Rumor: - Hawks expected to make big splash (Robertson, Knies, etc) | Page 80 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League
Toggle sidebar

Rumor: Hawks expected to make big splash (Robertson, Knies, etc)

  • If you are having issues logging in, we have found opening the log in page in a new tab/window rather than using the pop out should resolve these issues. We are working to get this resolved and thank you for patience.
  • Due to the increased volume of league transactions, the Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk section is temporarily restricted to where threads may only be started by moderators and sponsors. We anticipate that this restriction will be lifted some time after the first round of the draft.

Trade, offer sheet or not go after Robertson

  • Total voters
    90
JaegerDice said:
I've definitely heard that a team's success is best measured by the first 3 months of the season.
Click to expand...
Considering thanksgiving is the literal measuring stick on if a team will make the playoffs you very much can say a teams success is a good indicator by the first 3 months of the season.


Nothing says the kids are alright and a young core was outperforming ours like a 2-15-3 record when your star player is pointless. They got hard carried by their star player who had a healthy season. We won more games without Bedard in the lineup entirely than they won games with Celebrini putting up a Tony Snell stat line.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paul Allen
Lardis - Bedard - Boeser
Kantserov - Nazar - Frondell
Bertuzzi - Moore - Turbo
Greenway - Greene - Donato
Magi/Slaggs

Vlasic - Byram
Kaiser - Lev
Kulak - Rinzel
KK

Knight
Commesso

Much better balance overall compared to last year. Each d pair would have a veteran with one of the kids however they decide to roll them.
 
hawksfan50 said:
Robertson turned dowm$12 million per for 8 year deal with Dallas..

2 methods to sign hom by other teams:
.Before July 1st...could offer Dallas firsts in a sign and trade for setup on amount he agrees tob=likelyvabove $14milluon to maybe $+6 million per ....if you o the trade he can still sign for 8 years..

However if you wait till after July 1st and just offer sheet him which Dallas does not match they get 4 first anyway but your cobtract with him can be for only for 6 years...
Or if your trade with Dallas cones on or after July 1st this year but is a sign and trade then it can have ax7 year length.

Obviously Robertson n wants an 8 year deal at top money he expects..

So best to make a deal now with DLkas..they getcsame 4 firsts but Robertson coukd getv8 years instead of just 6or 7...
Is he worth 4 firsts?

I presume KD going all 3 firsts in 2027 plus 2028 2st..so the draft carage over after 2027 draft ..
But Brdsy woukd have his dream wubger so who cares aboutc4 1sts...right?

On thevother hand you could pay Alex Tuchh just $$$$$ without any draft carnage...

Your choice, KD.....
Click to expand...
OS Robo, trade Bert 50% retained next year for a 28 1st...there is 3/4 1st back in pocket
 
Paul Allen said:
What would you have considered appropriate value for Byram in this situation?


Makar, who we can both agree moved the needle, is also a ufa next summer. What would you consider market value for him to be then?
Click to expand...

Me personally? Without any in-depth information about the pipeline, prospect projections, etc. I would give either Florida's 1st next year (almost certain to be late) OR Chicago's top 10 protected first next year, plus the 2nd they got, plus Crevier.

Basically, I would remove the most valuable chip from the deal and protect myself from giving away an asset of similar value for at least another season.

That's why teams with brains ****ing protect top 10 picks.


I do not think the Blackhawks have enough high-value assets to make a play for Makar. You'd have to include Bedard, and that's not happening.

Hawkaholic said:
His value is what teams are willing to trade for him, and by the sounds of it, there were plenty of teams interested, and teams put in roughly the same offer we offered.
Click to expand...

This is the mindset of bad teams.

Good teams establish an internal measure of value for any given player, whether within the team or across the league, and do not let market lunacy dictate what they will pay for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paul Allen
Hawkaholic said:
No. Thats what the value for them is in a trade, period.
Click to expand...

No. It's not. Smart teams walk away from bad value trades all the time.

Teams contending for a cup have the leeway to make bad deals that benefit them short-term but hurt them long-term.

Bad or mediocre teams that make deals that benefit them short-term but harm them long-term remain bad teams. That is the Jim Benning method of team building.
 
Hawkaholic said:
Because they dont want to meet the value of the player in the trade.
Click to expand...

No, because the 'value' the market establishes is not aligned with their own evaluation of said player's value.

If you're the type of consumer who will pay $250,000 for a Honda Civic just because others in the market might, god be with you. Others will determine, no, that car is not worth that payment, because we have a better understanding of the inherent value of that car.
 
Blackhawkswincup said:
What the hell else is Jordan Greenway? He is f***ing worthless sack of shit who shouldn't be on NHL roster let alone a team like Hawks who actually need productive player to replace what we are losing in Mikheyev
Click to expand...
Honestly, you need to just go offline for a bit and chill the f**k out. It is absolutely embarrassing reading your rambling posts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: migi, Dead Meat and Beukeboom Fan
Tuch will be more than solid for the next 4-5 years, after that cap will be up so much it wont even matter.
20260624_142720.jpg
 
JaegerDice said:
No, because the 'value' the market establishes is not aligned with their own evaluation of said player's value.

If you're the type of consumer who will pay $250,000 for a Honda Civic just because others in the market might, god be with you. Others will determine, no, that car is not worth that payment, because we have a better understanding of the inherent value of that car.
Click to expand...
No, the value is set by what a team will pay for it, this isn't selling a car.
A "smart" team might really like the player, but dont have the assets required to get him, no matter how much they want him.
 
Hawkaholic said:
No, the value is set by what a team will pay for it, this isn't selling a car.
A "smart" team might really like the player, but dont have the assets required to get him, no matter how much they want him.
Click to expand...

Dude, the NHL is a closed market; this 'invisible hand of the market' nonsense flies even less within this context than it does in actual open economic markets.

Players are not actually worth what stupid GMs will pay; they are worth their measurable impact on a team.

If players are worth whatever the 'market' dictates then there is never a bad trade, because every trade was dictated by the market and the GMs were powerless.

We know this is bullshit because GMs manipulate the market to create bidding wars all the time.

Smart GMs let dumb GMs overpay.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Larmer83
Beukeboom Fan said:
You hope you get 4-5 good years out of Tuch. He's a poster child of characteristics for guys who don't age well.
Click to expand...
I am sure the Caps realize that as well, but some teams can see where the cap is headed and a contract like his wont be the problem some are making it out to be. Add another expansion team or two by the time his contract is even up, God knows how high the cap will hit. I bet in 3 years time he isnt even 8% of the teams cap. Smart teams that want to attempt to win now will navigate this correctly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beukeboom Fan
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 5 more.
    • Total: 32 (members: 19, guests: 13)

    Latest posts

    Ad

    Ad

    Top Bottom