HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Chicago Blackhawks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

How successful will the Hawks be next season?

View Poll Results: How far do the Blackhawks get in 12-13?
Miss playoffs 3 4.76%
1st round loss 27 42.86%
2nd round loss 19 30.16%
Conference final loss 8 12.70%
Appearance in the Cup finals 6 9.52%
Voters: 63. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-01-2012, 03:54 PM
  #76
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeydoug View Post
Which teams have fewer significant "ifs"? It's a very short list.

It's not always about defending Bowman as much as keeping in mind where the rest of the league is on a given situation/circumstance.
Wait a minute. You want a list teams with no second line center that had horrid goaltending last year and expect to contend for the Cup this year? You're right, it's a pretty short list, maybe only about 1 deep.

digdug41982 is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 04:05 PM
  #77
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,335
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeydoug View Post
Which teams have fewer significant "ifs"? It's a very short list.

It's not always about defending Bowman as much as keeping in mind where the rest of the league is on a given situation/circumstance.
Fewer if's? I'll just end up listing you all the teams that are Cup contenders. All these teams also happen to be a step ahead of the Hawks, who are not.

Los Angeles, St. Louis, Boston, Vancouver, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, NY Rangers.

Oh yes, none of those teams are perfect (although I'd say LA is pretty close at this point). But fewer holes than the Hawks? Easily. Bit depressing to even type that just now, honestly. I wish I could have the almost insane optimism of some of you (not you, hockeydoug, but certain others).

Chris Hansen is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 04:12 PM
  #78
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,335
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba88 View Post
GM did his job... Coaches have to be better.

The point I'm trying to make with the PK? Those same players were a Top5 PK in the NHL. It's not their fault that Kitch is stupid.

Keith is good, but he's not as motivated as he should be and he knows this. A new coach would work wonders with him.

Leddy already is a Top4 PMD, if he improves as much as I think, he will be good enough and won't make as much mistakes in his own end. If we have the Krüger since february all year and still improving, this will be good enough.


Every team has that many ifs and last year, everything that could go wrong went wrong
The current roster is missing two pretty great penalty killers that were on the 09-10 team, actually. Say what you will about Brent Sopel at even strength but he was a monster on the PK. And Madden.
You're right that Kitchen is stupid. So why, pray tell, should we have a positive outlook for the PK when we are going into the season knowing that he is the one running it?...

If Keith gave a crap about his motivation, he would have been back in old form last year. The excuse he made was fine for 10-11 - fans all gave him a break, as we should have. But he was no better next year. Clearly this is just the player he is now. Still one of the best defenseman in the league... just don't waste your own time and count on him returning to his old Norris form.

I'm one of Leddy's biggest fans, but he is a very weak defensive player at the moment. He is not and will not be good enough to fill the "Campbell role" next year - that is, the role of being one of the elite two-way defensemen in the NHL. Eventually? Yes, I think he will be good enough. But yeesh, you're asking for quite an exponential growth in his game there. That just doesn't happen for young defensemen in this league... not so soon.
Any version of Kruger from last year will absolutely not be good enough at #2C for a team with Cup aspirations. Are you kidding me? He leached off of Sharp and Hossa for almost the entire year and still put up pathetic numbers. I agree he improved at the end of the season and deserves an NHL roster spot going into next year, but certainly nowhere near the second line. Not unless you want another first round exit in which the Blackhawks' roster holes glare like high beams for the whole world to see again.

Chris Hansen is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 04:57 PM
  #79
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,617
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Fewer if's? I'll just end up listing you all the teams that are Cup contenders. All these teams also happen to be a step ahead of the Hawks, who are not.

Los Angeles, St. Louis, Boston, Vancouver, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, NY Rangers.

