The Great Cam Barker Appreciation thread (And former Hawks talk vol 7)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Behn Wilson

Registered User
Mar 14, 2002
5,339
975
Chicago, Il
Visit site
Letting assets walk and trading away everything not bolted down with the confidence that his draft picks are going to be more valuable.

I'm not saying he's right or wrong, but that's taking a gamble in my eyes.
A major reason those players were let go was because Bowman overpaid them and their qualifying offers would have been ridiculous for what they brought to the table. SO much so for Kubalik and Strome that they had zero trade value due to this.
 

BobbyJet

The accountability era?
Oct 27, 2010
30,595
10,261
Dundas, Ontario. Can
Thank goodness for the ignore option.

Back on topic, I was against trading Dach (it was too early), Cat (he could have been a valuable asset in the rebuild) and I was certainly against letting Kubalik walk for no return. Stevie Y didn't hesitate to pounce and Kubalik is now on a PPG pace. But I am not prepared to label Davidson as a terrible GM (yet). What he does going forward will determine that.
 

BobbyJet

The accountability era?
Oct 27, 2010
30,595
10,261
Dundas, Ontario. Can
A major reason those players were let go was because Bowman overpaid them and their qualifying offers would have been ridiculous for what they brought to the table. SO much so for Kubalik and Strome that they had zero trade value due to this.
Strome, yes... plus he had no place on this team going forward.
Kubalik, perhaps but why not keep him? He's a former 30-goal scorer who came off a poor season but Hawks could certainly use a potential PPG guy who can put the puck in the net. A comeback year on a losing team would have given him more value if Davidson wanted to move him.
 

Behn Wilson

Registered User
Mar 14, 2002
5,339
975
Chicago, Il
Visit site
Strome, yes... plus he had no place on this team going forward.
Kubalik, perhaps but why not keep him? He's a former 30-goal scorer who came off a poor season but Hawks could certainly use a potential PPG guy who can put the puck in the net. A comeback year on a losing team would have given him more value if Davidson wanted to move him.
Kubalik salary would have been way too high, I forget the amount but it was double what he is worth. He signed w Detroit for less than what his qualifying offer would have been. He only had one good year and sucked last year. With no salary cap, I would say pay them anything but Bowman screwed the Hawks cap up paying to much across the board and we lost tons of players vecause of that. Cap management is an important tool. They lost too many players like Teravainen because of this
 

BobbyJet

The accountability era?
Oct 27, 2010
30,595
10,261
Dundas, Ontario. Can
Kubalik salary would have been way too high, I forget the amount but it was double what he is worth. He signed w Detroit for less than what his qualifying offer would have been. He only had one good year and sucked last year. With no salary cap, I would say pay them anything but Bowman screwed the Hawks cap up paying to much across the board and we lost tons of players vecause of that. Cap management is an important tool. They lost too many players like Teravainen because of this
Kubalik's worth is debatable but I agree with the rest.
 

ClydeLee

Registered User
Mar 23, 2012
12,303
5,789
Letting assets walk and trading away everything not bolted down with the confidence that his draft picks are going to be more valuable.

I'm not saying he's right or wrong, but that's taking a gamble in my eyes.
It's seen as a risk but it really shouldn't be comparatively. If he kept those players and tried to add... that's still a big risk too.

It's risking that these players will improve enough to amount to anything and they can somehow gain assets to boost their bottom tier prospect pool at that time. Without the help of multiple likely high top 10 picks.
 

hockeydoug

Registered User
May 26, 2012
4,012
465
A major reason those players were let go was because Bowman overpaid them and their qualifying offers would have been ridiculous for what they brought to the table. SO much so for Kubalik and Strome that they had zero trade value due to this.
Kubalik was left to die by King and Davidson. His contract was fine.
Keeping Strome in the top 6 to have just one line good in 1 zone 5 on 5 killed the whole lineup.
Kubalik wasn't going to get much but it would help to have guy that could shoot and he wasn't going to hurt the tank. They shouldn't be worried about the cap for 5 years.
 

hockeydoug

Registered User
May 26, 2012
4,012
465
What was Teravainen's injury this month?

Such a brutal start for him this year. Before the EDM game that he left, he didn't have a single point against a team in a playoff position.
 

ClydeLee

Registered User
Mar 23, 2012
12,303
5,789
Kubalik was left to die by King and Davidson. His contract was fine.
Keeping Strome in the top 6 to have just one line good in 1 zone 5 on 5 killed the whole lineup.
Kubalik wasn't going to get much but it would help to have guy that could shoot and he wasn't going to hurt the tank. They shouldn't be worried about the cap for 5 years.
It would help what to have a guy that could shoot?

If you think he wouldn't help the team enough to not hurt the tank, what's the value in keeping him? He had no trade value, just hoping out a guy might regain value to get an equal player in trade or late pick isn't really a move to bank on.
 

hockeydoug

Registered User
May 26, 2012
4,012
465
It would help what to have a guy that could shoot?

If you think he wouldn't help the team enough to not hurt the tank, what's the value in keeping him? He had no trade value, just hoping out a guy might regain value to get an equal player in trade or late pick isn't really a move to bank on.
When they are getting crushed in shots, many of the shifts are a waste of everybody's time as they're not even close to generating a shot. Players out of position by a few feet, can't adjust to defenders, following up on assignments after shots...the guy knows how to get open to shoot and that would help many of the newer players learn. It's not about trade value, it's about not wasting everybody's time. Kane, Jones, and alot of blueline continuity is making the tank difficult enough, may as well do something instead of just adding these guys to the thread.
 

