SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

Toews back now plenty of cap

Created by: ChiHawk
Team: 2021-22 Chicago Blackhawks
Initial Creation Date: Jun. 30, 2021
Published: Jun. 30, 2021
Salary Cap Mode: Basic
Description
I think it's obvious with Toews back that he will take the helm again as 1C. Dach is likely the 2C and Suter has proven himself a worthy 3C. That leaves Strome either going to the wing or Suter going to the wing and Strome playing 3C. Given that Strome is not great as a winger and much better off as a center and ideally a 2C, it's time to move him IMO.

Nylander, Reichel, Borgstrom all need to earn their playing time at this point. If Hino doesn't produce, Reichel or Nylander step in. Don't love Kurashev on the 4th line but also think his defensive and speed add a dynamic to that line.

Hawks sign Saad; why? Because he's a great RW player as he showed in Colorado and the line of Kubalik - Toews - Saad was our best line and in the bubble. We simply don't have another two way winger in the top 6 if Reichel isn't ready. Nylander is a very different style and doubt he ever becomes as good as Saad at this point. If Reichel is ready, then we move Saad who is very attractive to any playoff team after how he produced with the Avs.
Free Agent Signings
RFAYEARSCAP HIT
3$1,250,000
2$1,250,000
2$1,000,000
1$2,500,000
UFAYEARSCAP HIT
2$1,200,000
5$5,500,000
Trades
1.
CHI
    These guys are gone
    2.
    CHI
    1. 2022 2nd round pick (VAN)
    VAN
    1. Zadorov, Nikita [RFA Rights]
    2. 2021 4th round pick (VAN)
    3.
    CHI
    1. 2023 6th round pick (TOR)
    Additional Details:
    I don't think Connolly is a bad piece for a playoff bound team, just overpaid and not much of any value coming back.
    TOR
    1. Connolly, Brett ($1,000,000 retained)
    4.
    ANA
    1. Strome, Dylan
    2. 2022 3rd round pick (VGK)
    Retained Salary Transactions
    DraftRound 1Round 2Round 3Round 4Round 5Round 6Round 7
    2021
    Logo of the CHI
    Logo of the CHI
    Logo of the VGK
    Logo of the CHI
    Logo of the CHI
    Logo of the CHI
    Logo of the FLA
    2022
    Logo of the CHI
    Logo of the CHI
    Logo of the VAN
    Logo of the CHI
    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 TOR
    Logo of the CHI
    ROSTER SIZESALARY CAPCAP HITOVERAGES TooltipBONUSESCAP SPACE
    23$81,500,000$59,592,121$452,439$5,115,000$21,907,879
    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
    $5,500,000$5,500,000
    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
    $2,625,000$2,625,000
    RW
    NMC
    UFA - 2
    Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
    $1,250,000$1,250,000
    LW
    UFA - 3
    Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
    $2,500,000$2,500,000
    C, LW
    UFA - 2
    Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
    $1,200,000$1,200,000
    RW, LW
    UFA - 1
    Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
    $842,500$842,500 (Performance Bonus$32,500$32K)
    LW, C, RW
    RFA - 1
    Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
    $1,250,000$1,250,000
    C
    UFA - 2
    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
    Logo of the Chicago Blackhawks
    $1,000,000$1,000,000
    RW, LW
    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
    $800,000$800,000
    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
    $1,000,000$1,000,000
    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
    Jun. 30, 2021 at 12:02 p.m.
    #1
    Avatar of the user
    Joined: Apr. 2021
    Posts: 657
    Likes: 352
    Ducks easily decline that
    Jun. 30, 2021 at 12:02 p.m.
    #2
    Avatar of the user
    Joined: Aug. 2020
    Posts: 3,892
    Likes: 2,794
    I think you’d have to make the Vegas 3rd the Chicago 2nd this year at minimum do Lindholm. Even then it’s hard to see ANA moving Lindholm.
    Jun. 30, 2021 at 12:06 p.m.
    #3
    exo2769
    Avatar of the user
    Joined: Jul. 2015
    Posts: 15,604
    Likes: 9,697
    ANA can get more for Lindholm, but I do like idea of acquiring him.
    Jun. 30, 2021 at 12:16 p.m.
    #4
    Thread Starter
    Avatar of the user
    Joined: Apr. 2017
    Posts: 18,991
    Likes: 9,300
    Quoting: QuackAttack
    Ducks easily decline that


    Quoting: jnowariak
    I think you’d have to make the Vegas 3rd the Chicago 2nd this year at minimum do Lindholm. Even then it’s hard to see ANA moving Lindholm.


    Quoting: exo2769
    ANA can get more for Lindholm, but I do like idea of acquiring him.



    Don't think they "easily decline" that. Lindholm is a rental, he's also not a top 20 defensive player in the NHL. He's good, but in a flat cap world, it's a lot of cap to take on and a lot of risk with him being a free agent. I bet the Ducks move him as it's also hard to imagine him in their rebuild plans.

    Strome conversely is not only a cost controlled, but being a young 24 year old RFA and a center which the Ducks need, his career is locked to the acquiring team or the Hawks if he stays.

    I'm looking at this trade based on draft value equally being a late 1st and a 3rd. Maybe remove the 3rd and include Beaudin, but I don't think it's that far off.
    exo2769 liked this.
    Jun. 30, 2021 at 12:21 p.m.
    #5
    exo2769
    Avatar of the user
    Joined: Jul. 2015
    Posts: 15,604
    Likes: 9,697
    Quoting: ChiHawk
    Don't think they "easily decline" that. Lindholm is a rental, he's also not a top 20 defensive player in the NHL. He's good, but in a flat cap world, it's a lot of cap to take on and a lot of risk with him being a free agent. I bet the Ducks move him as it's also hard to imagine him in their rebuild plans.

    Strome conversely is not only a cost controlled, but being a young 24 year old RFA and a center which the Ducks need, his career is locked to the acquiring team or the Hawks if he stays.

    I'm looking at this trade based on draft value equally being a late 1st and a 3rd. Maybe remove the 3rd and include Beaudin, but I don't think it's that far off.


    A couple of points. I do agree that Strome has more value than most people on Capfriendly give him. With that said, ANA can maximize value at the TDL and retain 50% of the cap. They'll get a haul back. a 1st plus a prospect IMO. With that said. I'd be willing to send Strome and Vlasic. I think both CHI and ANA would prefer Vlasic over Beaudin. Vlasic being a large body defensive dman would be a great fit long term next to Drysdale.
    Jun. 30, 2021 at 12:25 p.m.
    #6
    Thread Starter
    Avatar of the user
    Joined: Apr. 2017
    Posts: 18,991
    Likes: 9,300
    Quoting: exo2769
    A couple of points. I do agree that Strome has more value than most people on Capfriendly give him. With that said, ANA can maximize value at the TDL and retain 50% of the cap. They'll get a haul back. a 1st plus a prospect IMO. With that said. I'd be willing to send Strome and Vlasic. I think both CHI and ANA would prefer Vlasic over Beaudin. Vlasic being a large body defensive dman would be a great fit long term next to Drysdale.


    Vlasic could be a good option for the Ducks as well. I also think Kurashev could be in the deal but his value IMO is more given he's only 21 years old and his first season showed he's going to be a good 2 way player. Players that could be included; Kurashev, Nylander, Beaudin, Vlassic, Gaudette, Borgstrom all realistically are options but with varying degree of value of course.
    exo2769 liked this.
    Jun. 30, 2021 at 12:41 p.m.
    #7
    BRUCE THERE IT IS
    Avatar of the user
    Joined: Nov. 2020
    Posts: 1,645
    Likes: 1,180
    Canucks say yes!
    Jun. 30, 2021 at 1:22 p.m.
    #8
    Chicago
    Avatar of the user
    Joined: Jun. 2015
    Posts: 6,997
    Likes: 2,843
    Definitely going to have to add in the Anaheim trade, but it's the direction the team should be taking.
    Jun. 30, 2021 at 2:02 p.m.
    #9
    Chicago Blackhawks
    Avatar of the user
    Joined: Aug. 2017
    Posts: 1,026
    Likes: 408
    Quoting: ChiHawk
    Vlasic could be a good option for the Ducks as well. I also think Kurashev could be in the deal but his value IMO is more given he's only 21 years old and his first season showed he's going to be a good 2 way player. Players that could be included; Kurashev, Nylander, Beaudin, Vlassic, Gaudette, Borgstrom all realistically are options but with varying degree of value of course.


    I think Exo makes the most important point here, which is that Lindholm's value is greater to Anaheim than any other team currently. Without him, what are they left with? Cam Fowler, and the grossly overpaid ghost of Kevin Shattenkirk? Everyone loves Josh Manson because he lays the body, but he isn't all that great a defenseman...

    On the flip side, they have a ton of RFAs to sign, Max Comtois, Jones, Steel, Lundestrom, and that's minimum requirements. There's four others they may or may not sign. And then Baldy, his big contract just ended, so he'll likely be taking another one with them, for less yeah, but probably in the 4-5 range. And they're still carrying Kesler's dead weight, as well as 2 mil of Perry's contract.

