Blackhawks Trade Speculation: Who Would You Take?

With the Blackhawks looking for a second line center, let’s look at a few players that might be available for the right price. Which would you take?

Let’s start with some basic information regarding the first two players in the discussion.

First, both of these players are natural centers who take a significant amount of their team’s faceoffs; we’re not comparing a center to a player that’s primarily a wing.

Secondly, both of these players missed significant time last year. Combined, they played in only 102 games during the 2010-11 NHL season. So health has been a concern in the recent past.

Third, and perhaps most importantly, both contracts expire into unrestricted free agency in the summer of 2013. So both players have one more season under club control at their current cap number, and then will be free to leave (assuming the organization didn’t want to bring them back).

Finally, both teams are reportedly looking to sell. And both of these players have been mentions in rumors recently.

Here are the two players in question:

Player A Player B
AGE 28 26
$$ $4.000 $5.325
GP 40 40
G 8 7
A 16 20
Pts 24 27
 +/- -4 -17
PIM 28 45
F/O % 53.0% 48.0%
ATOI 18:46 22:00
HITS 16 110
BLK 24 33

There are a few numbers that jump off the page immediately. Obviously Player A is over a million dollars less expensive and is producing at a similar rate, and he’s a full five percent better in faceoffs this season than Player B has been.

However, Player B is averaging over three minutes per game more ice time, and has almost 100 hits more than Player A in just as many games. Clearly Player B is the more physical of the two players.

So which would you go after first if you were Blackhawks GM Stan Bowman? The younger, more physical player with the lower faceoff percentage and higher penalty minute total, or the older player who is producing just as much offensively, is better at the dot and costs less?

Who are these guys?

Player A is Derek Roy of the Buffalo Sabres, who is reportedly on the block.

Player B is Ryan Getzlaf of the Anaheim Ducks.

How do they compare to another flavor of the week, Carolina’s former-Hawk Tuomo Ruutu?

Roy Getzlaf Ruutu
AGE 28 26 28
$$ $4.000 $5.325 $3.800
GP 40 40 43
G 8 7 14
A 16 20 9
Pts 24 27 23
 +/- -4 -17 -2
PIM 28 45 36
F/O % 53.0% 48.0% 38.2%
ATOI 18:46 22:00 16:41
HITS 16 110 77
BLK 24 33 19
SH TOI 1:51 0:54 0:03

There are a couple considerations with Ruutu as well. First, he hasn’t been playing center for a good part of this season; he’s only taken 110 faceoffs this season, while both Roy and Getzlaf are close to 700 already. Indeed, even Patrick Kane has take more faceoffs (309) and is winning a significantly higher percentage (44.0) than Ruutu. So he really wouldn’t fill the center need.

Two other numbers from the comparison stick out, and they’re both related to Ruutu’s time on the ice. He has the lowest average of the three, and isn’t a factor at all on penalty killing duty. Getzlaf has a decent average of 51 short-handed seconds per game, but Roy averaging almost two minutes on PK per night would make him a factor in potentially improving one of the Hawks’ most glaring weaknesses.

The biggest plus that Ruutu has on the Roy and Getzlaf is his contract. Not only is Ruutu less expensive, but his deal runs out at the end of the 2011-12 season.

The final piece of this equation is the likely cost to get the player to Chicago.

Obviously Getzlaf, a gold medal winner and the captain in Anaheim, is going to require the most impressive package. Anaheim has gone on record saying they want NHL-ready players; this isn’t going to become a rebuild for the Ducks.

The situations with Ruutu and Roy are interesting, though. With forwards dropping like flies all over the NHL, effective players in walk years are the most popular players in the game. Ruutu’s name has come up in rumors with the Penguins, Red Wings, Blackhawks, and a number of other teams that hope to make a deep postseason run. His cost might be inflated because of the number of teams bidding for him.

Roy is an effective player for the Sabres, and he might ultimately be the least expensive of these three to acquire. There will certainly be a number of interested teams, but because of his injury concerns (recently injured a shoulder by the way), and the season remaining on his deal, the line is likely to be much longer for a guy like Ruutu. When you add the Sabres being over the cap right now, they might be in a position to move Roy earlier than Carolina or Anaheim.

So which of the three would you call on if you were Bowman?

38 thoughts on “Blackhawks Trade Speculation: Who Would You Take?

  • January 10, 2012 at 11:40 am

    forget Ruutu.
    Getzlaf would be nice but will cost good players Roy is your guy

  • January 10, 2012 at 12:04 pm

    I agree with Christine… Roy

  • January 10, 2012 at 12:21 pm

    Like I said yesterday, Roy is probably a more realistic option than Weiss.

