This is the first of our weekly Chicago Blackhawks' mailbags. I got rolling with my answers and discovered my word count had risen pretty quickly after just a handful of questions. I'll answer a set second of questions this weekend.
Q: What is likely to give in order to re-sign Brandon Saad to a contract that he deserves? -- Kyle Trusgnich
Scott Powers: Kyle, there’s no doubt something will have to give to re-sign Saad. The Blackhawks will certainly push for a bridge contract to fill up his wallet at a decent rate for the next few years while he’s still a restricted free agent and then reward him with a larger, long-term deal to really get him paid. Saad still can be expected to get something in the $3 million-plus range when he goes to negotiate his contract after the season.
Considering the Blackhawks already have 15 players signed and about $65 million committed to their 2015-16 roster and the estimate for the NHL cap is $71 million next season, the math isn’t that difficult. In order to fill a roster and re-sign Saad and possibly Marcus Kruger, the Blackhawks need to create some cap space and also rely more on their prospects.
So to your question, who could be a possible cap casualty? The obvious one to me would be Bryan Bickell. Brian Hedger have talked about this at length on our podcasts. While Bickell did shine in the 2013 playoffs and the Blackhawks probably don’t win the Stanley Cup without him, he hasn’t been worth the four-year, $16 million contract he was rewarded with after that last season. He has 20 goals and 36 points in 107 regular-season games since being paid. He does take his game to another level in the playoffs, but that may not be enough for the Blackhawks to keep him around.
I’ve heard Patrick Sharp, Brent Seabrook and Corey Crawford as other names thrown around, but I just don’t think it makes sense. Whether people like it or not, Crawford is here to stay until his contract runs up in the 2019-20 season. He’s making the going rate for a Stanley Cup-caliber goaltender and has played well this season. Seabrook has been more consistent this season, and the Blackhawks need as many experienced defensemen as they can get going forward, especially with Michal Rozsival and Johnny Oduya likely gone after this season. As for Sharp, he’s still playing at a high level. I could see him and Seabrook retiring as Blackhawks.
Q: Is there any chance we'll trade for Antoine Vermette? He's available, and the price tag shouldn't be too bad as a rental. Shaw's been awful, and should stay permanently at wing. Who knows how Richards will produce come playoff time. And it's unclear what they're plans for Teuvo Teravainen are. I'm a big Kruger fan, but big picture, we're one injury away from being very weak down the middle. Vermette's a perfect fit. -- Geoffrey Dubey
Powers: Geoffrey, I don’t foresee the Blackhawks adding a forward before the trade deadline. There’s a chance they acquire an experienced defenseman, but that may be unlikely as well. Cap space is a massive issue next season, but it still remains one this season. When they take Kris Versteeg and Trevor van Riemsdyk off the long-term injured reserve, they’re going to be right up against the cap again.
To add a piece like Vermette or a quality defenseman, they’d have to give up something similar financially. When I sat down with Stan Bowman last week, we talked about this. He basically said to fill one hole they would likely create another. I do think the Blackhawks have the lineup to compete for another Cup. When Versteeg comes back, Teravainen deserves to remain in the lineup. He could be that third-line center and move Andrew Shaw to the wing on the fourth line. There is some uncertainty with the defensemen. They need Johnny Oduya to get back on track, and it would be beneficial to them if van Riemsdyk could return to form in March and be ready for the playoffs. There was a risk when they traded Nick Leddy before the season, and they’re starting to feel the impact of that. Their defenseman depth isn't there.
Q. I feel like the Hawks have no physical presence on the ice. They rely on speed and finesse which is great but against these bigger teams, don't you think having some size and attitude would help free up the speed/finesse? -- Jeff Cleaver
Powers: Jeff, I feel like this a conversation that comes up every season since I’ve been on the beat. The Blackhawks’ identity is based on finesse and puck possession. It can be positive when Bickell, Shaw, Joakim Nordstrom or whomever else is willing to finish checks and create the occasional havoc whether to dislodge pucks from opponents or just deliver a blow. But overall, the Blackhawks aren’t that team, and they have proven they can win without being that team.
I do think the Blackhawks need their defensemen and forwards to be physical around the net and especially keep opponents from parking there in the Blackhawks’ zone. The Blackhawks lack of a true second-line center hurt them in that respect last season. The Kings’ depth down the middle was noticeable against the Blackhawks in the Western Conference finals. Adding Brad Richards helped address that issue. I do think the Blackhawks are in a better spot at center with Jonathan Toews, Richards, Shaw/Teravainen and Kruger on each line.
Q: So why Dennis Rasmussen and not Mark McNeill? -- Capt. Vic Fiebig, USN (Ret)
Powers: Capt. Fiebig, it was matter of adding a prospect the Blackhawks felt comfortable likely healthy scratching for a week or so. The Blackhawks wanted to give themselves another forward on the road trip just in case something happened, and they could call upon someone quickly. It’s harder to get a player out to California from Rockford on short notice. They like Rasmussen enough to bring him up, but he’s a bit older and they’re not concerned about affecting his development. They wouldn’t want someone like McNeill or Phillip Danault just participating in practices and morning skates. They want those guys playing as much as possible, so they remain in the AHL. McNeill is someone who deserves an NHL shot sooner than later.
