Buds Board Keepers League

did someone say rat ?

da phuck

Looks more like a turd

https://www.fanragsports.com/nhl/nhl-tr ... n-arrived/

interesting.. seems hammer more likely being move than seabrook

That Seabrook contract is terrible.

Bruyns wroteCOLONThat Seabrook contract is terrible.

Yep. It's pretty bad.

Hjalmarsson is certainly easier to move considering he's actually good and not on an awful deal

ya but hammer is on a reasonable cap and 4 mil doesn't help much really...

yes .. some bad contract for sure.. seabrook's contract is quite unmovable but they somehow gonna do it.. surprise someone wanna take kruger

if leafs grab hammer i will cry.. i wan a leafs player on my roster

I have no idea why Chicago would move Hjammer. Making 4 mil? Absolute steal. For a team with cap issues, trading top pair dmen making 4mil just doesn't seem like a smart move.

timwebb1212 wroteCOLONI have no idea why Chicago would move Hjammer. Making 4 mil? Absolute steal. For a team with cap issues, trading top pair dmen making 4mil just doesn't seem like a smart move.

Bc guys like Seabrook have immovable contracts. In addition to a lot of bad contracts they have a bunch of nmc's. They have to cut cap.

can they buy out someone?

but good to see chicago's time is up

CasperX22 wroteCOLON

Bruyns wroteCOLONThat Seabrook contract is terrible.

Yep. It's pretty bad.

Won 3 cups on it. Not really that terrible.

Robin Hood wroteCOLON

CasperX22 wroteCOLON

Bruyns wroteCOLONThat Seabrook contract is terrible.

Yep. It's pretty bad.

Won 3 cups on it. Not really that terrible.

lol they have won 0 cups with it, he just finished his first season of a 8 year deal and he is 32. It's probably in the top 10 for bad contracts depending on how steep his decline is.

Bruyns wroteCOLON

Robin Hood wroteCOLON

CasperX22 wroteCOLON

Bruyns wroteCOLONThat Seabrook contract is terrible.

Yep. It's pretty bad.

Won 3 cups on it. Not really that terrible.

lol they have won 0 cups with it, he just finished his first season of a 8 year deal and he is 32. It's probably in the top 10 for bad contracts depending on how steep his decline is.

What Matt said. There was literally no reason for them to hand out such a massive contract to him on the back-end of his career. Can't hand out multiple contracts like that when you have Toews and Kane making the kind of money they are.

Bruyns wroteCOLON

Robin Hood wroteCOLON

CasperX22 wroteCOLON

Bruyns wroteCOLONThat Seabrook contract is terrible.

Yep. It's pretty bad.

Won 3 cups on it. Not really that terrible.

lol they have won 0 cups with it, he just finished his first season of a 8 year deal and he is 32. It's probably in the top 10 for bad contracts depending on how steep his decline is.

This. Terrible contract.

CasperX22 wroteCOLON

timwebb1212 wroteCOLONI have no idea why Chicago would move Hjammer. Making 4 mil? Absolute steal. For a team with cap issues, trading top pair dmen making 4mil just doesn't seem like a smart move.

Bc guys like Seabrook have immovable contracts. In addition to a lot of bad contracts they have a bunch of nmc's. They have to cut cap.

I just think it seems like he should be one of the last guys they move. Trade someone like Anisimov if you have to, even Crawford.

timwebb1212 wroteCOLON

CasperX22 wroteCOLON

timwebb1212 wroteCOLONI have no idea why Chicago would move Hjammer. Making 4 mil? Absolute steal. For a team with cap issues, trading top pair dmen making 4mil just doesn't seem like a smart move.

Bc guys like Seabrook have immovable contracts. In addition to a lot of bad contracts they have a bunch of nmc's. They have to cut cap.

I just think it seems like he should be one of the last guys they move. Trade someone like Anisimov if you have to, even Crawford.

Anisimov has a NMC. So does Crawford. Plus they are weak down the middle and in goal behind them. 1. You aren't likely to get much for either. And 2. Trading either one would put them in a really bad spot. They really don't have much of value that they can move.