Either way, it's interesting that they can throw one out and not throw the other out if there's no hard and fast rule to follow.

 

Well that's the issue, there is no specific rule. So I'm a little surprised they said no to the deal, although I get them trying to say enough is enough. But the NHLPA is appealing this, and I'm guessing the arbitration ruling will say the deal has to be allowed because other crazy deals have been allowed, even if they weren't quite this crazy. Or maybe everybody can compromise and a 14 year deal can be agreed to. A cap on deal years won't really fix this, because even if you cap deals length at 8 or 10 years, guys will still sign front loaded deals with minimal money the last few years to minimize the cap hit anyways. There is a way to fix it though IMO.

 

For instance, if you have a vet under age 35 sign a 10 year, 60 million deal if the cap on years is 10, he can just take 9.5 million the first 6 years and then 750 k the last 4 to minimize the cap hit and get paid, as it's unlikely he'd play the last 4 years anyways. If you put in a rule that each year of the deal must pay out a certain percentage of the deal's average annual value though, you could probably kill this. For the above deal, let's say that percentage is 75, so then each year must pay out at least 4.5 million dollars. That kills signing a guy forever. Or you could just make the cap hit for each year the salary that year, but I like my idea better.

Edited July 21, 201015 yr by whitesoxfan101

Take it FWIW, but the Yahoo NHL blogger (who is in a bad mood today because he's a Devils fan) seems to think it's possible the Hawks and Panthers come to a deal on Campbell eventually as he "heard it from a Chicago source".

Edited July 21, 201015 yr by whitesoxfan101

Take it FWIW, but the Yahoo NHL blogger (who is in a bad mood today because he's a Devils fan) seems to think it's possible the Hawks and Panthers come to a deal on Campbell eventually as he "heard it from a Chicago source".

 

I refuse to believe it until I see it, cause Campbell's is a nasty contract. Either way, it would be nice to get it done before Niemi's arb hearing on the 29th.

Doesn't Campbell have a NMC too?

Doesn't Campbell have a NMC too?

 

According to capgeek.com, he has a part no-trade clause. He can designate eight teams that he is willing to accept a trade to. The Hawks then have 45 days to trade him to one of those teams.

The Hawks have the list, and Campbell can change any of the eight teams at any time. Plus, even if Flordia wasn't on the list, he could still accept a trade to the Panthers if he wanted.

 

The only creative way I could see Campbell getting moved to FLA is if the Hawks packaged Campbell with the rights to Niemi, and took Vokoun back. Vokoun has a cap hit of 5.7, but is a free agent at the end of the year. Flordia gets an overpriced but useful D-man and a goaltender they may want to build around, and the Hawks get out of the financial burden they are in with Campbell and Huet.

 

I just don't see a way where the Hawks can make a trade with Campbell and get total salary relief. It's just too bad of a contract.

 

Agreed with the bolded, but they don't need total salary relief right now, only partial. And to your point earlier in the post, I think they can be creative and find a deal to get that.

Edited July 22, 201015 yr by whitesoxfan101

I can honestly say at this point that I had no idea how bad this was going to be to get back under.

To get back to the level they want to be at, yes, they need total salary relief.

 

Seabrook needs a new deal and will probably see his cap hit go from 3.5 to around 5, and the same can basically be said about Sharp, since both have been identified as part of the core. There is also no long term plan in net right now, which will need to be addressed. It would also be nice for them to have a little wiggle room to add a veteran if needed.

 

Getting that seven million off the books long term will make Stan's life a lot easier.

 

Yeah they definitely need to keep Brent and Sharp. I think it's possible at some point that Hossa is moved if they can't do anything about Campbell, as much as it pains me to say it. I think that's something more along the lines of happening next summer though. One thing is for sure: if they can't move Brian, they're going to have to make a significant move that they really don't want to. Maybe they can put it off this summer, but they can't put it off any longer than that.

