30
|
|
Post by gigecj on Aug 15, 2020 11:53:12 GMT -6
I wonder if I listened to the same one T. Yes, he did mention diplomatically that the coach liked Gus more than him and that once Gus was traded DK received more ice time. IMAGINE DK HAVING TO DEFER TO ERIC GUSTAFFSON! I also heard him allude to the smallish nature of the team. Then, there was the allusion to how Norris Trophy winners will always come from a good team since the good teams won't spend much time in their own end. In order to win the Norris, you need to score. You can't score unless you're in the offensive zone more often. He still thinks of himself as being about as good defensively as he's ever been. He's also a big fan of Marian Hossa and believes the Hawks don't win any Cups without him. I didn't hear too much more. However, the story about Duncan "Keef" was interesting. He lost five on the top and six on the bottom and they were pulling out pieces in the locker room. To this day, he feels nothing in the frontal mouth area and often loses his replacement teeth. |
|
|
|
Post by gigecj on Aug 15, 2020 11:58:42 GMT -6
Great post. There’s no point in hating the Vegans cuz they did things right. My complaint is that if people watch the Vegans, and see that they don’t really have a super star, why can’t the Hawks be better? Seriously, the team on the ice is not very good. I know I know I don’t give chances to guys like Boqvist, Highmore, Strome, etc. But look at the small kid picked just one spot in front of Boqvist. He’s probably the best player in the playoffs right now, and the same age and same position. Now we have the exact same fill that Stan had before, but they’re younger, and he can sell patience for another year or two. Good players show something right away, maybe not their full potential, but they’ll show they belong. And most of Stan’s kids he brought in haven’t shown that yet. But we’re in a cap crunch so expect more kids and more problems!!! Kids are the problem, coach is the problem, GM is the problem...and the old core is also a problem. Toews gift wrapped turnover in game 1 and blowing coverage in OT is on him. Crawford's Meh. play is on him. Keith being schizo is on him. Kane being lazy is on him. As I've said for a few years...the rot is systemic. No one is absolved from blame. The 'hawks could be better with an organization-wide kick in the pants...but that won't happen until shit changes top-down. I just wanted to make it clear that I agree that "it's not on Vegas." I was looking for help regarding how they garnered success since entering the league. It does sound as though it was fair and that they did the best they could with all of it. When I said that I was now even more upset upon hearing this, I was unclear that I was more upset with my team top down after hearing about Vegas' actions. |
|
|
|
Post by BigT on Aug 15, 2020 12:22:30 GMT -6
I wonder if I listened to the same one T. Yes, he did mention diplomatically that the coach liked Gus more than him and that once Gus was traded DK received more ice time. IMAGINE DK HAVING TO DEFER TO ERIC GUSTAFFSON! I also heard him allude to the smallish nature of the team. Then, there was the allusion to how Norris Trophy winners will always come from a good team since the good teams won't spend much time in their own end. In order to win the Norris, you need to score. You can't score unless you're in the offensive zone more often. He still thinks of himself as being about as good defensively as he's ever been. He's also a big fan of Marian Hossa and believes the Hawks don't win any Cups without him. I didn't hear too much more. However, the story about Duncan "Keef" was interesting. He lost five on the top and six on the bottom and they were pulling out pieces in the locker room. To this day, he feels nothing in the frontal mouth area and often loses his replacement teeth. You could hear in his voice how he said many times they just weren’t a good team. You could also hear him and Colliton probably won’t mail each other an Xmas card. It wasn’t a Debbie Downer, but he did tip his hand there a bit to a few things he doesn’t care for. Also I found the team is too small comment to be interesting. I’ll post the Shaw and Bolland interviews, those are awesome too!!! |
|
|
|
Post by BigT on Aug 15, 2020 12:26:05 GMT -6
