[Report] Hawks about to trade core piece?

[BreadManPanarin]

John Jaeckel/HockeyBuzz.com:

Last night, the Seabrook rumors exploded. Two separate independent contacts of mine, one in Toronto, and the other in Chicago, have added to that buzz with what they had heard.
The two teams I have specifically heard from sources I trust are: Vancouver (as mentioned above) and Toronto. And that the Hawks, in spite of Seabrook's so-called "albatross" contract and alleged (but highly debatable) "declining skills," were getting a lot of interest on Seabrook.As of 10:30 Central last night, I heard that Seabrook had not yet been asked to waive for any deal.

[BreadManPanarin]

Super crazy thought, beyond absolutely crazy:

What if the Hawks offered up Kane/Seabrook as a duo to Vegas? In return for picks and possibly players that vegas takes in expansion? That would basically hit the reset button on Chicago's ongoing salary cap meltdown by clearing two contracts that combine for ~17 mil/year while immediately making Vegas a team with two experienced veterans with brand value and cup winning experience, one being a legit superstar. I realize this is super unlikely, but man would it be absolutely nuts. What could a hawks team led by Toews, Panarin, Keith, Hammer, Anisimov, Hossa, Crawford, the depth and young guys, players/picks from Vegas, and $17 mil in cap space do going forward? And would Kane/seabrook entertain waiving their NMCs together to make it happen? Kane might like to be out of Toews' shadow and be the Captain and sole headliner. He always seems to come after Toews here in Chi town.

okay, that's it for my absolutely ridiculous ramblings. I think the seabrook deal to Toronto might actually make sense tho.

[Daydream Nation]

Panarin, Kruger, another anchor contract, pote tial depth picks
For
2nd rounder


I know im way out in left field here but the shoe seems to fit:

Chicago- out of cap hell for the first time ever with a bonus 2nd (early one too)

Vegas- Potential superstar/face of the franchise- and a great fit with their topline c (on paper ) and maybe some depth picks tfor mcphee to wbeel and deal with.

I know its tinfoil. Just getting caught up in expansion fever I guess

Heavens NO! If the players take the escalator and the cap goes to $77 M, about all the Hawks have to do is trade Kruger and they are very close after they sign some RFAs to under 1 M contracts.

What anchor contract are you talking about? The only one in discussion is Seabrook. And I still don't get people calling Kruger a dump. He is a little overpaid but the guy has value. He'd get well over 2 M per on the open market. 3 M for 1 season is not outrageous.

I think the closer trade comp with Panarin is Taylor Hall. Granted, Hall's value is a little higher than Panarin but Edmonton should have gotten more than Larsson. Use that as your trade comp.

By the way, the rumor I heard was some kind of 3-way with Toronto and Anaheim but the stupid HF Board policies won't allow people to post certain stuff.

[BreadManPanarin]

By the way, the rumor I heard was some kind of 3-way with Toronto and Anaheim but the stupid HF Board policies won't allow people to post certain stuff.

Haha. All of that PMing business was madness.

[FinnishFlash]

I think the Seabrook rumors to Toronto have some weight to them. He's exactly the type of player they need to play with (and mentor) Reilly and the leafs have the cap space to take him on as well as some other dead weight in the shorter term to bail out Chicago if it nets them assets.

With Horton on LTIR, Lupul and Bozak off the books next year they will have a lot of money. As long as they do their math to ensure there are no issues signing Matthews, Marner and Nylander, I could see a mutually beneficial deal happening between them.

[STONE.]

If Seabrook ends up in Vancouver, I'll be so pissed.

[The Comish]

I'd take either Seabrook or Hjalmarsson in Edmonton. Those guys can play defense. Don't care about Seabrook's long contract. There are ways to mitigate those cap hits, although they can be costly.

[rataylor22]

I'd take either Seabrook or Hjalmarsson in Edmonton. Those guys can play defense. Don't care about Seabrook's long contract. There are ways to mitigate those cap hits, although they can be costly.

With Lucic, EDM can't afford another boat anchor contract. Hawks aren't trading Hammer, he's their second best D and has a great contract.

Also, this is a historic draft? Since when?