    So it would seem more likely that if they can get a good return for Lindholm, they'll send him off to make room for signings. But that return has to be better than what he's worth, optically, for even someone as dumb as Bob Murray. So I agree that you've got to put a better offer forward, but it isn't like you are wildly off.
    Jun. 30, 2021 at 2:14 p.m.
    #10
    Thread Starter
    Avatar of the user
    Joined: Apr. 2017
    Posts: 18,991
    Likes: 9,300
    Quoting: JackBurton
    I think Exo makes the most important point here, which is that Lindholm's value is greater to Anaheim than any other team currently. Without him, what are they left with? Cam Fowler, and the grossly overpaid ghost of Kevin Shattenkirk? Everyone loves Josh Manson because he lays the body, but he isn't all that great a defenseman...

    On the flip side, they have a ton of RFAs to sign, Max Comtois, Jones, Steel, Lundestrom, and that's minimum requirements. There's four others they may or may not sign. And then Baldy, his big contract just ended, so he'll likely be taking another one with them, for less yeah, but probably in the 4-5 range. And they're still carrying Kesler's dead weight, as well as 2 mil of Perry's contract.

    So it would seem more likely that if they can get a good return for Lindholm, they'll send him off to make room for signings. But that return has to be better than what he's worth, optically, for even someone as dumb as Bob Murray. So I agree that you've got to put a better offer forward, but it isn't like you are wildly off.


    Most importantly, Ducks are at the bottom of the rebuild process and about to start their climb. Lindholm and or Manson both are 1 year UFAs and can't see why either player at their age wants to wait around another 5 years to become a contender. In the same breathe, why wouldn't the Ducks move at least 1 or both to help accelerate their rebuild? They have to be thinking 4 to 6 years out which means going after players 25 years and younger.

    They have a pretty good prospect pool/young guys and the 3rd pick OA this year will only add to that with a player like Hughes, Evidsson, Clarke being options if they don't get Beniers. Notably, outside of Zegras, they don't necessarily have another top 6 center save for Lundestrom being a surprise. Strome fills a hole for sure.

    On D, they have notable young prospect/players such as...
    Drysdale, Mahura, Thrun, LaCombe

    Manson and Lindholm are just not the right timetable for their rebuild IMO. That doesn't mean they will sell cheap, but I think Lindholm is very good, but overrated here. He's worth a late 1st and a good (not great) prospect IMO. So Strome + Kurashev or Beaudin or Vlasic or Nylander should get a deal done IMO and a good move for both teams.
    JackBurton liked this.
    Jun. 30, 2021 at 2:27 p.m.
    #11
    Chicago Blackhawks
    Avatar of the user
    Joined: Aug. 2017
    Posts: 1,026
    Likes: 408
    Quoting: ChiHawk
    Most importantly, Ducks are at the bottom of the rebuild process and about to start their climb. Lindholm and or Manson both are 1 year UFAs and can't see why either player at their age wants to wait around another 5 years to become a contender. In the same breathe, why wouldn't the Ducks move at least 1 or both to help accelerate their rebuild? They have to be thinking 4 to 6 years out which means going after players 25 years and younger.

    They have a pretty good prospect pool/young guys and the 3rd pick OA this year will only add to that with a player like Hughes, Evidsson, Clarke being options if they don't get Beniers. Notably, outside of Zegras, they don't necessarily have another top 6 center save for Lundestrom being a surprise. Strome fills a hole for sure.

    On D, they have notable young prospect/players such as...
    Drysdale, Mahura, Thrun, LaCombe

    Manson and Lindholm are just not the right timetable for their rebuild IMO. That doesn't mean they will sell cheap, but I think Lindholm is very good, but overrated here. He's worth a late 1st and a good (not great) prospect IMO. So Strome + Kurashev or Beaudin or Vlasic or Nylander should get a deal done IMO and a good move for both teams.


    I'm down with your evaluation, I just don't think Bob Murray would be. They chose to keep Lindholm over Vatenen back when the discussion was "who's our real 1D and who is going to falter?" They chose Lindholm wisely, and I just don't think GMBM wants to move on from his current #1D and turn their team into a complete and total clown car until they have to. The TDL seems like a far more viable time for him to part with Lindholm, and get a better return.
    Jun. 30, 2021 at 2:35 p.m.
    #12
    Avatar of the user
    Joined: Nov. 2017
    Posts: 3,222
    Likes: 2,162
    Quoting: JackBurton
    I think Exo makes the most important point here, which is that Lindholm's value is greater to Anaheim than any other team currently. Without him, what are they left with? Cam Fowler, and the grossly overpaid ghost of Kevin Shattenkirk? Everyone loves Josh Manson because he lays the body, but he isn't all that great a defenseman...

