Jump to content
The Official Site of the Chicago Blackhawks
Old_Hawk

Seabrook

Recommended Posts

As I understand it, he barely makes the top fifteen for defenceman for 2016-17.  

If Seabrook is the most overpaid on this team, I believe Bowman is doing a good job.

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mvr said on 4 hours ago:

As I understand it, he barely makes the top fifteen for defenceman for 2016-17.  

If Seabrook is the most overpaid on this team, I believe Bowman is doing a good job.

Most overpaid player is IMO Toews but there were not many options for the Hawks/SB, there are more factors involved.IE if Kane is not such great player and would have been signed for 8 M, Toews would been signed for 8M too and this extra money has nothing to do with his performance/talent.

Edited by Modry-Jazyk
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks M-J and Irmaks.  You seem to get what I am trying to say, which isn't that really that hard to understand.  

Seabrook is a great Chicago Blackhawk.  Perhaps his most defining moment to me was going into the penalty box and being a leader to Toews.  And he has had plenty of more, including the series clincher in that round against the wangs.  What people are not understanding is the term of his contract, not the cap hit so much.  Bowman would have been smarter to sign Seabs to a four year deal until he was 35, then extend him on a yearly basis if need be.  Is that asking too much?  Obviously my opinion doesn't matter, and that's okay.  If Seabrook (Keith and Hossa) are all still playing well for their durations, that is what counts.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Big-T said on 12 hours ago:

Yoop, if I have time I will find Wilsons comments on why Joe signed those deals. Wilson clearly stated many times that his teams that his teams window was closing and he didn't want to be married to his players. His last two deals Wilson tried to trade him at least 3 times, and Joe used his NMC. He and Wilson feuded a couple years ago over it. Wilson expressed that he wanted to rebuild on many occasions, but he couldn't cuz his hands were tied. Marleau and Joe shouldn't have been re-signed their last deals, but Wilson chased the dream once more, he came close, but he's gonna have to tear it down soon. That's the only reason he was signed to shorter term deals!!!

So, it almost appears as if you are saying Thornton was signed 3 times by his GM to three year deals because Wilson did not want to have a real long term relationship.  In essence, he was prolonging something he apparently did not want, although every three years there was a chance to move on.  The no movement clause is a terrible tool for management, IMO.  Conversely, it is great in seveval ways for the player.  And yet, both parties, everywhere and all the time, agree to it.  When GMs paint themselves into that corner, they only have to look into the mirror to see the problem. Thornton was not obligated to re-sign with the Sharks.  And Wilson certainly could have let him go as a UFA and started over with $6+M.  Sometimes that is a far better way to go in dealing with pending free agents.  Unless, of course, the Dallas trade is the model.  (What a joke!).  

Again, as it relates to the Blackhawks, just because they can extend their players to max terms, is that really the best approach?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe Wilson wanted him after the first contract, he paid dearly, gave him the NMC and over 7 million, at that time, that was a lot of money. He was resigned due to Wilson not having many other options, and the ownership more than likely needed a selling point. He was re-signed. Joe wants to stay in the Bay Area, he's made that very clear. He was coming off of a good season, so he got another deal, I believe the last one was 4 years, he and Marleau signed twin deals. And the last one was where all hell broke loose and Wilson ripped on Joe and tried to trade him every summer except last one. Either way, I truly feel that Toews and Kane and Seabs are all overpayed. But you can't just point the finger at the player, Stan said himself that he wanted the two to be the highest paid in the league. And I think with Seabs, they could a front loaded the deal, and gave him all his money up front and had next to nothing on the back end. Where his AAV would be much less. 

 

However, I think they've earned those deals. I really do. If you don't want to pay someone on their past performance, what do you pay them for? I'd rather pay for past performance, than paying on potential!!!

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hsbob said on On ‎07‎/‎01‎/‎2017 at 2:52 PM:

Unlike Joe Thornton,Brent Seabrook has been one of the best post season players in the league and the organization decided to wrap him up long term,it is what it is.

 

GO HAWKS!!!!! 

Agreed, and the way he played last year, he deserved the big pay day. He would have been a UFA and would easily have received the same on the open market. But, no one can deny, his play is less than stellar this year. He didn't become a bad player overnight so it must be something else, (comfort zone, motivation). He's already won three cups and maybe he's ready to play out the string (it has happened to others). I don't know, but he's not the same player he was. As someone else noted, he is the Hawks biggest d-man, but his physical play has disappeared. I want to see the guy that put Backes into la la land and took it upon himself to get Toew's head screwed on against Detroit a couple of years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seabrook's only saving grace last season was his O output.  He was a medical-waste dumpster fire in the backend.

