2018/19 Blackhawks march to the lottery

[WrigleyField 22]

I don't think it was 100% unavoidable. There's a world out there where someone had the nerve not to sign Seabrook to a long extension. And as good as Crawford is, there's a reason we got so much mileage out of bad goalies when we were good.

 

But it was always going to be a very narrow path.

Yea, and I don't think it even took that much hindsight benefit to say some of those deals were bad as they were handed out.

[Tim]

I don't think it was 100% unavoidable. There's a world out there where someone had the nerve not to sign Seabrook to a long extension. And as good as Crawford is, there's a reason we got so much mileage out of bad goalies when we were good.

 

But it was always going to be a very narrow path.

Yea, and I don't think it even took that much hindsight benefit to say some of those deals were bad as they were handed out.

Bowman showed way too much loyalty to his guys. Either extending them or reacquiring them.

[squally1313]

I don't think it was 100% unavoidable. There's a world out there where someone had the nerve not to sign Seabrook to a long extension. And as good as Crawford is, there's a reason we got so much mileage out of bad goalies when we were good.

 

But it was always going to be a very narrow path.

Yea, and I don't think it even took that much hindsight benefit to say some of those deals were bad as they were handed out.

Bowman showed way too much loyalty to his guys. Either extending them or reacquiring them.

 

There was no way to predict Seabrook's decline being so steep...in that sense you can extend some of the blame beyond Bowman/Q to players like him for not playing to their expected, much less peak level. It would have taken a lot to let him go (see this article, though it's behind a paywall so might have to incognito it: https://faxesfromuncledale.com/how-not-to-write-about-the-hawks-elimination/)

 

Crawford is the 8th highest paid goalie in the NHL right now. No one could have known he was going to miss 60something games with some mysterious head injury, but his contract isn't the issue.

 

The Bickell contract, sure, though Teuvo Teravainen isn't making this team a contender (and Scott Darling definitely isn't). Danault would look great in a Hawks uniform, but it took deadline deals to get us over the top in 2015, so I'm not going to be too mad about going that route again in 2016.

[jersey cubs fan]

Yea, and I don't think it even took that much hindsight benefit to say some of those deals were bad as they were handed out.

Bowman showed way too much loyalty to his guys. Either extending them or reacquiring them.

 

There was no way to predict Seabrook's decline being so steep...in that sense you can extend some of the blame beyond Bowman/Q to players like him for not playing to their expected, much less peak level. It would have taken a lot to let him go (see this article, though it's behind a paywall so might have to incognito it: https://faxesfromuncledale.com/how-not-to-write-about-the-hawks-elimination/)

 

Crawford is the 8th highest paid goalie in the NHL right now. No one could have known he was going to miss 60something games with some mysterious head injury, but his contract isn't the issue.

 

The Bickell contract, sure, though Teuvo Teravainen isn't making this team a contender (and Scott Darling definitely isn't). Danault would look great in a Hawks uniform, but it took deadline deals to get us over the top in 2015, so I'm not going to be too mad about going that route again in 2016.

 

You can make excuses for any particular contract, but the point is the cap issues were known in advance of signing all of them, and he should have made more difficult decisions earlier rather than resigning everybody. They dominated the league with great offense and defense and mixing and matching goalies, but then you commit to both the aging defenders and the no longer young an cheap goalie and you shoot yourself in the foot. It's obviously not the same thing, but teams like the Patriots let guys go all the time. Bowman showed loyalty to the elite of the elite and the mid tier guys.

 

You can't just resign everybody and assume the wear and tear won't affect them in their's 30s.

[Banedon]

I don't think it was 100% unavoidable. There's a world out there where someone had the nerve not to sign Seabrook to a long extension. And as good as Crawford is, there's a reason we got so much mileage out of bad goalies when we were good.

 

But it was always going to be a very narrow path.

Yea, and I don't think it even took that much hindsight benefit to say some of those deals were bad as they were handed out.

Bowman showed way too much loyalty to his guys. Either extending them or reacquiring them.

 

My question is, how much did Q have to do with that? Everybody knows that guys that were in his doghouse would get traded away, so he had to have some influence in transactions. How much did he want those guys back that he'd had success with, even though they were older? Ultimately it comes down to Bowman, but I if Q also had input, I don't think the "oh poor Q, he was handed bad players" holds up entirely.