Oh yes, none of those teams are perfect (although I'd say LA is pretty close at this point). But fewer holes than the Hawks? Easily. Bit depressing to even type that just now, honestly. I wish I could have the almost insane optimism of some of you (not you, hockeydoug, but certain others).
As disappointing as it's been some areas of the Hawks roster hasn't been improved, I still have a shorter list. Even those teams that I rate better than Chicago, the difference is only marginal to me right now. All those teams have some glaring holes, depth, coaching, and/or health issues just as great or greater than Chicago in my opinion. I put Chicago in the top 3rd of the league right now and while I can't put Chicago well ahead of everybody else, I'm hard pressed to put any of them well ahead of Chicago.

The offseason is still young and some big trades could change the landscape. A few teams may put themselves well ahead or even with Chicago before next year.

hockeydoug is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 06:01 PM
  #80
sketch22
Registered User
 
sketch22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,307
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Fewer if's? I'll just end up listing you all the teams that are Cup contenders. All these teams also happen to be a step ahead of the Hawks, who are not.

Los Angeles, St. Louis, Boston, Vancouver, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, NY Rangers.

Oh yes, none of those teams are perfect (although I'd say LA is pretty close at this point). But fewer holes than the Hawks? Easily. Bit depressing to even type that just now, honestly. I wish I could have the almost insane optimism of some of you (not you, hockeydoug, but certain others).
Van:
- Kesler is hurt and their center depth without him is awful
- Have issues generating secondary scoring

Pitt:
- God awful goaltending
- God awful defense
- Lacking elite wingers to pair with Crosby and Malkin

Phil:
- Goaltending is an issue and massively overpaid
- No number 1 d-man
- Questionable depth on defense due to injuries and age

Every single one of them has issues just like the Hawks. The Hawks aren't the only team that would like to upgrade at 2-3 positions, but the opportunity isn't always there.

sketch22 is online now  
Old
08-01-2012, 06:11 PM
  #81
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,335
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sketch22 View Post
Van:
- Kesler is hurt and their center depth without him is awful
- Have issues generating secondary scoring

Pitt:
- God awful goaltending
- God awful defense
- Lacking elite wingers to pair with Crosby and Malkin

Phil:
- Goaltending is an issue and massively overpaid
- No number 1 d-man
- Questionable depth on defense due to injuries and age

Every single one of them has issues just like the Hawks. The Hawks aren't the only team that would like to upgrade at 2-3 positions, but the opportunity isn't always there.
Vancouver will be fine... they had the best record in the NHL last season, let's not act as if the Hawks are comparable with that team. And I hate the 'Nucks, and would love to trash them. But they are in a better position than Chicago to contend. Kesler isn't going to be out forever. When he's back, their offense is on par with Chicago's (1 difference in GF last season), their defensive group works better as a unit, their team as a whole has far better defensive structure, and their goaltending is a lot better.

Lol, Pittsburgh does not have awful goaltending. Everyone loves to hate on Fleury and yet he remains in the top half of NHL netminders... easily. Crawford - who I have supported as long as I can remember - is almost dead last.
Penguins scored a hell of a lot more goals than the Hawks last year, and let in 17 less as well. Their D had some problems vs. Philly, and yet it's still better than Chicago's. Their offense scored 34 more goals. I think they're going to manage to be okay.
Lack of elite wingers? Hahaha. You don't need a Marian Hossa to play with Crosby, a Zach Parise to play with Malkin. Give me a break - these are two generational talents far better than anyone on the Hawks. James Neal is no slouch himself. They have capable top-6 wingers. Not stars (except for Neal), but players who have the skill and means to play there. There aren't roster holes for Pittsburgh in the top-6 at all...

As for Philly, Bryzgalov is a good deal better than Crawford. Kimmo Timonen is a solid if unspectacular #1 guy. And their defensive group is fine... Timonen, Coburn, Meszaros, Schenn, Grossman, Gervais, Lilja, Gustafsson. I wouldn't say they're top in the NHL in defensive depth, but they're far from in a bad position, either. If one of their big guys goes down, then yeah, they're in trouble. But that's true for every team in the NHL. If Keith goes out for an extended period, the Hawks are screwed too. Same with Weber in Nashville. Chara in Boston. Pietrangelo in St. Louis. Etc.

