Blackhawks Bargain Basement Producing

While playing without Patrick Sharp, the Blackhawks have received some great performances from secondary players. But what cannot be overlooked is the cost of these contributions against the salary cap.

Chicago GM Stan Bowman has done a nice job of providing depth scoring this year. With the emergence of rookies Andrew Shaw and Jimmy Hayes, every corner of the roster has been producing.

Let’s put the Hawks’ secondary scoring into some financial context. If we look just at the full season salary cap numbers of Blackhawks players, consider how Shaw, Hayes and Viktor Stalberg stack up against some other teams’ stars this year in scoring.

Here’s a list of what some NHL teams have received to date from some of their top money players, and their combined full-season cap numbers.

  • LA Kings: Williams-Penner-Stoll – 17 goals, $11.500M
  • Edmonton: Hemsky-Horcoff-Gagner – 17 goals, $11.875M
  • Montreal: Gionta-Plekanec-Darche – 19 goals, $10.700M
  • Buffalo: Stafford-Leino-Roy – 19 goals, $12.500M
  • Anaheim: Getzlaf-Koivu-Hagman – 21 goals, $9.325M
  • Washington: Semin-Knuble-Laich – 22 goals, $13.200M
  • Carolina: Staal-Ponikarovsky-Jokinen – 23 goals, $12.750M
  • Chicago: Stalberg-Shaw-Hayes – 23 goals, $2.315M
  • Columbus: Nash-Vermette-Pahlsson – 24 goals, $14.200M

Look at the names on this list. Some of them, like Getzlaf, Semin, Staal and Nash, are regularly on all-star teams and get invitations to Olympic teams. Many of these players are being counted on to lead their teams into the postseason, and are being compensated to produce on the ice.

And yet there are Chicago’s Stalberg, Shaw and Hayes, making between $7-12M less than the other trios on the list, and they have given the Blackhawks as many, if not more goals.

Certainly we’re not implying that scoring goals is everything. And certainly a fan base with a struggling Patrick Kane can’t cast stones at other star players that aren’t putting the puck into the net.

But looking at the cost of the secondary players, and how well they’re producing (especially in under 20 combined games for Shaw and Hayes), certainly it’s starting to become obvious that the Hawks are getting great bang for their bucks.

This entry was posted in 2011-12 Blackhawks and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to Blackhawks Bargain Basement Producing

  1. Brad Stevenson says:

    Another fantastic article Tab, thank you very much.

    I think what sticks out for me is Patrick Kane. I honestly don’t understand why you, and some others, defend the necessity to keep Kane in Chicago. I think one of the reasons why his game sticks out so much to me, is that Toews effort and performance has always been Herculian…he gives 100% every shift from the moment he hits the ice until he returns to the bench. Kane does not…that’s plain and simple…he is a soft player and a floater…that is not how I played, and I can’t respect that style. And every year Kane has gone into a prolonged slump, EVERY YEAR, and this year’s seems to be the worst…and yet, what do we see from Kane, even last night??? He is not prepared to stick his nose into the crease to get a cheap goal. He continues to skate circles around the face off dot waiting to give either the perfect set up or score on a one timer.

    Hockey may be played like that on a computer, but not in any reality I know. Look at Toews, look at Stamkos…where are they scoring their goals??? Right around the crease, which is an area that Patrick Kane knows even less than his own zone.

    Thanks again for your awesome work! A+

  2. joey Zamboni says:

    Good post Brad, it’s looking like the Patrick Kane as a rock star love fest might be coming to an end…… And I think its affecting guys in the locker room as well….. He’s a prima dona who the organization sticks up for & protects because of the huge $$$$ they invested in him. I think it’s time to seriously consider trading him while he still has value & maybe a change in scenery might be the wake up call he needs.

  3. Brad Stevenson says:

    Thanks Joey…think about some of the names we have heard are available via a trade…the big 4 in Anaheim, Rick Nash, etc…any of these guys I would trade Kane for…because they possess multi faceted games, they score goals, they finish checks, they initiate contact, they back check, etc…

    Kane, IMO, has become a one trick pony (“one trick is all that boy can do…”), a peripheral player who makes beautiful passes. That’s it…and that’s not enough for $6 million.

