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 has to happen for Bow to go?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-07-2013, 12:08 PM
  #1
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
What has to happen for Bow to go?

Will another 1st round exit while failing to address the some old holes again be enough? What about missing the playoffs?

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 12:12 PM
  #2
Sevanston
Registered User
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 12,051
vCash: 500
Truthfully, I think the earliest we might see Bowman fired is summer 2014, assuming Q got fired in summer 2013.

If a full year with a coach that Bow chose still can't get the Hawks out of the first round, I can't see McD letting him stay in the GM role.

Sevanston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 12:13 PM
  #3
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,235
vCash: 500
I think he get's at least another offseason to fill holes.

The last 3 offseasons consisted of a cap crunch, 2 crappy FA pools and a 'potential' lockout.

Hawkaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 12:14 PM
  #4
Blackhawkswincup
Tornado Warning
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 116,351
vCash: 190
Also have to remember that its still too early for most of Bowman's draft picks to be judged

Many of his 2010 guys are still in NCAA or just turining pro ,, Same with 2011

Blackhawkswincup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 12:15 PM
  #5
UsernameWasTaken
Let's Go Blue Jays!
 
UsernameWasTaken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,572
vCash: 500
i'd give bowman two years after q gets fired before there's any reasonable chance of him getting turfed.

UsernameWasTaken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 12:16 PM
  #6
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
I like his draft picks, no issues there.

I'd give him:

9/10 drafting
3/10 trades
4/10 free agents

16/30 overall

Even if the drafting turns out good, there is more to the job than that.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 12:20 PM
  #7
Ace Rothstein
Aces High
 
Ace Rothstein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 3,739
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
Also have to remember that its still too early for most of Bowman's draft picks to be judged

Many of his 2010 guys are still in NCAA or just turining pro ,, Same with 2011
This is true but the odds of all of the prospects being impact players is very low. Even if they all end up being contributors, there just isn't going to be enough room for them. It is up to Stan to identify which prospects can be traded in order to fill current needs. That's why he's paid the big money. He gets a D- on this so far.

Ace Rothstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 12:24 PM
  #8
Blackhawkswincup
Tornado Warning
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 116,351
vCash: 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace Rothstein View Post
This is true but the odds of all of the prospects being impact players is very low. Even if they all end up being contributors, there just isn't going to be enough room for them. It is up to Stan to identify which prospects can be traded in order to fill current needs. That's why he's paid the big money. He gets a D- on this so far.
Bowman seems hesitant to move his prospects (Understandable many GM's are)

He does need to start dealing to an extent especially with glut of C prospects we currently have coming down pipeline

Blackhawkswincup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 12:26 PM
  #9
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace Rothstein View Post
This is true but the odds of all of the prospects being impact players is very low. Even if they all end up being contributors, there just isn't going to be enough room for them. It is up to Stan to identify which prospects can be traded in order to fill current needs. That's why he's paid the big money. He gets a D- on this so far.
Exactly, the drafting has been good, but time is ticking fast. If he can't identify which guys to move and get good value for them (NHL value, not picks/prospects), we're going to waste a lot of value we acquired from dismantling the team and end up not far from where we already are, only cheaper.

If he can't move prospects for NHL talent, which he has failed to do so far, we will have wasted most of the primes of our good players.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 12:30 PM
  #10
Sevanston
Registered User
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 12,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
I like his draft picks, no issues there.

I'd give him:

9/10 drafting
3/10 trades
4/10 free agents

16/30 overall

Even if the drafting turns out good, there is more to the job than that.
I mostly agree.

Drafting: Lots of promise in Bowman's picks. How many will make the big show is obviously up in the air, but plenty of them have shown promise at the lower levels. So far Rensfeldt is the only true "bust."

Trades: Outside of Leddy (and Oduya IMO, though I know that's a contentious opinion in these parts), Bowman hasn't really brought in any impact players via trade. Though with the exception of Campbell, I'd say he hasn't given up very much of importance either.

Free agents: Carcillo, Mayers, Roszival? Brookbank? Those are only positives I've got.

Sevanston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 12:39 PM
  #11
UsernameWasTaken
Let's Go Blue Jays!
 
UsernameWasTaken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,572
vCash: 500
his trades are the part that i'm worried about - and he has to do better on.

free agents - it seems like it's getting a lot harder to sign decent free agents, so i don't fault him too much for that

UsernameWasTaken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 01:02 PM
  #12
Kurtosis
COYS
 
Kurtosis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Norwood Park
Country: United States
Posts: 17,854
vCash: 500
I think he gets a chance to hire his own head coach and if (probably when) that coach fails he will in turn get the axe.