    Just for S&G, if the Sabres are really looking for a salary dump, the Hawks could take on Roy and Regher and even though both players are under contract next season as well, the Hawks could still find a way to fit them both in under the cap (assuming no change) (or they could also just dump Regher in the offseason).

    The problem is, I don’t know what other assets (besides Pegula bucks, which aren’t worth anything now that they’re at the cap) the Sabres have to be acquiring any difference maker. My thought, is that if they are going to be moving Roy, they will be looking for a “core” player in return, which won’t accomplish anything for the Hawks. The hope would be that they would be looking for non-core players/picks/prospects, to flip to another team for a core player (while sweetening the deal with some of their picks/prospects).

  • January 10, 2012 at 12:37 pm

    I would like Ruutu back here and you probably could get the D man in the same trade and my reasons for this are:

    1. Derek Roy to me any way is just an older version of Marcus Kruger.

    2. Put Patrick Sharp back at center (we won a cup with him at center). For important faceoffs you can always use Jammer and put Sharpie on wing..

    3. We need a physical forward and Ruutu fills the bill. He likes the physical play and will be that guy in front of the net picking up the dirty goals something we lack badly. I say put him on a line with Tazer and leave him there.

    I don’t know what Carolina is looking to get back but, they have a couple of D men we could use either Gleason or Allen would be nice. I don’t think we can subtract from the back end especially the top 4. We need to stabilize that 3rd pairing..

  • January 10, 2012 at 12:52 pm

    @ Will

    In the last 4.5 seasons Roy PPG is .89 and Toews PPG is .90.

    I’ve definitely come around to Kruger, but his offensive game is still sorely lacking. Roy is not an older Kruger, hes a legit offensive threat.

  • January 10, 2012 at 1:21 pm

    So, like I said you already have a Roy here and his name is Patrick Sharp. He can do everything and more than him. Please don’t compare Roy to Toews that is a terrible comparison. You can’t measure everything by numbers so, if that is the case Toews 1 Stanley Cup – Derek Roy 0. Toews 1 Conn Smythe trophy – Derek Roy 0 Conn Smythe trophies.

    To go anywhere this team needs to be more physical on the back end and up front if they don’t get those players they won’t go anywhere that is the bottom line. This is coming from a Blackhawk fan for over 50 years.

  • January 10, 2012 at 1:40 pm

    I was comparing their offensive output, not the total player in response to your asinine comparison of Roy and Kruger. Kruger is on a different planet from Roy offensively. If we’re talking about terrible comparisons, pot, meet kettle.

    So what do you have against Patrick Sharp, that you wouldn’t want another one of him on the Hawks (especially one who is willing to/the organization is willing to play at center)?!?!?!

  • January 10, 2012 at 2:14 pm

    What about Frans Nielsen from Islanders? Isles are out of playoff and Frans is in his last year of current contract. Three 30+ points season in row, work on fourth. Great penalty killer. Can be good second liner or great thirth liner.

  • January 10, 2012 at 2:32 pm

    If Weiss isn’t an option, and with Florida currently 3rd in the Eastern standings it looks like he isn’t, then I think a deal with Carolina makes the best sense…Ruutu and Gleason for a selection of one active player, 2 prospects and a draft pick.

    This is the lowest price we are likely to pay, Ruutu can definitely play Centre and between Hossa and Sharp that would be a dominating line when Sharpie returns. Plus you leave Toews, Stahlberg and Kane alone on the top line, as well as Bolland on the 3rd line.

    Gleason becomes our #4 DMan behind Hammer, and Leddy slides down to the 3rd pairing with Montador, making that an attractive pairing as well…Leddy will still get lots of minutes with PP time, but will be playing 18 to 20 minutes a game versus 25 to 27 (which is too much for him this early in his career).

    I believe that if we moved Bickell, Pirri, Lalonde and our 1st round pick this year, and a 3rd rounder next year, we could get the deal done with Rutherford…we WON’T be able to make a deal this cheaply with other teams, IMO…

    Ruutu and Gleason isn’t sexy, but they fit our specific needs and price range, plus the cookie cupboard hasn’t been completely raided. And if Ruutu plays well with Hoss, we could resign him in the off season for another year, until some of the young centres we have are ready…

    As for Getzlaf, or Perry, or Ryan from Anaheim, we would need to move Kane to achieve this…and I would do it in a heart beat…with the right compensation, a deal to move Kane to Anaheim for one of the top 3, plus Beauchemin would definitely make sense and put us over the top…again, IMO.