  4. Tab Bamford says:

    the hate for Kane is overplayed and cliche now, guys. let’s do something original, like come up w/ a legitimate problem facing this team and consider fixing it in a realistic manner.

  5. pete says:

    I was at the game last night and with Shaw and Hayes playing well I am starting to think we can get by with Kruger on the second line when Sharp comes back. Then all we need is a top four defenseman to pair with Hjarmalson and put Leddy with Montador as the last pair. What do you guys think. Lastly, I disagree with the comments on trading Kane. His scoring is down right now, but he makes everyone else better and he keeps the defense on its heels. When he is circling with the puck on the perimeter(especially on the PP) the opposing players are on their heels and they have no idea where he is going with the puck. And what about that shootout goal in Minnesota. He has an extreme skill level and its fun to watch. -Pete

  6. Andrew says:

    Yea Kane really does go into a slump the four years he’s played(not including this season yet). Consistently scoring 25+ goals a season since 08-09 really sucks don’t it? It’s one season out of many more to come. Don’t say he’s had a slump every year because you obviously don’t watch hockey. Kane’s role is to score, not hit. We have our physical guys on the team. Kane is guy who produces points. Just because he doesn’t score goals all the time doesn’t mean he doesn’t produce for the team. He has 39 points(10G 29A) which averages out to .83 points a game. Just because he doesn’t score doesn’t mean he can’t be a valuable guy to the team. Learn your hockey. Sure he may be a bit overpayed, but if they trade him away and he becomes a superstar(like most of the guys they get rid of) they’ll be sorry.

  7. Andrew says:

    ^@Brad Stevenson ^

  8. Travis says:

    Excellent article, and Jr., staff, and co. deserves a lot of credit with many pickups.

    Re Kane: Kane’s upside is far, far, far worth going through a once-a-year dry spell. When he’s on, he’s a monster, the kind of monster that can carry you to the cup. The past two games, he’s shown glimpses of snapping out of it, and last night he was making plays and creating space. It’s just a matter of time, try to chillax.

  9. Kyle says:

    FACT: Andrew shaw went to the Virgin Islands, when he came back they were just call the Islands!! LOL

    And Kane is in a scoring slump. and he will never be a go to the net type of player. But when he has the puck in space he’s stunningly good. he’s one of the best setup men/ passers in the game. this team needs him and loves him. Did anyone notice what Toews said? “they’re creating a lot of space out there. exspecially Kane. I know he’s getting down about not scoring any goals but he’s still doing a great job” Toews the captain said that. Kane needs to go out before a game and get wasted!!! then play hungover. He’ll stop over thinking, play with his instincts, score a goal and his confidence will be back up. I did that in college. I went 0-5 (baseball) 7 games in a row. Got plastered one night before a game, Coach put me lead off and said time to end your slump! first pitch I almost killed the shortstop. Slump over. Kane just needs his confidence back and stop over thinking it.

    TAB if you have any conects to the hawks, Tell them they need to get Kane hammered!!!!

  10. pete says:

    Does anyone agree with me that we might just need a second pairing defender at the trade deadline?

  11. Glenn says:

    A 3/4 D-man – yes.
    Trade Kane – perish the thought.

  12. Kyle says:

    I agree, 3/4 Dman for sure. I will miss Sean though.

  13. jared says:

    I watch hockey a lot

    Kane Great Talent….trade him….yes why…..? Several reasons…..
    Cup winning players that have left the Hawks since……Please give me their replacements

    Brent Sopel—Shot blocker chewed up 18-20 min a game
    Troy Brouwer-20+ goals
    Kris Versteeg-around 20 goals not sure of exact stats
    Kopecky-Hossa’s best friend timely goal scorer physical and used his size
    Adam Burish-role player no real statistical impact but a good agitator and draws penalties.
    Big Buff-11 goals in 22 playoff games…..beat vancouver by himself. (not to mention can play any position)
    Andrew Ladd-20 +goals can play on any line
    and more…….