I just have very little faith in the upper management of this team; although I do have decidedly less faith in coach Q to lead this team to further success without being handed an absolutely stacked squad.

Kurtosis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 01:16 PM
  #13
hawksfan50
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 3,357
vCash: 500
The truth is we have only 1 (TT) sure-fire top six forward in that prospect group --1 maybe or maybe not (Saad) and one still to early to tell (Calnan) -the rest are NOT top six material and bottom 2 line guys are a dime a dozen accross the pool of possibly available players (ie. FA's and trades oiut of other orgs) such that PRO SCOUTING may be more important than AMATEUR SCOUTING in filling the bottm 6 roles properly ...

OVERALL the amateur scouting dept has FAILED to give us COMPETENT 2-way D-men with size ,physicality and mobility -instead we get anover-abundance of smallish "offensemen" whose defensive flaws are glaring ,NO top rated goalie of the future candidates ,and as I said very few top 6 forward candidates...I tend to think STAN's drafting is over-rated OVERALL...Even in the few more physical D-men drafted--Johns,maybe Paliotta--you can't say they willbe even higher than #4,5,or 6th d-men--again no 1,2 or 3's to get excited over..

Stan's epic FAIL no legit 2c-will get resolved when EITHER TT takes the role (1-2 years away) OR if TT plays a top six wing spot,then they trade KANE for a 2c +pick...until then-WE ARE FLAWED UPFRONTin our top 6..

We are not the only NHL with mediocre NHL goaltending --but some teams even have better AHL goalies in the pipeline than us--STAN has not addressed that area well enough compared to other NHL teams either with a PREMIUM goalie of the future already in the AHLor with some NHL games already (eg. Ottawa-Lehner;WASh Holtby,FLA Markstrom etc..etc..) -nor has STAN traded for an excess goalie "talent" who could be a #1 on another team -nor has stan grabbed off UFA Jr. goalie prospects who have excelled at the WJHC level (eg. Makarov was signed by ANH as a ufa) ---STAN keeps on hoping his late rounder picks (Carruth,Mattsson,Whitney,Tomkins --somehow will prove the experts who did not rate them highly at draft time wrong -but he NEVER dares to go for a conensus first rounder "cream of the rop" type goalie in the draft-yes that could also fail-but SOME of these first rounder goalies DO as forecasted and willbe top end NHL goalies -the point is we have little HOPE of that when stan bypasses that possibilty for instead some bottom six forward late first rounder of the K. hayes variety -AND even if he was taking a forward there he blew it (the C take was BROCK NELSON who went to NYI at #30 after we traded the #30 to them for #35 and #58---as it turned out we took LUDVIG RENSFEDLT at #35 -who I pegged at #30 anyway--and who STAN--IMO, gave up on too way early by not signing him last summer -so a wasted pick --
BTW -Rensfeldt as a 20 year old is at #14 in ALLSVENKAN scoring with 7g+21a =28pts in 35 GP....just to compare KOPITAR was 10g 24a =34pts in 31GP ..Sure Kopitar is better--BUT he is also older -and even if he is a top line NHLer-I still say RENSFELDT had the potential to be a top two line guy ---K. hayes in my opinion willnever go that high a line .anyway STAN gave up on Rensfeldt way too early...MISTAKE upon mistake--because KENT SIMPSON (who we took at #58 in 2010) is NEVER going to be an NHL starying goalie and probably not a back-up either--SO as I see it STAN blew the 2010 draft badly --by drafting the wrong guy at #24 (should have taken NELSON as I had wanted) and by throwing Rensfeldt away for nothing and by getting noithing for moving down from #30 to #35 in that SIMPSONM willbe NOTHING...

In short this was a FIASSCO and no way can I give STAN such high mrks for his vaunred drafting... AS for getting TT --that was pure luck as stupid NHL GM's bypassed him leaving him as a gift for Stan ..Not drafting skill-pure luck..

hawksfan50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 01:22 PM
  #14
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
And the thing with the drafting is that it is much, much more the collective thoughts of the organization than trades or free agents are.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 02:05 PM
  #15
BobbyJet
HFB Partner
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,439
vCash: 500
With Stan it’s just as much of what he hasn’t done as it is what he has done. At the risk of understating his poor record since taking over as GM, neither are very impressive. I’m not going to re-hash it but it looks to me like he is incapable of doing anything meaningful, dealing at the NHL level. I hope he proves me wrong about that, but he'd better hurry up. That said, I’m not sure if Rocky has the stones, but Kitchen, Q and Stan should be gone before next October.

