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

What do we do if we lose?

View Poll Results: What do we do if we lose?
Acquire more physical talent (that can play, like Ott, not 4th liners) 17 25.00%
Acquire a legit 2C 22 32.35%
Acquire an additional 1st pairing D 2 2.94%
Fire Q 28 41.18%
Fire Bowman 8 11.76%
Do little to nothing, come back with the same team/management 19 27.94%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 68. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-21-2013, 12:53 PM
  #51
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmm View Post
We won the SC 3 years ago for the first time in 50 years, we just won the President's Cup for the first time in 22 years, and most of our players are young. Obviously any major changes would be foolish.
I'm not saying trade a core player but I would like to see the makeup of the depth changed if the team doesn't get it done this year. Too small, no net presence.

digdug41982 is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 12:54 PM
  #52
IU Hawks fan
They call me IU
 
IU Hawks fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: No longer IU
Country: United States
Posts: 21,184
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
Trading a core piece worked well in Chicago history

Oakley to Knicks was outrageous at time ,,, But Cartwright turned out to be key part of 3 championships
I wasn't around then, and I don't see an NBA team to be a very good comparison to begin with, but from what it looks like...Horace Grant was ready to step into Oakley's shoes anyway. It's like dumping Campbell because you have Leddy, except they actually got something for him.

IU Hawks fan is online now  
Old
05-21-2013, 12:59 PM
  #53
Blackhawkswincup
Tornado Warning
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 118,058
vCash: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by IU Hawks fan View Post
I wasn't around then, and I don't see an NBA team to be a very good comparison to begin with, but from what it looks like...Horace Grant was ready to step into Oakley's shoes anyway. It's like dumping Campbell because you have Leddy, except they actually got something for him.
True about Grant but he was playing C when coming into NBA with Oakley on Bulls (Grant could play both positions well)

There was actually no real reason to trade Oakley as Oakley/Grant down low presented Hawks with potential longterm 1-2 punch of bigmen

It came down to Krause thinking the makeup of core needed a guy like Cartwright over Oakley to get over hump in playoffs

Blackhawkswincup is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 01:06 PM
  #54
No Fun Shogun
Global Moderator
34-38-61-10-13
 
No Fun Shogun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Shogunate of Nofunia
Country: Fiji
Posts: 34,067
vCash: 5113
Quote:
Originally Posted by topher42 View Post
Teams that use the past to not change fail in the future.
Sure, but teams that overreact to every setback tend not to advance very far either.

Here's the facts.... we essentially blew up the team's entire depth three years ago.

We barely made the playoffs two years ago and still found a way to force a game seven OT against a significantly higher ranked and, yes, better team in the first round.

We made the playoffs last year with some ups and downs and major consistency issues and ended up getting bounced in the first round due to us being down and going up against a hot hand in the net.

We made the playoffs this year after being one of the most dominant teams throughout, easily advanced past the first round, and have had two bad games in a row in the second round.

Call me crazy, but that's an upward trajectory, especially if we end up winning this series, which I still think will be the case as it's not like winning three of five is an insurmountable task.

People are seriously acting like we're the Flames here. We have not bottomed out, we're not in need of a rebuild, and we certainly don't need to fire management and our head coach if we lose the series to Detroit just because the last few games left a bad taste in our mouths. A few tweaks need to be made and some holes need to be filled, but we don't need to tear down a wall and rebuild it, that's for sure.

And remember, this is the exact same conversation we had last offseason, too, wherein a good number of posters were huffing and puffing about the team not possibly being contenders and beginning a downward spiral as is.


Last edited by No Fun Shogun: 05-21-2013 at 01:14 PM.
No Fun Shogun is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 01:11 PM
  #55
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Comes down to this. Bowman and Q have been averse to making changes. Have a frank conversation with them about what plans they have for next year and if it doesn't involve change, that's it then. Doing nothing at the TD looks to be biting us in the ass hard. Clowe came cheap, Roy came cheap, we need offense and physical play, not getting it. Just turn this around, please, but if it doesn't, not like we didn't know about the holes.

digdug41982 is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 01:18 PM
  #56
Hawkscap
Registered User
 
Hawkscap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
Sure, but teams that overreact to every setback tend not to advance very far either.

Here's the facts.... we essentially blew up the team's entire depth three years ago.

We barely made the playoffs two years ago and still found a way to force a game seven OT against a significantly higher ranked and, yes, better team in the first round.

We made the playoffs last year with some ups and downs and major consistency issues and ended up getting bounced in the first round due to us being down and going up against a hot hand in the net.

We made the playoffs this year after being one of the most dominant teams throughout, easily advanced past the first round, and have had two bad games in a row in the second round.

Call me crazy, but that's an upward trajectory, especially if we end up winning this series, which I still think will be the case as it's not like winning three of five is an insurmountable task.

People are seriously acting like we're the Flames here. We have not bottomed out, we're not in need of a rebuild, and we certainly don't need to fire management and our head coach if we lose the series to Detroit just because the last few games left a bad taste in our mouths. A few tweaks need to be made and some holes need to be filled, but we don't need to tear down a wall and rebuild it, that's for sure.

And remember, this is the exact same conversation we had last offseason, too, wherein a good number of posters were huffing and puffing about the team not possibly being contenders and beginning a downward spiral as is.

It was more to how owners and fans hang onto coaches by what they have done in the past than what the current situation is: Ditka, Ozzie, Baker

Hawkscap is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 01:22 PM
  #57
No Fun Shogun
Global Moderator
34-38-61-10-13
 
No Fun Shogun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Shogunate of Nofunia
Country: Fiji
Posts: 34,067
vCash: 5113
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
Comes down to this. Bowman and Q have been averse to making changes. Have a frank conversation with them about what plans they have for next year and if it doesn't involve change, that's it then. Doing nothing at the TD looks to be biting us in the ass hard. Clowe came cheap, Roy came cheap, we need offense and physical play, not getting it. Just turn this around, please, but if it doesn't, not like we didn't know about the holes.
And that's a valid argument, that we should try to do more at the trade deadline. But making a trade here and there isn't exactly the monumental change that some are suggesting here, and I really doubt that picking up someone else in place of a guy we currently have and/or a pick in the next draft would've changed the overall effort (or lack thereof) from the previous two games.

We just had a couple bad games in a row. It happens.

Quote:
Originally Posted by topher42 View Post
It was more to how owners hang onto coaches by what they have done in the past than what the current situation is: Ditka, Ozzie, Baker
No doubt, but the point is that other teams began a long decline after their successes, or even immediately hit the cellar, whereas the Hawks have been pointing upwards since the damage was done in the 2010 offseason, so I don't think it's the most valid of comparisons.

No Fun Shogun is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 01:24 PM
  #58
UsernameWasTaken
Let's Go Blue Jays!
 
UsernameWasTaken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,157
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
Comes down to this. Bowman and Q have been averse to making changes. Have a frank conversation with them about what plans they have for next year and if it doesn't involve change, that's it then. Doing nothing at the TD looks to be biting us in the ass hard. Clowe came cheap, Roy came cheap, we need offense and physical play, not getting it. Just turn this around, please, but if it doesn't, not like we didn't know about the holes.
Because the players who should be performing aren't. That's not Bowman's fault.

You complained about Bowman last year too ... even though we had the same problem of some of our "stars" MIA ... and then we also had Crawford letting in horrible goals.

They're not going to fire both Q and Bowman...Q will be the first to go and Bowman will be allowed to bring in his own coach. Do you pay attention around the league? You have to be way more incompetent than Bowman to get fired.

UsernameWasTaken is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 01:29 PM
  #59
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Well, I'm not at all interested in trading stars or making a switch with Crawford. Crawford has been really good this year. That leaves secondary parts. I mean, do you really want to trade a core player and/or give up a ton for a goalie, probably Miller based on who should be out there?

digdug41982 is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 01:45 PM
  #60
UsernameWasTaken
Let's Go Blue Jays!
 
UsernameWasTaken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,157
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
Well, I'm not at all interested in trading stars or making a switch with Crawford. Crawford has been really good this year. That leaves secondary parts. I mean, do you really want to trade a core player and/or give up a ton for a goalie, probably Miller based on who should be out there?
No...but the reason these problems exist isn't that Bowman is incompetent. I doubt firing him would make any difference...and as I said it doesn't matter b/c by my count he has at a minimum 3 more years...and Q will definitely go first.

UsernameWasTaken is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 01:50 PM
  #61
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by UsernameWasTaken View Post
No...but the reason these problems exist isn't that Bowman is incompetent. I doubt firing him would make any difference...and as I said it doesn't matter b/c by my count he has at a minimum 3 more years...and Q will definitely go first.
This town will eat Bowman alive a la Toronto if he fires Q and sticks on IMO. Would be interesting to see. This town loves Q and won't understand why Bowman stuck on, even if it makes sense to some. I hope we can just win and not have to worry about it at all but I'm on the money on this one if it plays out that way. Ask anyone who lives here. You don't have to agree with it, just calling it like it is.

digdug41982 is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 01:51 PM
  #62
Illinihockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 16,490
vCash: 500
I would definitely entertain the idea of trading Seabrook for a big bodied #2 center. Not sure who that would be. You'd obviously need to find a vet defenseman to put on the 2nd pairing with Leddy, but that is doable.

Illinihockey is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 01:58 PM
  #63
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
I'm completely against trading any of the core. If we did move Seabrook for a 2C though, I'd look at MacKinnon first and foremost.

digdug41982 is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 02:25 PM
  #64
Hawkscap
Registered User
 
Hawkscap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
This town will eat Bowman alive a la Toronto if he fires Q and sticks on IMO. Would be interesting to see. This town loves Q and won't understand why Bowman stuck on, even if it makes sense to some. I hope we can just win and not have to worry about it at all but I'm on the money on this one if it plays out that way. Ask anyone who lives here. You don't have to agree with it, just calling it like it is.
This town does not love Q. The long time Hawk fans I know can't stand Q. Q fans are the same type that whined about Doug Collins getting fired by the Bulls.

Hawkscap is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 02:32 PM
  #65
Pepe Silvia
Registered User
 
Pepe Silvia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 6,575
vCash: 500
I think most of the players deserve a lot more of the blame than Quenneville for the past two games. You can ***** about the Stalberg situation, but Stalberg hasn't really done much to make me think Q made a mistake. Plus Saad seems to have gotten the message. He played great last night.

But the series is far from over, so I don't really see the point in making this thread. At least not yet. It makes us look like Canucks fans

Pepe Silvia is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 02:37 PM
  #66
Blackhawkswincup
Tornado Warning
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 118,058
vCash: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by topher42 View Post
This town does not love Q. The long time Hawk fans I know can't stand Q. Q fans are the same type that whined about Doug Collins getting fired by the Bulls.
I am a Q fan ,, My issues with the anti-Q crowd is the continued claim that Hawks won in spite of him or he did nothing

That is BS claim as he was right coach at right time for right team (I think it was Teemu who said that last summer about Q)

Q was exactly the coach team needed to take next step

Now with that said if they go out in round 2 this year Q needs to go especially after hiring Kompon

Blackhawkswincup is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 02:43 PM
  #67
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,774
vCash: 500
The team won the President's trophy. Depth is solid. The team is in decent shape against the cap. Most of the needed role players will be relatively cheap on the market or can be found in the system.

How many teams have fewer big questions looking at the next couple years? Pit has blueline and goalie issues, Boston looks to have a number of looming issues, Detroit has questions all over the roster, Vancouver is close to becoming a mess, STL will be restrained by a budget, LA is probably just as solid but they have some very serious moves they have to make at the blueline, the Rangers are going to continue to have serious depth issues, etc. I just don't see who stands much better off going into next year even if the Hawks lose the series.

Even if Chicago loses the next 2 games, I'm not sure you do anything besides tweak the team. Toews has been wiped out and a few others have played below where they should. I don't think a bad outcome can be pinned on Q or Bowman much. In the big picture, things are still pretty good. They have a quality team that hasn't played their best hockey in the playoffs. Hopefully that changes, but otherwise, I don't think they should do much of anything.

hockeydoug is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 02:47 PM
  #68
Blackhawkswincup
Tornado Warning
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 118,058
vCash: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeydoug View Post
The team won the President's trophy. Depth is solid. The team is in decent shape against the cap. Most of the needed role players will be relatively cheap on the market or can be found in the system.

How many teams have fewer big questions looking at the next couple years? Pit has blueline and goalie issues, Boston looks to have a number of looming issues, Detroit has questions all over the roster, Vancouver is close to becoming a mess, STL will be restrained by a budget, LA is probably just as solid but they have some very serious moves they have to make at the blueline, the Rangers are going to continue to have serious depth issues, etc. I just don't see who stands much better off going into next year even if the Hawks lose the series.

Even if Chicago loses the next 2 games, I'm not sure you do anything besides tweak the team. Toews has been wiped out and a few others have played below where they should. I don't think a bad outcome can be pinned on Q or Bowman much. In the big picture, things are still pretty good. They have a quality team that hasn't played their best hockey in the playoffs. Hopefully that changes, but otherwise, I don't think they should do much of anything.

Hawks have no #2 C (Well they do but Q wont play him at #2C) and the core as a whole has sucked this playoff

This team is also the softest in league and is getting exposed by Wings physical game

Changes better be coming cause next year I don't want Hawks heading into playoffs with some scrub pretending to be #2 C (Morrison/Handzus 3.0) , A worthless Kompon led PP (Absolutely brutal PP to watch) and Toews/Seabrook/etc MIA again when teams start throwing body around

Blackhawkswincup is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 02:49 PM
  #69
Hawkscap
Registered User
 
Hawkscap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
I am a Q fan ,, My issues with the anti-Q crowd is the continued claim that Hawks won in spite of him or he did nothing

That is BS claim as he was right coach at right time for right team (I think it was Teemu who said that last summer about Q)

Q was exactly the coach team needed to take next step

Now with that said if they go out in round 2 this year Q needs to go especially after hiring Kompon
My worries about Q started in the SC final where he needed Scotty to tell him to break up Toews and Kane. Kane with SHARP AT CENTER and Toews with Hossa.

Hawkscap is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 03:03 PM
  #70
Hugh Mongusbig
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
Call me crazy, but that's an upward trajectory, especially if we end up winning this series, which I still think will be the case as it's not like winning three of five is an insurmountable task.
What is this 3 of 5 nonsense?!? It's a 7 game series, and 3 have been played already. The Hawks need to win 3 of 4 now.

Hugh Mongusbig is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 03:23 PM
  #71
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
And The rest of those either were result of contract or ownership/player issues
My point is that it's a bad idea to trade away core players for non core players.

hockeydoug is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 03:29 PM
  #72
Hawkman
Moderator
The Chronic
 
Hawkman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,419
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by topher42 View Post
Teams that use the past to not change fail in the future.
Exactly. We've been The O6 Losers for most of the last century with only 3 Cups before 2010 in almost 100 years. Let's keep our change to a new winning tradition alive and not revert to our traditional losing tradition by making foolish moves the way we have for almost 100 years.

Hawkman is online now  
Old
05-21-2013, 03:32 PM
  #73
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,087
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
Now that I think of it firing Q could solve the #2 C issue

New coach likely more receptive to moving Sharp back

Saad-Toews-Kane
Morin-Sharp-Hossa
That's assuming it's Q that doesn't want to put Sharp there, which makes no sense considering the players Q has to put there.

HockeySensible is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 03:32 PM
  #74
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
Hawks have no #2 C (Well they do but Q wont play him at #2C) and the core as a whole has sucked this playoff
I'll say Toews and Seabrook have been bad, but the rest of the core seems to be close to what we would reasonably expect.

Quote:
This team is also the softest in league and is getting exposed by Wings physical game
I think positioning by the opponent has been hurting them more than physical play.

Quote:
Changes better be coming cause next year I don't want Hawks heading into playoffs with some scrub pretending to be #2 C (Morrison/Handzus 3.0) , A worthless Kompon led PP (Absolutely brutal PP to watch) and Toews/Seabrook/etc MIA again when teams start throwing body around
Not a fan of Q's assistants, but I don't think Handzus or Morrison were ever thought to be anything besides a stopgap 2c and weren't used as one except when there were injuries outside of an odd shift here and there.

Paying for a 2C is going to leave a big hole someplace else next year.

hockeydoug is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 04:28 PM
  #75
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 25,248
vCash: 500
we have a contending team, with good players and have a coach that may win the trophy for best coach of the season while having a record start and 1st place finish. We did make it past the 1st round.

It's easy to say that we will stand pat, try to add to our roster and go with what we know.
Whatever they do, they have to secure that the PP gets better. Getting Streit would be perfect for us and no, he isn't bad defensivly.

If a player has to go to show that mgmt is not pleased it would be Bolland

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 11:25 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.