    On the flip side, they have a ton of RFAs to sign, Max Comtois, Jones, Steel, Lundestrom, and that's minimum requirements. There's four others they may or may not sign. And then Baldy, his big contract just ended, so he'll likely be taking another one with them, for less yeah, but probably in the 4-5 range. And they're still carrying Kesler's dead weight, as well as 2 mil of Perry's contract.

    So it would seem more likely that if they can get a good return for Lindholm, they'll send him off to make room for signings. But that return has to be better than what he's worth, optically, for even someone as dumb as Bob Murray. So I agree that you've got to put a better offer forward, but it isn't like you are wildly off.


    Without Lindholm they are... a strong candidate for Shane Wright and Brad Lambert!
    JackBurton liked this.
    Jun. 30, 2021 at 4:01 p.m.
    #13
    Avatar of the user
    Joined: May 2017
    Posts: 8,269
    Likes: 4,915
    Many have commented on the Lindholm deal at the time i'm seeing this and you have already responded to them, so i'll set that one aside. The rest of the moves look good to me. I am in favor of a Saad reunion pt 3 but I think it's unlikley. I also think if we want to compete we need a better 3rd line, but we are probably better off using next year to asses what we have so i'm alright with not bringing anyone in there
    JackBurton and ChiHawk liked this.
    Jun. 30, 2021 at 6:03 p.m.
    #14
    Chicago Blackhawks
    Avatar of the user
    Joined: Aug. 2017
    Posts: 1,026
    Likes: 408
    Quoting: SlickWilly
    Without Lindholm they are... a strong candidate for Shane Wright and Brad Lambert!


    Are those the big shot names for '22? I really don't look into that at all until the current draft is over. Insufficient headspace.
    SlickWilly liked this.
    Jun. 30, 2021 at 6:04 p.m.
    #15
    Chicago Blackhawks
    Avatar of the user
    Joined: Aug. 2017
    Posts: 1,026
    Likes: 408
    Quoting: Wadejos123
    Many have commented on the Lindholm deal at the time i'm seeing this and you have already responded to them, so i'll set that one aside. The rest of the moves look good to me. I am in favor of a Saad reunion pt 3 but I think it's unlikley. I also think if we want to compete we need a better 3rd line, but we are probably better off using next year to asses what we have so i'm alright with not bringing anyone in there


    I'm still pissed that Stan did that ****, and I think there is literally no chance in hell Saad ever chooses to come to Chicago again. And who can blame him?
    ChiHawk and Wadejos123 liked this.
    Jun. 30, 2021 at 6:16 p.m.
    #16
    Avatar of the user
    Joined: Nov. 2017
    Posts: 3,222
    Likes: 2,162
    Quoting: JackBurton
    Are those the big shot names for '22? I really don't look into that at all until the current draft is over. Insufficient headspace.


    Yes. I myself am inclined to tank for the next two years because the top of the 1st round is supposed to be between franchise and generational talents for 2022 and 2023. I don't really see the point in toiling in the middle any longer because most upgrades we make are going to make us 3 seeds at best. But thats an entirely different subject. If Anaheim is inclined on selling, then 2022 and 2023 are pretty golden opportunities to do so.
    Jun. 30, 2021 at 6:19 p.m.
    #17
    Thread Starter
    Avatar of the user
    Joined: Apr. 2017
    Posts: 18,991
    Likes: 9,300
    Quoting: JackBurton
    I'm down with your evaluation, I just don't think Bob Murray would be. They chose to keep Lindholm over Vatenen back when the discussion was "who's our real 1D and who is going to falter?" They chose Lindholm wisely, and I just don't think GMBM wants to move on from his current #1D and turn their team into a complete and total clown car until they have to. The TDL seems like a far more viable time for him to part with Lindholm, and get a better return.


    Yeah, I don't think lindhom hangs around in Anaheim though; why would he? Anaheim is 4 to 6 years away from competing, isn't a huge hockey market, and their stadium is not in a great area and most of the big contract players live in better parts of OC and have to deal with an hour plus commute to get to the stadium...minor but matters. Lindholm probably walks to get a bigger contract with a bigger hockey town with a team that is closer to competing.
     
    Reply
    To create a post please Login or Register
    Question:
    Options:
    Add Option
    Submit Poll