As I watched the Chicago Blackhawks fall to the Colorado Avalanche I noticed that former first round pick Cameron "Cam" Barker was not in the lineup. After I noticed this I went to the Chicago Blackhawks website to see if he had been injured or sent down but I couldn't find a thing.
It seemed as though Cam was just a healthy scratch from the 'Hawks lineup in Colorado and after further investigation this has been a reoccurring instance, he has not been in the 'Hawks lineup since the Winter Classic and has only played twice in the last seven games.
After seeing this statistic it made me think, why is Cam Barker still on the NHL roster and not with the Rockford Ice Hogs? He carries a $2.442 cap hit and is just sitting on the bench, it makes no sense to me.
Barker hasn't played too poorly this season recording 17 points in 26 games, but has a plus-minus rating of -4 which is the tied for the lowest on the team, along with Brent Sopel. If Quenneville does not want to play Barker then why is he a Blackhawk, he should be an Ice Hog so he can actually get some playing time.
If Barker were to be sent back to the AHL, the 'Hawks cap problem would disappear and would be able to possibly trade for a second line center, which they do actually need. With Barker in the AHL the 'Hawks would have $3.758 Million in cap room, enough to find a good solution for the second line center situation, Jeff Haplern? Antoine Vermette?
I'm going to try and not side track to much from the issue at hand but I believe the second line center situation needs to be addressed. Whether Dale Tallon trades for a second line center or the situation is addressed in house (Petri Kontiola?) because Patrick Sharp is not a center, plain and simple.
Now that I have got that out back to the issue at hand, Cam Barker. I believe something needs to be done with him either play him or send him down. I think Cam is going to be a good player for the 'Hawks, but if he is not going to be used then get his cap hit off the books.
In my opinion, it makes no sense for Barker to be with the Chicago Blackhawks if he is not going to play most nights, especially with his high price tag and the current cap situation. But hey, I guess that's why Dale Tallon is the GM and Joel Quenneville is the coach...not me.
13 comments Last one added 5 months ago — Leave a Comment
Daniel Skiston 5 months ago
They still have Barker cause he is so talented and don't think that the hawks would want to give up on a number three pick in the draft. He is hitting the cap a bit right now. But with a lot of contracts coming up soon, its going to be really hard to resign Ducan Keith. Hes going to make a TON of money when he gets a new deal. Will the hawks be able to resign him? He maybe the next big d-man for them!
Edit Comment Cancel
Michael Wagner 5 months ago
I agree that Barker has a ton of talent but he isn't starting so why is he hear? They can sign Duncan Keith...they do have over 13 million coming free after this season, look for the 'Hawks to try and get an extension figured out then. Toews and Kane are likely to also get new contracts this summer too.
Edit Comment Cancel
Daniel Skiston 5 months ago
But when they resign kane and toews dont you think that there two contracts will at least take up most of that 13 million? So whats left for Keith?
Edit Comment Cancel
Michael Wagner 5 months ago
Lets use Jordan Staal's contract as a bench mark. It is likely that Jonathan Toews will get a similar contract, 4yrs-$16 million, Cap hit $4 mill. I would say Kaner will likely get a deal around 4yrs-$22 million, Cap Hit $5.5 Mill. There is $9.5 Million leaving $3.5 Million (which is how much Seabrook is being paid this season). Also look for Brent Sopel to likely get moved in the off-season (a $2.333 Mill. Cap Hit) The 'Hawks will need to get a little creative but I think there is a good chance that all three can be taken care of. Remember Kane, Keith and Toews are not RFA's until the end of next season but with all the RFA sniping I would expect them to extend these three this summer
Edit Comment Cancel
Daniel Skiston 5 months ago
Your the best with the numbers!!! I hope that your right, i really do!
Edit Comment Cancel
Michael Wagner 5 months ago
Haha Daniel. Thanks. I'm am almost 100% that they can afford them this off season. But we will need to wait and see.
Edit Comment Cancel
Jim Neveau 5 months ago
I agree with Michael that Tallon will certainly lock those three integral pieces of the system up in the off-season, and I also think that Martin Havlat won't get re-signed by the team. I think they'd rather lock up Kris Versteeg (a RFA this off-season) than re-sign Havlat. Also, who do you think will be the back-up goalie next year: Niemi or Crawford?