Kids are the problem, coach is the problem, GM is the problem...and the old core is also a problem. Toews gift wrapped turnover in game 1 and blowing coverage in OT is on him. Crawford's Meh. play is on him. Keith being schizo is on him. Kane being lazy is on him. As I've said for a few years...the rot is systemic. No one is absolved from blame. The 'hawks could be better with an organization-wide kick in the pants...but that won't happen until shit changes top-down. I just wanted to make it clear that I agree that "it's not on Vegas." I was looking for help regarding how they garnered success since entering the league. It does sound as though it was fair and that they did the best they could with all of it. When I said that I was now even more upset upon hearing this, I was unclear that I was more upset with my team top down after hearing about Vegas' actions. Yup. There’s a few teams that could have the same said about them. Look at the Leaves. They’ve had the top 5 picks a few times now and they keep doing the same type things the Hawks are doing. They’re not built for the playoff grind. Same for our Hawks. The Vegans did a lot of good in a short period of time. Good for them, I think it’s a lot better than how Columbus has tried to get anything done. That city is probably ready to fly the white flag on them!!! |
|
|
|
Post by LordKOTL on Aug 15, 2020 13:40:23 GMT -6
Kids are the problem, coach is the problem, GM is the problem...and the old core is also a problem. Toews gift wrapped turnover in game 1 and blowing coverage in OT is on him. Crawford's Meh. play is on him. Keith being schizo is on him. Kane being lazy is on him. As I've said for a few years...the rot is systemic. No one is absolved from blame. The 'hawks could be better with an organization-wide kick in the pants...but that won't happen until shit changes top-down. I just wanted to make it clear that I agree that "it's not on Vegas." I was looking for help regarding how they garnered success since entering the league. It does sound as though it was fair and that they did the best they could with all of it. When I said that I was now even more upset upon hearing this, I was unclear that I was more upset with my team top down after hearing about Vegas' actions. Trust me...I get it. I think the problem that a lot of people have in reconciling Vegas is that all previous expansion clubs had a deck stacked against them and they could only get bottom-tier players. From a league standpoint the league does have a vested interest in ensuring expansion clubs do well. Once the honeymoon phase is over they want to ensure that the expansion club has a nucleus of die-hard fans, and in that respect that is very hard to build if we go on the "pay your dues" mentality. See also: Atlanta--both times. You want the team to be good enough in the market that the fans have hope. On the flip-side you don't want to hand them an all-star club--which they didn't. Again, on paper after the draft Fleury was their best player and even then he was considered mid-tier. So in my opinion the expansion rules for Vegas...and Seattle which are essentially the same except Vegas can't be pilfered (that part I don't agree with), were about as balanced as could be--they effectively got/should get a middle-of-the-pack team on paper, and then rise and fall based on their team cohesiveness and buy-in to the gameplan. In that respect, I don't think Seattle will have the same success, but I expect them to be middle-third, which should be good for getting a solid core of fans...at least those willing to brave traffic to-and-from the Krak-house. because it was a nightmare when I lived up there and I can't imagine how bad now. With respect to the 'hawks, if we look at 2009, 2010, 2013, 2014, and even 2015 the 'hawks did much of the same. They had a gameplan that everyone could execute and they bought into it--plus they had team cohesiveness and a pack mentality. Since then it all started to get torn apart. As aforementioned some was Stan screwing stuff up in terms of personnel and not seeing the team for what it is. Some if it was on both Q and JC for not coming up with gameplans the team could execute, and it's also on the players for not playing like a team and playing like 19 individuals. I think that the 'hawks are better than what they give on the ice. Even though you'll see players occasionally playing how they should (like Kane/Strome/Debrincat's goal), for the most part, how Meh. have those three been this entire postseason? IMHO Vegas has positive synergy, and should be praised. the 'hawks have negative synergy, and that's the root of the 'hawks problem. I get the "jealousy" for lack of a better term, but BigT is right: You see what Vegas does and we think, "Why can't the 'hawks be better?" The way I see it is because Vegas is bought into being a blue-collar team, while the 'hawks are stuck being prima donnas. The frustrating and sad part, in my opinion, is the few times the 'hawks do buckle down, and work hard for the dirty goals and the grunt-play (like shot blocking, crashing the net, etc.), they are decent to good--at least enough to be a spoiler or a dark horse. The problem? They just don't do it with any regularity. When you see Kane floating, yeah, that's on him. But what does that say of JC not getting his head into the game and managing his ego? That's on JC. You also have to wonder if playing guys like Nylander well past his Use-by date isn't Stan meddling--not to mention how Stan has handled the roster. That's on him. I may be repeating myself here, but until that changes--until the 'hawks are seen for what they actually are and not what they were, there's likely no more forward progress--and that starts at the top. |