  • January 10, 2012 at 2:36 pm

    Shaacul, I like Franz Neilson from the Isles…perhaps we could make a blockbuster deal with them and acquire Mark Streit at the same time…you would think the Isles would love to make a deal with the talent laden Hawks…

  • January 10, 2012 at 2:40 pm

    Love to see Getzlaf here. Roy is not bad but I see him more like a Sharp, which we already have. Getzlaf brings good size and great puck handling. And being that he is more physical could help the defense out greatly on the back check side. As much as I hate to see him go..I would be ok with a Bolland/Bickell/prospect trade for Getzlaf. You then are replacing a 3rd line center with what we need in a 2nd line center. Kruger will come back to bolster the 3rd line. Not too much of a hit to our cap either and then go after our defencemen that we need.

  • January 10, 2012 at 2:41 pm

    If Ruutu isn’t playing center on a bad team, why would we move him back there and expect the situation to become good? And I would prefer that we improve our penalty kill it at all possible, and a deal adding Ruutu/Gleason really doesn’t do that.

  • January 10, 2012 at 2:42 pm

    re: Nielsen: if we’re going to be OK w/ a 30 pt guy as our #2 center, promote Pirri. imo Nielson would be no better as a 2C than Mayers.

  • January 10, 2012 at 3:12 pm

    Nielson is a poor man’s Bolland (although not as poor as his salary would indicate). If we ship Bolland out (probably not going to happen), then he’d be a great addition. Otherwise he is most certainly not a 2C.

  • January 10, 2012 at 3:24 pm

    Roy is the besst one of them, hes only 4m and we get at least 2 yrs with him. I think we want to re-sign the good players we get and not waste our picks/propects on rentals (its not like their 7m). With Roy at 4m we can re-sign him for similiar salary, Getlaz is younger and will get an even higher salary from someone. Keep Pirri on wing for a few yrs and we’ll have extra center guys. When Pirri’s really good he takes over 2 line center and we can trade Roy for another good player we need then…

    The only way way I would want to use a really good player as rental is if he does good but not really good and at least then get something back for him next (games 40-60)deadline.


    Ruutu and Gleason would get both players here. As well as Roy to re-sign for similiar, I would want to re-sign the good defenseman we get too. I think these 2 make us better than Roy and ? but either way would have the choice to re-sign one of the two and probally could re-sign both if we really wanted to and just play more of our rockford guys to balance the salary…

    I like Ruutu w Tazer and Kaner a lot, I think its what Kane is missing wo buff/pf who can score/pass.

  • January 10, 2012 at 5:18 pm

    I don’t like Ruutu as a center. We have been watching wingers try to play center for a few years and it hasn’t worked. Since the Hawks actually need 2 top 6 forwards it would be sweet to add Ruutu as a winger along with a center. He would look interesting with Toews & Kane, at least for a period, then Q would change lines.

    As for the center option I would take Roy over Getzlaf. He costs less & probably better in his own end. If he turned out to be like Sharp, that would be great.

  • January 10, 2012 at 6:12 pm

    Hey Ozzie
    Why waste a trade for a player you already have. I don’t have anything against a guy like Roy we have those perimeter players. We need somebody on the back end who would like to move somebody’s rear end from the puck. We need some physical winger or center who goes to the dirty areas for goals. If we don’t get those we are not going to win a Stanley Cup.

    Instead of bringing in a guy like Mark Stuart we brought in Chris Campoli and now we know how that turned out. We brought in Campoli we already had two Campoli’s, Keith and Campbell. We didn’t have a guy like Stuart a big physical stay home type of guy and we still don’t have that type of player on the back end.

    Your right the Kruger thing was a bad comparison but, numbers are just numbers and they don’t tell the whole story. We won a cup with Sharp at center and with the right players acquired we can do it again.

  • January 10, 2012 at 6:39 pm

    I don’t like any of the 3… Pacioretti from Habs!

    What ever we do don’t trade our 1st round pick this year… could be top 15 pick!
    Could be even higher… considering Sharp might not bounce back from apparent wrist injury…. look at how well Kane and Bickell are shooting the puck after their wrist injuries!