Edit Comment Cancel
Michael Wagner 5 months ago
I totally agree with Jim on Martin Havlat because he is getting older plus I believe that Versteeg has much more upside and can stay healthy (knock on WOOD)
Well Niemi is a free agent at the end of the season and with his solid play I would imagine it would be him. Crawford might be cheaper though!
Edit Comment Cancel
Gary LeGary 5 months ago
Horrible article. You suck.
Edit Comment Cancel
Jim Neveau 5 months ago
I'll handle Michael's defense on this one:
Thank you for your comment. I'm looking forward to reading your first article on Bleacher Report, and I will be interested to see how your work benefits the site.
I also happen to think his articles are good. Does that mean that my writing likely sucks too? If my taste is this bad, maybe I should focus on posting long rants about salary caps on the Blackhawks message board.
Edit Comment Cancel
Adam Kopp 5 months ago
Okay, I just had to chime in here on this whole "how can the Hawks possibly resign Kane, Toews and Keith" thing. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but...
As you all know, thirteen million comes off the books when Havlat and Khabibulin leave. There are also a few dead weight contracts on the books. Sopel and Byfuglien (he's a decent player, but he's not a three million a year player) come to mind. That's another five million.
But the key thing to remember isn't the size of the contract, it's the amount of the average cap hit. This season, the Hawks sit at 1.36 million under the cap. But this year, the cap includes the base of rookie contracts plus rookie bonuses.
So this year, Kane carries a 3.725 million dollar cap hit. Toews carries a 2.8 million cap hit. Keith carries a 1.475 million cap hit. These are hard numbers for the cap. They are taken into account.
Say that Kane's cap hit goes up to six million, Toews goes up to five million and Keith goes up to four million. Totaled up, that's twelve million. Now, subtract their cap hits before and you have a sum total ADDITION to the Hawks cap of four million.
Thirteen million is coming off the books in Havlat and Khabibulin. Four million is being added on. That leaves nine million in free cap space (plus 1.36 million in previously unused cap space).
Again, I could be reading this all wrong, but I'm looking at the breakdown and I'm not really seeing why everyone is so worried. Yeah, the Hawks have to resign Versteeg, Brouwer, Wisniewski and a few others, but none of those contracts will be enormous.
To me, it looks like the Hawks will have plenty of room to resign their players and even add another big contract if they were so inclined.
Edit Comment Cancel
Adam Kopp 5 months ago
As for Cam Barker, I personally think that there are several good D prospects in the pipeline for the Hawks. At this point, he has more value to other teams (the Sens have been coveting him for some time, if the rumor mill is to be believed), so why not deal him and get a player that the Hawks can actually use?
I'm obviously not saying that the Hawks should just throw him away, but if he's not playing, or he's being given every chance to succeed and he simply doesn't seem to be able to take the next step, than I'd rather trade him now with the banner of "former 3rd overall pick" than wait a year or two and trade him with the banner of "failed prospect." Which do you think would bring more back in a trade?
The Hawks have always had a problem with holding on to their prospects or current roster talent a little too long. I remember last year when, before the deadline, rumors were swirling that the Penguins wanted Havlat, even to the point where they were offering up Jordan Staal for him. The Hawks waited, the Penguins went after Hossa instead and Havlat got injured...Again.
I don't know for sure if that's the exact timeline. Maybe the Pens wanted Hossa all along. But I just remember reading that Havlat was their first choice because they wouldn't have to give up nearly as much to get Marty as they wound up losing in the Hossa deal.
Either way, Barker looks like he has potential and he's been solid here and there this season, but if he can't stay out on the ice and he's not injured, than the Hawks obviously see some flaw in either his game or his character. If that's the case, than why hold onto him and his cap hit when the defense is pretty solid and there is a hole in the top six on offense?
Edit Comment Cancel
Heffer Heffer 5 months ago
Its so obvious that Barker is "injured" to workaround the Cap issue. It has nothing to do with his character or ability to play.
At one point he had 17 points in 24 games. 12 being on the PP.
He played b/c Johnson and Wiz were hurt, so no cap issues. But when they came back Tallon needed to find a way to keep him on the roster so he created this phantom injury.
Once Khabby or Havlat gets traded you'll see Barker back in the lineup everyday.
Edit Comment Cancel
Leave a Comment
You must register to post a comment.