Thankfully, this year he's been better defensively.  He and Kempny have looked good together.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Big-T said on 14 hours ago:

I believe Wilson wanted him after the first contract, he paid dearly, gave him the NMC and over 7 million, at that time, that was a lot of money. He was resigned due to Wilson not having many other options, and the ownership more than likely needed a selling point. He was re-signed. Joe wants to stay in the Bay Area, he's made that very clear. He was coming off of a good season, so he got another deal, I believe the last one was 4 years, he and Marleau signed twin deals. And the last one was where all hell broke loose and Wilson ripped on Joe and tried to trade him every summer except last one. Either way, I truly feel that Toews and Kane and Seabs are all overpayed. But you can't just point the finger at the player, Stan said himself that he wanted the two to be the highest paid in the league. And I think with Seabs, they could a front loaded the deal, and gave him all his money up front and had next to nothing on the back end. Where his AAV would be much less. 

 

However, I think they've earned those deals. I really do. If you don't want to pay someone on their past performance, what do you pay them for? I'd rather pay for past performance, than paying on potential!!!

Well isn't that what Stan did with Bickell? How'd that work out? #Pitchforksandtorches :D

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Big-T said on 15 hours ago:

I believe Wilson wanted him after the first contract, he paid dearly, gave him the NMC and over 7 million, at that time, that was a lot of money. He was resigned due to Wilson not having many other options, and the ownership more than likely needed a selling point. He was re-signed. Joe wants to stay in the Bay Area, he's made that very clear. He was coming off of a good season, so he got another deal, I believe the last one was 4 years, he and Marleau signed twin deals. And the last one was where all hell broke loose and Wilson ripped on Joe and tried to trade him every summer except last one. Either way, I truly feel that Toews and Kane and Seabs are all overpayed. But you can't just point the finger at the player, Stan said himself that he wanted the two to be the highest paid in the league. And I think with Seabs, they could a front loaded the deal, and gave him all his money up front and had next to nothing on the back end. Where his AAV would be much less. 

 

However, I think they've earned those deals. I really do. If you don't want to pay someone on their past performance, what do you pay them for? I'd rather pay for past performance, than paying on potential!!!

Lot of things are taken into account, player's age, length of contract, cap situation, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There has to be some type or types of indicators on how to pay someone.   Past performance is one of them.   While it is not 100% accurate for future performance, it is a necessary "evil" to keep or obtain players you want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Right. If we really want to dumb it down, I'd say it's 50/50 between past performance and the expectation of moderate consistency in future performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Creature1958 said on 3 hours ago:

Well isn't that what Stan did with Bickell? How'd that work out? #Pitchforksandtorches :D

My guess is it would have worked out a lot better if he didn't contract MS.

 

GO HAWKS!!!!!

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

History is the best teacher, and that's what to expect for the future!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Creature1958 said on On 9. 1. 2017 at 6:26 PM:

Well isn't that what Stan did with Bickell? How'd that work out? #Pitchforksandtorches :D

I don't agree with Big-T, that teams pay for past performance, this is not true.

 

Big-T said on 20 hours ago:

History is the best teacher, and that's what to expect for the future!!!

I agree with you Big-T, past performance is hint for a team what to expect from players in the future, but that's all.This is not paying for past performance, teams still want the players play like they expected and players have to play at level they are paid for.

 

 

hsbob said on On 9. 1. 2017 at 9:30 PM:

My guess is it would have worked out a lot better if he didn't contract MS.

 

GO HAWKS!!!!!

who knows .. his decline came too suddenly after only short off-season 2013....In long term you are probably right.I still think that 1/2 of the season he has played in euro league during lock-out helped him much, he was local super star there and leader of the team, that was BIG psychical boost for him when he came back to the NHL with full confidence for rest of the season.Also his unexpected 2013 success together with huge contract he got could have slowed him down.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Is the second tweet supposed to describe what's happening in the video in the first tweet? Because if so, only one of those things happened. I won't blame Kempny on that goal, but it wouldn't hurt if he had a stronger stick.

Kempny did some good things last game and some bad things; if we're being honest about it. Got torched by Duchene. Gave Mackinnon all the time in the world (one of his biggest problems), who made him look silly on the Comeau goal. Overall though, he was fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hsbob said on On 1/9/2017 at 3:30 PM:

My guess is it would have worked out a lot better if he didn't contract MS.

 

GO HAWKS!!!!!

The first I heard about his MS diagnosis was AFTER he became a member of Carolina.  IF he had the disease as a Hawk, why didn't they LTIR him and keep Teravinen?  Beating a dead horse I know, but Bryan Bickell only played two months of really good hockey in his tenure as a Hawk when his free agent status was on the line.  I highly doubt he would have been any better than what he actually showed.  Neither his career stats or his overall play indicated he was top six material for the long haul, IMO.  I know he had several injuries after he was extended which may have hindered him but I never saw what made him that special (again besides the '13 Cup run.). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Granada said on 29 minutes ago:

^ Is the second tweet supposed to describe what's happening in the video in the first tweet? Because if so, only one of those things happened. I won't blame Kempny on that goal, but it wouldn't hurt if he had a stronger stick.