Artorius Horus T

sincerety
Nov 12, 2014
19,599
12,350
Suomi/Finland
Former Hawks contract player (never actually played for Hawks) RD Darren Raddysh, 25
is killing in the AHL this season. 8 goals, 25 points in 16 games, pace over 100 points.
- he has points in 14 of his 16 games

And yes, Darren is Taylor's older brother and both played in Erie.
 

Giovi

Registered User
Sponsor
Feb 1, 2009
2,696
3,955
Kubalik was left to die by King and Davidson. His contract was fine.
Keeping Strome in the top 6 to have just one line good in 1 zone 5 on 5 killed the whole lineup.
Kubalik wasn't going to get much but it would help to have guy that could shoot and he wasn't going to hurt the tank. They shouldn't be worried about the cap for 5 years.
Kubalik would have cost them 4 mill to qualify. He was trending down. He almost certainly wouldn't be producing now, with the talent he'd be playing with on the Hawks, the way he is with the Wings.

Signing him would have given the Hawks an expensive boat anchor that would have been near impossible to trade, and wouldn't ever have been part of the team when it turns the corner.

So what, exactly, would have been the point? What am I missing? What would the benefit have been to the Hawks to sign him?
 

x Tame Impala

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Aug 24, 2011
28,784
13,801
Yeah Adam Boqvist definitely accomplished enough to shit talk the Hawks on social media. Surely that won't come back to bite him in his long and illustrious NHL career
 

BobbyJet

The accountability era?
Oct 27, 2010
30,595
10,261
Dundas, Ontario. Can
Kubalik would have cost them 4 mill to qualify. He was trending down. He almost certainly wouldn't be producing now, with the talent he'd be playing with on the Hawks, the way he is with the Wings.

Signing him would have given the Hawks an expensive boat anchor that would have been near impossible to trade, and wouldn't ever have been part of the team when it turns the corner.

So what, exactly, would have been the point? What am I missing? What would the benefit have been to the Hawks to sign him?
A sniper needs the puck and he wasn't getting the line support here. Wings immediately put Kubalik on a line that would allow him to use his talent. Going to Wings was the best thing that ever happened to his career.
I sure wish Hawks had an astute GM like Stevie Y. Seems he disagrees with you.
 

Giovi

Registered User
Sponsor
Feb 1, 2009
2,696
3,955
A sniper needs the puck and he wasn't getting the line support here. Wings immediately put Kubalik on a line that would allow him to use his talent. Going to Wings was the best thing that ever happened to his career.
I sure wish Hawks had an astute GM like Stevie Y. Seems he disagrees with you.
I'm not sure what the disagreement would be. He cost Detroit less than he would have cost the Hawks, and he's producing more there than he would have in Chicago.

He was a good signing for Detroit. He would have been a bad signing for the Hawks.
 

nmgrbhfn

Registered User
Mar 27, 2018
1,735
1,052
Yeah Adam Boqvist definitely accomplished enough to shit talk the Hawks on social media. Surely that won't come back to bite him in his long and illustrious NHL career
AB was an injury or two away from first round bust. I liked moving him, but I didn't like the return. As numerous posters have said, SJ has no place on a tear-down to the studs rebuild.
 

BobbyJet

The accountability era?
Oct 27, 2010
30,595
10,261
Dundas, Ontario. Can
I'm not sure what the disagreement would be. He cost Detroit less than he would have cost the Hawks, and he's producing more there than he would have in Chicago.

He was a good signing for Detroit. He would have been a bad signing for the Hawks.
Well, it seems to me that KD didn't spend much time on this at all. If it takes some creativity to get something done so be it but I guess that is too much to ask.

My take: The bottom line is that you don't give away a proven 30-goal scorer.

BTW... I also disagree with the tag "boat anchor" and that he was "trending downward". You obviously didn't like him as a player.
 
Last edited:

nmgrbhfn

Registered User
Mar 27, 2018
1,735
1,052
The problem with Kubalik was Strome and Toews. Strome was a roster anomaly - could produce with very select talent but provide little else of hockey worth. At the same time he was impossible to move. Toews hasn't been a reliable enough player the last couple of years while occupying ANOTHER roster spot with a NMC. Hence a top six talent like Kubalik was left without a commensurate talent at center to play with. I credit Kubalik for some mental strength for staying positive until he landed on the right spot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BobbyJet

Giovi

Registered User
Sponsor
Feb 1, 2009
2,696
3,955
Well, it seems to me that KD didn't spend much time on this at all. If it takes some creativity to get something done so be it but I guess that is too much to ask.

My take: The bottom line is that you don't give away a proven 30-goal scorer.

BTW... I also disagree with the tag "boat anchor" and that he was "trending downward". You obviously didn't like him as a player.
He went from .7 ppg to .4. That, to me, is trending down.

Had KD signed him and he continued to struggle offensively, he would have been a boat anchor. Expensive, not producing, difficult to move is pretty much the definition of a boat anchor to me.

His qualifying offer would have been 4 million. That is how much it would cost the Hawks to keep him. I'm not sure how Davidson "creativity" would have altered that reality. Davidson could have negotiated with him after the deadline, but I'm pretty sure Detroit would have been a more favorable destination for him at that time.
 

Pertti

Registered User
Dec 1, 2019
715
243
He went from .7 ppg to .4. That, to me, is trending down.

Had KD signed him and he continued to struggle offensively, he would have been a boat anchor. Expensive, not producing, difficult to move is pretty much the definition of a boat anchor to me.

His qualifying offer would have been 4 million. That is how much it would cost the Hawks to keep him. I'm not sure how Davidson "creativity" would have altered that reality. Davidson could have negotiated with him after the deadline, but I'm pretty sure Detroit would have been a more favorable destination for him at that time.
Qualifying offer is just for rights, you are not obligated to pay it and he signed less, so might have signed less to stay Chicago too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad