HFBoards

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

Kovalchuk to the Hawks

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-22-2010, 11:23 PM
  #26
DarkReign
Registered User
 
DarkReign's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,584
vCash: 500
LeBrun stole my f-ing material, that hack.

DarkReign is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-22-2010, 11:24 PM
  #27
DarkReign
Registered User
 
DarkReign's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,584
vCash: 500
...that was a joke.

DarkReign is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-22-2010, 11:47 PM
  #28
Tankerjockey
 
Tankerjockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 36
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gman3 View Post
A comment on this situation: It's an interesting theory but I doubt the Blackhawks want to risk upsetting team chemistry. Given how well they're playing of late there's no reason to make that kind of move.


I agree. I doubt this is happening.

Tankerjockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 12:08 AM
  #29
EbonyRaptor
Registered User
 
EbonyRaptor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Boonies
Country: United States
Posts: 2,954
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Sidorkiewicz View Post
Thrashers fan here, it seems every Kovalchuk proposal to Chicago has two roster players coming back including prospect/first round pick - Versteeg and Barker being the most common.

Just curious in order of importance (1 being least likely to trade) how would you rate the following players in any deal for Kovalchuk.

Rating going by scoring stats is:

1.Sharp
2.Versteeg
3.Bollard (pro-rata)
4.Byfuglien
5.Ladd
6.Barker

Wouldn't you offer Ladd or Bollard up before Versteeg in any proposal for Kovalchuk? Versteeg seems a more valuable player than these two because as well as secondary scoring, he is excellent on the PK.
Bolland is a very good PKer too and is the only true center on the list. The Hawks have a surplus of wingers, but not much depth at center. Plus, Bolland is just coming off back surgery and there will not be enough time before the trade deadline for other GMs (Waddell) to determine that Bolland has recovered fully. We don't have much defensive depth either, so I would be fine with making the trade two forwards instead on one forward and Barker.

But due to the Hawks not having any cap room, the two players on the Hawks would have to add up to approximately the same salary as Kovy - in other words (2) $3M players for (1) $6M player (Kovy). So, that eliminates Ladd because he makes less than $2M. That leaves wingers Sharp, Versteeg and Byfuglien. Sharp should not be traded because he is one of the players that is truly a leader on the team and one of those "glue" guys that is needed to keep the team chemistry positive. That leaves Versteeg and Byfuglien.

So, the three possible trade packages would be (1) Versteeg & Byfuglien, (2) Versteeg and Barker, or (3) Byfuglien & Barker. Throw in Skille and call it a deal.

EbonyRaptor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 12:08 AM
  #30
DarkReign
Registered User
 
DarkReign's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,584
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tankerjockey View Post
I agree. I doubt this is happening.
Welcome to perennial contention.

Chicago is interested, IMO. Depending on Bowman's ability to stomach the movement of roster players, I am thinking Chicago makes a HUGE splash very soon after the Oly break.

I thought it was conjecture when I spoke about it in another thread, but now that LeBrun and TSN's McKenzie are talking about it like they have heard interest, its all but a done deal.

No team in the league can offer Atlanta what Chicago can. Not one.

DarkReign is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 12:10 AM
  #31
DarkReign
Registered User
 
DarkReign's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,584
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EbonyRaptor View Post
So, the three possible trade packages would be (1) Versteeg & Byfuglien, (2) Versteeg and Barker, or (3) Byfuglien & Barker. Throw in Skille and call it a deal.
Two roster players you mentioned, plus a prospect and pick (a 1st).

DarkReign is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 12:18 AM
  #32
Tankerjockey
 
Tankerjockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 36
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkReign View Post
Welcome to perennial contention.

Chicago is interested, IMO. Depending on Bowman's ability to stomach the movement of roster players, I am thinking Chicago makes a HUGE splash very soon after the Oly break.

I thought it was conjecture when I spoke about it in another thread, but now that LeBrun and TSN's McKenzie are talking about it like they have heard interest, its all but a done deal.

No team in the league can offer Atlanta what Chicago can. Not one.
I don't have the math in front of me, but I think it would be real tough long term to keep him around. If Stan can do the math and keep the depth, I'm all for it, but I can't see Kolvy giving a home town discount to the Hawks come contract time. If Stan thinks he can make it work , I'm all for it.

Tankerjockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 12:20 AM
  #33
crimsonking
Registered User
 
crimsonking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,951
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkReign View Post
Welcome to perennial contention.

Chicago is interested, IMO. Depending on Bowman's ability to stomach the movement of roster players, I am thinking Chicago makes a HUGE splash very soon after the Oly break.

I thought it was conjecture when I spoke about it in another thread, but now that LeBrun and TSN's McKenzie are talking about it like they have heard interest, its all but a done deal.