BobbyJet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 02:23 PM
  #16
deytookerjaabs
Registered Smut User
 
deytookerjaabs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,184
vCash: 500
He's done a horrible job of managing what he was handed post cup. Unlike some posters here, I refuse to believe he shopped Campbell after we won the cup as there was not even a tainted rumor of that happening!! At the time, Campbell and his 7.1 mil cap hit was not considered expendable by Mr. Bowman. Yet, the following year all of the sudden the hit is too high and it's worth moving because we had a rookie who looked alright. You don't trade off a veteran all-star just because a rookie looked good for a few weeks. You also, don't trade off THREE all-star caliber talents who combined are close to Campbell's cap hit and then decide the following year to dump a fourth all-star caliber player. That's a joke. Either decide Campbell could be moved or buried after the cup and keep the remaining talent (Buf, Lad, Versteeg) or keep the player who gives you the second best puck moving defensive unit in the league. I can't stand the excuses for Bowman on this and he's done nothing to replace these former all-star caliber players.

Drafting? The jury isn't out yet and regardless of whom we drafted I don't think we're doing enough to develop and nurture our picks as we were doing 3-7 years ago.

Trades? Crawford + Emery tandem again this year, enough said there.

deytookerjaabs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 02:51 PM
  #17
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Agreed on your Campbell point. No way he should have been moved if the idea was just to carry on without replacing him in some way (which it was and failed). Also, no ****ing way the Hawks offer Campbell up after the Cup plus 2 or 3 first round picks and get turned down, no ****ing way. Too visionary for Bow though.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 04:07 PM
  #18
Blackhawkswincup
Tornado Warning
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 116,351
vCash: 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by deytookerjaabs View Post
He's done a horrible job of managing what he was handed post cup. Unlike some posters here, I refuse to believe he shopped Campbell after we won the cup as there was not even a tainted rumor of that happening!! At the time, Campbell and his 7.1 mil cap hit was not considered expendable by Mr. Bowman. Yet, the following year all of the sudden the hit is too high and it's worth moving because we had a rookie who looked alright. You don't trade off a veteran all-star just because a rookie looked good for a few weeks. You also, don't trade off THREE all-star caliber talents who combined are close to Campbell's cap hit and then decide the following year to dump a fourth all-star caliber player. That's a joke. Either decide Campbell could be moved or buried after the cup and keep the remaining talent (Buf, Lad, Versteeg) or keep the player who gives you the second best puck moving defensive unit in the league. I can't stand the excuses for Bowman on this and he's done nothing to replace these former all-star caliber players.

Drafting? The jury isn't out yet and regardless of whom we drafted I don't think we're doing enough to develop and nurture our picks as we were doing 3-7 years ago.

Trades? Crawford + Emery tandem again this year, enough said there.
No one wanted Campbell ,, It wasn't til Fla gave Tallon greenlight to spend money in summer of 2011 that we found a taker

And Rocky was never going to bury Campbell and his at time of cup 6 yrs (7.1M) contract. No owner would throw away that much money (Which is what it would be equal too ,, Not to mention Rocky already had to eat the nearly 12M in Huet costs these last 2 years)

So bashing Bowman for that is odd

And Leddy picked up plenty of PMD role last year

Your mad that Tallon screwed Hawks over cap wise ,, Yet you blame Bowman for it

Blackhawkswincup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 04:09 PM
  #19
Blackhawkswincup
Tornado Warning
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 116,351
vCash: 190
Also would like to remind people of some hindsight here

- Buff was worthless most of year ,, Had big playoffs but lets not pretend he was anything more

And he is overpaid pylon in Winnipeg ,, Hawks would smartly never shell out 5.2M for him to play D

- Ladd was a 3rd liner and nothing more up to that point

- Steeger was god awful in 2nd half of 09-10 season ,, He was not some uber impressive essential part of team

Blackhawkswincup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 04:18 PM
  #20
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 24,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
I like his draft picks, no issues there.

I'd give him:

9/10 drafting
3/10 trades
4/10 free agents

16/30 overall

Even if the drafting turns out good, there is more to the job than that.
His trades are better than 3/10 --> more like 7/10

what you miss is bring back the own players to good prices. I give him TKK, Seabs and Sharp as normal paid. No discounts or anything like this but not overpaid. Other than that I say 4/10

Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
Agreed on your Campbell point. No way he should have been moved if the idea was just to carry on without replacing him in some way (which it was and failed). Also, no ****ing way the Hawks offer Campbell up after the Cup plus 2 or 3 first round picks and get turned down, no ****ing way. Too visionary for Bow though.
this again? we talked this over and over again and again. It was a decison about the future and a deal that had to be made.




give it up, Bowman won't be gone soon. Before Bowman will be gone, he will fire Q and the his coach and Bowman get at least until the end of the 13/14 season