|
|
|
Post by gigecj on Aug 15, 2020 13:55:29 GMT -6
I just wanted to make it clear that I agree that "it's not on Vegas." I was looking for help regarding how they garnered success since entering the league. It does sound as though it was fair and that they did the best they could with all of it. When I said that I was now even more upset upon hearing this, I was unclear that I was more upset with my team top down after hearing about Vegas' actions. Trust me...I get it. I think the problem that a lot of people have in reconciling Vegas is that all previous expansion clubs had a deck stacked against them and they could only get bottom-tier players. From a league standpoint the league does have a vested interest in ensuring expansion clubs do well. Once the honeymoon phase is over they want to ensure that the expansion club has a nucleus of die-hard fans, and in that respect that is very hard to build if we go on the "pay your dues" mentality. See also: Atlanta--both times. You want the team to be good enough in the market that the fans have hope. On the flip-side you don't want to hand them an all-star club--which they didn't. Again, on paper after the draft Fleury was their best player and even then he was considered mid-tier. So in my opinion the expansion rules for Vegas...and Seattle which are essentially the same except Vegas can't be pilfered (that part I don't agree with), were about as balanced as could be--they effectively got/should get a middle-of-the-pack team on paper, and then rise and fall based on their team cohesiveness and buy-in to the gameplan. In that respect, I don't think Seattle will have the same success, but I expect them to be middle-third, which should be good for getting a solid core of fans...at least those willing to brave traffic to-and-from the Krak-house. because it was a nightmare when I lived up there and I can't imagine how bad now. With respect to the 'hawks, if we look at 2009, 2010, 2013, 2014, and even 2015 the 'hawks did much of the same. They had a gameplan that everyone could execute and they bought into it--plus they had team cohesiveness and a pack mentality. Since then it all started to get torn apart. As aforementioned some was Stan screwing stuff up in terms of personnel and not seeing the team for what it is. Some if it was on both Q and JC for not coming up with gameplans the team could execute, and it's also on the players for not playing like a team and playing like 19 individuals. I think that the 'hawks are better than what they give on the ice. Even though you'll see players occasionally playing how they should (like Kane/Strome/Debrincat's goal), for the most part, how Meh. have those three been this entire postseason? IMHO Vegas has positive synergy, and should be praised. the 'hawks have negative synergy, and that's the root of the 'hawks problem. I get the "jealousy" for lack of a better term, but BigT is right: You see what Vegas does and we think, "Why can't the 'hawks be better?" The way I see it is because Vegas is bought into being a blue-collar team, while the 'hawks are stuck being prima donnas. The frustrating and sad part, in my opinion, is the few times the 'hawks do buckle down, and work hard for the dirty goals and the grunt-play (like shot blocking, crashing the net, etc.), they are decent to good--at least enough to be a spoiler or a dark horse. The problem? They just don't do it with any regularity. When you see Kane floating, yeah, that's on him. But what does that say of JC not getting his head into the game and managing his ego? That's on JC. You also have to wonder if playing guys like Nylander well past his Use-by date isn't Stan meddling--not to mention how Stan has handled the roster. That's on him. I may be repeating myself here, but until that changes--until the 'hawks are seen for what they actually are and not what they were, there's likely no more forward progress--and that starts at the top. Great post! I have another question (somewhat related I suppose) for the peanut gallery: I don't think it's been specified as to the reason for John McDonough's firing. Does anyone have insights? Some of use thought it would be "Step 1" in a multi-step process. Instead, as far as I know, no further such moves haves been made. For instance, Stan is still there seemingly comfortable in his recliner. That would seem to me to reflect that McD was the one front office guy ready to get the heave-ho to Stanbo (kinda like he was with Coach Denis Savard), but Rocky stood in his way. I still think that a huge reason Stan is not a great GM is the fact that he never played the game at ANY level. Stuff like how "big" a team make-up should be or the overall "heart" of a team I think is difficult for a non-player like Stan to accurately measure. I believe having actually played the game gives one those inherent sensibilities. It is my humble opinion that it was far easier for a GM of Stan's makeup to be GM when the core was young, much broader (Hoss, younger Seabs, Sharpie, et al.) and just "a player away" perhaps. Now, he needs to have that OTHER SENSE that I don't think he has to construct a Stanley Cup calibre team. It's somewhat I think the difference between playing a fantasy sport as a guy who never played the sport and then trying to construct a team using a locker room mentality. In the latter, there's bound to be "misses" along the way (Nylander for example?). |