Edited July 22, 201015 yr by whitesoxfan101

kuklaskorner

 

RT @OnFrozenPond: Panthers send C Jeff Taffe to the Blackhawks for former ATL C Marty Reasoner

kuklaskorner

 

RT @OnFrozenPond: Panthers send C Jeff Taffe to the Blackhawks for former ATL C Marty Reasoner

I see this as them not being that far off with Niemi.

Bickell resigns with the Hawks...3 year, one way deal, $500k, $525k & $600k.

Bickell resigns with the Hawks...3 year, one way deal, $500k, $525k & $600k.

I am a big Bickell fan. Every time he played, he made smart plays and was productive. Big body, should slide in nicely to Eager's role I would guess.

I am a big Bickell fan. Every time he played, he made smart plays and was productive. Big body, should slide in nicely to Eager's role I would guess.

Exactly what role I would expect him to take over. I think its a pretty good deal for him and the Hawks.

Exactly what role I would expect him to take over. I think its a pretty good deal for him and the Hawks.

I think Bickell was happy with any deal that didn't have him going back and forth from Rockford

Bickell resigns with the Hawks...3 year, one way deal, $500k, $525k & $600k.

 

Bickell is solid, but most importantly they filled a roster spot with a salary as low as $500k

Hawks to sign D Prospect Nick Leddy

 

Great news.

 

Hawks also signed Hugh Jessiman. 26 year old d-man, was the 12th overall pick in 2003.

Hawks to sign D Prospect Nick Leddy

 

Great news.

 

Hawks also signed Hugh Jessiman. 26 year old d-man, was the 12th overall pick in 2003.

 

Ranked #1 prospect in the organization?? Nice. Good to see the Cam Barker trade could provide more than just salary cap relief and a concussed Swede.

The Hawks have been a good drafting team for quite some time now. They've delivered at least 1 starting caliber player in every draft since 2002.

 

02: Keith, Wisniewski

03: Seabrook, Crawford, Byfuglien

04: Bolland, Brouwer, Dowell, Bickell, Barker

05: Hjalmarsson (and possibly Skille/Davis/Brophey this yr)

06: Toews (possibly Danis-Pepin or Makarov)

07: Kane

 

Beach and Lalonde in 08, Olden, Pirri, Kruger in 09, and the Hayes brothers in 10.

The Hawks have been a good drafting team for quite some time now. They've delivered at least 1 starting caliber player in every draft since 2002.

 

02: Keith, Wisniewski

03: Seabrook, Crawford, Byfuglien

04: Bolland, Brouwer, Dowell, Bickell, Barker

05: Hjalmarsson (and possibly Skille/Davis/Brophey this yr)

06: Toews (possibly Danis-Pepin or Makarov)

07: Kane

 

Beach and Lalonde in 08, Olden, Pirri, Kruger in 09, and the Hayes brothers in 10.

 

They didn't draft Jimmy. Plus I believe Jimmy was picked in 2009 by the Maple Leafs. Hawks just traded their 3rd round pick to get him this year.

 

Alot of people liked how Leddy and Lalonde feed off each other in prospect practice. A scout was quoted they could be the 19 and 20 year old version of Keith and Seabrook in due time.

Edited July 27, 201015 yr by J.Reedfan8

They didn't draft Jimmy. Plus I believe Jimmy was picked in 2009 by the Maple Leafs. Hawks just traded their 3rd round pick to get him this year.

 

Alot of people liked how Leddy and Lalonde feed off each other in prospect practice. A scout was quoted they could be the 19 and 20 year old version of Keith and Seabrook in due time.

Right, I meant draft-day acquisition for the other brother Hayes.

The Niemi arbitration ruling will be on Saturday; Hawks will then have 48 hours to make a decision

The Hawks lost money in 2009-2010.

The Hawks lost money in 2009-2010.

They had to give 50% of their playoff gate receipts to a league revenue-sharing plan they were not allowed to benefit from when times were bad?

What a f***ing scam.

They had to give 50% of their playoff gate receipts to a league revenue-sharing plan they were not allowed to benefit from when times were bad?

What a f***ing scam.

League revenue sharing is a good idea, but not at 50%, that's ridiculous.

don't the Wirtz own the company that distributes liquor to the UC?