HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Chicago Blackhawks
Notices

2006 - Pronger to Chicago?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-11-2013, 02:44 PM
  #51
WarriorofTime
Registered User
 
WarriorofTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
Yeah, the Hawks had a weak payroll coming out of the lockout. That's why I never understood Dollar Bill being such an advocate for the cap because it forced him to spend more on the team.
No salary cap lead to a bunch of escalating salaries. Lots of the stars were making $10 million the last few years before that lockout.

WarriorofTime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-11-2013, 02:47 PM
  #52
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 22,547
vCash: 1948
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarriorofTime View Post
No salary cap lead to a bunch of escalating salaries. Lots of the stars were making $10 million the last few years before that lockout.
I remember, guys like Kariya, Jagr, Forsberg. None of which Bill would have any interest in. I just find it odd that his plan ended up costing him a lot of money he would not have otherwise spent. It was good for the league overall but Bill took it up the ass on that one.

coldsteelonice84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-11-2013, 02:54 PM
  #53
WarriorofTime
Registered User
 
WarriorofTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
I remember, guys like Kariya, Jagr, Forsberg. None of which Bill would have any interest in. I just find it odd that his plan ended up costing him a lot of money he would not have otherwise spent. It was good for the league overall but Bill took it up the ass on that one.
Yeah hawks spent more than they would have but it was a longterm type thing. When salaries are escalated that means all FA are going to get more because of what the big boys can offer. For example, Bobby Holik got 5 years/$45 million from the Rangers in 2002. That's mind-boggling for a peak mid-60s point player who had recently been a mid-50s point 32 year old player.

I can see why Wirtz would be hard-line on wanting to put an end to that.

WarriorofTime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-11-2013, 03:33 PM
  #54
unbridledid
Registered User
 
unbridledid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 355
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
No he was not

There was no reason for Hawks to dump Vorobiev who showed best potential of our young forwards as rookie in 05-06

Anderson was never given fair chance playing behind a D that made Khabibulin look like Bryzgalov

And again why dump Babchuk when they could have allowed him to leave for Russia and hold onto his rights

It was 3 examples of wasteful asset management by Tallon simply because they were Mike Smith prospects who he had low opinion of
Perhaps there was more to dumping Vorobiev than they just didn't like Russians. He hasn't made an attempt to come back to the NHL and for all the potential you say he had you would figure some team would have offered something for him ?

Anderson turned out the best of the bunch and who really cares about him anyway.

unbridledid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-11-2013, 03:41 PM
  #55
Blackhawkswincup
Global Moderator
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 95,181
vCash: 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by unbridledid View Post
Perhaps there was more to dumping Vorobiev than they just didn't like Russians. He hasn't made an attempt to come back to the NHL and for all the potential you say he had you would figure some team would have offered something for him ?

Anderson turned out the best of the bunch and who really cares about him anyway.
Hawks owned Vorobiev's rights for many years so he couldn't just come back to another team

And the way things ended with him speaking truth of how horrible the Hawks organization was on his way out further eroded chances of NHL return

nowadays he is 30 yrs old in KHL and has struggled with injuries so coming back to NHL isn't viable

And who cares about Anderson? Potential Vezina nominee ,, Yeah totally who cares

Blackhawkswincup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-11-2013, 04:02 PM
  #56
unbridledid
Registered User
 
unbridledid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 355
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
Hawks owned Vorobiev's rights for many years so he couldn't just come back to another team


And the way things ended with him speaking truth of how horrible the Hawks organization was on his way out further eroded chances of NHL return

nowadays he is 30 yrs old in KHL and has struggled with injuries so coming back to NHL isn't viable

And who cares about Anderson? Potential Vezina nominee ,, Yeah totally who cares

Hawks had his Vorobiev's rights until he was 27. Yea his attitude seemed to be an issue, I believe he also didn't want to play much defense either if my memory is correct.

As for Anderson, he didn't find his game until he came to the avs and goaltending isn't an issue for us. You do remember he was passed around and available for any team to take. The Avs traded him for who exactly ? He had a good run, so did Theodore, you want him too ?

He is good but not great, and as I said who cares that he is gone. Not like when we traded Hasek, now that hurts.

unbridledid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-11-2013, 05:15 PM
  #57
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,354
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
Yeah, the Hawks had a weak payroll coming out of the lockout. That's why I never understood Dollar Bill being such an advocate for the cap because it forced him to spend more on the team.
I missed this before. The Hawks were well above the cap floor coming out of the lockout. The cap in 2006 was 39 million if I recall and the cap floor was set at 21.5 million for the 2006 season. It then moved to a fixed +/- with contingencies of the established revenue midpoint. The Hawks spent over 30 million in 2006. You could take LaPointe and Khabibulin off the books in 2006 and they were still running well above the daily minimum before they dumped players.

The only year Chicago was relatively close to the cap floor was 2008 because of all the ELCs and initial extensions. They dumped salary in 2008 (after WWW passed, spending was no longer an issue) which is why their year-end number was so low for 2008. Samsonov, Ruutu (more expensive than Ladd), and Lapointe's departure lowered total year end payroll considerably in 2008.

The Hawks daily number before sell offs had them in the middle of the pack in daily payroll the two years coming out of the lockout. Even during most of the dark years before the lockout, the Hawks weren't as cheap as they were made out to be on player spending, they just spent the money terribly and almost always refused to sign long contracts. Of course they were cheap in plenty of other ways.

hockeydoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-11-2013, 08:32 PM
  #58
Penosity
Registered User
 
Penosity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,233
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
When you pay Havlat elite money despite no elite production and injury history = Yeah a gamble

Havlat was easily the best forward the Hawks had since Amonte when he came here.
What did he average 0.9 ppg in Chicago?
Not too shabby.

Penosity is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2013, 12:36 AM
  #59
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 22,613
vCash: 500
Havlat wasn't a gamble... he was Chicagos Mr. Everything when we added him

Bubba88 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2013, 11:54 AM
  #60
WarriorofTime
Registered User
 
WarriorofTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,319
vCash: 500
Best thing Dale did was tank out of the lockout.

Although adding Sharp and Versteeg were pretty neat as well.

WarriorofTime is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:07 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.