|
|
|
Post by gigecj on Aug 15, 2020 14:00:23 GMT -6
Trust me...I get it. I think the problem that a lot of people have in reconciling Vegas is that all previous expansion clubs had a deck stacked against them and they could only get bottom-tier players. From a league standpoint the league does have a vested interest in ensuring expansion clubs do well. Once the honeymoon phase is over they want to ensure that the expansion club has a nucleus of die-hard fans, and in that respect that is very hard to build if we go on the "pay your dues" mentality. See also: Atlanta--both times. You want the team to be good enough in the market that the fans have hope. On the flip-side you don't want to hand them an all-star club--which they didn't. Again, on paper after the draft Fleury was their best player and even then he was considered mid-tier. So in my opinion the expansion rules for Vegas...and Seattle which are essentially the same except Vegas can't be pilfered (that part I don't agree with), were about as balanced as could be--they effectively got/should get a middle-of-the-pack team on paper, and then rise and fall based on their team cohesiveness and buy-in to the gameplan. In that respect, I don't think Seattle will have the same success, but I expect them to be middle-third, which should be good for getting a solid core of fans...at least those willing to brave traffic to-and-from the Krak-house. because it was a nightmare when I lived up there and I can't imagine how bad now. With respect to the 'hawks, if we look at 2009, 2010, 2013, 2014, and even 2015 the 'hawks did much of the same. They had a gameplan that everyone could execute and they bought into it--plus they had team cohesiveness and a pack mentality. Since then it all started to get torn apart. As aforementioned some was Stan screwing stuff up in terms of personnel and not seeing the team for what it is. Some if it was on both Q and JC for not coming up with gameplans the team could execute, and it's also on the players for not playing like a team and playing like 19 individuals. I think that the 'hawks are better than what they give on the ice. Even though you'll see players occasionally playing how they should (like Kane/Strome/Debrincat's goal), for the most part, how Meh. have those three been this entire postseason? IMHO Vegas has positive synergy, and should be praised. the 'hawks have negative synergy, and that's the root of the 'hawks problem. I get the "jealousy" for lack of a better term, but BigT is right: You see what Vegas does and we think, "Why can't the 'hawks be better?" The way I see it is because Vegas is bought into being a blue-collar team, while the 'hawks are stuck being prima donnas. The frustrating and sad part, in my opinion, is the few times the 'hawks do buckle down, and work hard for the dirty goals and the grunt-play (like shot blocking, crashing the net, etc.), they are decent to good--at least enough to be a spoiler or a dark horse. The problem? They just don't do it with any regularity. When you see Kane floating, yeah, that's on him. But what does that say of JC not getting his head into the game and managing his ego? That's on JC. You also have to wonder if playing guys like Nylander well past his Use-by date isn't Stan meddling--not to mention how Stan has handled the roster. That's on him. I may be repeating myself here, but until that changes--until the 'hawks are seen for what they actually are and not what they were, there's likely no more forward progress--and that starts at the top. |
|
|
|
Post by LordKOTL on Aug 15, 2020 16:05:21 GMT -6
Trust me...I get it. I think the problem that a lot of people have in reconciling Vegas is that all previous expansion clubs had a deck stacked against them and they could only get bottom-tier players. From a league standpoint the league does have a vested interest in ensuring expansion clubs do well. Once the honeymoon phase is over they want to ensure that the expansion club has a nucleus of die-hard fans, and in that respect that is very hard to build if we go on the "pay your dues" mentality. See also: Atlanta--both times. You want the team to be good enough in the market that the fans have hope. On the flip-side you don't want to hand them an all-star club--which they didn't. Again, on paper after the draft Fleury was their best player and even then he was considered mid-tier. So in my opinion the expansion rules for Vegas...and Seattle which are essentially the same except Vegas can't be pilfered (that part I don't agree with), were about as balanced as could be--they effectively got/should get a middle-of-the-pack team on paper, and then rise and fall based on their team cohesiveness and buy-in to the gameplan. In that respect, I don't think Seattle will have the same success, but I expect them to be middle-third, which should be good for getting a solid core of fans...at least those willing to brave traffic to-and-from the Krak-house. because it was a nightmare when I lived up there and I can't imagine how bad now. With respect to the 'hawks, if we look at 2009, 2010, 2013, 2014, and even 2015 the 'hawks did much of the same. They had a gameplan that everyone could execute and they bought into it--plus they had team cohesiveness and a pack mentality. Since then it all started to get torn apart. As aforementioned some was Stan screwing stuff up in terms of personnel and not seeing the team for what it is. Some if it was on both Q and JC for not coming up with gameplans the team could execute, and it's also on the players for not playing like a team and playing like 19 individuals. I think that the 'hawks are better than what they give on the ice. Even though you'll see players occasionally playing how they should (like Kane/Strome/Debrincat's goal), for the most part, how Meh. have those three been this entire postseason? IMHO Vegas has positive synergy, and should be praised. the 'hawks have negative synergy, and that's the root of the 'hawks problem. I get the "jealousy" for lack of a better term, but BigT is right: You see what Vegas does and we think, "Why can't the 'hawks be better?" The way I see it is because Vegas is bought into being a blue-collar team, while the 'hawks are stuck being prima donnas. The frustrating and sad part, in my opinion, is the few times the 'hawks do buckle down, and work hard for the dirty goals and the grunt-play (like shot blocking, crashing the net, etc.), they are decent to good--at least enough to be a spoiler or a dark horse. The problem? They just don't do it with any regularity. When you see Kane floating, yeah, that's on him. But what does that say of JC not getting his head into the game and managing his ego? That's on JC. You also have to wonder if playing guys like Nylander well past his Use-by date isn't Stan meddling--not to mention how Stan has handled the roster. That's on him. I may be repeating myself here, but until that changes--until the 'hawks are seen for what they actually are and not what they were, there's likely no more forward progress--and that starts at the top. Great post! I have another question (somewhat related I suppose) for the peanut gallery: I don't think it's been specified as to the reason for John McDonough's firing. Does anyone have insights? Some of use thought it would be "Step 1" in a multi-step process. Instead, as far as I know, no further such moves haves been made. For instance, Stan is still there seemingly comfortable in his recliner. That would seem to me to reflect that McD was the one front office guy ready to get the heave-ho to Stanbo (kinda like he was with Coach Denis Savard), but Rocky stood in his way. I still think that a huge reason Stan is not a great GM is the fact that he never played the game at ANY level. Stuff like how "big" a team make-up should be or the overall "heart" of a team I think is difficult for a non-player like Stan to accurately measure. I believe having actually played the game gives one those inherent sensibilities. It is my humble opinion that it was far easier for a GM of Stan's makeup to be GM when the core was young, much broader (Hoss, younger Seabs, Sharpie, et al.) and just "a player away" perhaps. Now, he needs to have that OTHER SENSE that I don't think he has to construct a Stanley Cup calibre team. It's somewhat I think the difference between playing a fantasy sport as a guy who never played the sport and then trying to construct a team using a locker room mentality. In the latter, there's bound to be "misses" along the way (Nylander for example?). I have less of an issue with Stan not playing the game and more that he think he's the smartest guy in the room. If Stan would stick to finance, he'd be fine. Instead he thinks he's a hockey mind...when he's not. It's not hard for a boss who is just a manager to take a step back and let the experts do their job without meddling in the technical details. Instead it's like he wants "yes men". If Stan would have deferred to a good coach like Q (even though Q did lose the room), or post Q got a seasoned coach, and had expert scouts and listened to them, I could deal with his lack of HockeyIQ. |
|
|
|
Post by gigecj on Aug 15, 2020 16:32:16 GMT -6
Lord,
To me, trying the be the "smartest guy in the room" when you shouldn't is akin to trying to overcome his lack of in-the-room hockey acumen.
