HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Chicago Blackhawks (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=30)
-   -   The Stalberg situation (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1201631)

Bubba88 06-04-2012 05:39 AM

The Stalberg situation
 
A topic we haven't had for a few weeks now....

Stalberg only has 1 year left on his contract and it's a very cheap contract. He will play in the Top6 most of the time and I don't see a reason why he won't end up with 0.5 PPG again this year.
I don't think the Cap will go up but in the end, it won't go down either.
Looking at other players at this age, size and production he would get 3+ million as UFA. Now what to do with him?

1. Extend him early before he puts up that numbers at a better price for the Hawks? Would he agree to this because he isn't stupid. He knows he could end up with a better contract as longer the season is and as more points he puts up. On the other side, this past year could have been a fluke (which I doubt)

2. Wait until the end of the season. This could really put his price up. Like I said above, this could end up with a big price we may couldn't afford and lose him for nothing - which would suck. On the other side, he he takes a step backwards we wouldn't have another Frolik situation here

3. Trade him while his value is high. At his cheap rate, he would be interesting for other teams that spend close to the Cap, but that's the biggest reason why we should keep him. I would say that this really depends on his return.

WarriorofTime 06-04-2012 05:42 AM

Let him play out his contract. If he's producing and he and his agent are willing to negotiate for the right price then extend him. If he wants to chase top dollar let him walk. The fanatical need to get a return on every player that walks through the organization is misplaced. Stalberg is useful for our chances for having success next year.

rick hawk 06-04-2012 05:47 AM

At this point its impossible to know where his future lies. He has to continue to show more progress. Otherwise Saad, Morin or maybe even, Beach might be better
long term options in the top six.

Marotte Marauder 06-04-2012 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarriorofTime (Post 50487063)
Let him play out his contract. If he's producing and he and his agent are willing to negotiate for the right price then extend him. If he wants to chase top dollar let him walk. The fanatical need to get a return on every player that walks through the organization is misplaced. Stalberg is useful for our chances for having success next year.

And if he has a 25-25 season and walks, just who is going to be the replacement?

Sign him to at least a Frolik deal and focus on getting what we don't have instead of just replacing what we already have.

BBSeabs27 06-04-2012 06:40 AM

What's the time frame allowed for extensions (if any)?? If there are no restrictions, I say wait untiil mid-way through next season before extending him, if the hawks choose to. Otherwise, we'll just take him to free agency, maybe trade him at the draft next year (get a 2nd or 3rd back).

It seems Bowman likes him alot, but Q really doesn't. So it'll be interesting to see how this plays out. I think he likes it in chicago and knows we're only a decent goaltender away from winning the cup.

UsernameWasTaken 06-04-2012 07:42 AM

The only problem I have is if Saad and Hayes are ready to play we're getting into a situation where we have too many forwards. I don't know that Stalberg has to go, but someone does.

Marotte Marauder 06-04-2012 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UsernameWasTaken (Post 50487933)
The only problem I have is if Saad and Hayes are ready to play we're getting into a situation where we have too many forwards. I don't know that Stalberg has to go, but someone does.

If Saad or Hayes are ready or not, I wouldn't mind seeing them, Hayes in particular, hone their craft in Rockford for a full season, to avoid another Kruger mishandling.

If an error is to be made, I err on the side of bringing a kid up too late rather too early. He won't be as likely to be overwhelmed and perhaps even hungrier to stay with the big club. Hunger that the team is sorely missing right now.

UsernameWasTaken 06-04-2012 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marotte Marauder (Post 50488313)
If Saad or Hayes are ready or not, I wouldn't mind seeing them, Hayes in particular, hone their craft in Rockford for a full season, to avoid another Kruger mishandling.

If an error is to be made, I err on the side of bringing a kid up too late rather too early. He won't be as likely to be overwhelmed and perhaps even hungrier to stay with the big club. Hunger that the team is sorely missing right now.

I don't disagree...although Saad at least looks pretty ready. He'll probably be here for the first nine next year, so it will be interesting to see how he looks. If he looks good, I wouldn't mind him playing here...he has more size and, it looks, strength than Kruger...and as a wing he doesn't have quite the same defensive responsibilities as a centre.

stingo 06-04-2012 09:41 AM

Stalberg was great this past year.

He had almost no PP time, and scored 20 goals.

zytz 06-04-2012 10:06 AM

Don't think there are any restrictions on when extensions can occur- so I would expect him to
get one between December and march if he's playing well.

HawksFan74 06-04-2012 10:44 AM

http://www.secondcityhockey.com/2012...ehead-and-roll

Good article I read on him yesterday. Naysayers are not going to want to commit another deal to him thinking it was a fluke.

Question I have is the Hawks have nobody currently to replace him. I know everyone wants to throw Saad in every line up but I feel it's just too early for him.

