CanOfCorn

LDF and Austin Illini, We...as fans...have the luxury of looking back on every signing, contract, trade or non-trade with 20/20 vision. Well, it's OUR 20/20 vision. We see things the way we want to. For instance, having to deal Saad to keep Seabrook. Signing Bickell to 4 years, whatever the total is. Trading this player we love for that player we don't love as much. But there are things we don't see. Trades that are agreed to but pulled at the last minute because of injury or owner doesn't like it. Signings based on progress. Signings based on performance. Signings based on potential. Signings based on market. Here's a stat. For this coming year. Brent Seabrook is the highest paid Blackhawks D-man. He is also the 13th highest paid d-man in the league. PK Subban is first at $9 m. This is just this year. Let's say Seabrooks contract kicked in this year. He'd be the 9th highest paid d-man in the league. Right behind Zdeno Chara. So, now, let's look at the d group, cap hit and league rank: Seabrook: $5.8 (13) Keith: $5,538,462 (20) Hammer: $4.1 (65) Daley: $3.3 (94) Rundblad: $1.05 (150) TVR: $925,000 (157) By the way, I got all of these at http://www.spotrac.com/nhl/rankings/cap-hit/defenseman/ You should see the murderers row of horribly paid defensemen above ours on that list. Even the ones that may have earned the contract haven't won a damn thing (Subban, Weber, Suter, Phaneuf, Pietrangelo, Karlsson). You sign players like Keith and Seabrook and Hossa to those long but slightly undervalued contracts for two reasons...one for their service so they know they are going to be taken care of and two, other players notice this and want to play for your team, not oonly because you win, but because you are protected by your org. But then, you would say, what about Bickell? Well, at the time he was extended, he just had a monster post-season. That's one. He's a power forward, something the Blackhawks don't have a lot of. That's two. That was the market rate for those types of players, coming off that season/playoffs. That's three. The cap was supposed to have gone up more than it has by now. That's four. Let's go to trades. Sharp needed to go because he's getting older, the issues in the locker room, AND you have players ready to step up and take that role. Sure it sucked to lose Johns, but this is the old argument of how do you view minor leaguers? Are they tradeable until they prove they can play at the big league level? OR are they someone you need to hold onto because they are going to be awesome? Pros and cons to both, I would say. But, for me, Johns hasn't done anything until he does something (RIP Yogi). Saad wanted to get paid. The Blackhawks couldn't afford him at what he wanted. If he would have taken a little bit of a discount, he would still be here. But, as is his right, he wanted the most he can get. So you get what you can. And to be honest, I think the FO did pretty damn well for themselves. So what if Dano isn't here to start the season. Teuvo wasn't either, but he was up when it mattered and won a Cup. It won't be long for Dano. AA is a serviceable 2C or 3C who should be pretty good on a line with Kane and Panarin. Oduya waited as long as he could. He's more expensive and older than Kruger, so he had to get as much as he could. The Blackhawks couldn't meet his demands in his time frame. So, he found a team that could. Be well. But the fact that Kruger probably could have gotten double his salary, and maybe more, but opted to stay with the Hawks is pretty incredible. My point with all of this isn't to prove you are wrong. Because you aren't wrong. But you aren't right either. And neither am I. Johns could be awesome and we could regret that trade. Sharp may score 40 or he may show his age. Dano might never pan out to be anything. Or he may be 75% of what Saad was. We could go through this with ALL of our players. So, let's just not. The Blackhawks have won 3 Cups in 6 years and are poised to do it again in the next few. That's pretty incredible and Stan deserves credit for it. One more thing. Sure Bickell's contract sucks now. I think we can all agree on that. But think of this...when he gets traded or sent down, there is so much depth, I wouldn't feel nervous about who would take his place. And honestly, other than Rundblad, I don't worry about the D depth either. Sure there are some green d-men in Svedberg, Pokka and Gustaffson, but one of those three should be able to step up when called upon. Whew.

QUOTE (LDF @ Oct 5, 2015 -> 02:55 PM) interesting ... i really thought it might be Panarin. to tell you the truth, i wish it was. Didn't you just post that video? THAT'S why he isn't. Kane and AA are PERFECT for him.

QUOTE (Soxfest @ Oct 2, 2015 -> 12:31 PM) Makes the trade look even worse right now. I expected Dano to make the team based on Bowman talking about him. Easy there...he's only 20, same age as Saad when he came up, and if I remember correctly, Saad didn't make the team out of camp either. Although I could be wrong on that one. This trade can't be graded until everyone's played some games with their new teams. Saad could crap the bed once the real season starts. Just relax and be glad the horrific White Sox season is over and now we get to watch hockey again!