You are really stretching it pretty far with some of these "roster holes" you've listed... that, or you're just making them up completely (Pittsburgh's wingers... really?).

Chris Hansen is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 06:14 PM
  #82
madgoat33
Registered User
 
madgoat33's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Vancouver will be fine... they had the best record in the NHL last season, let's not act as if the Hawks are comparable with that team. And I hate the 'Nucks, and would love to trash them. But they are in a better position than Chicago to contend. Kesler isn't going to be out forever. When he's back, their offense is on par with Chicago's (1 difference in GF last season), their defensive group works better as a unit, their team as a whole has far better defensive structure, and their goaltending is a lot better.

Lol, Pittsburgh does not have awful goaltending. Everyone loves to hate on Fleury and yet he remains in the top half of NHL netminders... easily. Crawford - who I have supported as long as I can remember - is almost dead last.
Penguins scored a hell of a lot more goals than the Hawks last year, and let in 17 less as well. Their D had some problems vs. Philly, and yet it's still better than Chicago's. Their offense scored 34 more goals. I think they're going to manage to be okay.
Lack of elite wingers? Hahaha. You don't need a Marian Hossa to play with Crosby, a Zach Parise to play with Malkin. Give me a break - these are two generational talents far better than anyone on the Hawks. James Neal is no slouch himself. They have capable top-6 wingers. Not stars (except for Neal), but players who have the skill and means to play there. There aren't roster holes for Pittsburgh in the top-6 at all...

As for Philly, Bryzgalov is a good deal better than Crawford. Kimmo Timonen is a solid if unspectacular #1 guy. And their defensive group is fine... Timonen, Coburn, Meszaros, Schenn, Grossman, Gervais, Lilja, Gustafsson. I wouldn't say they're top in the NHL in defensive depth, but they're far from in a bad position, either. If one of their big guys goes down, then yeah, they're in trouble. But that's true for every team in the NHL. If Keith goes out for an extended period, the Hawks are screwed too. Same with Weber in Nashville. Chara in Boston. Pietrangelo in St. Louis. Etc.

You are really stretching it pretty far with some of these "roster holes" you've listed... that, or you're just making them up completely (Pittsburgh's wingers... really?).
They had 10 more points than the hawks and played in a division where they were the only PO team. Hawks played in a division with 4 PO teams and where 101 points was 4th place. You don't think the hawks could have had more than 101 points in that division?

madgoat33 is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 06:22 PM
  #83
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,335
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by madgoat33 View Post
They had 10 more points than the hawks and played in a division where they were the only PO team. Hawks played in a division with 4 PO teams and where 101 points was 4th place. You don't think the hawks could have had more than 101 points in that division?
The Hawks were 6-7-3 vs NW division teams other than Vancouver, so... no, probably not. In comparison, the Hawks had a great record against the ever-so-tough Central division, at 16-6-2.

Point being, the "Weak divison! Strong divison!" argument is a silly one. Vancouver was great against the Central and Pacific themselves, anyway. They were and still are a better team than the Hawks, as much as I'd prefer that not be the truth.

Chris Hansen is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 06:28 PM
  #84
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Beukeboom Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,723
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Your post listed a majority of all the hypothetical positive possible - it seemed excessively optimistic to me, but granted I seem to have misunderstood the point you were trying to make.

Even so...
An improvement from Crawford and a capable PK are two big "if's" as it is. The PK will almost surely not improve very much, given the same exact personnel are returning as well as the same coaching staff (Kitchen handles the PK). Even when we had the good Crawford in 10-11, the PK was still really bad.

Still, even if a good Crawford and good PK are a reality next year for the Hawks, there are simply too many roster holes (as well as, in this hypothetical scenario, still having one of the very worst PP's in the league) for the team to truly contend for the Cup. Not to mention the terrible team defense, which is a problem whether Crawford improves his numbers or not... although I doubt CC improves much at all if he's hung out to dry this next year as often as he was the last.

