If the hawks sign both,it would mean one of the core players would have to be traded.i think that it would probably be Kane.i read on another blog that the canadians were very interested in Kane,what would we get from Montreal if that was the case?
I don't see them getting either or both for that matter. BUT if we did, I'm assuming you'd see Hammer and Stalberg traded for little return with both guys having either Montador or Frolik tossed in the deal.
If the hawks sign both,it would mean one of the core players would have to be traded.i think that it would probably be Kane.i read on another blog that the canadians were very interested in Kane,what would we get from Montreal if that was the case?
You're dreaming. I doubt Hawks have even sniffed at either of these guys with the money they want.
I don't see them getting either or both for that matter. BUT if we did, I'm assuming you'd see Hammer and Stalberg traded for little return with both guys having either Montador or Frolik tossed in the deal.
If the hawks sign both,it would mean one of the core players would have to be traded.i think that it would probably be Kane.i read on another blog that the canadians were very interested in Kane,what would we get from Montreal if that was the case?
If the Hawks could sign Parise and Suter, but it meant having to deal off Kane, Frolik and Hjalmarsson...then you do it in an instant and don't think twice about it. Not only does it make the team much better, but you'd also gain some sick riches back for Kane (picks or prospects, whatever...).
If we get both and we have to trade 1 of the core, I'd trade Hossa to the Pens or Flyers
For..?
I think it would have to be Hossa or Kane moved. I'm not sure how movable Hossa is right now with the concussion. And I personally would rather keep him over Kane anyway. He's a more complete player.
I think it would have to be Hossa or Kane moved. I'm not sure how movable Hossa is right now with the concussion. And I personally would rather keep him over Kane anyway. He's a more complete player.
That's true, but Hossa will have 2-4 years until he starts to decline, whereas Kane will have another 10 or so until that age decline. Better to lose Hossa than Kane IMO. However, if I was Stan and just signed Suter and Parise, my first moves would be dumping Stalberg, Frolik, Montador and Hjalmarsson. Probably for a return that they are not worthy of, but moves that will have to be made.
If we did sign both and had to move someone my guess would be Kane. But who's to say that Hossa will ever even play this year? They may put him on LTIR.
You won't get a true impact player for Hossa though. Not at 34 coming off a major concussion.
For Kane you could easily get an actual #1 goalie and more.
If we get both and we have to trade 1 of the core, I'd trade Hossa to the Pens or Flyers
We could make space for both by dumping Hammer, Frolik, and Montador...assuming we're only getting picks back (i.e. no one who is going to add salary). We'd be right up against the cap though.
anyway...i doubt we get either of P or S...let alone both of them.
Exactly. I'm blown away that we even made Parise an offer. There's pretty much zero chance we see Parise or Suter in an indian head next year.
I know it's just speculation, but maybe Parise or Suter or both really WANT to play in Chicago and might be willing to take a little less money to do so.
It would be a pipedream to sign both of them, but I don't think it's unrealistic to sign one of them to a contract.
