Wow...ok guys, put your emotions away for just one second and look at a few things objectively here.
1. Troy Brouwer, over the last few years, has had chance after chance after chance to crack the top six and earn a net presence position on the PP with the Hawks, and hasn't been able to take advantage. First of all, he has good size but too often gets out-muscled to be that net presence the Hawks need. Second, his only 20 goal season came playing on the best team in franchise history, similar to when Darren Mccarty scored at a 20 goal pace for the Wings in the late 90s; more products of the team they played on. Third, he did throw 200+ hits per season in Chicago, but I've seen more than one person here (non-Hawk fans) criticize him for not throwing big hits, and claim that his hits aren't thrown to hurt people, but because he thinks he has to. At best he was a 4th line player who played the pp part-time when he was hot. To me, that is NOT worth 2.3 million, not even close.
2. Andrew Ladd and Dustin Byfuglien, the former of which I have said many times is the one guy I wish the Hawks kept, got big paydays from the Jets (Thrashers). But to claim they are 5million+ players today is grossly over-valuing their one good season. Ladd is a very effective player. He hits, disrupts the opposition, is a great net presence and brings alot of grit. I always believed he'd be a good player, but I didn't think he was a 30 goal, 60 point player, which is what he was last season. Before we appoint him the next great power forward, how about we wait and see what happens when he becomes the focal point of opposing teams' defensive gameplan. As for Byfuglien, he still has yet to put together a good, full season. He was absolutely atrocious in the second half last year and didn't look much better yesterday. His defense is terrible, and he is probably the most inconsistent player this side of Alex Kovalev. He's got a canon for a shot and is one of the most intimidating physical players in the game when he wants to be, the problem is that he too often would rather be somehwere else. Ladd may be worth his 5 million if he can keep it up, but Buff has yet to show me that he can earn his money. The Hawks simply chose Sharp and Bolland over Buff, a choice I would make again and again.
3. Kris Versteeg is a bit of an enigma to me. I live him as a player and to this day would take him back in a heartbeat, but I can't for the life of me figure out why he's had so much trouble fitting in everywhere he's been since the Hawks. had it not been for that RFA snafu, he's still be a Hawk most likely and that one is on management. I don't think you'll find a Hawk fan who would tell you that they DON'T blame them for that. That being said, it's really tough to say if Versteeg would have been the 50+ point pest we all knew and loved if he stayed, or the below-average scoring winger he's become since.
4. Ben Eager and Adam Burish, as effective as they were, got alot of money for players of their calibre. a combined 2.2 million is a little much for part-time 4th liners, no matter how effective they are. That's not say I didn't like having them, but I think anyone would admit they, along with Sopel, would probably have been the most expendable Hawks.
5. Tomas Kopecky got a TON of money to go to Florida. 3 million per season. Ask yourself this question: If the salary floor wasn't where it is, would any team pay Tomas Kopecky 3 million per season? The answer is absolutely not. The Hawks could have kept Kopy, but again, he would have likely been retained at 2 million+, and that's too much for 15 goals and a part-time top 6 player.
6. Last but not least, Brian Campbell. If the salary floor was where it is now two years ago, and the Panthers needed NHL bodies and salary, they most likely would have made the deal then. The fact is that for Campbell to be traded, the circumstances had to be just right, and he needed to accept the deal as well. Not an easy trade to make at all, but a necessary one. Yes, we lost a good player in 51. Yes, he fit our system perfectly. No there is no direct replacement on the roster today. This is a loss on the ice, but a gain in salary cap room and future franchise financial health. Make no mistake, this was a salary dump, pure and simple.
Now having said all that, I believe most of these players would likely have been retained had it not been for the salary cap and RFA issue, which I do blame management for. But the reality is the salary cap is there. How do you give up Jonathan Toews, Patrick Kane, Patrick Sharp, Marian Hossa, Duncan Keith or Brent Seabrook, all proven NHL commodities, for guys who at the time, had never put together a fully consistent 82 game season, or had never scored more than 50 points? Any GM in his right mind would have made the same choices at the time. Whatever happenes after that is kind of out of your control.
Consider also that team chemistry was probably taken into account. They kept the group that was likely the most close knit, in order to try and rebuild as quickly as possible. That's probably why Bolland and Hammer were retained.
Look, anyone is entitled to their opinion, but to ignore any facts that do not suit your argument is the definition of being biased. I don't think I ever said the Hawks wouldn't miss any of these players they lost. All I keep saying is that, given that they had to chose, they made the right choices.