Toggle sidebar

GDT: 3/30/25 Utah @ Hawks 3pm CHSN

TheFridge said:
Maximizing ELC years is contender strategy. Does this team look like they're contending?

Your idea is that, the Hawks are going to be capped out and contending in the third year of Lev's contract (assuming it slid, and they didn't burn the year), so that third year becomes really valuable.

But that's not the play and that's not the right math. Why would you want to negotiate that second contract after Lev's had presumably a couple very good years and his best year to date on a contending team? Do you want him earning 10M a year on his second deal, just to "take advantage" of one year of 925k? Or would you rather get to his second contract quicker, make a bet that he's going to keep getting better, and have him on a team friendly 5-6M deal through his mid-20s?
Click to expand...
they will be relatively closer to contending assuming they pick top 3 the next two years and add ufa's/trade pieces/more prospects along the way, so yeah I think Lev at 925k is worth more to this team in 3 years than forgoing it by burning a year this year...and the argument you're making for manipulating his service time to negotiate a cheaper deal could be fools gold if the agent/player say give me a 1 year deal and I'll prove my worth, players aren't stupid, Vlasic is not a good comp because he might've seen his value as less stable and valued the long term security, Levshunov could easily say I'll prove it on a one year deal and the Hawks just pull his fair value a year forward when they didn't need to do that
 
  • Like
Reactions: WarriorofTime
Toews2Bickell said:
they will be relatively closer to contending assuming they pick top 3 the next two years and add ufa's/trade pieces/more prospects along the way, so yeah I think Lev at 925k is worth more to this team in 3 years than forgoing it by burning a year this year...and the argument you're making for manipulating his service time to negotiate a cheaper deal could be fools gold if the agent/player say give me a 1 year deal and I'll prove my worth, players aren't stupid, Vlasic is not a good comp because he might've seen his value as less stable and valued the long term security, Levshunov could easily say I'll prove it and the Hawks just pull his fair value a year forward when they didn't need to do that
Click to expand...

Who are all these high-end young players taking one-year prove it deals? Name literally anyone. They're most likely not going to get Lev on a super team friendly 8-year deal, but they're absolutely not going to be giving him a one-year deal. If Lev comes out of his ELC onto a 1-year, prove-it deal, that's because he's busting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BHawks77
ELC burn makes bridge deal more likely imo

Either way I’m sure this is probably motivated by KD wanting to show off his new toy like last year with Korchinski, he just can’t help himself
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paul Allen and Toews2Bickell
ello said:
ELC burn makes bridge deal more likely imo

Either way I’m sure this is probably motivated by KD wanting to show off his new toy like last year with Korchinski, he just can’t help himself
Click to expand...
was wondering if maybe thats why we've seen the drastic change in philosophy to go young, the urgency to show off some of the picks they've made to ownership because what good is it if KD/FO accumulate all these assets and end up fired before they see what they have
 
Toews2Bickell said:
don't want to debate the elc stuff anymore, they clearly don't care about burning years, excited to see levshunov continue to develop, hes fun to watch
Click to expand...

I mean, it's not really a debate. You're trying to apply contender strategy to a team that's not going to be capped out and worrying about maximizing ELC years for 5-6 years.

These aren't the 2007-08 Blackhawks. They're not ascending to contender in the next two years. These are the 2004-05 Blackhawks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beukeboom Fan
TheFridge said:
I mean, it's not really a debate. You're trying to apply contender strategy to a team that's not going to be capped out and worrying about maximizing ELC years for 5-6 years.

These aren't the 2007-08 Blackhawks. They're not ascending to contender in the next two years. These are the 2004-05 Blackhawks.
Click to expand...
go levshunov
 
TheFridge said:
Maximizing ELC years is contender strategy. Does this team look like they're contending?

Your idea is that, the Hawks are going to be capped out and contending in the third year of Lev's contract (assuming it slid, and they didn't burn the year), so that third year becomes really valuable.

But that's not the play and that's not the right math. Why would you want to negotiate that second contract after Lev's had presumably a couple very good years and his best year to date on a contending team? Do you want him earning 10M a year on his second deal, just to "take advantage" of one year of 925k? Or would you rather get to his second contract quicker, make a bet that he's going to keep getting better, and have him on a team friendly 5-6M deal through his mid-20s?
Click to expand...
No offense man, but this doesn't make a lick of sense. Maximizing team control is an every team strategy, not a "contender" strategy. All you're really saying is you hope that Levshunov will sign an extension that is bad for him. Which... yeah that's great for the Hawks, whenever that may be. That's not math, that's negotiation and hopeful thinking. But he could also just...... not? Like a long-term extension could be bad for the Hawks because they had less time to evaluate and determine that he wasn't worth it (example I use is imagine if the Hawks had extended Barker for 8 years after like 2006-07, that probably would have effed the whole window) or if he sees young DMen getting $10 million AAV and the Hawks are only offering $5 million AAV, he could just say 'nah I'll bet on myself' and sign a bridge instead.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Toews2Bickell
Bridge deals get a bad wrap. I kinda like bridge deals. The more contract years you smoosh into a players career the better, that’s when they will be playing their absolute best hockey. Also with a bridge you are super sure a player is good before you pay them.

