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

[Stu Grimson]

Darling was a special find and will prove himself even to you sceptics. And I'm not saying Nilsson is likewise but based on the scouting reports, he could be. As I said, Stan should have received at least a draft pick for him. Hawks already have an abundance of bottom six players in the system.

11 game sample size and that is what you simply call a find? You must like to gamble a lot don't you?

 

[BK]

Nilsson was nothing for the Islanders.
I was happy when he stopped playing for them.

Was not thrilled when we picked him up. Not upset he is gone at all.
Best of luck with McJesus

He was brought up way to early by the Islanders. After we picked him up I watched some film and I can see why people hype him. He has a lot of potential. If he said he would not play in Rockford and then Stan made the right choice in moving him. Anyone who is pissy that he could have said this has no concept of money/real life because the money he can make in the KHL would be generational compared to the amount he would make in the AHL.

 

[CourtneyDagger50]

He was brought up way to early by the Islanders. After we picked him up I watched some film and I can see why people hype him. He has a lot of potential. If he said he would not play in Rockford and then Stan made the right choice in moving him. Anyone who is pissy that he could have said this has no concept of money/real life because the money he can make in the KHL would be generational compared to the amount he would make in the AHL.

I definitely agree that he was brought up to early.

And he went to the KHL because he doesn't want to be in the A

 

[Hawkaholic]

Darling was a special find and will prove himself even to you sceptics. And I'm not saying Nilsson is likewise but based on the scouting reports, he could be. As I said, Stan should have received at least a draft pick for him. Hawks already have an abundance of bottom six players in the system.

Darling isn't that good, he is just a product of the team in front of him.

 

[Hawkaholic]

Darling was a special find and will prove himself even to you sceptics. And I'm not saying Nilsson is likewise but based on the scouting reports, he could be. As I said, Stan should have received at least a draft pick for him. Hawks already have an abundance of bottom six players in the system.

And what would that draft pick be? A bottom 6 player 5 years down the road.

 

[BK]

I definitely agree that he was brought up to early.

And he went to the KHL because he doesn't want to be in the A

I would have done the same. Adding an extra 0 to $100k is worth it plus it is tax free.

 

[CourtneyDagger50]

I would have done the same. Adding an extra 0 to $100k is worth it plus it is tax free.

You won't find me arguing that!

 

[Ace Rothstein]

You'd think the Hawks traded Darling based on some of the reactions in this thread.

 

[zytz]

wtf is even going on in this thread. stan must don his ninja outfit and run around kicking everyone's dog the way people are mad at him.

this might be the most inconsequential move made yet this summer

 

[Illinihockey]

wtf is even going on in this thread. stan must don his ninja outfit and run around kicking everyone's dog the way people are mad at him.

this might be the most inconsequential move made yet this summer

Go back to the Leddy trade thread, everyone calls Nilsson a nothing and a throw in. Now the world is ending because the Hawks traded this generational talent.

 

[kmwtrucks]

The reason I'm upset is the trade of Rannta and Nillsson got nothing in return with either longterm or short term value. And both of those guys have no effect on the cap at this point. If we are going to trade them get something that could be of Value on Return otherwise at least wait until we are sure we do not have to move Crawford. Would the return for both be worse in 1 month? I cannot see how. Both players have some NHL roster value because of how both played last year. We got back players with no Roster value but also no upside.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Your premise is based on the notion that the Hawks are interested in trading Crawford, or at least are partial to the idea.

The reality of the situation is that doesn't appear to have ever been the case. Crow's the Hawks' guy, they're sticking with him for good reason, and saying that they should consider otherwise is just being a contrarian at this point.

Further, what would be a fair return? Two nothing prospects? An extremely late round draft pick? Unless you're expecting more than what the Nucks got for Lack, I don't see what you could've possibly expected that we'd realistically get that would appease the upset folks in here.

This was a nothing move, getting upset about it is just getting mad for the sake of getting mad. And we got a dece prospect in return for Raanta, let's not act like the backup goalie market is so barren and that teams that need one are so desperate that they're going to toss out an arm and a leg for one.

 

[rick hawk]

The reason I'm upset is the trade of Rannta and Nillsson got nothing in return with either longterm or short term value. And both of those guys have no effect on the cap at this point. If we are going to trade them get something that could be of Value on Return otherwise at least wait until we are sure we do not have to move Crawford. Would the return for both be worse in 1 month? I cannot see how. Both players have some NHL roster value because of how both played last year. We got back players with no Roster value but also no upside.

That's it exactly. Both guys might even have been useful pieces in deals to move a guy like Bickell or Versteeg or any other future trade. Instead they were dumped for nothing and there was no urgency to it that I can see.

 

[hockeydoug]

That's it exactly. Both guys might even have been useful pieces in deals to move a guy like Bickell or Versteeg or any other future trade. Instead they were dumped for nothing and there was no urgency to it that I can see.