Some positive things will probably happen. Some things will turn for the negative as well. Such is the nature of the NHL. There is little reason to expect that a bottom-four playoff team from last year that couldn't get out of the first round will suddenly vault into contending for the Cup in the late rounds of the playoffs despite no genuine changes in the roster or coaching staff.
If everything I said happened in my initail post, the Hawks would be favorites to win the Cup. All it takes is a couple those things to happen and I think the Hawks are in the upper tier with the serious contenders.

No offense Chris - but you're just ludicrously negative. Maybe from your perspective your just being realistic - but from your post the Hawks are going to be fighting with the Jackets for Jones or McKinnon.

IMO - the Hawks have the personel to PK effectively. If I'm the coaching staff, I'm spending all summer to figure out WTF happened last year, and what we need to do to fix it. I'm not just writing off the season because they were bad on the PK last year, and Crawford struggled. There have been a ton of teams that had aspects of their games that struggled, that were able to turn it around. Will the Hawks? Who knows, but I don't think it's impossible for them to do so like you seem to.

Beukeboom Fan is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 06:40 PM
  #85
BobbyJet
Registered User
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,838
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
The Hawks were 6-7-3 vs NW division teams other than Vancouver, so... no, probably not. In comparison, the Hawks had a great record against the ever-so-tough Central division, at 16-6-2.

Point being, the "Weak divison! Strong divison!" argument is a silly one. Vancouver was great against the Central and Pacific themselves, anyway. They were and still are a better team than the Hawks, as much as I'd prefer that not be the truth.
Yep. Our goaltending, PP and soft play especially drag us down in the comparison. Canucks have the sisters and a few other softies, so need to compensate by bringing in some physical presence elsewhere in the line-up, and they have done a decent job of doing so. They will be tough to beat with Schneider as the starter.

BobbyJet is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 06:42 PM
  #86
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,335
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beukeboom Fan View Post
If everything I said happened in my initail post, the Hawks would be favorites to win the Cup. All it takes is a couple those things to happen and I think the Hawks are in the upper tier with the serious contenders.

No offense Chris - but you're just ludicrously negative. Maybe from your perspective your just being realistic - but from your post the Hawks are going to be fighting with the Jackets for Jones or McKinnon.

IMO - the Hawks have the personel to PK effectively. If I'm the coaching staff, I'm spending all summer to figure out WTF happened last year, and what we need to do to fix it. I'm not just writing off the season because they were bad on the PK last year, and Crawford struggled. There have been a ton of teams that had aspects of their games that struggled, that were able to turn it around. Will the Hawks? Who knows, but I don't think it's impossible for them to do so like you seem to.
No offense taken - it's easy to misunderstand what I'm saying, as I've already done once in this thread with one of your posts.

Still, you've just said what I addressed in the post where I misunderstood you! Yes, if everything possible goes right, then the Hawks will be genuine Cup contenders, and would probably win it. But how realistic is that? How realistic is it that, and I'm quoting from you, "guys like Crawford, Keith & Kane bounce back, and some young guys like Jayes, Saad, and Shaw contribute more. Add in just average special teams and the Hawks could be significantly better with a similar roster."

Really?
Everything is going to go right?
I don't think I'm being excessively negative. Really! I've said in most of my posts in this thread that the Hawks will be more or less the same team as last year. Some players will progress (Toews maybe takes the next step)? Some players will regress (like Kane did last year, for example). This is reality, not overwhelming pessimism!
It may not have been in this thread (although I think it was), but I've already said that the Hawks will be similar to last year - approximately 100 points and an exit in the first or second round.
There's no need for the exaggeration. I have characterized the Hawks as a "good" team numerous times. Because they are a good team.
But no, logically speaking, they are not among the best teams. Which is all I have ever been saying. Barring a ludicrous, miracle-filled season in which every single player on the Hawks improves, the special teams stop being pathetic despite Kitchen running a useless PK for two years straight and a terrible PP all year long last year with no apparent desire by the coaches to adjust, Crawford returns to form, etc. etc. etc... well, barring that, the Hawks are not good enough to win the Cup. There are too many holes in the roster, too many problems with the team and coaching staff to legitimately say that Chicago is on par with the best teams in the NHL and has a great shot for a Cup next season.
Because it's just not true.

They are a good team. As I've noted, this is something I've said plenty of times.

I am not "ludicrously negative," Beukeboom. I am realistic, and I don't just think I am - I actually am. Not every player will get worse. Not every player will get better, either. Players progress, and players regress. The perfect storm of progression will not happen - it is extremely unrealistic. And the perfect storm (for lack of a better term) of regression will not happen either.
So what do you get, when you bring back essentially the same exact roster save for a few rookies here and there, the same coaching staff (aside from a new assistant to run the PP who has a very, very bad history in that role)... the same everything?
Well, I'm repeating this word yet again, but... you get the same thing.
The same old team.

It's ludicrously negative to think that the same thing will achieve more or less the same results?
Nah. That is realism. Based off of aphorism I'm sure most of us have heard more than our share of times.


The ones who insist on and on that the team will somehow be much better next year, has a fantastic shot to go all the way to the Finals and win, be the best team in the league... well. I'm not saying it's impossible, of course it's not. But which is more likely? That the same team will accomplish the same result, or that it will inexplicably do far better than ever?

Nothing's written in stone here, but predictions are the practice of likelihood. And the most likely case is that the Hawks maintain the status quo next year.

I think I've explained my point of view quite thoroughly.

Chris Hansen is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 07:15 PM
  #87
Sir Psycho T
More Cowbell!
 
Sir Psycho T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Redwood City, CA
Posts: 3,632
vCash: 500
Let's not talk about the Hawks having it easy in the NW division, I am sure the Oilers and Gagner would love the play the Hawks more often.

If those games aren't proof this team isn't competing for a Cup I don't know what is. I understand sometimes you underestimate a team and they surprise you and the worst team in the NHL can beat the best, but the Hawks didn't just lose those games they where humiliated in a way that a "Contending" team should never have been, not by a team that finished with the 2nd worst recond in the NHL, and not once but twice.

Sir Psycho T is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 07:22 PM
  #88
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,617
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post
Let's not talk about the Hawks having it easy in the NW division, I am sure the Oilers and Gagner would love the play the Hawks more often.

If those games aren't proof this team isn't competing for a Cup I don't know what is. I understand sometimes you underestimate a team and they surprise you and the worst team in the NHL can beat the best, but the Hawks didn't just lose those games they where humiliated in a way that a "Contending" team should never have been, not by a team that finished with the 2nd worst recond in the NHL, and not once but twice.
Like losing 8-3 to CLB before dumping 2 more against bad teams right before April. Just can't lose like that and expect to win a cup.

hockeydoug is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 07:59 PM
  #89
DisgruntledHawkFan
Moderator
 
DisgruntledHawkFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 23,595
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to DisgruntledHawkFan
Chris, you are one of my favorite posters... but Sopel was atrocious, regardless of circumstance. Total warrior that would gladly block shot after shot, but blocking a shot and then passing the puck straight to the guy that just drilled you in the ribs at 100mph doesn't make you a good PKer. Losing Madden, Versteeg, Burish, and Sharp's drop off are what made this teams PK so mediocre.

DisgruntledHawkFan is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 08:02 PM
  #90
DisgruntledHawkFan
Moderator
 
DisgruntledHawkFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 23,595
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to DisgruntledHawkFan
I will say you are bang on about this team being the same though. Outside of a Kris Versteeg like emergence from Saad/whoever, this team is seriously flawed.

DisgruntledHawkFan is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 08:44 PM
  #91
sketch22
Registered User
 
sketch22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,307
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledHawkFan View Post
Losing Madden, Versteeg, Burish, and Sharp's drop off are what made this teams PK so mediocre.
You don't think the hiring of Mike Kitchen had a whole to do with the pk being so terrible for the last 2 years?

sketch22 is online now  
Old
08-01-2012, 09:22 PM
  #92
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,335
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledHawkFan View Post
Chris, you are one of my favorite posters... but Sopel was atrocious, regardless of circumstance. Total warrior that would gladly block shot after shot, but blocking a shot and then passing the puck straight to the guy that just drilled you in the ribs at 100mph doesn't make you a good PKer. Losing Madden, Versteeg, Burish, and Sharp's drop off are what made this teams PK so mediocre.
Ah, maybe my memory is fuzzy on Sopel's effect on the PK, then. I just remembered his good positioning and fearless shotblocking on the kill... but if he wasn't effective, I easily could've missed it.

He was bad at even strength but I always felt like he was very effective on the PK. Could be remembering incorrectly for sure, though - so many things about that team were awesome, so I may have glossed over this one.

At any rate, you're right about all those players you listed. Remember Versteeg's SH goal against the Jackets? Man, I miss that team.

Chris Hansen is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 09:25 PM
  #93
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,335
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeydoug View Post
Like losing 8-3 to CLB before dumping 2 more against bad teams right before April. Just can't lose like that and expect to win a cup.
It was a 16 game sample size I presented, not just three games. Pretty different.
You do at least have to admit the "division X is weak, division Y is strong" argument doesn't hold any water in Beukeboom's post. The Hawks had trouble against the NW. If I had to give a reason why, I'd say it's the speed of the teams - especially Colorado and Edmonton, who I personally see as the two fastest teams in the league. The Hawks have had trouble against faster team since the massive roster turnover following the Cup win.

EDIT: My mistake, I didn't really have the correct context of your post (I did know you were responding to SPT and not me, but I assumed it was about something different than it actually was). Still, I'll just leave this post here. Haha.


Last edited by Chris Hansen: 08-01-2012 at 09:46 PM.
Chris Hansen is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 09:27 PM
  #94
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,335
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sketch22 View Post
You don't think the hiring of Mike Kitchen had a whole to do with the pk being so terrible for the last 2 years?
DHF was implying that the loss of those players as well as Kitchen's incompetence are both part of the problem, given a recent post of his in a similar thread.

Chris Hansen is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 09:32 PM
  #95
sketch22
Registered User
 
sketch22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,307
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
DHF was implying that the loss of those players as well as Kitchen's incompetence are both part of the problem, given a recent post of his in a similar thread.
Ok. I didn't see any mention of Kitchen except from you in this thread. I didn't know about the other one.

sketch22 is online now  
Old
08-02-2012, 01:51 AM
  #96
Sir Psycho T
More Cowbell!
 
Sir Psycho T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Redwood City, CA
Posts: 3,632
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeydoug View Post
Like losing 8-3 to CLB before dumping 2 more against bad teams right before April. Just can't lose like that and expect to win a cup.
Like losing 8-3 once to a team with your back-up in net after having already wrapped up the division, like that.

Sir Psycho T is offline  
Old
08-02-2012, 02:11 AM
  #97
Cullksinikers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: 'Merica
Country: United States
Posts: 14,697
vCash: 500
The thing of the greatest magnitude holding this team back from being an extremely successful, consistent, and back-to-form hockey club is stubbornness. The way this team is run through management and coaching and the effort of the players hitting the ice has got to change. The same system, lenience, and overall attitude surrounding the Chicago Blackhawks organization needs to do a 180-degree turn. I am sure I sound spoiled. I am complaining about a 100+-point team. However, it is very frustrating to see a change in philosophy, not necessarily the firing of any staff behind the bench or in the press box, being the only thing holding this team back. Hesitancy to go out and have more than a couple moves to hit or miss on is something that Stan Bowman does that I don't dislike. He had a love for three players this summer. They were Brodeur and Parise and sitll is going after Doan. Brodeur getting a one-year deal (?) offered to him is fine with me. Offering Parise the same amount of money but less years was fine by me. Adding Doan to this top-six is fine with me. However, you have to have a plan "B". This FA period wasn't the most exciting in the world, however, there were a few serviceable players available that would have been a solid backup plan after we missed out on Parise that could fill roles better than we currently have now. And no, I am not talking about the soft Euro or lack of effort kind of stuff being tossed out on the ice. The team also does not hit anyone. Why were the 2010 Blackhawks such a good team? They could do it all. They had plenty of skill, they had grit, and they had toughness. You see some gritty, agitating players like Shaw and Hayes who are still developing and should not be being relied upon as heavy as they may be in the coming year. Who on this team hits? Seabrook is our most physical defenseman, and Shaw is the only guy consistently who will go body-to-body with someone over the course of the game. This team needs to get back to being intimidating, more gritty, and getting some of the swagger back. The tough depth of that awesome 2010 team made us awesome. Guys like Burish, Fraser, Madden, etc. were guys who could chip in, play their roles well, and give us around ten minutes of solid hockey a night. This team has some skill. The skill is extremely top-heavy, however, there is some certainly still here and some more in the development stages. This team is too soft, not being forced the way they change their play that has gotten them knocked out of the WCQF for the last couple years, and not capitalizing. Not only are they not being opportunistic on the power play, but they are not capitalizing on winning and going and making another run with a team that has skill, the ability to be intimidating, some young, solid players who can bring the swagger back to the guys in red, white, and black, and a chance to use some of their prospects to fill a couple holes to go out in a now weaker division, get a top-three seed, and go on a deep run into the playoffs with home-ice advantage and try to bring that fifth Stanley Cup home to the beautiful city of Chicago, Illinois. We are not advantageous enough at this juncture. We need to make a couple moves and tweak our philosophy. We are close to having the right players to do it. We need management to add a couple solid pieces and for Quenneville and his two buddies to make a philosophy change that gets these guys intimidating, gutsy, agitating, chances to display their skill, capitalize, consistently be more successful, be more productive, and be a far more opportunistic team than has been displayed from the last two bottom-three seed teams that faltered in the playoffs and didn't do the job. The same thing just doesn't ****ing work. They almost have the right players and just need a tweak and philosophy. I know it isn't what he's all about, but Wirtz needs to put pressure on Bowman and the coaching staff he has running the show be forced to tweak their philosophy. Be advantageous and less hesitant. Don't be afraid to make a move to change your roster as a general manager. Don't be afraid to make a move to chance your philosophy being taught to the players as their head coach.


Last edited by Cullksinikers: 08-02-2012 at 02:16 AM.
Cullksinikers is offline  
Old
08-02-2012, 03:15 AM
  #98
Crazy_Ike
Cookin' with fire.
 
Crazy_Ike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,606
vCash: 500
Good god no one is going to read that.

Crazy_Ike is offline  
Old
08-02-2012, 03:36 AM
  #99
Sir Psycho T
More Cowbell!
 
Sir Psycho T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Redwood City, CA
Posts: 3,632
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy_Ike View Post
Good god no one is going to read that.
I did and it's a really good and well thought out post.

It's obviously the pouring out of a true fan upset with the teams current situation and I understand it completely.

I'll summarize.

1. Management and coaches refuse to change their ways even though it's obvious they have a lot of the blame of the past 2 years.

2. Bowman didn't get his first guys so he should have gone to plan b and gotten some guys who could have helped this team instead of doing nothing.

3. This team is soft and weak and needs some size and bangers and not to rely on Seabs, Shaw and Carbomb to do all the hitting.

4. This team needs to dedicate some time, energy, and effort into special teams because no team in the bottom 10 in the league in both PP and PK will win. A change in mentality of how their run is desperately needed.

5. That this team has failed the last 2 years yet nothing, players, coaches, even team strategy has changed, they keep thinking the same thing that didn't work last year will suddenly work this year.

Sir Psycho T is offline  
Old
08-02-2012, 06:39 AM
  #100
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 24,492
vCash: 500
Plan A was Parise, Plan B is still possible....


Kitch is far more a reason why our PK sucks than the loss of Madden and Sopel. Those 2 guys are not the difference between top5 and bottom5

Bubba88 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:50 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.