https://x.com/DailyFaceof...gTxYV1iJjYkNI6AQ_Gvw&s=19

It'll be interesting if this writer is correct about Bedard. That would be something 40 goals this season.

https://x.com/DailyFaceoff/status/1831381208741093747?t=8KgTxYV1iJjYkNI6AQ_Gvw&s=19

It'll be interesting if this writer is correct about Bedard. That would be something 40 goals this season.
- BetweenTheDots

Thanks BtD, interesting read. Bedard stays healthy, us fans are in for a sweet ride.

The alternatives? Let him walk for nothing, or trade him where you would never get fair value back?
- LAHawk

I agree. They would have had to find a similar player with a similar contract. Marner or Rantanen are about it, assuming nobody's NTC list gets in the way.

I agree. They would have had to find a similar player with a similar contract. Marner or Rantanen are about it, assuming nobody's NTC list gets in the way.
- 333inthe3rd

I wouldn't trade Draisaitl for either one of them.

Did it slow or hinder Vlasic's development ?
- LAHawk

Apples and oranges.

Lucic has apparently signed a PTO with the Devils.

The alternatives? Let him walk for nothing, or trade him where you would never get fair value back?
- LAHawk

I believe I read here at least 745 times that Stan shoulda got Player X to sign at a hometown discount of at least 33%. Because he couldn't do so, Stan sucks nards.

I wouldn't trade Draisaitl for either one of them.
- LAHawk

In a vacuum, me neither. But nobody wants to see them walk, either, not while they are still in that competitive window. Just saying that's the best way to retain most of the value lost, God forbid, assuming they can do a sign and trade.

But, what's the over/under on the date that Stanbo utter =for the first time in Edmonton --- 'I like our team'???

Ah yes, Mikheyev....lots of speed but no sense as to what to do with it.
He is where plays often go to die.

But seriously, meh player who has many brain farts but has the odd good play once in a while.
Enjoy.

The alternatives? Let him walk for nothing, or trade him where you would never get fair value back?
- LAHawk

I never cared for the walk for nothing statement. They paid him a pile of money and he consistently put up points. It's a fair exchange and when it's over it's over. No one missed out on any value.

There's nothing wrong with letting guys walk if you can't come to a deal that is best for the team will be reflective of the players output.

I think they should have waited to see how this year shakes out first.

I agree. They would have had to find a similar player with a similar contract. Marner or Rantanen are about it, assuming nobody's NTC list gets in the way.
- 333inthe3rd

Or they sign 2 or 3 players instead and try more of a depth approach.

I believe I read here at least 745 times that Stan shoulda got Player X to sign at a hometown discount of at least 33%. Because he couldn't do so, Stan sucks nards.
- mohel

I heard Stan had an offer of 2 second round picks for LD but was holding out for more.

I never cared for the walk for nothing statement. They paid him a pile of money and he consistently put up points. It's a fair exchange and when it's over it's over. No one missed out on any value.

There's nothing wrong with letting guys walk if you can't come to a deal that is best for the team will be reflective of the players output.

I think they should have waited to see how this year shakes out first.
- fattybeef

Was told on this board you need top tier talent (at least 2) in order to win. But if you have the best 2, you need to trade one of them for depth players (becoming the Carolina Hurricanes) because otherwise you have to work too hard to get under the cap, and might have to lose a depth player.

Unfortunately what a player is worth is not necessarily what he is worth to his current team, but to what another team would pay for his talents. If the Hawks try to squeeze Bedard for the sake of the team, I am sure there are teams that would give up their 3 #1 draft choices to offer sheet him. Maybe KD would love that, we know how much he loves his draft capital. (that is sarcasm for those ready to jump down my throat).

It is also obvious that after the COVID debacle of the players having a tremendous escrow bill to pay off, that the players are in no mood to give the owners any slack. In fact, that is one of the reasons why the players are taking a big part of it's contract dollars in bonus, which is lockout proof. This idea of taking less salary to keep the gang together is just a fallacy. The only reason why a Florida based team (or Tennessee for that matter) has a player take a lower AAV, is because not paying state taxes more than makes up for the lower salary.


The escrow is going to be a big contentious part of negotiations before the 2025 season. Players don't want it anymore, and of course the owners do.

Or they sign 2 or 3 players instead and try more of a depth approach.
- fattybeef

Right, if they can't get a near equivalent player. We're all still traumatized by Panarin for Saad. Nothing against Saad, but that was not a trade of near equals. Bowman had to figure out the puzzle instead of overpaying to get the band back together.

...

Unfortunately what a player is worth is not necessarily what he is worth to his current team, but to what another team would pay for his talents. If the Hawks try to squeeze Bedard for the sake of the team, I am sure there are teams that would give up their 3 #1 draft choices to offer sheet him. Maybe KD would love that, we know how much he loves his draft capital. (that is sarcasm for those ready to jump down my throat).

...

- LAHawk

Only if Ottawa is the one that offer sheets him. Because those have the best chance of being high picks. I kid. Sort of.