Kempny did some good things last game and some bad things; if we're being honest about it. Got torched by Duchene. Gave Mackinnon all the time in the world (one of his biggest problems), who made him look silly on the Comeau goal. Overall though, he was fine.

Ehh, I wouldn't say Kempny was "fine".  IMHO no one on D had a good game.  Their game was at least as bad as Crawford's if not collectively worse.  Granted, Kempny is a rookie D-man, I won't lay it on him.  However, with respect to his partner...scoring 1 goal and causing 2 is never a fair trade.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LordKOTL said on 10 minutes ago:

Ehh, I wouldn't say Kempny was "fine".  IMHO no one on D had a good game.  Their game was at least as bad as Crawford's if not collectively worse.  Granted, Kempny is a rookie D-man, I won't lay it on him.  However, with respect to his partner...scoring 1 goal and causing 2 is never a fair trade.

Yeah, agreed -- I just didn't want to start a big stink about it, so I said "fine" if only to not get into a big argument, but I agree; he certainly didn't impress me (personally) that game.

Edited by Granada

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am willing to give Seabs a pass, he seems to be the revolving d-man on this team, between this year and last Seabs is getting the job off playing with the rookies. 

In terms of salary, Hammer went through the same after he signed a contract extension, yes I know 4 million versua 6.9 is a difference but if Tazer, Keith and Kane get a pass I think our most clutch defencemen deserves the same from our fan base.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yooper496 said on 1 hour ago:

The first I heard about his MS diagnosis was AFTER he became a member of Carolina.  IF he had the disease as a Hawk, why didn't they LTIR him and keep Teravinen?  Beating a dead horse I know, but Bryan Bickell only played two months of really good hockey in his tenure as a Hawk when his free agent status was on the line.  I highly doubt he would have been any better than what he actually showed.  Neither his career stats or his overall play indicated he was top six material for the long haul, IMO.  I know he had several injuries after he was extended which may have hindered him but I never saw what made him that special (again besides the '13 Cup run.

the bolded....are you saying that the hawks knew he had MS but didnt tell him and traded him to carolina without telling them either?

wow....

and without that 2 months of good hockey we might possibly down to 2 cups instead of 3. 

not a fan of overpaying any hockey player....but if i would overpay one it would be bickell.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
galaxytrash said on 1 hour ago:

the bolded....are you saying that the hawks knew he had MS but didnt tell him and traded him to carolina without telling them either?

wow....

and without that 2 months of good hockey we might possibly down to 2 cups instead of 3. 

not a fan of overpaying any hockey player....but if i would overpay one it would be bickell.

I'm not saying anything, gt.  Merely responding directly to bob's thought.  I have no idea if the Hawks' medical staff knew about Bickell's disorder prior to him being dealt.  My thinking is that management just wanted to get rid of his contract.  Besides, if they knew about a pre-existing issue and did not inform the Hurricanes, the trade would have been voided by the league.

In case you missed it, I referred twice to his significance in 2013!

And yet because they re-signed him for whatever reasons, they may have ultimately lost out on Saad, a true top six LW, and they did lose Teravinen.  Except you would prefer to pay Bickell instead.  Really?!

To you and your followers, please do not put false meaning into my simple words!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hawkinmontreal said on 3 hours ago:

I am willing to give Seabs a pass, he seems to be the revolving d-man on this team, between this year and last Seabs is getting the job off playing with the rookies. 

In terms of salary, Hammer went through the same after he signed a contract extension, yes I know 4 million versua 6.9 is a difference but if Tazer, Keith and Kane get a pass I think our most clutch defencemen deserves the same from our fan base.

Not entirely directed at you, but if if Seabs, Tazer, Keith, and Kane get an automatic pass for stinking up the joint--then why not the goalie who, more often than not, has bailed out most of their defensive brainfarts--especially early this season and all of last season?

IMHO it's less about "giving them a pass" and more about being objective about, "hey, they need to be better."  and let's be honest: in recent memory just about ever player making more than 4M needs to be better from the net on out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LordKOTL said on 1 minute ago:

Not entirely directed at you, but if if Seabs, Tazer, Keith, and Kane get an automatic pass for stinking up the joint--then why not the goalie who, more often than not, has bailed out most of their defensive brainfarts--especially early this season and all of last season?

IMHO it's less about "giving them a pass" and more about being objective about, "hey, they need to be better."  and let's be honest: in recent memory just about ever player making more than 4M needs to be better from the net on out.

I agree with you, I did not include CC only because this was a topic on Seabrook, but yes you are right about CC.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×