[SpongeWorthy]

i know less than nothing about hockey

 

but why is the perception/reality that the hawks are skating a bunch of geriatrics out there? isn't this the sport where jaromir jagr is still playing or something

[minnesotacubsfan]

i know less than nothing about hockey

 

but why is the perception/reality that the hawks are skating a bunch of geriatrics out there? isn't this the sport where jaromir jagr is still playing or something

 

he is, but so is Tom Brady and Bartolo Colon. Jagr is a freak and not particularly good at this point in his career, more like roster filler at a decent level of play.

 

I'd echo Brendons sentiment about the say Q had in personnel. Its a great question.

[UMFan83]

i know less than nothing about hockey

 

but why is the perception/reality that the hawks are skating a bunch of geriatrics out there? isn't this the sport where jaromir jagr is still playing or something

 

They aren't but they are paying a lot of money to 2 particular geriatrics to lead the defense and they've both regressed, Seabrook considerably more than Keith. Because of how much of the cap they take up (along with Toews and Kane who are both still productive, Kane moreso) the Hawks don't have very much depth, especially defensively where they are paying for two top pairing defensemen but aren't anywhere close to getting top pairing production from anyone on the roster.

[Banedon]

There's rumors out there now that the Hawks were just gonna fire Dineen and Samuelson but that Q fought them on it...leading to his being dismissed too.

[Flames24Rulz]

Dumb, wrong, bad decision. Bowman's trying to save his ass for failing to manage the salary cap and roster and Q takes the hit for it. What a shame.

 

yeah, this is pretty much how I feel. I guess I also don't get why both Bowman and Q kept their jobs after last season. And I really don't get why Bowman gets a chance to dig out of his own grave while Q didn't.

 

Sure, Q had some really frustrating moments with his preference for veterans over skilled, young guys. But, honestly, when's the last time Bowman made a good move -- signing or trade? Drafting DeBrincat? Signing Panarin? I guess his best trade the last few years was being able to get a first round pick from Nashville for Ryan Hartman at the deadline last year. Every other trade and signing have either had a neutral, or negative effect to the roster.

 

It's tough for me to blame the coach when there are like 5 actual good players on the roster, but that's just me.

[Derwood]

Feels like a bush league move. Q has earned better than this sort of treatment

[Banedon]

Saad took a puck to the grill in practice. He was taken straight to the dentist.

[minnesotacubsfan]

Saad took a puck to the grill in practice. He was taken straight to the dentist.

 

memories of Keith in 2010. CHAMPIONSHIP!! (?)

 

jk

[jersey cubs fan]

 

[Brian707]

I ran into Carcillo at a Louis CK comedy show in 2012.

 

That's all I got, seemed like a decent dude, unlike the scumbag that I paid $50 a ticket to see.

[biittner77]

I was surprised by the timing of this move but not by the move itself. Hockey is a little different in that mid season coaching changes typically happen earlier than in baseball or football. There's at least some examples of hockey teams turning it around under a different coach (The Penguins a couple years ago). People are saying a lot of good things about Colliton. We'll see.

 

The Hawks are, in some form or other, rebuilding. Q & the front office probably thought that they might be able to make one last run with the current group. Why they thought that given the roster is anybody's guess but this is a coach that wanted Brandon Manning who is terrible and a GM that gave Brandon Manning way too much money to be terrible. They did almost literally nothing else to improve the team. Maybe they didn't realize that Murphy was going to miss the beginning of the season. None of that speaks well for any of the people involved.

 

Q is not the guy to oversee a rebuild. Why would he even want to? He'll always be a Chicago sports legend. Look how all of the former Bears get treated. The Hawks will welcome him back in a few years and no one will be thinking that Q was treated unfairly. I wouldn't even be shocked if he got another chance to coach the Hawks again.

 

Let's say Bowman gets fired at the end of the season. The New GM gives Colliton a year to show what he can do or brings in someone else to be the scapegoat during the rebuild. When they're ready to take the next step he makes the big splash of bringing Q back for another shot at a dynasty. Stranger things have happened.

[jersey cubs fan]

I wouldn't even be shocked if he got another chance to coach the Hawks again.

 

Let's say Bowman gets fired at the end of the season. The New GM gives Colliton a year to show what he can do or brings in someone else to be the scapegoat during the rebuild. When they're ready to take the next step he makes the big splash of bringing Q back for another shot at a dynasty. Stranger things have happened.

