Proposal: Chicago-Arizona

  • PLEASE check any bookmark on all devices. IF you see a link pointing to mandatory.com DELETE it Please use this URL https://forums.hfboards.com/

thesaadfather

Registered User
Jan 30, 2014
2,746
776
Ohio
I like the deal value-wise and it fills a need from a Chicago perspective, but isn't Reider looking for a raise to $2.5 million+?
 

kmwtrucks

Registered User
Mar 11, 2014
1,830
636
Pokka is waiver Exempt still so you can keep him in the minors, Which has some value his is Also a Right D which also adds some value. He looks to be a sure fire NHL d man the question is does his upside higher then 4/5. probably that is about it. Hawks can afford about 1.5-2 to pay a wing at this point. The reason he might do it with the hawks on a 1 year deal would be he would probably be getting top 6 minutes. Which would really set him up for his next deal. SAAD was a 2nd rounder and ended up a LT 6 mil deal after his ELC. POKKA made his WC team for Finland
 

rt

Clean Hits on Substack
Rieder is >90% (my opinion) to hit at least 40pts with the Hawks while playing top PK mins. >50% odds (opinion) to hit at least 45pts for the Hawks. Andrew Ladd was a 45pt rental last deadline and returned Dano and a 1st. This is obviously a different situation, but I'd say a piece like Rieder should be worth somewhere between just Pokka and the Dano+1st package. We just traded an early 2nd for DeAngelo. I'd hesitate to give up Rieder for basically the same prospect.
 

rt

Clean Hits on Substack
Why would Arizona do this?
Arizona already has 8 defensemen on the roster.

Yeah, around the deadline our most glaring need was D depth where we were just empty. Then we traded for Kyle Wood. And signed Alex Goligoski to a five year deal. And traded for Anthony DeAngelo. At the draft, we took just a single forward. We used every other pick on D. Then we decided to keep Connauton, Dahlbeck, and Tinordi after not qualifying them. Then we decided not to buy out Michalek. Then we signed Schenn. All of the sudden, we're not so desperate. It's not like we're stacked with D, but it's not nearly as pathetically thin (organizationally) as it was five months ago.
 

Hawksfan2828

Registered User
Mar 1, 2007
13,437
20
Libertyville, IL
I want Bowman to hang onto Pokka. He's going to be a good one and eventually Seabrook is going to slow down and the Hawks are going to need to replace him and Pokka IMO is a legit top 4 to do that.
 

member 157595

Guest
Chicago's managed their cap so well they can't afford 3rd line players. Let alone the 1LW they still need.

A lot of tears can fit inside 3 Stanley Cups.

Chicago went for it...and it worked. 3 times.
 

Hawksfan2828

Registered User
Mar 1, 2007
13,437
20
Libertyville, IL
Chicago's managed their cap so well they can't afford 3rd line players. Let alone the 1LW they still need.

I don't know what that means considering there are many teams that are worse off than the Hawks when it comes to the cap - oh yeah and the Hawks won 3 cups so...

I think what Bowman has done is nothing short of amazing. Yeah, he has handed out some bad contracts but you know what? you can excuse that because the Blackhawks continue to win.

As far as #1 LW, if it's an issue still in December you better believe Bowman will address it, however as of now the "hole" at #1 LW is nothing more than conjecture. Perhaps one of the kids will step into that role?
 

Blackhawkswincup

RIP Fugu
Jun 24, 2007
189,053
22,592
Chicagoland
I want Bowman to hang onto Pokka. He's going to be a good one and eventually Seabrook is going to slow down and the Hawks are going to need to replace him and Pokka IMO is a legit top 4 to do that.

Pokka is blocked by Bowman from playing on Hawks and will have to be exposed in expansion draft

Future is looking bleak for Pokka in Hawks organization
 

BK

"Goalie Apologist"
Feb 8, 2011
33,636
16,483
Minneapolis, MN
Pokka is blocked by Bowman from playing on Hawks and will have to be exposed in expansion draft

Future is looking bleak for Pokka in Hawks organization

He is blocked but he is more blocked by Keith, Hammer, Seabrook, Campbell, and MK than he is by Bowman.

I personally think we need to move a D and if we did I would move TVR (actually Seabrook after this year but that is a pipe dream).

TVR is the 7th best D man on our roster, which is a great problem to have. 1. Keith 2. Hammer 3./4. Campbell/Seabrook 5. MK (could end up being 3) 6. Pokka 7. TVR. This is the deepest D the Hawks have ever had. TVR is due for a new deal after the 17/18 season so that helps with his market value.



Technically speaking we don't have to expose Pokka if we go with the alternative to protecting 7 forwards, 3 D, and 1 goalie, which is what I would do.
 

The Nuge

Some say…
Jan 26, 2011
27,949
9,111
British Columbia
Rieder's too expensive for Chicago, while Pokka isn't worth Rieder, and wouldn't make the Coyotes roster. I don't see the fit for either team
 

thedoughboy

Registered User
Feb 22, 2015
1,594
5
Tinyest of the fifty
Chicago's managed their cap so well they can't afford 3rd line players. Let alone the 1LW they still need.

I Can't hear you.

What was that you said?

Speak up please

Rieder would likely sign at 2.5mil with Chicago. I don't know if they can afford that. Also, Ville Pokka isn't enough.

Not really TBH, as sad as that is. And I'd agree with you on that one.

Pokka is blocked by Bowman from playing on Hawks and will have to be exposed in expansion draft

Future is looking bleak for Pokka in Hawks organization

Pokka is blocked because he isn't good enough to be on the roster of a cup contending team, or at least he hasn't been up to this point. Where would you slot him in?

Above Schenn and maybe Connauton.

Pokka is projected at a top 4 D. (3-4 not 1-2)

That doesn't mean he can actually play at that level yet.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad