SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

Making moves

Created by: ChiHawk
Team: 2021-22 Chicago Blackhawks
Initial Creation Date: May 21, 2021
Published: May 21, 2021
Salary Cap Mode: Basic
Description
Maybe slight overpay for Lindholm given he's a rental.

Bringing back Sadder fills the RW top 6 hole we have.

Strome is as good as gone, just trying to figure out the best package for him. Connolly is a interesting piece to any playoff team, and I've always liked Hallender and think maybe he can put it together. Would love Nylander but Hawks would have to give up a big piece in addition to Strome and not sure we have that.
Free Agent Signings
RESERVE LISTYEARSCAP HIT
3$950,000
RFAYEARSCAP HIT
3$1,250,000
2$1,200,000
2$950,000
2$2,250,000
UFAYEARSCAP HIT
4$4,500,000
Trades
1.
ANA
  1. Kurashev, Philipp
  2. Zadorov, Nikita [RFA Rights]
  3. 2021 1st round pick (CHI)
2.
3.
CHI
  1. Hållander, Filip
  2. 2022 1st round pick (TOR)
Additional Details:
If Tavares is out next season
TOR
  1. Connolly, Brett ($1,000,000 retained)
  2. Strome, Dylan
Retained Salary Transactions
DraftRound 1Round 2Round 3Round 4Round 5Round 6Round 7
2021
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the VGK
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the VAN
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the FLA
2022
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the VGK
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the CHI
2023
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$57,199,621$452,439$5,082,500$24,300,379
Left WingCentreRight Wing
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$3,700,000$3,700,000
LW, RW
UFA - 1
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$10,500,000$10,500,000
C
NMC
UFA - 2
$4,500,000$4,500,000
LW, RW
UFA - 5
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$6,400,000$6,400,000
LW, RW
UFA - 2
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$925,000$925,000 (Performance Bonus$2,500,000$2M)
C, RW
RFA - 1
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$1,250,000$1,250,000
LW
UFA - 3
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$2,250,000$2,250,000
C, LW
UFA - 2
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$2,625,000$2,625,000
RW
NMC
UFA - 2
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$1,000,000$1,000,000
C
RFA - 2
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$1,200,000$1,200,000
C
UFA - 2
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$950,000$950,000
RW, LW
RFA - 1
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$1,000,000$1,000,000
RW, C
UFA - 1
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$811,667$811,667 (Performance Bonus$32,500$32K)
LW, C
RFA - 1
Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender
Logo of the Anaheim Ducks
$2,602,778$2,602,778
LD
UFA - 1
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$894,167$894,167 (Performance Bonus$850,000$850K)
RD
RFA - 1
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$1,000,000$1,000,000
G
UFA - 1
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$5,538,462$5,538,462
LD
NMC
UFA - 2
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$3,850,000$3,850,000
RD
UFA - 1
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$800,000$800,000
G
UFA - 1
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$1,350,000$1,350,000
LD
RFA - 3
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$925,000$925,000 (Performance Bonus$850,000$850K)
RD
RFA - 2
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$925,000$925,000 (Performance Bonus$850,000$850K)
LD
UFA - 1
ScratchesInjured Reserve (IR)Long Term IR (LTIR)
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$6,875,000$6,875,000
RD
NMC
UFA - 3
Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
$3,900,000$3,900,000
C, RW
UFA - 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
May 21, 2021 at 1:58 p.m.
#1
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2021
Posts: 348
Likes: 155
Congratulations, youre the 200th post on ACGM of hawks fans begging us to trade for Lindholm...


Honestly ill be really disappointed if we dont try to
May 21, 2021 at 2:04 p.m.
#2
exo2769
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2015
Posts: 15,855
Likes: 10,093
I hope Tavares is good to go next season. I truly hate seeing accidents like that happen. I feel so bad for him.

Since this is ACGM I understand you've qualified in the post an assumption that he won't be back. I do think Strome would be a decent fit on a temp status. TOR's truly excellent wingers would even increase Strome "Re-trade" value after next season...or when JT comes back just in time for the playoffs next year. Connolley isn't really a fit IMO. Dubas isn't looking to take on more longer term cap. Stan can eat it next year anyway.
ChiHawk liked this.
May 21, 2021 at 2:10 p.m.
#3
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2017
Posts: 19,320
Likes: 9,797
Quoting: Tyler_A10
Congratulations, youre the 200th post on ACGM of hawks fans begging us to trade for Lindholm...