QUOTE (LDF @ Oct 1, 2015 -> 04:02 PM) all true but lets not the team maneuver themselves to where it will happen sooner b/c of salary cap restrictions. let the team have flexibility to continue to improve while winning championships. A couple of things... 1) You have Duncan Keith on a long contract and while he's not hurting for money, he is UNDERPAID considering he's a Norris winner, 3x SC winner and Olympic gold medal winner. 2) Stanbo has done some of what you have said, by dealing Saad, who is young, but wanted too much money, and he got one serviceable player in Anisimov and one young up-and-comer, Dano. 3) He has also signed players out of college or with overseas pro experience that aren't raw, in Teravainen, TVR and Panarin. 4) On Seabrook, at the end of the deal, let's say the last 3-4 years, his contract IS tradeable. Because teams near the salary cap floor may need to get cap compliant, BUT, they won't have to ACTUALLY pay Seabrook the $6.75 M (or whatever it is, I can't remember the actual cap number). AND if the Blackhawks wanted to sweeten the deal, it's less for the Blackhawks to send to cover even 50% of his salary. So the CAP HIT will be the $6.75M, but the actual SALARY will be closer to $4M. 5) Seabrook has earned this contract. Every last dollar. 6) Regarding the bolded above, that doesn't work. Just ask the White Sox. But honestly, the Blackhawks have, what, 7 players currently on the roster that have been on the team for all 3 SC (Toews, Kane, Hossa, Bickell, Keith, Seabrook and Hjalmarsson). YOu can include Sharp if you want, just because he won 3. That means 2/3 of the team has turned over. I think the Front Office has done a pretty good job at keeping this team on top.

Seabrook's contract is cheap, by comparison, at the end of the deal. It'll be great for cap floor teams because it'll still count as $6.875 M, but the Blackhawks, or any team that gets him, will be getting a stodgy veteran for $4.5 mil (including signing bonus). And if Seabrook can stay relatively healthy, I think he'll be a good player well into his 30's. He earned this contract.

How 'bout the fact that it would probably take Q? So, then the Sox would lose Shark AND Q? And replace them with who? Obviously, Shark is probably gone, but replacing two starters is not the best idea.

Can I send IK Enemkpali to the "Deflategate" hearing and have him coldcock Goddell AND Brady?

QUOTE (LDF @ Jul 2, 2015 -> 11:17 AM) 1 mil in the difference... ummmm btw, i read that pit approach the hawks about a possible trade to get it done. they were surprise with no answer while reading of the trade was done with cbj. i would have like to know what pit was offering. also wasn't it pitt going to offer Saad a QO. Pitt, on paper, is closer to a SC team. I'd rather put Saad on a team that isn't quite as close. Plus, obviously, StanBo LURVES him some Anisimov.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jul 1, 2015 -> 02:51 PM) There are many radfems that think being gay is a choice that you need to make to break thru the stranglehold of the patriarchy who would disagree with you. And that's a political statement, not genetics. We are who we are, but that doesn't mean we can't choose to do something else, does it?

QUOTE (Brian @ Jul 1, 2015 -> 10:31 AM) A dude I didn't know on Facebook legit thought that guys chose to be gay because they can't get girls. It was the dumbest argument I ever got involved in. And you are just as dumb for even getting in the argument.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 23, 2015 -> 02:19 PM) I was thinking about something the other day. The current generation of 20 somethings to young 30 somethings are members of the generation that could do no wrong as kids. When they played competitive sports it was OK to suck and OK to lose. These are the same people who quit jobs after a year or so and move on to another firm or profession when the jobs aren't fun or what they expected. We've been told the current generation is seeking easy street ASAP and can't understand work ethic like previous generations. My psychological question is why hasn't this moved over to sports? We expect a ton from our young athletes. College football and basketball players get ripped in the press and by fans when they don't perform well. Guys in big league baseball from the Participation Trophy Generation get ripped and are expected to produce lest they get reamed by media and fans. My question is ... why do we expect this age group to perform like the Pete Rose age group? Is this a factor in baseball hitters not being as good nowadays or young NBA lottery picks of the last 3-4 years for the most part sucking? Has this filtered to professional sports? I just wondered why fans and media expect so much from young players nowadays when they are from a totally different generation, one not raised to excel and compete as hard as past generations. Also, how can a 20-something fan who was raised that losing is OK and just participating is enough ... how can that fan demand so much from players and even boo players when they were raised that failure is very OK? Please respond if you understand my point. I would say it HAS moved over to sports in a way. Not by being "ripped in the press and by fans," but with things like LeBron's "The Decision." You would NEVER have had that before this "generation."

