Why would the hawks let kubalik walk to UFA for nothing over 1 mil? You really think the hawks won't give him 4M x 1 and let him walk for 3M x 2? Dilusional

Ristolainen is garbage. Ruhwedel and Friedman are better at 750k. I think the pens would rather pay erod 3m then heinen

The Ferland/Zucker trade makes no sense for Vancouver, In effect you've stuck them with Zucker 5.5m. cap hit, the exact reason you made the trade for Pens for cap relief

no actually i took that off someone's post and like I said it could be to any team.

people have said the same thing about a lot of guys who have come to the penguins. But fact is he gets a chance to turn it around here and the Pens could use a big physical defender that can skate.
There is no pressure on him here. We already know Letang and Marino eat minutes. He can get back to basics and figure it out here. People use to rag on guys like Ceci too, But being in a place where you're role is known and limited really helps guys. As I said, he's here to turn it around. It's clearly a small gamble, but the reward is much higher than the risk.

Also, I don't think they keep Erod over Heinen. Of the two of them ERod is the 12th guy on a healthy team.

Erod showed a lot in a an increased role and has meshed well in the top 6. Heinen hasn’t. Is it really worth it to grab ristolainen for 2M? The flyers have already talked extension with him and I don’t think he takes 2 (even though he isn’t worth any more than 2)

even hawks fans are chasing Kubalik out the door on here.
You got a guy with falling production for the 2nd year in a row and his QO is 4 mil +.
You say why do they not sign him for 4m x 1. The answer to that is simple. Why are they over paying a guy on a 1 year deal leading him to FA? How does that make any more sense?
If my position makes no sense than yours is even worse. If he was a FA would you resign him to 4M? the answer to that is no, so are you really losing anything here? The answer to that is no.
Surely you wouldn't suggest he's worth a long term deal at that rate either. Because he's not.
It would be one thing if he had some stabilizing stats. Shown improvement over the last 2 years. But it's been steady decline. He signed a show me contract after 1 good year....he did not show he was worth the current deal, why sign him to even more?

I had already had this point about Risto at the top. How much is he really worth. The question to that is more than just on a 1 year deal. We clearly agree his value isn't high. Because he is a defenseman he will probably get something though aka 2m +....but the point I made above is if his value isn't that high, he could continue on that route on another team, or he can take a little less to try to turn it around and bet on himself. There is a whole list of "bad" defensemen that came to PIT and turned it around, leading to better pay days, like Ceci did as an example. Does Ceci get 3.25 if he doesn't come to PIT?
I'm sure if PHL throws a boat load of money at him he takes it. I'm not sure that's the case. Nor am I sure it's best for him to take a short term little bit rather than betting he can turn it around to cash in for a little less for a year. 1 mil less for a year might be worth the 1-2 mil more for a longer term deal. That's clearly something he'd have to weigh.

You way over hype ERod on a few numbers. He's 28 and playing on a 1 year 1 mil deal this year for a reason. Don't be the guy to make that mistake. He had a lucky year, great, let him take that elsewhere.
While 3 mil might be on the high end for Heinen, and that's a different story, the reality is he's a guy who shows up in the playoffs, and is the kind of grinder you need to win games when they count. He's the kind of guy who will go fight for the puck, which is something ERod won't do, he's too busy trying to cherry pick a goal. That might work in the regular season but come the playoffs it's not going to fly.
Between the two Heinen is a better hockey player. Just looking at the historical output between the two you're going to get more out of Heinen. He might not get you 25 goals a year but it's all about knowing your role and filling it. He did that for BOS and he's doing that here.

I think the playoffs will be a huge indication on who gets paid between heinen and erod. There are 1 or 2 top 6 spots up for grabs imo next szn

I honestly don't think the team views either one of those guys as top 6.
They will try to move zucker and replace him. If Rust leaves they will go to FA to replace him. I'd rather have any number of free agents in the top 6 than either of those 2 if push comes to shove.
Which is why above I went after Rakell.
Heinen was brought in to be a defensively responsible 3rd line guy with some offensive upside. They got that. They'll keep him for that. They need those guys who are willing to check and fetch pucks. They went out of their way to find bigger wingers to do that. At 6'1 Heinen fits that bill. They grew tired of the team getting shoved around.