  • January 10, 2012 at 9:36 pm

    Ryan O’Reilly, TJ Galiardi, Ryan Wilson


    Sharp, Bickell

  • January 10, 2012 at 10:45 pm

    The real question is, are the Hawks looking to make trades? Are they any rumours circulating from the powers that be that Chicago’s organization is in fact looking for a 2nd line centre? Not at all trying to be rude or sarcastic, just really curious…

  • January 10, 2012 at 10:51 pm

    @Shane – Stan Bowman has been pretty clear w/ the media that he’s looking for a center and a defenseman. This isn’t news, and hasn’t been for a month.

  • January 10, 2012 at 10:52 pm

    @Ivan – no.

  • January 11, 2012 at 1:52 am

    I don’t have cable & I didn’t ever see anything on the Blackhawks website. I watch most of my games through game centre. Hence me being out of the loop. Thanks for clarifying, albeit with a pretty snide remark.

  • January 11, 2012 at 7:51 am

    per Tim Sassone twitter

    “Name to file away of d-man #Blackhawks might be looking at: Washington’s Jeff Schultz. Scouts talk.”

    I wonder if he couldn’t be had for very little, for among other reasons, the cap situation in Washington. If they want to do something near the deadline they will need to move some salary. I think I might like a deal involving Schultz if we’re sending back essentially nothing.

  • January 11, 2012 at 8:39 am

    Hawks will not part with Kane. The Hawks know that as he matures he will be one of the most dangerous players on the ice and his D will get better as well. Hawks have cap space, but need to bolster the defensive end of the ice. That makes trading Bolland or even Frolik unlikely. Besides, Hawks also need to make room for Hayes, Morin, Saad, Smith and Pirri in the next couple of years. That leaves Bickell and Stallberg as trade bait on the forward side.

    Producing goals is not the problem. Look at the standings. Hawks have given up 125 goals yet is 5th in the entire league. We need D. We actually could use 2 D men. Lepisto, ODonnell and Scott just are not making it happen. Additionally, the Hawks are thin in the minors on D. Bowman needs to concentrate on keeping the puck out of our net.

  • January 11, 2012 at 9:51 am

    Hawks need D THIS year for sure. Conservitively a stay at home 4-5 guy. A top 4 guy would be better. I don’t want the hawks to go and sell the farm. I think in 2-3 years when Kevin Hayes, Saad, Olsen, Pirri, Morin and McNiel are ready to play pro hockey the hawks will be winning two, three cups in a row. And think about this! Jimmy Hayes, Shaw, Krugar and Smith will be even better! and our core will be in there prime. Minus Hossa, who is my favorite player. I think we forget sometimes how young our core is. I’m probably over estimating our system. I would love to win a cup this year dont get me wrong. But still keep in mind the future. We have seen it this year and the end of last, the Hawks at the top of thier game can compete with any team. One good D-man and some good health will get us to the finales IMO. A true 2cnd line center with the D should win the cup I think. But maybe that right center isn’t out there for the price we want to pay. The guys we can afford to trade I dont think are our prospects. I think its Stallberg, Bickel, Frolik, Lepisto (of course), and Burnette if any one would take him. take 2 of those YOUNG NHL PLAYERS ( minus Burnette on the young part) and a 2cnd or 3rd pick and get a Good D man. Give some young guys some time to play and develope. Hayes and Shaw playing tough hockey right now makes this possible. Let’s hope they keep it up or I’ll be eatin shoe. We dont need to make a blockbuster trade and get a Star center and Dman. We’re close dont panic.

  • January 11, 2012 at 10:37 am

    Get rid of Bowman Jr. He’s the problem!

  • January 11, 2012 at 10:59 am

    re: Sassone’s Jeff Schultz rumor… there’s one major problem w/ him. His contract. Schultz has two more years on his current deal at a Montador-like cap hit. With the kids coming along through the organization, if Schultz was indeed acquired one would have to think that one of Montador/Hjalmarsson was going somewhere else either during this season (in a deal for a 2C perhaps) or over the summer. There’s no reason Bowman would develop so much quality organizational depth on the blue line only to have the entire NHL roster full of veterans signed for 2 more years.

  • January 11, 2012 at 11:00 am

    He really isn’t, Donald.

  • January 11, 2012 at 12:13 pm

    Tab, when you refer to Our quality depth of young blue-line players… who are you speaking of? AHL is so weak on D… Lalonde? Connelly? Please! We all ready have a few good skaters who are not capable of pushing a bowlingball down a hill- let alone Holmstrom or Franzen out of the crease! ( Leddy, Keith, Monty)

    Clendening was aweful @ WJC!

