Blackhawks

[wonderbread]

The Blackhawks have release a statement advising of a presser to announce the signings of Kane, Toews, and Keith. Kane and Toews will each receive five-year deals for $31.5 million and a $6.3 million average salary. Keith gets a 13-year, $72 million contract that averages $5.54 million per season.

 

 

With a current payroll of almost 60 million how will they fit these players new salary's under the cap? How can they get away with this?

[Stoner]

The Blackhawks have release a statement advising of a presser to announce the signings of Kane, Toews, and Keith. Kane and Toews will each receive five-year deals for $31.5 million and a $6.3 million average salary. Keith gets a 13-year, $72 million contract that averages $5.54 million per season.

 

 

With a current payroll of almost 60 million how will they fit these players new salary's under the cap? How can they get away with this?

 

These contracts won't kick in until next season, right?

[inkman]

These contracts won't kick in until next season, right?

Correct. Given that they have $15 million tied up in Hossa and Campbell, I'd be shocked if both and possibly either were on the Blackhawks next season. It's going to be tough to trade Soupy but Hossa will have takers.

[carpandean]

That's a good question. If those numbers are right, then their cap hit would be $63.738 million for players signed for next season (10F, 5D, 1G.)

[vasabresfan]

I remember listening to XM's NHL station when Kane was interviewed about the re-signing (this was maybe a few weeks ago) and the reporter asked him some questions about Buffalo. I was somewhat surprised with his response. He said all the politically correct interview type things ("Chicago is a great place to play, fans are great, they honored me by drafting me first overall, lots of fun, adopted hometown, blah blah blah..."). However, in response to the Buffalo questions, there was some trepidation in his voice. He talked about how he grew up going to Sabres games and always want to play for the Sabres, etc., and frankly, he didn't sound all that sincere in his excitement about playing in Chicago.

 

With Chicago heading into a cap-related quagmire and with as much talent as they have, what are the chances he could end up in the blue and gold in the next couple of years? If it is any other star, I'd say slim-and-none. But this guy really seems to want to come home (cab incident aside). I've watched a bunch of his games this year and he is one exciting player...

[LabattBlue]

Correct. Given that they have $15 million tied up in Hossa and Campbell, I'd be shocked if both and possibly either were on the Blackhawks next season. It's going to be tough to trade Soupy but Hossa will have takers.

The kicker is that even if they can find a taker for Campbell, they won't be able to take salary back in return. It will be real interesting to see how their roster looks next September.

 

Even with all the money spent, I'm not sure the Blackhawks have a goalie that can take them far in the playoffs.

 

I wonder if the money spent on their core is better than the money the Sabres have spent on theirs? :cry:

[Stoner]

The kicker is that even if they can find a taker for Campbell, they won't be able to take salary back in return. It will be real interesting to see how their roster looks next September.

 

Even with all the money spent, I'm not sure the Blackhawks have a goalie that can take them far in the playoffs.

 

I wonder if the money spent on their core is better than the money the Sabres have spent on theirs? :cry:

 

Miller for Kane.

[darksabre]

Miller for Kane.

 

I know you're not serious, but it is an interesting thought.

 

However...no. I'll keep Miller. I'd rather have Toews. :thumbsup:

[Stoner]

I know you're not serious, but it is an interesting thought.

 

However...no. I'll keep Miller. I'd rather have Toews. :thumbsup:

 

Vanek for Kane?

[cdexchange]

Vanek for Kane?

 

 

for sure

[darksabre]

Vanek for Kane?

 

Ask much as I think Vanek is an underachiever, I'll take his goal scoring over Kane's assists. If Kane was a Center though...

[korab rules]

Vanek for Kane?

 

Kane = Connolly.

 

I want Toews!!!

[Mbossy]

The Blackhawks have release a statement advising of a presser to announce the signings of Kane, Toews, and Keith. Kane and Toews will each receive five-year deals for $31.5 million and a $6.3 million average salary. Keith gets a 13-year, $72 million contract that averages $5.54 million per season.