It makes perfect sense for Vancouver. @palhal just refuses to read up on how accrued cap space works.

If we don't think he's worth the QO then we trade him at this deadline and get value back, or we give him the QO to see if he regains any more value back and trade him at next deadline or extend him. We aern't hurting for money next year, we can afford the QO no problem. A rebuilding team that already doesn't have a ton of assets just doesn't let value walk out the door for nothing.Plenty of teams would want to trade for Kubalik at the deadline, even if its not the value we would have got a year ago something is still better than nothing. Your proposal is nothing more than wishful thinking. If you want Kubalik then trade for him

I know how it works. You seem to think that a team has more cap if they take on players that want. Zucker is not a 2m cap hit in the trade is done. By your logic then, Pittsburg has a 3.5m cap deficient if Ferland is acquired.

I don't see CHI throwing good money after bad.
The idea that everyone is rushing out to trade for him at TDL is optimistic at best. There are plenty of other forwards on the market at TDL. Most likely teams are looking at the trade for him and asking themselves what do they want to give up and for what kind of rental.
Are you going to run out trying to win a cup trading for a guy who's play is in decline to win a cup. No right. You're going to go look for someone who's actually playing well.
There really isn't much to this. Clearly it's a hypothetical. But ;point being he's in the same boat as DeBrusk. DeBrusk is a guy who's play has declined. His QO isn't worth the output and BOS probably moves on because of that. CHI is in the same situation. They just aren't going to throw millions at a guy they see declining. There is no point to that. Even if you say they don't have guys. 4 million cap in the open market is better than tossing good money after bad. Which is why CHI does none of what you are suggesting. Why waste 4 mil of cap when you can sign someone else with it? That makes 0 sense.

Nope because Ferland will be on LTIR with Pittsburgh so they'll just clear all of zuckers 5.5.

Canucks don't want to operate in LTIR so they wouldn't put Ferland in it ideally.

It's pretty simple if you go read some articles about it. I've explained it a few times here though and you don't seem to understand the benefit of new using LTIR space. You seem to understand how LTIR works but not the benefits of accruing capspace by not using LTIR.

We need a return for him

We don't need to sell him so if we don't trade him at the TDL for what we feel is fair value, its not so bad. The fact he is a RFA means theres more value than a rental at this stage also.
The fact your saying his play is in decline is quite pessimistic, players have down years, heck CHI as a whole team is having one. Discarding a player for a bad season is unwise and has many a time come back to hurt the team who trades the player away.
He is in no way in the same boat as DeBrusk, Debrusk has asked for a trade, has had multiple concussion injuries and has never scored 30 goals in a season. Kubalik is early in his NHL career and has one hell of a snipe on him.
CHI is not in the same position as BOS, we are a bottom 10 team with limited assets, you are a team looking to contend for a cup and have a solid foundation laid.
I think its very safe to say that we can virtually guarantee you Kubalik will not be allowed to walk for nothing come end of season.

Btw, it wasn't long ago people were saying Strome would walk for nothing from CHI. These people weren't thinking, don't allow yourself to fall into that false narrative for Kubalik.

yes players have bad seasons, it's when they start stringing those bad seasons and asking for large cap hits that it becomes a problem.
You have two alternatives. 1. You sign him to a 4+ mil dollar deal with term. That is clearly a bad option given the consecutive declining years. 2. walk him to FA anyway.
You just ignored the fact that I laid out. 4 mil cp hit on the FA market is probably leading you to a better "asset".
You are going to spend 4+ mil on a guy, go get a better player for it. It's not hard to figure that part out.

what you need and what you'll get are two different things.
If you can't get a return for him this year, and that is skeptical. What makes you think you will get one next. In the mean time, you miss the chance to spend the 4 mil cap hit on a FA they could target instead.
If you are going to drop 4 mil in cap, you can get a solid winger for that. There is no need to drop it on a guy who's play has gone down hill in your system.
This whole thing put together above there is gamble territory. It's a hope and prayer these guys bounce back and you land steals. That's why he's there. Because if you are going to drop 4 mil on a guy, you should look elsewhere and anyone being objecting can see that.

Yes, we would absolutely be prepared to offer him 4m. The last 2 years have been broken up with different protocols and our team has been extremely poor. To pin that on 1 guy is irresponsible.