  • January 11, 2012 at 12:21 pm

    @wall: When I speak of the quality of d-men depth in the organization I’m referring to Olsen, Lalonde, Johns, Clendening, Holl and, to an extent, Stanton. Was Clendening great a the WJC? Not really. But Johns had a strong tournament, and we’ve already seen (and you should have been impressed by) Olsen at the NHL level this season in brief action. The point is, there are guys coming that will be in Chicago before two years are up, so having five veterans creating a concrete ceiling makes no sense at all.

  • January 11, 2012 at 3:07 pm

    Wall- I’ll agree that Leddy’s too weak, but how can you say that Monty and Keith aren’t tough? Did you watch Keith bully Rick Nash against the Jackets last night? And Montador does an average job of getting forwards away from the crease, which is fine for 3rd pair.

  • January 11, 2012 at 3:37 pm

    Stan Bowman absolutely isn’t the problem with this organization…while his FA work has been so-so, his drafting has been excellent…we will be a perennial winner for the next decade because of his drafts and the contract work with our core…

    A 5th or 6th DMan WON’T cut it…everyone here needs to get educated, we have REAL defensive problems and we need a bona fide top 4 DMan to play with Hammer…Leddy slides to the 3rd pairing with Monty…

    If we added Ruutu, he could play centre, and well enough, or we could keep Kruger as the 2nd Centre and give he and Toews 4 of the best scoring forwards in the league to play with…that is why Ruutu/Gleason is the best prospect for us at this point, on many levels…we would have:

    Stahlberg-Bolland-Frolik (making this quite a dangerous line)
    Hayes-Mayers-Shaw (use Brunette and Bickell as trade pieces if possible)



    This is a lineup that would be good at both ends of the ice, will take the body, and can win playoff games…

  • January 11, 2012 at 3:46 pm

    “re: Sassone’s Jeff Schultz rumor… there’s one major problem w/ him. His contract. Schultz has two more years on his current deal at a Montador-like cap hit. With the kids coming along through the organization, if Schultz was indeed acquired one would have to think that one of Montador/Hjalmarsson was going somewhere else either during this season (in a deal for a 2C perhaps) or over the summer. There’s no reason Bowman would develop so much quality organizational depth on the blue line only to have the entire NHL roster full of veterans signed for 2 more years.”

    His contract isn’t steep, but it isn’t cheap, and it lasts another two years. I don’t think the timeline for any of the Hawks young d-men (Olsen excluded) falls within the timeframe of that contract. If by chance one becomes ready, I don’t think the Hawks would have trouble moving a veteran d-man with a reasonable cap number and a small number of years left on it, (Hammer, Monty, or Schultz). Besides, we can use Schultz now. That said, there are other options for sure – but I like that he might come very cheap via trade.

    Though, inside of your comment rests an interesting point about veterans vs. organizational depth. Kane, Sharp, Hossa, and Stalberg are all top six forwards – if we believe in our depth why not trade one of these four to fulfill our perceived need at 2C? With Hayes, Morin, Saad, Smith and Shaw pushing from down below aren’t the Hawks in a position to make a blockbuster deal (so long as the winger moved isn’t Stalberg – he isn’t worthy of a blockbuster)? I’m not convinced that it should happen, but if you were told that one of the three blockbuster worthy had to be moved for a 2C which would you pick?

  • January 12, 2012 at 7:25 am

    OK… What is everyones problem with Sharp, and aquireing someone as such. You can not have too many good two way players. If we won a cup with Sharp, and Roy is like Sharp, how is that a bad move. Not to mention, if Sharp is out with this injury, Roy replaces that. And if they are both healthy, then can play with the roster. You use Sharp with Roy and Kane on a second Line with Stalberg, Toews, and Hossa up front. You can load up the front with Sharp, Toews and Kane, and still have Balance on the second line… there are options. Roy would be a value on the PK, and by the time his contract ends, you would hope Pirri would be ready to move up to 2C. Granted this has to be all based on value ( you cant give up too much ), but if you can deal Bickell, Kruger, Morin and a mid pick for Roy and maybe a project type prospect, i think you have to pull the string if your the Hawks. and that goes for buffalo too. You can get a 3 young players who can in 2-3 years make great 2nd/3rd lines guys for a guy earning 4M and coming off an injury; you would do that.

  • January 12, 2012 at 1:03 pm

    Everyone should realize that the Hawks are 2 players short of a solid run to the cup:
    One 2nd pairing D and One 2nd line Center.