    We are not the cup team we were we will not be able to be a serious contender without something to shake things up and come close to this again. I would very much like to keep the man who scored one of the greatest Goals in Hawks history but we will be outworked out produced and outmatched unless we can get somewhere close to the team we had. Look at all the cup winners in the last 5 years…..they all looked like the hawks team of 2010…..We dont look like that anymore but the flyers rangers bruins canucks all do

  14. jared says:

    I do think you are spot on about our rookies though….We may just be alright if they can keep producing like this but you cant bank on a rookie in the postseason

  15. Brad Stevenson says:

    First off, I think that Kane IS the issue right now, as the rest of the team has really rallied around the Sharp injury…and to Andrew, wow, name calling and ignoring the comments about Kane, which are all valid…aren’t we all Hawks fans? There is no need to run each other down, if you want to that get into politics.

    Those that have rushed to Kane’s defence all corroborate what was written…he is a one trick pony and when he is good, he’s great and when he is bad, he is worse…now if you want to live with that, and all of his loafing around the ice, great…neither you nor I are the GM of the Hawks…we will see what Stan does.

    Likely he will keep Kane, because we win even when he is off his game. But if Hossa or Toews take off a week or month watch what would happen to this team. And that is why I think we would see huge improvement by trading Kane. But again, whatever, it is a hockey blog site…

    As for Pete, you might be right…I think at this point the true top 4 DMan should be the #1 concern for the Hawks…I still think we could benefit from a true #2 Centreman, but how long would he be here and what would we have to pay for him??? At least with the DMan we could utilize him for at least a couple of years before the farm system demands he be moved.

  16. Tab Bamford says:

    Based on some of the suggestions I’m seeing, there are some folks drinking the bong water in Chicago’s fanbase. Wow!

    To Jared’s list of players that have left:

    Sopel – replaced by Sean O’Donnell. Easily break-even.
    Brouwer – 20-goal guy who wanted $3M to be that. Replaced by Viktor Stalberg, who might score 30.
    Versteeg – has 17 goals for Florida right now. Nice player. Not fitting in our top-six. Failed in Toronto & Philly.
    Kopecky – 19 pts & -11 in Florida. Replaced effectively by Andrew Brunette this year.
    Burish – he’s Andrew Shaw Sr.
    Byfuglien – now getting paid $5M+ to be a mediocre defenseman. Crying for him to come back is blatant ignorance.
    Ladd – best case scenario is Jimmy Hayes replaces him next year.

    But, thankfully, it’s a good thing to not be the Cup team we were. The salary cap happens in the NHL, and leads to roster evolutions all over the league. Your nonsensical begging for a 23-year-old superstar to get run out of town is lacking of both substance and common sense. Please… stop.

  17. jared says:

    your missing the point to and if im drinking bong water your drinking anti freeze….are all the players replacable DUHHH!!!! but your response is money based….where is the depth….and if you think stahlberg will score thirty your on the crack pipe. We have 0 depth one thing for sure though you never actually replaced the players i mentioned and at the time they were exactley what we needed. About 3 weeks ago nobody knew who hayes and shaw were so to anoint them as season saviors is a bit premature it will take about 2-3 years of consistent play to anoint them….and lastly I dont want to run him out of town but winning the cup is worth patrick kane’s lazy ass. There are no more dynasties in sports….LOVE WINNING NOT THE PLAYER

  18. jared says:

    Oh the cowboys traded Hershel walker and got aikman smith and irvin….FYI

  19. Tab Bamford says:

    My response didn’t mention money once, Jared. And your assertion that the Blackhawks have zero depth is the funniest – and least informed – things I’ve read in quite some time. The Hawks have six players with at least 10 goals; only Vancouver and St. Louis can say that in the entire Western Conference. As I’ve said more than once already – Stop. Please.

  20. Kyle says:

    Right on TAB right on. Kane may be in a funk but he’s not getting traded. nor should he. Haters gonna hate! And I have heard of shaw and hayes way before three weeks ago. the hawks have a great deep organazation and it will mature around kane and the core. Any talk of him be traded is dumb, and pointless. notta gonna happen and for the right reasons.

