pick for cat came from MTL
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:16 p.m.
      #17
      exo2769
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: Jul. 2015
      Posts: 15,532
      Likes: 9,572
      Quoting: Wadejos123
      I refuse to believe that we could have not kept Panarin. We pay 18 mil to Seabrook, Dehaan, Maata, smith who effectively do just about nothing for our roster. that's not including the 6 mil from saad that would not be here had that trade not happened. We 100% could have made Panarin work.


      The timing of those are all different though. Time changes everything. I was the guy saying Panarin was being assisted by Kane. I'll admit it. I'll also admit I was wrong...just like I was also wrong about Byram vs Dach. With that said...I don't think we could have kept Panarin. Even at $10M. That would have (pretty much) required Seabs not getting a contract.
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:17 p.m.
      #18
      exo2769
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: Jul. 2015
      Posts: 15,532
      Likes: 9,572
      Quoting: TheEarthmaster
      Considering Chicago was a player for Panarin last year, I don't think that's true. But even if you can't keep Panarin, why do you trade him with two years left on his contract for a worse player at the same cap hit? I get that Saad had more term but that's the definition of trying to solve a problem before it's a problem yet. You don't actively weaken your roster when you're a contender.


      No, I'll 100% agree with you that the return wasn't what I would have liked. I would have like a 1st round pick...aka...foudy to be part of the deal to. It's not a great trade, but I personally don't think the Hawks would have been able to keep him in just about any situation except going back to undo the Seabs trade.
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:25 p.m.
      #19
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: Jun. 2015
      Posts: 15,921
      Likes: 6,980
      Quoting: exo2769
      We'll see what Romanov does. This trade is an odd situation for EITHER side to say in the moment that they won. Or heck even now. Romanov hasn't played a game yet. He's a promising prospect for sure, but so are lots of kids. Danault was also and I'm dead seious when I saw this.......a TERRIBLE player for the Hawks and Hogs. So...A.) give credit to Danault for the turn around, but he SUCKED. I don't blame Bowman for trading away a 22 year old center that got 5 points in 32 NHL games and couldn't even crack a .5ppg in the AHL. Seemed like he was the definition of needed a change of scenery and he took FULL advantage of it.


      yup. danault didnt look like he was gonna be an NHLer at that moment. He seemed just like sorta a "throw in" in the deal. Kinda like when Tyler Biggs and Stuart Percy were included in the Kessel deal. Give danault credit though, he definitely turned things around. Would he have ever reached his ceiling in Chicago? probably not
      exo2769 liked this.
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 6:58 p.m.
      #20
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: Jul. 2019
      Posts: 14,042
      Likes: 5,158
      Quoting: mhockey91
      yup. danault didnt look like he was gonna be an NHLer at that moment. He seemed just like sorta a "throw in" in the deal. Kinda like when Tyler Biggs and Stuart Percy were included in the Kessel deal. Give danault credit though, he definitely turned things around. Would he have ever reached his ceiling in Chicago? probably not


      I think Ryan Poehling is in the same situation but with more value than Danault had. He’s always been a good 200 ft player, but now stuck being the Center depth in MTL. 21 yo, 5 points in the NHL in 28 games, 13 points in 36 AHL games. Look like Danault ( except Danault was a little bit older ) when he got traded. A team should definitely get a shot at Ryan, personally I would wait Danault or Domi extend long terms before thinking of trading Ryan. @exo2769
      mhockey91 and exo2769 liked this.
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 7:19 p.m.
      #21
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: Jun. 2015
      Posts: 15,921
      Likes: 6,980
      Quoting: GMs
      I think Ryan Poehling is in the same situation but with more value than Danault had. He’s always been a good 200 ft player, but now stuck being the Center depth in MTL. 21 yo, 5 points in the NHL in 28 games, 13 points in 36 AHL games. Look like Danault ( except Danault was a little bit older ) when he got traded. A team should definitely get a shot at Ryan, personally I would wait Danault or Domi extend long terms before thinking of trading Ryan. @exo2769


      yeah i think Poehling atm has one more year before his value tanks.

      Danault was drafted in 2011 and traded in 2016 (Draft + 5 years)
      Poehling was drafted in 2017 and it is now 2020 (Draft + 3 years)

      so Poehling is definitely in a better position than Danault was, but this year is very important for him
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 8:06 p.m.
      #22
      Thread Starter
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: May 2017
      Posts: 8,184
      Likes: 4,786
      Quoting: exo2769
      The timing of those are all different though. Time changes everything. I was the guy saying Panarin was being assisted by Kane. I'll admit it. I'll also admit I was wrong...just like I was also wrong about Byram vs Dach. With that said...I don't think we could have kept Panarin. Even at $10M. That would have (pretty much) required Seabs not getting a contract.


      Panarin for Saad was cap neutral. You're telling me you don't think we could have come up with an extra 4 mil? I don't believe that. I was wrong on Byram v Dach but I was on Panarin's side this whole time. Wha I've ben saying about it today is what I've been saying for years
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 8:18 p.m.
      #23
      exo2769
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: Jul. 2015
      Posts: 15,532
      Likes: 9,572
      Quoting: Wadejos123
      Panarin for Saad was cap neutral. You're telling me you don't think we could have come up with an extra 4 mil? I don't believe that. I was wrong on Byram v Dach but I was on Panarin's side this whole time. Wha I've ben saying about it today is what I've been saying for years


      But can you tell me (and ill believe you...why not?) That you thought Panarin would be a Hart finalist at any point in his career? He took such a big jump with CBJ and then again the NYR. I can 100% understand the return being low. Panarin had two years left. I just dont think he...at the time...had the kind of upside were seeing. Very similar concept to Danault, but different worlds. Panarin was receiving feeds from Kane and one timing them. Are you going to make a prediction now that Kubalik might be similar to Panarin? He's a sniper that will 100% get more PP time next year.
      Sep. 9, 2020 at 9:05 p.m.
      #24
      Thread Starter
      Avatar of the user
      Joined: May 2017
      Posts: 8,184
      Likes: 4,786
      Quoting: exo2769
      But can you tell me (and ill believe you...why not?) That you thought Panarin would be a Hart finalist at any point in his career? He took such a big jump with CBJ and then again the NYR. I can 100% understand the return being low. Panarin had two years left. I just dont think he...at the time...had the kind of upside were seeing. Very similar concept to Danault, but different worlds. Panarin was receiving feeds from Kane and one timing them. Are you going to make a prediction now that Kubalik might be similar to Panarin? He's a sniper that will 100% get more PP time next year.


      Did I see him scoring 112 pts in a season (what he was on pace for)... no. Hart finalist (possibly winer)... no. But I did see him as a ppg player every year for the next decade. I also saw him as Kane's best friend and also the most skilled player Kane has ever played with. He was 100% a superstar in my eyes. The only reason why I didn't see him as a heart finalist was because I saw if he had 90 points Kane would have 100. I knew Panarin could carry his own line, he just didn't have to in Chicago. Panarin was my favorite player. I even had his jersey (and still do). I thought people that said Kane carried him were stupid. I know you have no way of fact checking me so I guess you'll just have to take my word. The return wasn't even half of what it should have been in that trade, and like I said I refuse to believe we couldn't come up with the extra 4 mil.
       
      Reply
      To create a post please Login or Register
      Question:
      Options:
      Add Option
      Submit Poll