    Leddy is 24 minute ready and is not the D problem, Hammer is. He has very weak passing and shooting skills – only one offensive move – slam the puck into the zone. Good, not great, defensive D skills, and Bowman’s only overpaid player. He should be traded immediately. The 2nd D pairing needs to be as offensive minded as Keith-Seabrook. That means we need a Seabrook type D to pair with Leddy. Must have solid D skills and can move the puck (passing/shooting) when needed. Gleason fits the bill: 24 mins, 1st PK D, +1 on a CAR team that is -35, and can move the puck when needed. Package up Hammer with prospects/picks for Gleason with prospects/picks. Wouldn’t you rather have Dylan Olsen (or Stephen Johns) ultimately on that 3rd pairing down the road?

    2nd line C is another animal. Must be a 2-way and set-up man. Kruger will get there but is a year or two away from being a true 2nd liner. Tim’s idea of “Bickell, Kruger, Morin and a mid pick for Roy and maybe a project type prospect” is a good starting point point but Kruger needs to stay for the 4th C and future 2nd C. BUF has played 7 centers this year but they need a producing “play now” guy at wing/center. We cannot give that up. And Roy, if you consider our defensive C/W shortcomings, doesn’t meet our needs. This may be a stretch but Jarret Stoll was a playmaker prior to the EDM youth retooling. In LA he just doesn’t fit. LA needs C/W youth and some grit and Stoll is an UFA next year. He’s big, is a 2 way, #1 PK and #2 PP, 56% face off, and cheap (1.7M). May only take Bickell, Morin, low prospect/low pick for a 29 year old who “may” be rejuvenated setting up Hossa and Sharp and jammin up the net.

  • January 14, 2012 at 12:33 am

    Derick Brassard isn’t a bad option either. He’s only 24, he’s 200 lbs, and has offensive potential. I think he’s a very solid player and could fit well. I also think the Jackets would let him go pretty easy because of how trade rumors have been around for awhile and because of his sub-par stats this year (which can easily turn around if he is traded).

  • January 15, 2012 at 11:02 pm

    Getzlaf makes the centre position complete, causes more Cap problems down the road.
    He is physical and when not gassed difficult a player as there is to defend against and play against. He costs you a top junior prospect, and number one and a rostered player and maybe even top prsopect from Rockford.
    Roy has a Cap-friendier, not Getzlaf, he is stocky and quick, and does still have issues with the shoulder he injured last season. Still a really fine offensive player who would have no problem adjusting to playing here. I am really not sure if the Sabres are looking for a now injection, but if they weren’t it would still cost a top prospect from rockford and one of the top three junior players the Hawks have rights to.
    Columbus would love to dump that Vermette contract along with Brassard’s
    It just seems Brassard is an over-paid under achieving youngster far from polished and although he comes with upside, you ALREADY are paying him too much when he arrives…which means his next contract will cost you even more.
    Vermette makes far more than Columbus wants to pay for his role and current production, and the fact they tied that Carter contract to the books to make the playoffs. Vermette is solid all over and might fit into a bigger role playing with the hawk skilled guys.
    I find it hard to believe they rashly pull the trigger for bigger contracts.
    A guy like Frans Neilsen has gone under the radar with a horrible Islander team but shows upside. Yup he is gonna want a long term contract real soon, but he gets to prove if he is worth it the rest of THIS year-if he doesn’t produce…all you lost was a futures.
    Dominic Moore is unsigned for next year makes a reasonable 1.1 mil and is what he is a smaller quicker guy who can slide up and down the centre position to all lines, but doesn’t fit as a long term solution. Ans with the number of teams looking for centes HE COSTS you more than you want to spend because the market will demand it.
    T. Ruuttu was NEVER any good at the centte position, and has to go down in NHL history as the most disappointing hyped player (called by all “best player not currently in the NHL”…while in Finland)in the last decade.
    Yeah trade for him and all you have down is added a wing who is one hit from the infirmary.

    On defense for depth purposes and a way to spell the 40 yr. old ODonnell, they may try and pry Mark Stuart away from Winnipeg (since their GM knows the hawk farmhands well) or Bryan Allen from Carolina where they need to inject players soon and may be interested players from Rockeford to add depth to their roster and a draft pick. If my memory serves Allen is much better on LD than RD.

    I know it is fun to try and make imaginary trades that are one sided or boost the home team into high status, but this club is a pretty good one. I don’t know if they are gonna start gambling the future on players that don’t stick around…so a 2nd rounder or an Icedog may be the most they want to spend if they don’t get a keeper….

Leave a Reply

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