I can't wait until he's gone.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2020 17:22:47 GMT -6
Lord, To me, trying the be the "smartest guy in the room" when you shouldn't is akin to trying to overcome his lack of in-the-room hockey acumen. I can't wait until he's gone. Amen Fixed it for you Gig |
|
|
|
Post by HawkeyLife07 on Aug 15, 2020 21:52:48 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by gigecj on Aug 15, 2020 23:00:16 GMT -6
Lord, To me, trying the be the "smartest guy in the room" when you shouldn't is akin to trying to overcome his lack of in-the-room hockey acumen. I can't wait until he's gone. Amen Fixed it for you Gig That's right. It should be part of my bedtime prayers. |
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Aug 16, 2020 8:39:44 GMT -6
Trust me...I get it. I think the problem that a lot of people have in reconciling Vegas is that all previous expansion clubs had a deck stacked against them and they could only get bottom-tier players. From a league standpoint the league does have a vested interest in ensuring expansion clubs do well. Once the honeymoon phase is over they want to ensure that the expansion club has a nucleus of die-hard fans, and in that respect that is very hard to build if we go on the "pay your dues" mentality. See also: Atlanta--both times. You want the team to be good enough in the market that the fans have hope. On the flip-side you don't want to hand them an all-star club--which they didn't. Again, on paper after the draft Fleury was their best player and even then he was considered mid-tier. So in my opinion the expansion rules for Vegas...and Seattle which are essentially the same except Vegas can't be pilfered (that part I don't agree with), were about as balanced as could be--they effectively got/should get a middle-of-the-pack team on paper, and then rise and fall based on their team cohesiveness and buy-in to the gameplan. In that respect, I don't think Seattle will have the same success, but I expect them to be middle-third, which should be good for getting a solid core of fans...at least those willing to brave traffic to-and-from the Krak-house. because it was a nightmare when I lived up there and I can't imagine how bad now. With respect to the 'hawks, if we look at 2009, 2010, 2013, 2014, and even 2015 the 'hawks did much of the same. They had a gameplan that everyone could execute and they bought into it--plus they had team cohesiveness and a pack mentality. Since then it all started to get torn apart. As aforementioned some was Stan screwing stuff up in terms of personnel and not seeing the team for what it is. Some if it was on both Q and JC for not coming up with gameplans the team could execute, and it's also on the players for not playing like a team and playing like 19 individuals. I think that the 'hawks are better than what they give on the ice. Even though you'll see players occasionally playing how they should (like Kane/Strome/Debrincat's goal), for the most part, how Meh. have those three been this entire postseason? IMHO Vegas has positive synergy, and should be praised. the 'hawks have negative synergy, and that's the root of the 'hawks problem. I get the "jealousy" for lack of a better term, but BigT is right: You see what Vegas does and we think, "Why can't the 'hawks be better?" The way I see it is because Vegas is bought into being a blue-collar team, while the 'hawks are stuck being prima donnas. The frustrating and sad part, in my opinion, is the few times the 'hawks do buckle down, and work hard for the dirty goals and the grunt-play (like shot blocking, crashing the net, etc.), they are decent to good--at least enough to be a spoiler or a dark horse. The problem? They just don't do it with any regularity. When you see Kane floating, yeah, that's on him. But what does that say of JC not getting his head into the game and managing his ego? That's on JC. You also have to wonder if playing guys like Nylander well past his Use-by date isn't Stan meddling--not to mention how Stan has handled the roster. That's on him. I may be repeating myself here, but until that changes--until the 'hawks are seen for what they actually are and not what they were, there's likely no more forward progress--and that starts at the top. Great post! I have another question (somewhat related I suppose) for the peanut gallery: I don't think it's been specified as to the reason for John McDonough's firing. Does anyone have insights? Some of use thought it would be "Step 1" in a multi-step process. Instead, as far as I