Confirmed with Link: [CHI/EDM] Hawks acquire F Liam Coughlin for G Anders Nilsson

[Bubba88]

He was good in europe, but not good in NA. Kind of like Salak. We all know how this ended.

Hawks have their 1/2/3 and only Need a goalie for Rockford.

 

[Pepe Silvia]

Why so angry dude? It's simple to see that if Crawford is moved, the lineup will be stacked top to bottom. Sharp+Darling > Crawford or better yet if Crawford was moved earlier you could insert Saad in that equation instead of Sharp. Anyway I doubt Stan is going to trade him but you can't blame us for being passionate and wanting to ice the best team and that will only happen with the departure of Crawford. Till then the team will keep making him look good back there hopefully till we get a trade partner, I trust the team D so we shouldn't have a problem.

Not angry, just annoyed by whiny, entitled "fans" that started watching the Hawks after 2010. You can want Crawford traded all you want. It's not going to happen, but I get the logic regarding the cap. I just can't stand certain posters that try to downplay all the great things he's done for this team.

Saad is gone. It sucks, but you need to accept it and move on. The return was more than enough.

 

[Blackhawks]

Not angry, just annoyed by whiny, entitled "fans" that started watching the Hawks after 2010. You can want Crawford traded all you want. It's not going to happen, but I get the logic regarding the cap. I just can't stand certain posters that try to downplay all the great things he's done for this team.

Saad is gone. It sucks, but you need to accept it and move on. The return was more than enough.

I have been a fan since 96, and I am sure Bobby has been a fan longer if I am not mistaken, I really doubt bandwagon fans that started watching in 2010 can be that passionate about the team and moves done by Stan.

 

[Bubba88]

Hawks traded their #3 and #5 goalie to become the backup of NY & EDM

 

[rick hawk]

Hawks traded their #3 and #5 goalie to become the backup of NY & EDM

Exactly. You can say this doesn't matter all you want but it doesn't appear to be good asset management to me and a lot of others.

 

[Blackhawks]

Exactly. You can say this doesn't matter all you want but it doesn't appear to be good asset management to me and a lot of others.

It would be if they actually got something for them, how can you trade two legit NHL backups that possibly can hold a starting position for absolutely nothing? I understand this supposedly doesn't hurt the team right now but it sure can help the team down the line if they got somewhat of promising prospects or draft picks in return.

 

[Ace Rothstein]

The Hawks did Raanta a favor and got something for Nilsson while they still could. Who gives a **** about these guys?

 

[Bubba88]

not really. Raanta trade was at least a bit of value and they did him a favor. Nilsson isn't proven in the NHL. Saying he is legit is just wrong

 

[rick hawk]

Its not as wrong as suggesting Coughlin is a legitimate asset. Perhaps the Hawks are in the charity business now.

 

[BobbyJet]

Why so angry dude? It's simple to see that if Crawford is moved, the lineup will be stacked top to bottom. Sharp+Darling > Crawford or better yet if Crawford was moved earlier you could insert Saad in that equation instead of Sharp. Anyway I doubt Stan is going to trade him but you can't blame us for being passionate and wanting to ice the best team and that will only happen with the departure of Crawford. Till then the team will keep making him look good back there hopefully till we get a trade partner, I trust the team D so we shouldn't have a problem.

And if that team D does not hold up quite as well going forward, we will see Crawford exposed as the average goalie he is (but, but, but he won 2 SC's, I know ).

Even if Crawford was the goalie some wish he was, eliminating $ 5M by trading him and applying that money toward a #4 dman (for example) would make this team better - and that's what it is all about.

It's certainly a moot point now however. Stan has literally given away the depth we had between the pipes. Once again Hawks are a significant injury away from being vulnerable between the pipes.

 

[Blackhawks]

not really. Raanta trade was at least a bit of value and they did him a favor. Nilsson isn't proven in the NHL. Saying he is legit is just wrong

Alright but Nielsson is regarded as a good prospect with a projection of future in the NHL, what did we get back in return? You can't do Raanta a favor and get decent return at the same time? Honestly all I see is excuses and more excuses.

 

[Bubba88]

there was no market for AHL goalies that only have shown potential. None of them is proven and legit.

We might bring back Salak?

 

[Blackhawks]

And if that team D does not hold up quite as well going forward, we will see Crawford exposed as the average goalie he is (but, but, but he won 2 SC's, I know ).

Even if Crawford was the goalie some wish he was, eliminating $ 5M by trading him and applying that money toward a #4 dman (for example) would make this team better - and that's what it is all about.

It's certainly a moot point now however. Stan has literally given away the depth we had between the pipes. Once again Hawks are a significant injury away from being vulnerable between the pipes.

Fans and players alike are blinded by cups as if it is an individual accomplishment, that argument will always be thrown in your face no matter how good of a case you make for a player not being as great as the cup he just won with a team. With the 6 second vine age, people have a very short and selective memory.

 

[Blackhawks]

there was no market for AHL goalies that only have shown potential. None of them is proven and legit.

We might bring back Salak?

So why trade for picks or prospects because non of them have proven anything in the NHL. Seriously what you just said is comical.

 

[Marotte Marauder]

there was no market for AHL goalies that only have shown potential. None of them is proven and legit.

We might bring back Salak?

So why trade for picks or prospects because non of them have proven anything in the NHL. Seriously what you just said is comical.

The argument rotates between " who gives a crap about picks/prospects, we just won a Cup" and " we can get all the picks we want when we offload what we don't want/can't afford".

I guess it's easier than analyzing each transaction individually.