Honestly ill be really disappointed if we dont try to


Go back historically 6 months ago and I started that fortunately or unfortunately, so sorry! smile
May 21, 2021 at 2:10 p.m.
#4
Once a Kings Fan Too
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 40,959
Likes: 25,759
BIG overpay for one year of Lindholm. For that package, you also get one year of Rakell. This assumes that we can't re-sign either one.
May 21, 2021 at 2:12 p.m.
#5
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2021
Posts: 348
Likes: 155
Quoting: ChiHawk
Go back historically 6 months ago and I started that fortunately or unfortunately, so sorry! smile


Im not mad at you, just funny how we all agree that "this would be really smart" and yet it seems like its an opinion only held by people on these forums
ChiHawk liked this.
May 21, 2021 at 2:40 p.m.
#6
exo2769
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2015
Posts: 15,855
Likes: 10,093
Edited May 21, 2021 at 2:45 p.m.
Quoting: ChiHawk
Go back historically 6 months ago and I started that fortunately or unfortunately, so sorry! smile


Quoting: Tyler_A10
Im not mad at you, just funny how we all agree that "this would be really smart" and yet it seems like its an opinion only held by people on these forums


I think the hard part is that ANA should probably just extend him. That way guys like Drysdale can be guided along in their development with a Vet opposite the rookie. I'd like to have him on the Hawks for sure. I just don't think ANA will part with him unless it's a deal they can't refuse...aka...ALOT more than this. They're trading away a piece that's quite useful to them in their rebuild.

***EDIT*** I honestly think we'll have a better shot at Seth Jones. I don't think he's ready to sign up to start a rebuild with CBJ...and trading Jones would go along way toward getting that rebuild underway. Heck CBJ might even be a front runner for Share Wright.
May 21, 2021 at 2:52 p.m.
#7
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2017
Posts: 19,320
Likes: 9,797
Edited May 21, 2021 at 3:05 p.m.
Quoting: exo2769
I think the hard part is that ANA should probably just extend him. That way guys like Drysdale can be guided along in their development with a Vet opposite the rookie. I'd like to have him on the Hawks for sure. I just don't think ANA will part with him unless it's a deal they can't refuse...aka...ALOT more than this. They're trading away a piece that's quite useful to them in their rebuild.

***EDIT*** I honestly think we'll have a better shot at Seth Jones. I don't think he's ready to sign up to start a rebuild with CBJ...and trading Jones would go along way toward getting that rebuild underway. Heck CBJ might even be a front runner for Share Wright.


I disagree. Anaheim is further behind in their rebuild then the Hawks. They are literally bottom of the league and that was playing against the Sharks, Kings, Yotes, and even the Blues who aren't very good. Why would Lindholm want to stick around for a rebuild that's years away when he's entering the prime of his career? I promise it's not to mentor Drysdale even though I can understand Anaheim would like that. It's also not like Anaheim has a monster fan base, or the stadium is even in a good area of Orange County, or paying 13.3% income tax is a privelage. I mean, I guess if his wife or kids are hung up on living in Orange County then I guess but I don't see why for his own career he's interested in staying and it is his decision not the Ducks.

Anaheim should move him to get more & younger assets to continue their rebuild knowing there is a good chance they lose him for nothing. With a flat cap, I beleive the return of a lottery pick, younger decent heavy hitting D man and a young middle 6 forward isn't not intriguing to the ducks. I certainly don't think they are getting "ALOT" more for a 1 year rental.
May 21, 2021 at 2:58 p.m.
#8
Roster Architect
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2021
Posts: 2,643
Likes: 909
Leafs pass.

In all likelihood, Tavares is back next season. Regardless if he's not, Strome isn't the type of player to take his place. Leafs management has always gone after guys that have good skating, and Strome isn't a great skater. He doesn't fit what they like in a player and certainly isn't worth a 1st alone, they definitely wouldn't add a prospect to also take on another winger that they don't need.

Shop Strome elsewhere, he's just not fitting with the group in Toronto at all.
May 21, 2021 at 3:01 p.m.
#9
hey look a squirrel
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 6,080
Likes: 3,775
Is Suter available?
If so, what is cost to acquire him?
May 21, 2021 at 3:03 p.m.
#10
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2017
Posts: 19,320
Likes: 9,797
Quoting: Trickster
Is Suter available?
If so, what is cost to acquire him?