 

 

With a current payroll of almost 60 million how will they fit these players new salary's under the cap? How can they get away with this?

 

They'll have to trade or waive someone to make tagging room. Any player that has a contract next year applies to the cap and they could be real close or a bit over.

 

If they're close, they may not be able to call someone up (that has a 2010-11 contract) to replace an injured player. I'd expect they get rid of some salary, waiver or trade. (Sopel and/or Barker to Leafs suggested) They have to do this before they announce the contracts of these three guys.

[tom webster]

They'll have to trade or waive someone to make tagging room. Any player that has a contract next year applies to the cap and they could be real close or a bit over.

 

If they're close, they may not be able to call someone up (that has a 2010-11 contract) to replace an injured player. I'd expect they get rid of some salary, waiver or trade. (Sopel and/or Barker to Leafs suggested) They have to do this before they announce the contracts of these three guys.

 

 

This is the latest team that fans point to when they try to convince themselves that big market teams will spend themselves into cap hell and rue the day that they handed out these contracts.

I know that there are contracts that teams regret but I ask you a couple of questions;

 

1) Has there been some superstar cut loose strictly because of cap constraints?

2) Has there been a case where some wise spending team added an impact player at reduced rate or via reduced return in trade value because of cap issues?

3) What became of all the warnings of a major drop in cap ceiling for next year? Was this just another ruse by the NHL to get some of their veteran players under reduced value contracts?

 

As I have said before, I have heard since Andy Messersmith signed with the Atlanta Braves in the seventies that free agency was the ruination of mankind. I'm still waiting.

I'll end with a thought from Bill Polian prior to the advent of unrestricted free agency in the NFL. To paraphrase, there might be a learning curve but eventually the top organizations will figure it out and will continue to be the top organization

[shrader]

They'll have to trade or waive someone to make tagging room. Any player that has a contract next year applies to the cap and they could be real close or a bit over.

 

If they're close, they may not be able to call someone up (that has a 2010-11 contract) to replace an injured player. I'd expect they get rid of some salary, waiver or trade. (Sopel and/or Barker to Leafs suggested) They have to do this before they announce the contracts of these three guys.

 

Bob McKenzie's stuff over at TSN suggests that they may just be under the wire with the tagging room. Like you said, it's going to get interesting if any serious injury occurs.

[Mbossy]

Bob McKenzie's stuff over at TSN suggests that they may just be under the wire with the tagging room. Like you said, it's going to get interesting if any serious injury occurs.

 

I wouldn't want to be Sopel or Barker right now. Seems like the only options if they need a forward. There aren't any? that have contracts into 2010-11. Unless they get rid of Campbell? Nah. Couldn't happen? Could it?

[FogBat]

I remember listening to XM's NHL station when Kane was interviewed about the re-signing (this was maybe a few weeks ago) and the reporter asked him some questions about Buffalo. I was somewhat surprised with his response. He said all the politically correct interview type things ("Chicago is a great place to play, fans are great, they honored me by drafting me first overall, lots of fun, adopted hometown, blah blah blah..."). However, in response to the Buffalo questions, there was some trepidation in his voice. He talked about how he grew up going to Sabres games and always want to play for the Sabres, etc., and frankly, he didn't sound all that sincere in his excitement about playing in Chicago.

 

With Chicago heading into a cap-related quagmire and with as much talent as they have, what are the chances he could end up in the blue and gold in the next couple of years? If it is any other star, I'd say slim-and-none. But this guy really seems to want to come home (cab incident aside). I've watched a bunch of his games this year and he is one exciting player...

I have to wonder if Kane is a bit intimidated by the size of Chicago. Most Buffalo expatriates will readily testify that, once they move to a bigger city, Buffalo is much easier to get around than, say, Boston, Chicago, Dallas, LA, and even NYC - and that it has a distinct culture that none of us can get anywhere else. Just sayin'...

[inkman]

With Chicago heading into a cap-related quagmire and with as much talent as they have, what are the chances he could end up in the blue and gold in the next couple of years? If it is any other star, I'd say slim-and-none. But this guy really seems to want to come home (cab incident aside). I've watched a bunch of his games this year and he is one exciting player...