Quote:

Contract: One year left at 875K, and this is where the debate begins.

Stick Around Or Hit The Bricks: Boy, this is a loaded one. It's clear to everyone that you can sell high on Stalberg, as high as you're probably ever going to be able to. A 20-goal scorer who can play up and down the lineup at that contract is going to look tantalizing to a lot of GMs. Add to that that when Vik hits unrestricted free agency next summer, the bidding for him (unless he completely falls off the table, which tends not to happen in walk years) probably starts at 3 mildo per year and could very well go north of 4. That's going to be too pricey for a Hawks team with kids coming up to take his role anyway. Morin or Saad look to be the prime contenders to do so. So there's a lot that says Stalberg will be part of a package, and depending on what comes back, you couldn't argue.

On the flip side, if the Hawks do move Stalberg, they're not going to be able to afford someone to then do what he does, or likely won't without moving a couple pieces (and it would have to be more than Hammer, which probably means Bolland, and we just discussed that). If they decide to do so, they have to be sure that Saad or Morin or some other kid is actually ready to step in and contribute. No one knows that yet. And having a player with that offense and speed on that deal who can play on any of the four lines isn't the worst thing in the world.

It would seem neither is a wrong answer, exactly.
I would like to see him here at a cap friendly deal. You sign him at whatever fits in to the 70 mil CBA structure. If it gets rolled back in the future, so be it. Maybe Stans thinking lately has a lot to do with the upcoming CBA.

DisgruntledHawkFan 06-04-2012 10:58 AM

If he's willing to sign for a few years on the right side of 2.5, absolutely keep him around.

Cullksinikers 06-04-2012 11:21 AM

Trade Stalberg while his value is where it currently stands and a second-round pick for Clowe.

Hawkaholic 06-04-2012 12:00 PM

I say if you can package him and upgrade for a top 6 W, you do it instantly.

If you can't, then keep him and sign him to a reasonable contract. If that's not possible, deal him at the deadline for some veteran help + a pick that we lost in the Oduya trade.

Sarava 06-04-2012 12:49 PM

I wouldn't sign him at this point. And if you can move him for the right price, you do that. IMO guys like Saad and Morin are the Hawks future wingers, not Stalberg.

Rexy 06-04-2012 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hawkaholic (Post 50495293)
I say if you can package him and upgrade for a top 6 W, you do it instantly.

If you can't, then keep him and sign him to a reasonable contract. If that's not possible, deal him at the deadline for some veteran help + a pick that we lost in the Oduya trade.

trade a top 6 W for a top 6 W.

why?

Sarava 06-04-2012 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rexy (Post 50497721)
trade a top 6 W for a top 6 W.

why?

One that plays well against teams not named the Blue Jackets would be a good start.

TorMenT 06-04-2012 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rexy (Post 50497721)
trade a top 6 W for a top 6 W.

why?

The reasoning behind it I'm sure is because there are plenty of top 6 Wingers that are better than Stalberg out there.

Cullksinikers 06-04-2012 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rexy (Post 50497721)
trade a top 6 W for a top 6 W.

why?

Stalberg is a top-six winger on a team that's biggest forward need is a top-six winger or center depending on what they do with Kane in regards to positioning.

T0ny0 06-04-2012 01:04 PM

I don't see Stalbergs value being any higher...
That being said, I'm not opposed to keeping him.

digdug41982 06-04-2012 01:10 PM

Sign him now or trade him. Don't let him get to UFA, he'll be payed through the moon.

Rexy 06-04-2012 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TorMenT (Post 50497931)
The reasoning behind it I'm sure is because there are plenty of top 6 Wingers that are better than Stalberg out there.

and they will all have a cap hit of triple what Stalberg makes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cullksinikers (Post 50497943)
Stalberg is a top-six winger on a team that's biggest forward need is a top-six winger or center depending on what they do with Kane in regards to positioning.

a top 6 W for a top 6 W is a lateral move. If it was for a #2 Center, then fine. But not for someone that plays the same position.

Hawkaholic 06-04-2012 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rexy (Post 50497721)
trade a top 6 W for a top 6 W.

why?

I don't really think Stalberg is a top 6 W, not the type of one we need anyway.

And the point of trading a 'top 6 W' for a top 6 W would be because they are signed to a decent deal and I don't want to pay Stalberg top 6 W money.

cherrypik 06-04-2012 02:20 PM

I would package Stalberg and Perri for a tough top 6 winger that can protect Kane and Toews. Honestly, I would overpay for a 29 year old Steve Ott. That guys plays all the PP, PK and is pretty good a the faceoff dot.

Bubba88 06-04-2012 02:57 PM

Ott for Pirri & Stalberg and you want Bowman gone?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:57 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.