Toronto wouldn't have the assets to acquire him unless a deal is to be had for Nylander to be included in a package. Suter right now is a very versatile forward for the Hawks either playing center or wing. He's the type of 3rd liner anchor player the Hawks need. Strome is a top 6 guy and if Toews is back, Strome needs to be moved IMO.
Trickster and Aussie_Blackhawk liked this.
May 21, 2021 at 3:37 p.m.
#11
exo2769
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2015
Posts: 15,855
Likes: 10,093
Quoting: ChiHawk
I disagree. Anaheim is further behind in their rebuild then the Hawks. They are literally bottom of the league and that was playing against the Sharks, Kings, Yotes, and even the Blues who aren't very good. Why would Lindholm want to stick around for a rebuild that's years away when he's entering the prime of his career? I promise it's not to mentor Drysdale even though I can understand Anaheim would like that. It's also not like Anaheim has a monster fan base, or the stadium is even in a good area of Orange County, or paying 13.3% income tax is a privelage. I mean, I guess if his wife or kids are hung up on living in Orange County then I guess but I don't see why for his own career he's interested in staying and it is his decision not the Ducks.

Anaheim should move him to get more & younger assets to continue their rebuild knowing there is a good chance they lose him for nothing. With a flat cap, I beleive the return of a lottery pick, younger decent heavy hitting D man and a young middle 6 forward isn't not intriguing to the ducks. I certainly don't think they are getting "ALOT" more for a 1 year rental.


A couple of things. ANA had a number of issues, but Lindholm himself being injured was a huge issue. As for who has progressed further in their rebuild. Generally, yes I do agree, but I could also see a counterpoint suggesting ANA is just as far along. ANA just shed Getzlaf and doesn't have any of their older guard still around which allows for more cap space to sign productive UFAs. Guys like Zegras and Drysdale and this year's pick will go a long way toward helping their future. The Hawks are still reliant on Kane for offense and Keith was their highest ATOI Dman last year.

As for the taxes...it's not quite as big a deal as people make it out to be. It's not nothing for sure, but taxes get paid to the state in which the game is played...so most years each of these guys have to file something like 20 different state returns...and even 12.3% state income tax for the state of California if you play the Kings or Ducks. YES, 41 home games means more games played in California, but if he came to the Hawks a $5M per year salary is a $350k difference in state taxes. Yeah, that's a lot of money, but I'd argue there are bigger items that overtake this tax delta. Starting with your agent negotiation $5.35M vs $5M. But then the whole...winning vs money thing.
May 21, 2021 at 3:55 p.m.
#12
exo2769
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2015
Posts: 15,855
Likes: 10,093
Quoting: ChiHawk
Toronto wouldn't have the assets to acquire him unless a deal is to be had for Nylander to be included in a package. Suter right now is a very versatile forward for the Hawks either playing center or wing. He's the type of 3rd liner anchor player the Hawks need. Strome is a top 6 guy and if Toews is back, Strome needs to be moved IMO.


TOR has some REALLY nice assets. Amirov, Robertson, Topi Niemelä, Timmy, Sandin...
May 21, 2021 at 3:57 p.m.
#13
exo2769
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2015
Posts: 15,855
Likes: 10,093
Edited May 21, 2021 at 4:07 p.m.
Quoting: Trickster
Is Suter available?
If so, what is cost to acquire him?


The hard part about this trade is that it'll require one of TORs best prospects. IMO, it really can't be a pick or even an A- prospect. The Hawks already have too many players that are looking for ice time. Thoughts along the lines or Amirov or Niemela+, or Roni+ . This way CHI can leave them in Europe while they figure out what's going on with their 9 Dmen and 15 forwards...
ChiHawk liked this.
May 21, 2021 at 4:15 p.m.
#14
hey look a squirrel
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 6,080
Likes: 3,775
Quoting: ChiHawk
Toronto wouldn't have the assets to acquire him unless a deal is to be had for Nylander to be included in a package. Suter right now is a very versatile forward for the Hawks either playing center or wing. He's the type of 3rd liner anchor player the Hawks need. Strome is a top 6 guy and if Toews is back, Strome needs to be moved IMO.


Ty for insight.
May 21, 2021 at 4:20 p.m.
#15
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 8,322
Likes: 4,970
Quoting: exo2769
TOR has some REALLY nice assets. Amirov, Robertson, Topi Niemelä, Timmy, Sandin...


They definetly won't move Amirov, Sandin, or Robertson for Suter
exo2769 liked this.
May 21, 2021 at 4:23 p.m.
#16
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 8,322
Likes: 4,970
I would rather hold onto the 11th pick than trade it for 1 year of Lindholm. Lindholm alone doesn't make us a contender or fix our defence. Would rather draft BPA at 11 which will probably be a forward. If we do Lindholm it should be top 5 protected 2022 1st, and we will need to bring in a second defenceman as well to ensure we aern't picking anywhere near the top 10 again.
May 21, 2021 at 4:41 p.m.
#17
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2017
Posts: 19,320
Likes: 9,797
Quoting: exo2769
A couple of things. ANA had a number of issues, but Lindholm himself being injured was a huge issue. As for who has progressed further in their rebuild. Generally, yes I do agree, but I could also see a counterpoint suggesting ANA is just as far along. ANA just shed Getzlaf and doesn't have any of their older guard still around which allows for more cap space to sign productive UFAs. Guys like Zegras and Drysdale and this year's pick will go a long way toward helping their future. The Hawks are still reliant on Kane for offense and Keith was their highest ATOI Dman last year.

As for the taxes...it's not quite as big a deal as people make it out to be. It's not nothing for sure, but taxes get paid to the state in which the game is played...so most years each of these guys have to file something like 20 different state returns...and even 12.3% state income tax for the state of California if you play the Kings or Ducks. YES, 41 home games means more games played in California, but if he came to the Hawks a $5M per year salary is a $350k difference in state taxes. Yeah, that's a lot of money, but I'd argue there are bigger items that overtake this tax delta. Starting with your agent negotiation $5.35M vs $5M. But then the whole...winning vs money thing.


Yes, very aware of the tax situation. Lindholm's next contract will likely be about $7M. $3.5M being taxed at 13.3% is $465K versus in Illinois at 4.95% is $173,250 so $291,750 difference which to anyone is a big chunk of change. Additionally, any investments or additive businesses Lindholm has get taxed at that income rate which can overtime far exceed his annual salary making California even less attractive. California is also one of those states that they don't care if you have another home in Nevada, Florida, Texas, etc. As long as you have a home in california you owe california income taxes...very unfriendly if you make over $1M a year and they are ruthless. So that said, I understand what you're saying only being a $291,750 and negotiable by the agent (which is true) but it's not just salary, it's exponential when you start talking about money sitting in investments for that player.

I agree that Zegras and Drysdale are awesome pieces and this year's pick should help as well, but Anaheim is still behind the Hawks IMO and don't have as much revenues to support the organization. How many times have you heard of a player wanting to leave the Hawks? There's a good reason for it. Other teams aren't so fortunate and not saying people don't want to play in Anaheim, just saying the Hawks have a lot to offer players with fanbase, perks, facilities, etc. that are top notch. I think those play into a players decision as well.
exo2769 liked this.
May 21, 2021 at 4:46 p.m.
#18
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2017
Posts: 19,320
Likes: 9,797
Quoting: Wadejos123
I would rather hold onto the 11th pick than trade it for 1 year of Lindholm. Lindholm alone doesn't make us a contender or fix our defence. Would rather draft BPA at 11 which will probably be a forward. If we do Lindholm it should be top 5 protected 2022 1st, and we will need to bring in a second defenceman as well to ensure we aern't picking anywhere near the top 10 again.


I would much rather be picking in the 2022 draft in the mid round range (say #15 through #17) then picking at #11 in this year's draft. We are going to miss out on the big defenders (hughes, power, evidsson) and after around pick 9, I don't see any players having top line ceilings either at forward or defense. It's just a weak draft after the first 8 to 10 picks. 11 is a bad spot IMO. For a team loaded with prospects/players in the bottom 4 on D and bottom 6 up front, i'm not seeing this draft be a big help to us. Maybe we get lucky and win the lottery, trade up or get super lucky and one of the big 3 defenders falls our way but i doubt it.

Lindholm on the other hand, fixes our biggest hole on this team and usually when players come to chicago they want to stick around so I'm betting we can extend him.
May 21, 2021 at 6:22 p.m.
#19
exo2769
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2015
Posts: 15,855
Likes: 10,093
Quoting: Wadejos123
They definetly won't move Amirov, Sandin, or Robertson for Suter


I agree. I just don't think a 2nd or abramov (or equivalent prospect) is something the Hawks are interested in. Suter fits what they're looking for right now.
Wadejos123 and ChiHawk liked this.
May 21, 2021 at 6:27 p.m.
#20
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 8,322
Likes: 4,970
Quoting: ChiHawk
I would much rather be picking in the 2022 draft in the mid round range (say #15 through #17) then picking at #11 in this year's draft. We are going to miss out on the big defenders (hughes, power, evidsson) and after around pick 9, I don't see any players having top line ceilings either at forward or defense. It's just a weak draft after the first 8 to 10 picks. 11 is a bad spot IMO. For a team loaded with prospects/players in the bottom 4 on D and bottom 6 up front, i'm not seeing this draft be a big help to us. Maybe we get lucky and win the lottery, trade up or get super lucky and one of the big 3 defenders falls our way but i doubt it.

Lindholm on the other hand, fixes our biggest hole on this team and usually when players come to chicago they want to stick around so I'm betting we can extend him.


Two seconds this year and two thirds next year, so plenty of ammo to move up if we wanted to. There are some forwards I like around the 11 range. Chaz Lucius, Fabian Lysell, Autu Raty, Dylan Guenther.
May 21, 2021 at 9:19 p.m.
#21
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2017
Posts: 19,320
Likes: 9,797
Quoting: Wadejos123
Two seconds this year and two thirds next year, so plenty of ammo to move up if we wanted to. There are some forwards I like around the 11 range. Chaz Lucius, Fabian Lysell, Autu Raty, Dylan Guenther.


Really hard to say if those forwards turn into anything more then a middle 6 or bottom 6 guys. I just don't see them being as big of piece as getting Lindholm and extending him for the next 5 seasons. Again, it's not a great draft year to fall outside of the 8th pick or so in my opinion. In order to move up from #11 to top 6 we'd probably have to move both 2nds.
May 21, 2021 at 10:46 p.m.
#22
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 8,322
Likes: 4,970
Quoting: ChiHawk
Really hard to say if those forwards turn into anything more then a middle 6 or bottom 6 guys. I just don't see them being as big of piece as getting Lindholm and extending him for the next 5 seasons. Again, it's not a great draft year to fall outside of the 8th pick or so in my opinion. In order to move up from #11 to top 6 we'd probably have to move both 2nds.


Beniers, Eklund, Power, Hughes, Johnson, Clarke, Edvinsonn, Lysell, Guenther are all worth the hawks taking at 11 for sure imo. Thats 9 guys. Sprinkle in the fact that Wallstedt will pretty likley go ahead of our pick at 11, who knows about the other goalie suppose to go high and there are plenty of other skaters that could go before us. My point is if theres 9-10 guys worth taking there for sure I like the odds of one of them making it to us
May 22, 2021 at 11:46 a.m.
#23
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2017
Posts: 19,320
Likes: 9,797
Quoting: Wadejos123
Beniers, Eklund, Power, Hughes, Johnson, Clarke, Edvinsonn, Lysell, Guenther are all worth the hawks taking at 11 for sure imo. Thats 9 guys. Sprinkle in the fact that Wallstedt will pretty likley go ahead of our pick at 11, who knows about the other goalie suppose to go high and there are plenty of other skaters that could go before us. My point is if theres 9-10 guys worth taking there for sure I like the odds of one of them making it to us


Berniers, Power, Eklund, Hughes, Edvinsson, Wallstedt, Guenther, Johnson, Lysell are the only guys with top line potential IMO, and if 70% reach that potential, that would be a successful draft class given the weakness in the draft. So out of those 9, 6 would be great to reach top line potential. Unlikely any of them fall to the Hawks and the falloff after those guys is noticeable. Unlike prior draft years, there isn't a couple players with elite potential and 10 players after that with top line ceilings per their pre-draft scouting reports. This is the year to trade a lottery pick along with an asset like Strome who doesn't appear to fit the system well and fill a gaping hole at first line LHD in my opinion.
May 22, 2021 at 1:35 p.m.
#24
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 8,322
Likes: 4,970
Quoting: ChiHawk
Berniers, Power, Eklund, Hughes, Edvinsson, Wallstedt, Guenther, Johnson, Lysell are the only guys with top line potential IMO, and if 70% reach that potential, that would be a successful draft class given the weakness in the draft. So out of those 9, 6 would be great to reach top line potential. Unlikely any of them fall to the Hawks and the falloff after those guys is noticeable. Unlike prior draft years, there isn't a couple players with elite potential and 10 players after that with top line ceilings per their pre-draft scouting reports. This is the year to trade a lottery pick along with an asset like Strome who doesn't appear to fit the system well and fill a gaping hole at first line LHD in my opinion.


I would be willing to bet on one of those guys falling to us. Especially in this year where scouting was so unusual. I'll guarentee to you a guy or two goes ahead of us that isn't mocked there
ChiHawk liked this.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Submit Poll