  21. jared says:

    now getting paid $5M+ to be a mediocre defenseman

    $3M to be that. Replaced by Viktor Stalberg, who might score 30.

    Yeah you did….those are copied and pasted from YOUR post…..do me a favor though count the wins and losses to teams over 500. I did the answer is 8 (counting OT losses as losses) 8 out of 28 wins are against teams over 500 I personally didnt want to know how many of those 8 wins were in OT or a SO so i stopped there…..Sense I lack so much common sense I fail to see how a team that gives up 9 goals to the bottom dwelling Edmonton Oilers can win without a drastic change. You keep forgetting that I am also a hawks fan but I do have enough common sense to realize that the team in 2010 would kick this teams ass all over the ice.

    Since I lack common sense I would very much like for you to educate on how or why the Hawks actually have a realistic chance to win it all this year cause without a drastic move i dont see it.
    Thanks so much Tab

    when you answer my questions I’ll STOP driving you nutz!

  22. Tab Bamford says:

    My final response to the trolling Jared is simply to point out the painfully ironic naivete of your argument.

    You referenced Phil Esposito as a “if he can get traded” guy.

    Esposito was 24 w/ 74 career goals for the Hawks. Chicago traded him because the immediate moment blinded the organization to the potential of what could be. He scored 643 goals after the Blackhawks traded him for a package that appeared to solve an immediate, short-term problem.

    If you cannot see that arguably the greatest possible argument against your (lack of) logic was made by you, then there isn’t a need for me to waste any more time.

  23. wall says:

    Jared, I agree with your perspective on Kane and the 2010 Hawks-
    I also see what most do not see the Hawks have played a very easy schedule + home thus far… that will soon change (Feb. + March). Realizing the Hawk’s weaknesses earlier this year, I was the 1st person to suggest bringing up Hayes + Shaw!!!! Because the Hawks have way to many holes whaen compared to 2010, Bruins, Pens, Rangers. The good news is the Rookies are way better than expected and for the 1st time since 2010, they have energized all lines! The bad news- ( don’t know how long it will last- is it adrenaline??? or are they that good? I think Shaw is somewhat “High” (eventually will slow)- but Hayes is just plain damn big-and goes to net (anti-Bickell).

    so Hawks are much closer to being great—

    But Tab- You make a couple of references in your reply to Jared about Overpaid/underperforming 2010 Hawks—
    This is my exact argument against Kane!!! Two years ago the Hawks were stealing from Kane for his services— Now Kane is stealing from the Hawks- my previous posts about Marchand aren’t about who is better- it is about a player who can help you win when he is not scoring goals, and will keep about 4 million in pocket to find other “missing pieces”.

  24. Tim says:

    This is just my feeling, but the only “untouchable” is Toews. Maybe Keith . Otherwise, a good GM would have pretty much every other player on the table for the “right price”. The question is what is the right price. For Kane, It would have to be top 3 forward, and a 3/4 defencemen, while not blowing out the cap. And lets face it, that deal isnt on the table. We do need a 3/4 D-man, but we have pieces we can move other than a top 3 Forward.
    The bottom line right now, we need Kane. Sharp is out and we need to keep the scoring up. I dont know if this is just me, but i have a feeling its helping Shaw to play with Hossa. If Kane were to go, Hossa would probably go up the first line with Stalberg and Toews, and where does that leave us. Trading Kane wouldn’t be an “answer” because there is no one one the block who replaces him.

  25. Kyle says:

    Who are they?

  26. Tab Bamford says:

    I would say Toews, Kane, Keith, Seabrook, Sharp & Hossa are untouchable right now. And by untouchable, I mean there isn’t a team that would make/accept an offer that’s big enough to get any of those guys out of Chicago.

  27. Kiki says:

    Tab, I was reading through everything above and really enjoying all the comments. I have to say that Pete seems to have hit it on the head. He’s exactly right about Kaner and we need another defenseman at the trade deadline. Don’t you agree?

  28. Tab Bamford says:

    I do agree w/ Pete’s assessment that trading Kane is silly, and that the Blackhawks need a second-pair defenseman.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>