Chicago Blackhawks

$75M cap means exactly what?
June 19, 2017, 12:15 PM ET [587 Comments]
John Jaeckel
Chicago Blackhawks Blogger • RSS • Archive • CONTACT



All across the very real digital entity known as the Blackhawk Blogosphere yesterday you could almost hear a gigantic sigh of relief when the 2017-18 NHL salary cap was announced—at a higher than expected $75 million.

I then read in more than a few places, something to the effect of:

“Great, now Stan doesn’t have to make any big moves (ie, trade a core contract), just be rid of Kruger and TVR, and we’re good.”

Anyone who knows me or has read here for very long knows caponomics—and just plain ‘rithmetic—are not exactly my stock in trade. I usually leave it to others.

So I got the straight dope from Chris (@HawksCap). This cap number essentially means, assuming Marcus Kruger and Trevor van Riemsdyk are wearing other sweaters next season, that the Hawks are somewhere between $500K and 2-3 million over the cap, depending on whether you factor in a full, 23-man roster—which you do ultimately have to do—so the Hawks still have some trimming to do (by the most conservative modeling).

But whether there’s a little or a lot of trimming, this annual salary cap dance should be viewed a little differently this year.

In years past, the quote above reflected the mindset of the organization and fans: “trim here, trim there, get under the cap, and with our remaining players—built around our great core—we’ll be in contention for the Cup.”

Some fans are still locked into this way of thinking. And let me be clear, you’re entitled to think what you like.

I am just going to present the opposing argument—that although the cap has been set a bit higher than expected, that is not a “magical” solution—even though it might have been in previous offseasons.

And even if the cap were set at $80 million, there would nonetheless remain significant hockey/personnel reasons for Stan Bowman to be making a big move or two this offseason.

Here is a literally direct quote I read here on my message board thread—and separately on Twitter—by two different authors.

“We won the West last year. The team is not bad at all. It’s a playing style problem, not a personnel problem.”

I have a number of issues with this line of thinking. First, “we” didn’t “win the West last year.” The team that absolutely smoked the Hawks in the first round, the Nashville Predators, won the West.

Sure, the Hawks had the best regular season record in the West. That counts for something, right? Yes, the last two seasons, the Hawks have been a pretty good—make that very good— regular season team.

What does that mean?

Subjectively, there’s a different style of play in the regular season versus the playoffs. In the playoffs, it’s less run and gun, and pretty plays made around the perimeter. It’s more fighting for opportunities around the net and in the slot. It’s less lightning transition, more dump and chase.

Less pate’ de foie gras, more lunch pail.

The Hawks have always struggled to adjust—at some point in the playoffs, when the opponent finally forced them to do it—to more of a station-to-station style. But in their Cup years and the conference final year of 2014, they’ve always seemed able to eventually flip that switch and go to war. The last couple of years? Not as much. But that’s a non-scientific observation.

Where the “playing style” argument falls down for me is it assumes Joel Quenneville and staff either couldn’t see, or couldn’t accept, that they needed to instill a different approach. I find that difficult to believe, based on Quenneville’s track record, and his resulting level of respect around hockey.

And that is just way too convenient a way to avoid looking at the 5 rookies on the roster (at least 2-3 of whom would probably have been better off in the AHL), three defensemen over age 35, one line (for the second straight season), accounting for 40-45% of the forward offense.

You certainly can’t say Quenneville didn’t try all kinds of line combinations.

I just cut about 7 paragraphs from this article, pointing out 3-4 critical areas where the Hawks have regressed—or changed for the worse—since 2015 (for those curious, 5-on-5 possession, penalty kill, faceoff%, scoring distribution).

Because, come on, just give it the eye test. The team that folded like a moldy card table in your grandma’s basement this past May is not the same team that won the Cup in 2015—not even close.

So what happened, Quenneville forgot how to coach—or the Hawks finally reached a tipping point in terms of offseason talent depletion?

There’s another argument I’ve heard—that the Hawks encountered a “perfect storm” in round 1 versus the eventual conference champion Predators.

Fair enough—and so that’s the bar you have to get over if you want to get back to the Finals.

Either something has to change—beyond just subtracting Kruger and TVR to squeeze under the salary cap—or fanbase should just be satisfied being a good, but not great team, on the decline. And that’s fine, too.

But count me, at least, in the camp that expected an other couple of years of elite competitiveness with Duncan Keith, Patrick Kane, Jonathan Toews, Niklas Hjalmarsson, Brent Seabrook et al under contract.

Perhaps more importantly, count the management of the Blackhawks in that camp as well.

By all accounts, Team president John McDonough was “livid,” after the Hawks’ first round elimination this past Spring, especially comng on the heels of a first round out the previous season. Rumor has it, and the Hawks own statements support this, that the team needs deep playoff runs to turn a profit—especially with their salary structure composed as is. I know, I’ve reached broken record status on that last bit. But it bears repeating with regard to what the Hawks will do this offseason.

And recently, there have been several reports—allegedly coming from within the front office—that the Hawks are up to something big and “unexpected” this summer.

Saying that and doing it are, admittedly, two different things. And it’s quite possible that the Hawks aren’t still actively trying to retool the roster this summer, or that they’ll try and ultimately be unable to find the right deal or deals.

But common sense (and a lot of evidence) would suggest that the old way of thinking with regard to the offseason and the salary cap—“just get compliant and everything will take care of itself”—is probably now 2+ years out of date.

The summer rolls on. More as I hear it.