In general I like a mixture of both: for example gamble and go long on bedard (his “not elite” season is amazing for us if you want to get a discount this summer) and dangle low money high years at FutureMoore (I feel super sure he’s at least a cogliano 3C) low money high years for FutureRinzel (I’m pretty sure he’s at least a minute eating 4D)Go long on Vlasic type. Gotta go short on a korchinski or a Nazar. They are wildcards.

Levshunov is the huge gamble. You could bet long and look like a fool or a genius. Need more evidence.
 
We are having Rinzel and Moore debuting and their thread will be know for yet another ELC discourse for the hundredth time lol.

I think this is the most excited I've been for a game this season. Del Mastro, Nazar, Lev, KK and Knight were all exciting but now it's a long anticipated double whammy.

And we get to watch live in the EU too.

What's not to love?!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Troya, ello, BHawks77 and 3 others
WarriorofTime said:
No offense man, but this doesn't make a lick of sense. Maximizing team control is an every team strategy, not a "contender" strategy. All you're really saying is you hope that Levshunov will sign an extension that is bad for him. Which... yeah that's great for the Hawks, whenever that may be. That's not math, that's negotiation and hopeful thinking. But he could also just...... not? Like a long-term extension could be bad for the Hawks because they had less time to evaluate and determine that he wasn't worth it (example I use is imagine if the Hawks had extended Barker for 8 years after like 2006-07, that probably would have effed the whole window) or if he sees young DMen getting $10 million AAV and the Hawks are only offering $5 million AAV, he could just say 'nah I'll bet on myself' and sign a bridge instead.
Click to expand...

No. What I'm saying is, it's better to negotiate the second contract when the player has less of a resume to use in the negotiation. Presumably, Levshunov is going to be a better player 3 years from now than he will be 2 years from now. I *assume* he's not going to sign an 8-year deal on his second contact, whether the Hawks burn the year or not. So you're trying to get him on the best deal possible for his age 22-26 seasons.

The Barker comp is kinda weird because that dude didn't burn the year and then he did end up screwing the Hawks on his second contract by "breaking out" for 40 points and his best NHL season prior to his second deal.

You've still got to make smart bets. You wouldn't have given Barker a long-term deal for big money after 80 NHL games to pedestrian results. But you probably would have signed Barker to a 2-3 year deal at 1.5-2M at the time and then not signed him to a 3-year deal at 3.083M.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vegarover
vegarover said:
goidxatcdraws? Oof, somebody started drinking early this morning.
Click to expand...
Don’t worry about him. In my mind he has a neuromuscular disorder that prevents him from being able to type correctly, and he can’t vocalize well enough to use the dictation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mrfenn92
TheFridge said:
No. What I'm saying is, it's better to negotiate the second contract when the player has less of a resume to use in the negotiation. Presumably, Levshunov is going to be a better player 3 years from now than he will be 2 years from now. I *assume* he's not going to sign an 8-year deal on his second contact, whether the Hawks burn the year or not. So you're trying to get him on the best deal possible for his age 22-26 seasons.

The Barker comp is kinda weird because that dude didn't burn the year and then he did end up screwing the Hawks on his second contract by "breaking out" for 40 points and his best NHL season prior to his second deal.

You've still got to make smart bets. You wouldn't have given Barker a long-term deal for big money after 80 NHL games to pedestrian results. But you probably would have signed Barker to a 2-3 year deal at 1.5-2M at the time and then not signed him to a 3-year deal at 3.083M.
Click to expand...
I’ll drop it but the bolded you quoted to refute said negotiation and then like the ninth word in your post is negotiated.
 
TheFridge said:
No. What I'm saying is, it's better to negotiate the second contract when the player has less of a resume to use in the negotiation. Presumably, Levshunov is going to be a better player 3 years from now than he will be 2 years from now. I *assume* he's not going to sign an 8-year deal on his second contact, whether the Hawks burn the year or not. So you're trying to get him on the best deal possible for his age 22-26 seasons.

The Barker comp is kinda weird because that dude didn't burn the year and then he did end up screwing the Hawks on his second contract by "breaking out" for 40 points and his best NHL season prior to his second deal.

You've still got to make smart bets. You wouldn't have given Barker a long-term deal for big money after 80 NHL games to pedestrian results. But you probably would have signed Barker to a 2-3 year deal at 1.5-2M at the time and then not signed him to a 3-year deal at 3.083M.
Click to expand...
he has less nhl gp if you let the elc slide and send him back to rockford?
 
Utah is actually a super interesting team to play today. Their team speed really embarrassed the Hawks a month ago. Then we beat them in OT but got outshot super bad.

Since then we added Levshunov Rinzel Moore. My guess is that we may match or exceed their team speed now and we get beat close just on inexperience. Will be keyed in on how Rinzel handles himself. Will he sit back and play in a rocking chair or will he play his normal game.

For Moore interested to see just how fast this guy is. Some analysts said he has mcdavid level speed. I’m excited to finally see how much it stands out. As well as the forechecking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Toews2Bickell
Foligno wouldn’t exactly be a top choice of a linemate for Moore, but whatever.

Be curious to see Moore and Reichel together for a shift or two to see if their combined speed can create some issues for the opponent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom