Blackhawks: Was There Ever A Point In Bringing Malcolm Subban In?
By Ryan Fedrau
Was Malcolm Subban needed in the Robin Lehner trade? The Chicago Blackhawks didn’t use him in any meaningful way.
Is it fair to say bringing Malcolm Subban to the Chicago Blackhawks was a waste, even when they didn’t have Robin Lehner? I’d say so, as he never saw any meaningful time on the ice and probably won’t be re-signed by the team.
Subban has mostly been a backup in the NHL and a starter in the minors for mostly all of his hockey career. He was Marc-Andre Fleury’s backup in Vegas, but, that didn’t last long, as he was traded after just two years of being there.
Subban has played in 66-games from 2015-present. He was once looked at as a decent NHL prospect but never became the goalie Boston wanted him to be when they drafted him. Heck, he wasn’t even the backup to Tuukka Rask they wanted him to be.
Still, he ended up with the Blackhawks via a trade that saw Lehner end up in Vegas. Basically, Chicago was trying to move a goalie who they might have not been able to re-sign for a goalie they definitely won’t be re-signing.
This isn’t a knock to Subban, I just don’t understand the reasoning on bringing him to Chicago. The Hawks would have been just fine bringing up Collin Delia. They strung Subban around for no reason. I’m actually on his side here.
Chicago should have brought up Delia. If Delia is going to be one of the future goalies of this franchise, giving him a few games after the trade deadline, when this team believed they were out would have helped his growth.
The trade didn’t make sense then, it doesn’t make sense now, and heck, it’ll never make sense. If you want to get a draft pick for Lehner, fine, but make it a first-round pick. They moved him believing they wouldn’t re-sign him during the offseason… So they bring in a guy they definitely won’t re-sign? What’s the logic in that?
They should have just brought up Delia. Would have made way more sense.