No team in the league can offer Atlanta what Chicago can. Not one.

I agree. I think Chicago is looking into it (despite the team saying they weren't). What helps this situation is the fact that in this supposed deal, we'd give up talent (and money) for next year when we need to make room. What better team is there than Atlanta? A team in the Eastern conference, who we play once a year to help move potential large dollar players.

crimsonking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 12:22 AM
  #34
crimsonking
Registered User
 
crimsonking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,951
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tankerjockey View Post
I don't have the math in front of me, but I think it would be real tough long term to keep him around. If Stan can do the math and keep the depth, I'm all for it, but I can't see Kolvy giving a home town discount to the Hawks come contract time. If Stan thinks he can make it work , I'm all for it.
If Chicago is looking to move, I think they would be thinking this really is a rental, and won't move to resign him next year.

crimsonking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 12:37 AM
  #35
Tankerjockey
 
Tankerjockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 36
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by crimsonking View Post
If Chicago is looking to move, I think they would be thinking this really is a rental, and won't move to resign him next year.

If it costs Versteeg , and Barker or Ladd no problem. Going to be overloaded on forwards real soon. It makes sense then.

I worry about the Chemistry a little bit, but winning creates good chemistry.

Tankerjockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 01:25 AM
  #36
Blue Liner
Registered User
 
Blue Liner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 4,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tankerjockey View Post
If it costs Versteeg , and Barker or Ladd no problem. Going to be overloaded on forwards real soon. It makes sense then.

I worry about the Chemistry a little bit, but winning creates good chemistry.
The chemistry angle is a pretty legit one, but if you're only losing two guys that's not like you're gutting the whole team. Maybe people know something I don't, but I've never heard anything about Kovalchuk being difficult to deal with or being a bad teammate or anything of the sort. Not to mention in theory the guy would come in knowing he has a chance at a Cup (let alone a great run makes him all the more valuable come contract time next season for whoever gets him) I would think he'd come in and just want to fit in and enjoy the luxury of having that much talent around him for the first time in his career. That Hawks dressing room is pretty tight knit and well established. It's always possible and that's the risk but I really don't think the chemistry would be upset by making this move.

Blue Liner is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 01:33 AM
  #37
Tankerjockey
 
Tankerjockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 36
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Liner View Post
The chemistry angle is a pretty legit one, but if you're only losing two guys that's not like you're gutting the whole team. Maybe people know something I don't, but I've never heard anything about Kovalchuk being difficult to deal with or being a bad teammate or anything of the sort. Not to mention in theory the guy would come in knowing he has a chance at a Cup (let alone a great run makes him all the more valuable come contract time next season for whoever gets him) I would think he'd come in and just want to fit in and enjoy the luxury of having that much talent around him for the first time in his career. That Hawks dressing room is pretty tight knit and well established. It's always possible and that's the risk but I really don't think the chemistry would be upset by making this move.

Only guy I see effecting chemistry is Sharp. From what I understand he's the top guy in the locker room. Between being a leader and prankster. I doubt they want to move him anyway.

Some say Versteeg is going to be a great player. I like him, but I see a lot of stupid moves and turnovers. I think he can be replaced. Barker sucks, LAdd can be replaced. Don't know how much it would cost, but i would think Steeg and Barker or Ladd would be enough.

Tankerjockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 01:43 AM
  #38
Blue Liner
Registered User
 
Blue Liner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 4,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tankerjockey View Post
Only guy I see effecting chemistry is Sharp. From what I understand he's the top guy in the locker room. Between being a leader and prankster. I doubt they want to move him anyway.

Some say Versteeg is going to be a great player. I like him, but I see a lot of stupid moves and turnovers. I think he can be replaced. Barker sucks, LAdd can be replaced. Don't know how much it would cost, but i would think Steeg and Barker or Ladd would be enough.
You raise a good point with Sharp.

Blue Liner is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 02:34 AM
  #39
EbonyRaptor
Registered User
 
EbonyRaptor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Boonies
Country: United States
Posts: 2,954
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tankerjockey View Post
If it costs Versteeg , and Barker or Ladd no problem. Going to be overloaded on forwards real soon. It makes sense then.

I worry about the Chemistry a little bit, but winning creates good chemistry.
Chicago can not add salary this season because we are already at the cap. Therefore, the only type of trade the Hawks can do is one where the salary cap hit of the player(s) being traded is equal or greater than the salary cap hit of the player(s) coming to the Hawks. Kovalchuk's salary cap hit is $6M so the salary cap of the players Chicago would send to Atlanta must total $6M or greater.