They were deals made independent of the active roster. They weren't part of the cap.

As far as any value they had, Bowman can more than offset it picks and/or better prospects and cheaper prospects if a potential buyer is upset that they couldn't get Chicago's 3, 4, or 5 goalies.

These trades didn't mean anything in relation to the other trades, or the cap.

 

[BobbyJet]

The reason I'm upset is the trade of Rannta and Nillsson got nothing in return with either longterm or short term value. And both of those guys have no effect on the cap at this point. If we are going to trade them get something that could be of Value on Return otherwise at least wait until we are sure we do not have to move Crawford. Would the return for both be worse in 1 month? I cannot see how. Both players have some NHL roster value because of how both played last year. We got back players with no Roster value but also no upside.

Exactly..... and a very good point raised in post 138 as well. These deals reflect Stan at his stupidest.

 

[BK]

The reason I'm upset is the trade of Rannta and Nillsson got nothing in return with either longterm or short term value. And both of those guys have no effect on the cap at this point. If we are going to trade them get something that could be of Value on Return otherwise at least wait until we are sure we do not have to move Crawford. Would the return for both be worse in 1 month? I cannot see how. Both players have some NHL roster value because of how both played last year. We got back players with no Roster value but also no upside.

The long term value is Coughlin. Stan is taking a chance that he develops. IF he develops into a power forward then there is your value. If he doesn't then we traded the risk for a player that we might not have been able to get to come over here....remember we have Crawford signed for a few more years a long with Darling. There was no room for him or Raanta. We would have lost Raanta either way because he would not have passed waivers but I would have rather had a mid-late round pick.

 

[rick hawk]

They were deals made independent of the active roster. They weren't part of the cap.

As far as any value they had, Bowman can more than offset it picks and/or better prospects and cheaper prospects if a potential buyer is upset that they couldn't get Chicago's 3, 4, or 5 goalies.

These trades didn't mean anything in relation to the other trades, or the cap.

Are you saying that Stan can offset this by offering even better prospects to buyers than these assets he just squandered?????? If that's what you really mean is that supposed to make us feel better about it?

 

[hockeydoug]

Exactly..... and a very good point raised in post 138 as well. These deals reflect Stan at his stupidest.

Stan hedges his bets in net last year.
Works out in ideal fashion, cheap and effective too.
Now the pieces have no value to Chicago's active roster and the whole league knows it.
Stan cashes them in for something instead of nothing.

What is with the frustration about shipping out two pieces that the rest of the league wasn't going to worry about? There are going to be a half dozen or more goalies on waivers this fall and there are still plenty of cheap veteran options available.

I have no idea why so many can think that gms are sitting and waiting on Sharp and Bickell's price to drop while at the same time thinking two depth goalies, of no use to Chicago in 16', add any value to a trade package with Chicago. It doesn't make any sense, everybody knows Raanta's and Nilsson's value to Chicago.

 

[hockeydoug]

Are you saying that Stan can offset this by offering even better prospects to buyers than these assets he just squandered?????? If that's what you really mean is that supposed to make us feel better about it?

For one I don't think it mattered at all.
For those that think it would hamper another trade for some reason, yes, I thought it might help to know that they can still move the other contracts.

If anything I thought it would add some perspective. The trade is inconsequential for the big team. As soon as Chicago dumped Raanta to Rockford, he wasn't worth much of anything. When Darling was extended, he was worth less.

A gm wasn't going to do Chicago a favor. They're looking at potential backups that they didn't need, they're gambling and weren't about to pay a good price...so they didn't. Fasth, Harding, the monster, etc. are still floating around too.

 

[Hawkaholic]

Love how people think the 2 goalies we just traded will be of any sweetener at all to any trade. They were worthless, hence, the returns they got. The only people that are complaining are the ones that wanted Crawford traded.

It's the best return they could probably get, but continue to come to baseless conclusions with no knowledge at all.

 

[Hawkaholic]

F Fasth, Harding, the monster, etc. are still floating around too.

Good point, goalies who have actually succeeded in the NHL at some point are still UFAs. Could easily sign one of them to be our 3rd/4th goalie, and there are always UDFAs or Euro goalies to sign for nothing. But, continue to bash moves that have zero impact on Chicago...

 

[Marotte Marauder]

Love how people think the 2 goalies we just traded will be of any sweetener at all to any trade. They were worthless, hence, the returns they got. The only people that are complaining are the ones that wanted Crawford traded.

It's the best return they could probably get, but continue to come to baseless conclusions with no knowledge at all.

So what is the value of Sharp?

 

[Hawkaholic]

Whatever a team is willing to pay, pretty simple.

 

[Marotte Marauder]

Whatever a team is willing to pay, pretty simple.

So is a team likely to pay more or less when their trading partner is vulnerable?

 

[Hawkaholic]

So is a team likely to pay more or less when their trading partner is vulnerable?

I fail to see what this has to do with 2 goalies who had no future in Chicago.