Like you alluded to in your title. It would be a steal. Something we aren't prepared to do in our current position. Being that we are so poor, we have the capacity to allow his return to form. The last 2 years have been tough but hopefully we bottomed out with JC and Bowman and the new management can come in and turn the page.

We don't need to go out and get a guy for 4M on the open market, we are a bottom 10 team, we need to develop guys or trade guys like Kubalik for younger assets. Letting him walk would be a huge mistake and show complete negligence on the organisations behalf.

If he is as bad as you think, you too could go and get a "solid winger" for cheaper on the FA market. Why spend it on Kubalik?

did you not read what I typed. Every guy on here that i picked up is a gamble.
That's the whole point of the post.

You are putting imaginary value on a guy just because I picked him up. Note I'm not trying to sign him to some 4 mil deal, if I had 4 mil there I would go get a 4 mil winger.
You can't get past the fact that signing him costs you something. It's not like signing him is free to CHI. It's not. 4 mil on him is 4 mil not going somewhere else.
As far as it always being another players fault, at some point the buck stops on all players. He's part of the issue as to why they are bad. Note, his production is dropping too. It's not just all on "someone else".
which is the whole point.
You want to spend 4 mil on a guy who's play doesn't add up. That makes 0 sense. Even if you think CHI has the money, it still makes 0 sense. It only makes everyone else want their cut too then. You end up relegated to the team that over pays guys to play there. Which is dumb. The pay has to match the production. No hope and prayers after 2 declining season he turns it around.

Almost the entire teams production is down on last year, yet you choose to scapegoat Kubalik. Selling low on him or even letting him walk is reckless and unjustifiable.
Whats to say you go and put that 4m into another guy who now starts to fall off because of a poor system? Its a risk game, and with Kubalik they have control and value of somewhat.
I would feel very confident that Kubalik in a better system in a top 6 role would work and thats inevitably why your okay with taking a "gamble"on him. You would also have to factor in that the cap will be increasing and "if" he was a UFA that there would be many teams in the market to pick him up.
Your talking about a guy who's having a down turn over the last couple of years that is still producing 0.55ppg on a horrible offensive team and is a RFA at 26 years old. 4M to give you more options is a "risk" worth doing.

his production isn't just down 1 year though, it's down two. And it's down by a lot.
His point production this year is a .38 ppg. lets be honest on the numbers. Lets not try to bury it under this .55 ppg number where I don't know where you get that from.
6 of those points are coming on the PP. That's a .25 ppg at 5v5 and even strength. That's not great production and it isn't the production level on would expect out of a top 6 guy, which is why he doesn't get top 6 role in CHI.
Clearly other teams taking a "risk" on him is one thing, but the risks are not comparable. Stop trying to compare them. Paying 2-3 for a guy and over 4 is not the same thing.
Especially if you are talking about actual term. At 26 he is a UFA next year unless given term. Other people taking a "risk" are looking at a 1 year deal, as I described above.
Teams can take a 1 year flyer on a guy, if it doesn't work out oh well, move him on. But you are over here with a position that he's an asset to keep. Who in their right mind signs a guy with repetitive falling production to huge contracts with term. No one. That's clearly a bad move.
It's not like you get choices either. You sign him to a 4+M deal on a 1 year term and he's a UFA. So you either get a risky longer term big money deal, or you save yourself the problem after having had the "prove" it years where he did not "prove" it.
Clearly the production of the team is down. But the production of the team was never good to begin with. It was a handful of people playing well. Of which he was one. When he stopped playing well that was the problem. Which is typically the problem on teams. When guys who use to score 5v5 at a .33 rate are now only netting 5v5 goals at a .11 rate everyone's numbers go down.
That's what you are looking at. You're "best" players are suppose to you know play the best. But that didn't happen. So why get caught up in extending a deal like that. It's a bad decision when the team can use 4 million else where.

Chicago and Boston are in different situations. Boston keeps Debrusk if they can't get good value back to have him help on their playoff run. Then sure, they might let him walk. Hawks are making a playoff run. It makes no sense to keep him past the TDL if we have no reason to resign him. And to say that theres absolutely no team that would trade for him is just crazy