 

[Bubba88]

we did trade prospect for prospect... we traded a goalie that has a Slim Chance to become a valueable goalie for a prospect that most likely won't even be a career AHLer

in the end, it was prospect for prospect.
Pretty sure this was the best offer we got. Nilsson wanted to go to the NHL, Hawks have no room and we did him a favor. Same with Raanta.

Those guys have had Little to no trade value. Hawks just have been nice to them instead of taking away their chances to Play in the NHL they gave them that Chance. Pretty sure both take NHL over playing in the NLA, SEL, FEL or KHL

 

[fatbeard]

I have been a fan since 96, and I am sure Bobby has been a fan longer if I am not mistaken, I really doubt bandwagon fans that started watching in 2010 can be that passionate about the team and moves done by Stan.

The only thing this proves is that you've watched more ****** hockey than most. Congratulations on your unusually high suck-tolerance.

 

[dbridge]

It would be if they actually got something for them, how can you trade two legit NHL backups that possibly can hold a starting position for absolutely nothing? I understand this supposedly doesn't hurt the team right now but it sure can help the team down the line if they got somewhat of promising prospects or draft picks in return.

It's a terribly watered-down market for goalies this year. I think Haggerty was an ok return for Raanta, I could see him as a bottom 6 forward potentially. I doubt Coughlin ever sees significant NHL time, but as someone else said, he's a lottery ticket.

You complain about asset management, but what would you do with Nilsson? It sounds like he wouldn't come over unless he could snag an NHL job, which wouldn't happen here. If you keep him in Russia for another year, you lose his rights next off-season. There are only so many teams with goalie openings, not to mention teams willing to give an NHL job to a goalie who has been underwhelming in North America throughout his career.

There seems to be a train of thought that Bowman calls up one team and takes the first offer he can get. I'm sure he shopped Nilsson around, and this is the best return he could get. And with Nilsson, you either trade him now or lose him for nothing next year. So no, it's not a spectacular trade for an incredibly useful asset. But you're trading away a player who wasn't going to play in Chicago this year and would be a free agent next year in exchange for the aforementioned lottery ticket.

 

[Hawkaholic]

And if that team D does not hold up quite as well going forward, we will see Crawford exposed as the average goalie he is (but, but, but he won 2 SC's, I know ).

You mean that awesome D we had when we were getting outplayed multiple times in the ANA series? Or the first 4 games of the TB series?

No, we definitely owned both of those series every game and Crawford just sat back there and got carried to a Cup.

 

[Blackhawks]

You mean that awesome D we had when we were getting outplayed multiple times in the ANA series? Or the first 4 games of the TB series?

No, we definitely owned both of those series every game and Crawford just sat back there and got carried to a Cup.

Exactly the games that the D wasn't 100%, Crawford didn't perform, perfect example of a goalie that is the product of a team.

 

[hockeydoug]

Hawks traded their #3 and #5 goalie to become the backup of NY & EDM

This

If they were down to their number 3, they/Stan would probably trade picks or redundant prospects for another goalie anyway.

They're probably better off having minutes and starts cleared out so they can land another Raanta anyway.

Given Darling's successful season in a backup role, and his cheap contract, it's unlikely anybody in the system was going to pass him up at number 2 anyway. This move was also done independently of the other trades, it's not like they lost anything meaningful for a trade package. It didn't slow down any other trades or impact value of the other trades. They still have plenty of picks and plenty of prospects that could be used to offset any value that Nilsson might have possibly added in a big trade.

Clearing out redundant assets, or assets they aren't going to use just makes sense, I don't understand why there's any criticism of this trade. Any team should expect their gm to trade the number 3 unless they goalie is very young, on the way up, and a lock to be the AHL affiliate starter or better.

 

[Hawkaholic]

Exactly the games that the D wasn't 100%, Crawford didn't perform, perfect example of a goalie that is the product of a team.

Pretty sure he won 2 of the first 4 games vs. TB, and let in 2 goals in those 2 games. Both, easily goalie wins.

And in Game 6, TB outplayed Chicago, and he pitched a shutout.

Keep on keeping on.

 

[Hawkaholic]

Exactly. You can say this doesn't matter all you want but it doesn't appear to be good asset management to me and a lot of others.

What else would you have done?
Waived Raanta in September? = losing him for nothing
Let Nilsson just sit and rot in the KHL? (since he wasn't coming here because he knew he wasn't getting a back up job?

Hawks actually traded their #4 and #5. Raanta didn't even play the majority of the games in the AHL when he was sent down.

Not only that, Hawks will just sign some other goalie to be their #4, and probably another guy to be #5. Who gives a ****?

 

[hockeydoug]

Exactly the games that the D wasn't 100%, Crawford didn't perform, perfect example of a goalie that is the product of a team.

What isn't a product of the team is his ability to be available every spring for a full and long workload. I'm even willing to ignore the impact he has for the team's confidence.

His ability to bounce back quickly time and time again, unlike most goalies, isn't a product of the team either. He's done the same thing with 3 different goalie coaches now and multiple backups behind him.

We get the logic, but this argument about his cap impact ignores many of the other important aspects of what he brings to the team that helps them win games.

The Hawks are still in the bottom half of the league in terms of spending cap dollars on the goalie position anyway. The Hawks' goalie position outplays its cap hit relative to the rest of the league. That's not an advantage worth giving up just to gamble.

 

[hockeydoug]

What else would you have done?
Waived Raanta in September? = losing him for nothing
Let Nilsson just sit and rot in the KHL? (since he wasn't coming here because he knew he wasn't getting a back up job?

Hawks actually traded their #4 and #5. Raanta didn't even play the majority of the games in the AHL when he was sent down.

Not only that, Hawks will just sign some other goalie to be their #4, and probably another guy to be #5. Who gives a ****?

Good point about Raanta possibly being the #4 this offseason. All the more reason to just consider the trade effective asset management.