Two of Versteeg ($3.1M), Barker ($3.1M), or Byfuglien ($3.0M) would meet that criteria. One of those three plus Ladd ($1.5M) would not be enough salary leaving Chicago for the trade to work.

When Bolland returns after recovering from surgery (supposedly in February), the Hawks will have (10) top-9 forwards - Toews, Kane, Hossa, Sharp, Versteeg, Ladd, Brouwer, Byfuglien, Madden and Bolland. That is one too many. Therefore a swap of 2 of those top-9 forwards for Kovy will work OK from a numbers perspective. If the Kovy trade is not made, than the Hawks will have a $3M+ forward playing on the 4th line. Talk of chemistry concerns should include the loss of ice time for that top-9 guy having to play on the 4th line. Burish is also supposed to return from injury in early March which means we will have another forward wanting ice time. So, while the concern of hurting team chemistry by trading for Kovy is legitimate, it may also be affected by the return of Bolland and Burish as other players get shuffled around.

EbonyRaptor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 09:42 AM
  #40
Tankerjockey
 
Tankerjockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 36
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EbonyRaptor View Post
Chicago can not add salary this season because we are already at the cap. Therefore, the only type of trade the Hawks can do is one where the salary cap hit of the player(s) being traded is equal or greater than the salary cap hit of the player(s) coming to the Hawks. Kovalchuk's salary cap hit is $6M so the salary cap of the players Chicago would send to Atlanta must total $6M or greater.

Two of Versteeg ($3.1M), Barker ($3.1M), or Byfuglien ($3.0M) would meet that criteria. One of those three plus Ladd ($1.5M) would not be enough salary leaving Chicago for the trade to work.

When Bolland returns after recovering from surgery (supposedly in February), the Hawks will have (10) top-9 forwards - Toews, Kane, Hossa, Sharp, Versteeg, Ladd, Brouwer, Byfuglien, Madden and Bolland. That is one too many. Therefore a swap of 2 of those top-9 forwards for Kovy will work OK from a numbers perspective. If the Kovy trade is not made, than the Hawks will have a $3M+ forward playing on the 4th line. Talk of chemistry concerns should include the loss of ice time for that top-9 guy having to play on the 4th line. Burish is also supposed to return from injury in early March which means we will have another forward wanting ice time. So, while the concern of hurting team chemistry by trading for Kovy is legitimate, it may also be affected by the return of Bolland and Burish as other players get shuffled around.

Can't argue with any of that. Excited to see how creative Stan gets if he does at all.

Tankerjockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 09:48 AM
  #41
Lesmeister
Registered User
 
Lesmeister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 413
vCash: 500
versteeg
Barker
Ladd
2nd

for

Kovy

this is the real deal

Lesmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 10:31 AM
  #42
Beemer335
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 44
vCash: 500
Right now, I really like this team and wouldn't risk disrupting chemistry or anything like that especially when this team is already scoring enough goals.

That being said, Bolland and Burish will be back after the olympics maybe even before and we will have too many forwards. Plus we're gonna have to let some guys like Versteeg, Barker, and possibly Byfuglien or Sharp (doubtful) go anyway after the season because of the salary cap.

Taking all of this into consideration, it makes perfect sense to pull the trigger and they will be able to offer more NHL proven talent than any other team. If we don't do this trade we might see guys like Ladd or Byfuglien playing on the 4th line or being healthy scratches when Bolland and Burish return. We might as well get a superstar rental for the rest of the season to help push us to the cup as long as it doesn't cost us more than Versteeg, Byfuglien, Barker, and a prospect/pick.

Beemer335 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 01:05 PM
  #43
Tankerjockey
 
Tankerjockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 36
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lesmeister View Post
versteeg
Barker
Ladd
2nd

for

Kovy

this is the real deal
That's a lot to give up for a rental player. I would hope we get their 2nd if that's the way it went down.

Tankerjockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 01:48 PM
  #44
EbonyRaptor
Registered User
 
EbonyRaptor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Boonies
Country: United States
Posts: 2,954
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lesmeister View Post
versteeg
Barker
Ladd
2nd

for

Kovy

this is the real deal
Add Valabik to the deal to replace the defensive depth lost by trading Barker and I would do this deal. Valabik's salary cap hit is $0.775M and is an RFA after 10/11. Ladd gives Atlanta size up front which they are lacking.

The salary swap would be:

Versteeg ($3.083M) + Barker ($3.083M) + Ladd ($1.55M) = $7.716M
Kovalchuk ($6.4M) + Valabik ($0.775M) = $7.175M

The three Hawk players are the most likely to be gone next season anyway. This deal clears $7M plus provides a good young RFA d-man signed for another season at minimum wage. He is defensive depth this season and is insurance against the possibility of losing Hjalmarsson to an offer sheet too high for the Hawks to match.

Ths lineup could look like this:
Kovy-Toews-Kane
Sharp-Bolland-Hossa
Brouwer-Madden-Byfuglien
Eager-Fraser-Burish
Kopecky)

Keith-Seabrook
Hjalmarsson-Campbell
Valabik-Sopel
(Hendry)

EbonyRaptor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 03:21 PM
  #45
theaub
Lets go Hawks!
 
theaub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Markham, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,529
vCash: 995
I think that's an underrated reason as to why to do any move where we cut off a bit of salary. Having the tagging space to re-sign Hammer (and possibly Niemi) would be nice.

theaub is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2010, 05:47 PM
  #46
Peter Sidorkiewicz
Kovalchuk Army
 
Peter Sidorkiewicz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 3,692
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EbonyRaptor View Post
Add Valabik to the deal to replace the defensive depth lost by trading Barker and I would do this deal. Valabik's salary cap hit is $0.775M and is an RFA after 10/11. Ladd gives Atlanta size up front which they are lacking.

The salary swap would be:

Versteeg ($3.083M) + Barker ($3.083M) + Ladd ($1.55M) = $7.716M
Kovalchuk ($6.4M) + Valabik ($0.775M) = $7.175M

The three Hawk players are the most likely to be gone next season anyway. This deal clears $7M plus provides a good young RFA d-man signed for another season at minimum wage. He is defensive depth this season and is insurance against the possibility of losing Hjalmarsson to an offer sheet too high for the Hawks to match.

Ths lineup could look like this:
Kovy-Toews-Kane
Sharp-Bolland-Hossa
Brouwer-Madden-Byfuglien
Eager-Fraser-Burish
Kopecky)

Keith-Seabrook
Hjalmarsson-Campbell
Valabik-Sopel
(Hendry)
I like that deal from Atlanta point of view. Just curious if atlanta decides to deal kovalchuk for prospects and drafts picks and therefore selects boston or la as its preferred trading partner, would slava kozlov interest you as a '2nd option' after kovalchuk? He has very good chemistry with hossa (better than kovy, as kovy and hossa didn't play on the same line, while slava and hossa did) and has a very good playoff record with detroit especially with regards to clutch goals. A deal similar to the above but without versteeg. Ladd and barker for kozlov and valabik. Seems fair?

Peter Sidorkiewicz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2010, 02:48 AM
  #47
EbonyRaptor
Registered User
 
EbonyRaptor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Boonies
Country: United States
Posts: 2,954
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Sidorkiewicz View Post
I like that deal from Atlanta point of view. Just curious if atlanta decides to deal kovalchuk for prospects and drafts picks and therefore selects boston or la as its preferred trading partner, would slava kozlov interest you as a '2nd option' after kovalchuk? He has very good chemistry with hossa (better than kovy, as kovy and hossa didn't play on the same line, while slava and hossa did) and has a very good playoff record with detroit especially with regards to clutch goals. A deal similar to the above but without versteeg. Ladd and barker for kozlov and valabik. Seems fair?
Absolutely not. The Hawks don't need another forward as we already have a surplus of them. The only reason I would want Kovy is because he is an exceptional talent, arguably top 5 forward in the NHL. If a move is to be made, the order of priority would be goaltending and then defensive depth.

EbonyRaptor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2010, 01:42 PM
  #48
MrSerious
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,099
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EbonyRaptor View Post
If a move is to be made, the order of priority would be goaltending and then defensive depth.
Agreed. They should maybe go after Giguere. I dunno what other goalie would be available but he is a Stanley Cup and I think Conn Smyth winner. I dunno who would be available to fill out the bottom pairing.

MrSerious is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2010, 07:23 PM
  #49
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,142
vCash: 500
Patrick Sharp
Cam Barker
Brent Sopel
3rd rd pick

for

Kovalchuk
Valabik
2nd rd pick

Hawkaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2010, 03:43 PM
  #50
Bring Back GLR
Commit to the Indian
 
Bring Back GLR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Blackhawkville
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,917
vCash: 500
If we could grab Kovy we have to do it. Within reason though. ie. I don't want to see a guy like Sharp moved. Skille, Barker, Versteeg, etc. Even guys like Ladd and Buff I'd hate to see go cuz of the playoff intensity they have. But at the same time if we could ice a first line PP unit of Toews, Kane, Hossa, Kovy and Keith. We could slice through everyone. We're gonna need some real top end guys here if we want to beat teams like a healthy Wings squad, a motivated Sharks team even an angry Canucks team.

Then what happens if we face the Caps or Pens in the Final. I don't want to go all the way there and get out gunned especially since our goalie situation most likely won't improve.

Bring Back GLR 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 01:32 PM.

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.