He's going to have another job long before the Hawks are ready for another shot at a dynasty.

[biittner77]

I wouldn't even be shocked if he got another chance to coach the Hawks again.

 

Let's say Bowman gets fired at the end of the season. The New GM gives Colliton a year to show what he can do or brings in someone else to be the scapegoat during the rebuild. When they're ready to take the next step he makes the big splash of bringing Q back for another shot at a dynasty. Stranger things have happened.

He's going to have another job long before the Hawks are ready for another shot at a dynasty.

 

If he wants one, absolutely. He's still under contract so he'd need the Hawk's permission. Not granting it would be a bush league move. He might not mind getting paid $6 million to take a year off either.

 

But what's the right landing spot for Q? It would have to be a team that is already on the cusp of being good. People started talking about the Kings but I don't see that as being much better than the Hawks. St. Louis? Montreal might be the job he really wants.

[jersey cubs fan]

I wouldn't even be shocked if he got another chance to coach the Hawks again.

 

Let's say Bowman gets fired at the end of the season. The New GM gives Colliton a year to show what he can do or brings in someone else to be the scapegoat during the rebuild. When they're ready to take the next step he makes the big splash of bringing Q back for another shot at a dynasty. Stranger things have happened.

He's going to have another job long before the Hawks are ready for another shot at a dynasty.

 

If he wants one, absolutely. He's still under contract so he'd need the Hawk's permission. Not granting it would be a bush league move. He might not mind getting paid $6 million to take a year off either.

 

But what's the right landing spot for Q? It would have to be a team that is already on the cusp of being good. People started talking about the Kings but I don't see that as being much better than the Hawks. St. Louis? Montreal might be the job he really wants.

 

Where have you seen he'd need permission? He was fired. No coach that was fired needs permission to take another job. That only happens when a coach decides to step away or they "mutually agree" to part ways.

Even if he did wait a year, he will still have another job before the Hawks are ready for another shot at a dynasty.

[biittner77]

He's going to have another job long before the Hawks are ready for another shot at a dynasty.

 

If he wants one, absolutely. He's still under contract so he'd need the Hawk's permission. Not granting it would be a bush league move. He might not mind getting paid $6 million to take a year off either.

 

But what's the right landing spot for Q? It would have to be a team that is already on the cusp of being good. People started talking about the Kings but I don't see that as being much better than the Hawks. St. Louis? Montreal might be the job he really wants.

 

Where have you seen he'd need permission? He was fired. No coach that was fired needs permission to take another job. That only happens when a coach decides to step away or they "mutually agree" to part ways.

Even if he did wait a year, he will still have another job before the Hawks are ready for another shot at a dynasty.

 

It gets discussed here: https://www.secondcityhockey.com/2018/11/6/18067978/blackhawks-fire-head-coach-joel-quenneville-nhl-2018-jeremy-colliton-ahl-rockford-icehogs

 

I guess it was part of the last CBA or something. The team can't ask for compensation from another team but they can deny permission while under contract. The Hawks get out from paying him $6 million if they let him go but whatever team did sign Q would have to give him a lot of money to make it worthwhile.

[jersey cubs fan]

I don't see how that is discussed at all there, but anyway, the point is he will have another job before the Hawks build another dynasty.

[biittner77]

I don't see how that is discussed at all there, but anyway, the point is he will have another job before the Hawks build another dynasty.

 

It's in the comments, not the article. Not that it matters, the Hawks aren't going to stand in the way of him coaching somewhere else and someone probably will pay him enough to make it worthwhile. I wonder though if Q can win without the kind of talent he had here given that the game has caught up with what the Hawks did when they were very good. It seems as though there have been decent players that couldn't adapt to what Q wanted them to do. As good as he's been, is he willing to change or will he be like Phil Jackson insisting that the triangle offense still works even when it clearly doesn't anymore.

 

None of that changes the fact that someone will give him a job but I could see him not being nearly as successful and then not wanting to stay.

[Butterscup]

Fire Q.

[UMFan83]

Blackhawks might be one of the worst 2 teams in the NHL. Second to last in both points per game and goal differential. It’s crazy how fast it got so bad

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Blackhawks might be one of the worst 2 teams in the NHL. Second to last in both points per game and goal differential. It’s crazy how fast it got so bad

 

They went Cup > first round exit > first round exit > missed playoffs > this.

 

Marian Hossa and Nick Hjarlmarsson were really that important, I guess.