QUOTE (kitekrazy @ Jun 29, 2015 -> 02:23 PM) Doesn't lay blame on Ventura. If I'm Ventura, I’m making them go through infield and outfield pregame drills like Little League teams. I don’t care if players feel embarrassed. They ought to be embarrassed by their Little League-like play fielding and throwing. They ought to have enough pride to fix it. Note to Samardzija - want to get paid like an ace, act like one. I don't know if this is done or do players try to improve on their own instead of going through the motions. I remember in 2005, when Rowand wasn't hitting he would go to the batting cages in the morning. If they fired Ventura they might get maybe a week of improvement that may be about it. I read a comment someone mentioned a culture of losing. That supports my theory they always get too many guys from losing organizations. Grindy.

Not willing to pass judgment yet, especially since he was raking until he hurt his knee.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 24, 2015 -> 11:41 AM) Conor in the 2 hole today. Interesting. You're a dirty birdy.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 23, 2015 -> 01:37 PM) Welcome Annie You just dated yourself!

Let's get: 1) a win 2) a major league record

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 23, 2015 -> 12:26 PM) The other interesting part of that is the floor is $52.8 million. Teams that are significantly under include Arizona, Nashville, Buffalo, and New Jersey. Arizona only has 11 players signed for next year. They can resign their player and add AHLers and get there without Bickell. Just saying. To me, Bickell is a buyout candidate because of his vertigo. I can't imagine anyone would want him AT THAT PRICE considering he could barely play in the SCF.

QUOTE (soxfan49 @ Jun 19, 2015 -> 06:43 PM) I think he meant Barker, not Campbell, in terms of going #3 and was supposed to be great. Hockeybuzz is run by Eklund who is garbage. I never read Eklund. I read the bloggers and MOST of them are pretty good. I'm impressed with the Blackhawks guy and the Lightning guy. Eklund and Tanner are idiots.

QUOTE (LDF @ Jun 19, 2015 -> 09:26 AM) with ref to those players you mention. campbell was a first round pick who was picked #3. at the time many thought he would develop to be a better player. Huet, the team needed goalies and at the time needed players at key position. the rfa, the team didn't have any choice but to offer the offer sheet. yeah everything happened at one time, but decisions had to be made for the sake of the team, esp for the future. that is why i keeping stating on the having the cost and contract spread out. but with this team they were able to win the first stanley cup. a special win. the last time was in the 1960's. the GM does not have the ability to have hindsight to make better judgement. blackhawks roster https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009%E2%80%93...ackhawks_season I think you need to check your history. I don't mean that to be rude, but this is just flat out wrong. By the way, hockeybuzz is pretty good.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 03:58 PM) Not sure about Richards. I bet he wants to come back and will probably come back cheap. They do have some better depth at center in the organization, so they might not need him. He wants to. He has a good relationship with Kaner. He's being paid by the NYR. He doesn't need a ton of money. I bet he comes back. 1C Toews 2C Richards 3C Kruger 4C Danault Some who can play center but don't need to: Shaw, TT, Desjardins.

QUOTE (Dunt @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 12:54 PM) Jamie Carroll pitches now? Jamey Carroll might?

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 09:07 AM) f*** Bernstein. In other news Im really enjoying Goff and Spiegs. This.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 08:52 AM) Sharp will be traded. You get rid of his salary and he will probably bring you back one of the draft picks they lost this year. Bickell might not bring back as much, but teams are going to always get excited about his size, so he shouldn't be that hard to move. You can only hold back $900K of the salary. The rest is still with the big club. Bickell won't get as much as we think. MAYBE a 3rd rounder. Sharp is gone. Hopefully to Washington or Montreal, for his sake. He's been a trooper and deserves to go somewhere he can win. Crawford will only go if StanBo is blown away by an offer. Saad, Kruger, Desjardins, Richards...all back. Oduya, unless he decides to be a nice guy, is gone. Roszival, Vermette, Cumiskey...gone. Rundblad, traded. IMHO.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 16, 2015 -> 12:13 AM) Caulfield, I think you and some others underplay what our current underachievers can bring on the market. I happen to believe the do-over I've suggested will work and Sox can get a bushel full of players for LaRoche, Shark, Robertson, Duke, Lexi and Melky. These guys are sucking now but still have baseball left in them in the NL. We can re-build the roster quickly and efficiently IMO! He has NOT sucked. The others, ok. How about this...maybe develop some positional prospects in the minors. Don't necessarily have to draft a Mike Trout. What I see is a bunch of mashers that SO 200 times a year. And...they...never...change. OR, you get a light hitting defensive wizard. That's all this org churns out recently. That needs to change.

1. Phil 2. Q 3. Jack Pardee