Bubba88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 04:24 PM
  #21
deytookerjaabs
Registered Smut User
 
deytookerjaabs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,184
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
No one wanted Campbell ,, It wasn't til Fla gave Tallon greenlight to spend money in summer of 2011 that we found a taker
This is just a statement of your opinion with absolutely no evidence whatsoever that he was shopped, which would have been exactly what any GM with foresight would do. If he was shopped in any way we would know, but he wasn't and he was then dumped next year, and Leddy isn't anywhere near Campbell in terms vision, puck movement, and overall skill.

deytookerjaabs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 04:29 PM
  #22
Ace Rothstein
Aces High
 
Ace Rothstein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 3,739
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba88 View Post
His trades are better than 3/10 --> more like 7/10
Which trades are those? He's made one decent trade so far, Barker for Leddy.

Ace Rothstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 04:39 PM
  #23
deytookerjaabs
Registered Smut User
 
deytookerjaabs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,184
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
Also would like to remind people of some hindsight here

- Buff was worthless most of year ,, Had big playoffs but lets not pretend he was anything more

And he is overpaid pylon in Winnipeg ,, Hawks would smartly never shell out 5.2M for him to play D

- Ladd was a 3rd liner and nothing more up to that point

- Steeger was god awful in 2nd half of 09-10 season ,, He was not some uber impressive essential part of team
Anyone with half a hockey brain knew all three of those players were still playing below their potential

So, we lose the mediocre Buff, Ladd, Versteeg only to keep the mediocre puck moving overpaid Campbell and then dump him because only Tallon will take him, as if there wasn't a huge FA bidding war for the guy.

And now? Leddy, Stalberg, Frolik, Kruger

You went from a team who decides to trade off secondary scoring depth and keep the secondary puck moving defensive abilities. Ok. Then, trades off the later only to now have **** for depth scoring and **** for a #3 Dman! Yeah, it was lame seeing us lose scoring depth but I figured in a year or two we could replace that. Then, we lost another 20+ minutes a game of having the best transition game in the league. We didn't have to lose both of those things and I'm praying harder than anyone Rozsival allows Leddy to become the next big thing.

deytookerjaabs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 04:39 PM
  #24
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,017
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by deytookerjaabs View Post
He's done a horrible job of managing what he was handed post cup. Unlike some posters here, I refuse to believe he shopped Campbell after we won the cup as there was not even a tainted rumor of that happening!! At the time, Campbell and his 7.1 mil cap hit was not considered expendable by Mr. Bowman. Yet, the following year all of the sudden the hit is too high and it's worth moving because we had a rookie who looked alright. You don't trade off a veteran all-star just because a rookie looked good for a few weeks. You also, don't trade off THREE all-star caliber talents who combined are close to Campbell's cap hit and then decide the following year to dump a fourth all-star caliber player. That's a joke. Either decide Campbell could be moved or buried after the cup and keep the remaining talent (Buf, Lad, Versteeg) or keep the player who gives you the second best puck moving defensive unit in the league. I can't stand the excuses for Bowman on this and he's done nothing to replace these former all-star caliber players.

Drafting? The jury isn't out yet and regardless of whom we drafted I don't think we're doing enough to develop and nurture our picks as we were doing 3-7 years ago.

Trades? Crawford + Emery tandem again this year, enough said there.
Uhh, none of Buff, Ladd or Versteeg were all-stars when they were in Chicago. Versteeg was a solid 2nd line winger, Ladd a 3rd liner and Buff was all over the place before coming alive in the playoffs. No GM in the league was going to take Campbell off Chicago's hands when his caphit was a huge reason why Chicago was forced to move the likes of Buff, Ladd and Steeger.

Bowman did the best he could with the mess Tallon created.. and, even though Chicago missed Campbell last year, Chicago's still better off cap-wise without him. You can't have a 7.1M Dman on your 2nd pairing. You simply can't. The cap's only going to be at 64.3M next year.. Chicago's already commited I believe 57M to 17 players for next season.. take away Montador, Oduya and Rozsival and put in Campbell and Chicago would have 57M commited to just 15 players. Not a good place to be for a team that already lacks quality depth.

As for when Bowman gets canned (if he does), it won't be until he hires a coach of his own and we see how the team plays. Luckily for Bowman, if things don't go well this year, they'll fire Q at the end of the year, bring in a new coach, and alot of the young players that are in Rockford/Chicago will have another year of experience. Saad, Clendening, McNeill, Danault and possibly K.Hayes, Johns and Teravainen could all be in Chicago/Rockford at the start of the 2013 season (Obv. Saad & Clendening already turned Pro).

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 04:41 PM
  #25
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 24,874
vCash: 500
I like that you seem to forget that there is something like the Salary Cap

Bubba88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 01:06 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.