Right, if they can't get a near equivalent player. We're all still traumatized by Panarin for Saad. Nothing against Saad, but that was not a trade of near equals. Bowman had to figure out the puzzle instead of overpaying to get the band back together.
- 333inthe3rd

I agree that Bowman should’ve gotten more, but a lot of this is hindsight. There was one guy posting here at the time who thought this was a bad deal…don’t recall the handle but don’t see him posting here anymore. Mo probably ran him off.

At the time though everyone thought Saad was exactly the guy the Hawks needed…could play heavier hockey for the playoffs and was going to jumpstart El Capitan.

Also this was on the heels of a poor playoff performance by Panarin vs the Preds. Sure everyone played poorly but Panarin really had no answer or seemingly desire for fighting thru Preds standing him up at the blue line.

The two biggest issues with that deal for me, if we’re employing hindsight, is that Bowman should’ve dealt Panarin for a younger blue chip prospect and draft capital instead of trying to keep the window open.

Toews was pretty much spent at that point and the only two players from the Cup runs still playing to their rep and contract were Kane and Keith…and Keith was starting to slide in part due to a lack of depth on the Hawk blue line.

I know some here think Hammer was still the same guy from the 3 Cup runs but it’s just not true. Maybe they could’ve gotten more for him too but it’s all spilt milk and hindsight at this point.

I believe I read here at least 745 times that Stan shoulda got Player X to sign at a hometown discount of at least 33%. Because he couldn't do so, Stan sucks nards.
- mohel

What's your point?

Ah yes, Mikheyev....lots of speed but no sense as to what to do with it.
He is where plays often go to die.

But seriously, meh player who has many brain farts but has the odd good play once in a while.
Enjoy.
- Fakepartofme

Better than having slow guys do the same thing.

I heard Stan had an offer of 2 second round picks for LD but was holding out for more.
- DarthKane

He wanted a '26 3rd added.

Was told on this board you need top tier talent (at least 2) in order to win. But if you have the best 2, you need to trade one of them for depth players (becoming the Carolina Hurricanes) because otherwise you have to work too hard to get under the cap, and might have to lose a depth player.

Unfortunately what a player is worth is not necessarily what he is worth to his current team, but to what another team would pay for his talents. If the Hawks try to squeeze Bedard for the sake of the team, I am sure there are teams that would give up their 3 #1 draft choices to offer sheet him. Maybe KD would love that, we know how much he loves his draft capital. (that is sarcasm for those ready to jump down my throat).

It is also obvious that after the COVID debacle of the players having a tremendous escrow bill to pay off, that the players are in no mood to give the owners any slack. In fact, that is one of the reasons why the players are taking a big part of it's contract dollars in bonus, which is lockout proof. This idea of taking less salary to keep the gang together is just a fallacy. The only reason why a Florida based team (or Tennessee for that matter) has a player take a lower AAV, is because not paying state taxes more than makes up for the lower salary.


The escrow is going to be a big contentious part of negotiations before the 2025 season. Players don't want it anymore, and of course the owners do.
- LAHawk

I've said it many times, the escrow is BS. Owners take on market risk, not employees.

Only if Ottawa is the one that offer sheets him. Because those have the best chance of being high picks. I kid. Sort of.
- 333inthe3rd

As long as it's not ST. Louis or the Preds.

Right, if they can't get a near equivalent player. We're all still traumatized by Panarin for Saad. Nothing against Saad, but that was not a trade of near equals. Bowman had to figure out the puzzle instead of overpaying to get the band back together.
- 333inthe3rd

Saad will have his number retired.

I never cared for the walk for nothing statement. They paid him a pile of money and he consistently put up points. It's a fair exchange and when it's over it's over. No one missed out on any value.

There's nothing wrong with letting guys walk if you can't come to a deal that is best for the team will be reflective of the players output.

I think they should have waited to see how this year shakes out first.
- fattybeef

I think it was very important for them to get him resigned ASAP because of multiple reasons.

First, the whole contract thing would have been a distraction all year until it was done, the media, the fans, the whole organization. Now, it's done, the direction with Leon Draisaitl is set.

They've also re-enforced the commitment to one of their two huge stars, which is important for the upcoming negotiation with the other one. With one locked in, the odds increase that the other will do the same and try to bring back a cup or more.

The value for this deal wasn't going to significantly change now vs later, he was going to get somewhere exactly in this range and there is really no reason to wait. The absolute worst would be to have him walk for nothing, because they don't have someone ready to come and fill that void and the return for a player like him would be significant. They needed to lock him in and make sure they can secure that deal now or figure out a plan B without derailing their whole season and again having a distraction.

It also doesn't matter if the GM is Stan Bowman, Jeff Jackson, or pretty much any GM, he was gonna get similar money, NMC, etc.

I've said it many times, the escrow is BS. Owners take on market risk, not employees.
- rpeters01

The owners still have all the expense risk. Escrow has nothing to do with market/profit the owners receive. The players wanted a guaranteed 50/50 split on revenue. The escrow was in case the revenue isn't attained. The salary cap is based on that expected revenue. Alternatively they could have no escrow, and the players take a lower salary during the season and get bonused out at the end of the year based on the actual revenue numbers. Or no revenue split and have the union negotiate each contract type with the owners, regardless of the leagues revenue