So you are suggesting the Blackhawks are goin to trade a player they JUST decided to build their franchise around?

[vasabresfan]

So you are suggesting the Blackhawks are goin to trade a player they JUST decided to build their franchise around?

 

No, I'm not suggesting anything. I don't think that the Blackhawks had a choice about re-signing Kane (or the other two) at this juncture for that very reason. He is a fantastic player. They want to keep him. The fans love him. He commands big dollars and his deal needed to be extended. They could not tell their fans that they intend to let any of those three players go at this point. I don't think that they could even explore the option until they have another quality season because they were so bad for so long, and they would risk an uproar.

 

However, I think that the economics of the situation will dictate that they must cut ties with at least one of them. You can probably fit a couple of star level salaries under the cap (Crosby & Malkin, etc), but they would have huge money tied up in Hossa, Campbell, Keith, Toews, and Kane. That doesn't include Seabrook and Huet, who both make some big bucks. Barker, Sharp, and Sopel loom on the horizon. Toews is the face of the franchise. Hossa is signed until infinity. Campbell's contract is already an albatross circling the mast. There just isn't enough money to go around and someone is going to have to go eventually.

 

My hope is that when the Blackhawks get into a salary cap bind and are looking for volunteers, Kane would be the first to step forward. The team would have an out in saying that they have a lot of talent that they needed to sign and had to make a very difficult decision to keep as much of the core intact as they could. They could even blame it on the player's desire to play for the team that he grew up watching and for which he had always dreamed of playing. Hmmmmmmm-- now I know I've heard that rhetoric used before. If I could only remember who that was...

[Taro T]

No, I'm not suggesting anything. I don't think that the Blackhawks had a choice about re-signing Kane (or the other two) at this juncture for that very reason. He is a fantastic player. They want to keep him. The fans love him. He commands big dollars and his deal needed to be extended. They could not tell their fans that they intend to let any of those three players go at this point. I don't think that they could even explore the option until they have another quality season because they were so bad for so long, and they would risk an uproar.

 

However, I think that the economics of the situation will dictate that they must cut ties with at least one of them. You can probably fit a couple of star level salaries under the cap (Crosby & Malkin, etc), but they would have huge money tied up in Hossa, Campbell, Keith, Toews, and Kane. That doesn't include Seabrook and Huet, who both make some big bucks. Barker, Sharp, and Sopel loom on the horizon. Toews is the face of the franchise. Hossa is signed until infinity. Campbell's contract is already an albatross circling the mast. There just isn't enough money to go around and someone is going to have to go eventually.

 

My hope is that when the Blackhawks get into a salary cap bind and are looking for volunteers, Kane would be the first to step forward. The team would have an out in saying that they have a lot of talent that they needed to sign and had to make a very difficult decision to keep as much of the core intact as they could. They could even blame it on the player's desire to play for the team that he grew up watching and for which he had always dreamed of playing. Hmmmmmmm-- now I know I've heard that rhetoric used before. If I could only remember who that was...

Except there is no way a team goes "looking for volunteers" to leave the team.

 

The team is going to keep as many of their assets as possible; and for those that they decide they can't keep, they will make a decision whether they are better off trading them (as the Sabres did w/ Soupy) or using every last bit of value they currently have that asset under contract for and will then let them walk at the end of the season (as the Sabres did w/ Briere).

 

Is it more likely that the Hawks would trade Kane than trade captain and face of franchise Toews? Absolutely, although both moves have slim odds. But there is no way the Hawks go up to Kane and say, "Pat, would you mind if we tried shopping you to other teams? We've just got too much talent and too much salary and you are the guy we think is expendable. But since you've been such a hard working team player, we'll send you where you want to go; not to the team that will give us the most back for you." They simply cannot play it that way.

 

It also is much more likely that the team will trade or outright cut some of the other high price guys rather than cutting the core if/when they get to that point. They already did it to a degree when Khabibulin walked as an UFA. Huet isn't as good, but he's under contract and they couldn't afford to keep both.