[Jouko-Pouko]

Vegas- Potential superstar/face of the franchise- and a great fit with their topline c (on paper ) and maybe some depth picks tfor mcphee to wbeel and deal with.

Panarin and Shipachyov were are a great fit when they played together in the KHL and in international tournaments. They played together about two years, so that would be a great fit for sure.

But I just don't see Chicago trading Panarin. His contract is great value and he's a superstar offensive player - you don't trade a guy like that to get out of bad contracts. Chicago's situation isn't even all that bad this year; they just need to trade Kruger which shouldn't be an issue. Nick Bonino at $1.9M was considered great value and I don't see much difference between those two, so you don't need to sacrifice your 2nd best offensive player to get rid of Kruger's $3M cap hit.

[Daydream Nation]

Just read an article that stated the cap escalator IS NOT getting approved and the cap will be flat at 73 M. If that is the case the Hawks would have to move a core piece besides Kruger. And if that really happens it just makes the Kane and Toews 10.5 M contracts worse and worse. When those contracts were signed the thinking was that the salary cap would keep going up and it would be in the 80-million range within a couple years (now). Bad timing and a hard cap salary league is what ended the Hawks cup contention so abruptly. Same for the Kings. The best hockey I've seen in the last 10 years was the LA/CHI 2014 Western Conference Final and both of those teams are shells of what they were. I don't see how that is good for hockey. Oh well...

[blackaces]

Why would Seabrook waive his NMC?

BTW Monday at 5 p.m. ET is the deadline for teams to ask players to waive no-move clauses for the purposes of the expansion draft (A response is not due until Friday).

Nothing to do with Chicago but Friedman says he's hearing Ottawa has asked Phaneuf to waive - "Dorion isn’t commenting, but word is Phaneuf was indeed asked to waive."

Also he says Keith Yandle has been asked to waive and word of that came out at the NHL Combine.

[lucafen4]

There was no "rape incident."
That was a money-grab attempt, based on fiction.

Saga, episode,.. whatever you want to call it. I think daytimes comment was directed more at the negative publicity it brought to Kane and the hawks, that type of thing tends to leave a bad taste in mouths, founded or not

[rataylor22]

Just read an article that stated the cap escalator IS NOT getting approved and the cap will be flat at 73 M. If that is the case the Hawks would have to move a core piece besides Kruger. And if that really happens it just makes the Kane and Toews 10.5 M contracts worse and worse. When those contracts were signed the thinking was that the salary cap would keep going up and it would be in the 80-million range within a couple years (now). Bad timing and a hard cap salary league is what ended the Hawks cup contention so abruptly. Same for the Kings. The best hockey I've seen in the last 10 years was the LA/CHI 2014 Western Conference Final and both of those teams are shells of what they were. I don't see how that is good for hockey. Oh well...

FWIW, the cap had definitely started flattening by the time Toews and Kane signed their deals. I don't think anybody expected it to be 80 million by now.

Also, I doubt they've made that decision either way. They might be leaning that way, and that's great, until it actually comes to he point where you have to have the stones to make that decision.

[RizzeeDizzee]

Zero chance this is anyone but Panarin, and I think it's a logical move

[Daydream Nation]

FWIW, the cap had definitely started flattening by the time Toews and Kane signed their deals. I don't think anybody expected it to be 80 million by now.
.

A lot of people thought it would be going up more and be in at least the high 70s by now. That's part of the way the Hawks explained the deal. No one thought in a couple years that they would still be the highest paid players in the league. Remember that they signed the contract 3 years ago. I'll give Bowman credit that they projected the cap to have increased more than 4 M since the time they signed the contract.

Just because I am bored, let's look at this closer.

The 1988 contracts were signed before the 14-15 season when the cap was 69 M. It had just gone up 4.7 M from the previous season. So if you figure a 4 M increase per season moving forward that would give you. 73 M in 15-16, 77 M in 16-17 and 81 M in 17-18. If we now have a flat cap at 73 M this season that is a huge difference between what they figured. So I don't know exactly what is reasonable to expect in terms of a yearly salary cap increase but from those numbers alone I contend that the Hawks had some bad timing in terms of when they resigned Kane and Toews. I still don't know why they felt the need to sign them a full season before they were free agents.