know, no further such moves haves been made. For instance, Stan is still there seemingly comfortable in his recliner. That would seem to me to reflect that McD was the one front office guy ready to get the heave-ho to Stanbo (kinda like he was with Coach Denis Savard), but Rocky stood in his way. I still think that a huge reason Stan is not a great GM is the fact that he never played the game at ANY level. Stuff like how "big" a team make-up should be or the overall "heart" of a team I think is difficult for a non-player like Stan to accurately measure. I believe having actually played the game gives one those inherent sensibilities. It is my humble opinion that it was far easier for a GM of Stan's makeup to be GM when the core was young, much broader (Hoss, younger Seabs, Sharpie, et al.) and just "a player away" perhaps. Now, he needs to have that OTHER SENSE that I don't think he has to construct a Stanley Cup calibre team. It's somewhat I think the difference between playing a fantasy sport as a guy who never played the sport and then trying to construct a team using a locker room mentality. In the latter, there's bound to be "misses" along the way (Nylander for example?). Well put! I've been more gallery than peanut for a few weeks due to a fishing trip among other things but I believe McD's keeping a last placed team's barn full was doing his job........this hasn't been the case when the team was a cellar dweller in the past! I'm sure things went into the decision we're unaware of but it's Danny and Stanbo's team now. When it comes to team size,I'll post this as exhibit 'A'....... blackhawks.ice.nhl.com/club/roster.htm?type=prospect&location=/prospectsDoc mentioned the average size league-wide is now 6'2" and 200lbs. One forward over 6'0" OR 200lbs and he's back in Europe for good,Gilbert's the only D prospect over and we've seen what the HC thinks of him. Vlasic and Regula have some size but it's mostly beanpole-like. Nolander's the very same player who was demoted back to the A by two different coaches and I doubt the defensive-minded,no nonsense Ralph Krueger woulda had any more use for his sorry ass than his predecessors did. Krueger did indeed find a big use for the 20yro Henri Jokiharu though,his minutes increased as the year went on and Buffalo was able to unload Scandella and Bogosian's salaries because of it. |
|
|
|
Post by BigT on Aug 16, 2020 10:43:08 GMT -6
Great post! I have another question (somewhat related I suppose) for the peanut gallery: I don't think it's been specified as to the reason for John McDonough's firing. Does anyone have insights? Some of use thought it would be "Step 1" in a multi-step process. Instead, as far as I know, no further such moves haves been made. For instance, Stan is still there seemingly comfortable in his recliner. That would seem to me to reflect that McD was the one front office guy ready to get the heave-ho to Stanbo (kinda like he was with Coach Denis Savard), but Rocky stood in his way. I still think that a huge reason Stan is not a great GM is the fact that he never played the game at ANY level. Stuff like how "big" a team make-up should be or the overall "heart" of a team I think is difficult for a non-player like Stan to accurately measure. I believe having actually played the game gives one those inherent sensibilities. It is my humble opinion that it was far easier for a GM of Stan's makeup to be GM when the core was young, much broader (Hoss, younger Seabs, Sharpie, et al.) and just "a player away" perhaps. Now, he needs to have that OTHER SENSE that I don't think he has to construct a Stanley Cup calibre team. It's somewhat I think the difference between playing a fantasy sport as a guy who never played the sport and then trying to construct a team using a locker room mentality. In the latter, there's bound to be "misses" along the way (Nylander for example?). Well put! I've been more gallery than peanut for a few weeks due to a fishing trip among other things but I believe McD's keeping a last placed team's barn full was doing his job........this hasn't been the case when the team was a cellar dweller in the past! I'm sure things went into the decision we're unaware of but it's Danny and Stanbo's team now. When it comes to team size,I'll post this as exhibit 'A'....... blackhawks.ice.nhl.com/club/roster.htm?type=prospect&location=/prospectsDoc mentioned the average size league-wide is now 6'2" and 200lbs. One forward over 6'0" OR 200lbs and he's back in Europe for good,Gilbert's the only D prospect over and we've seen what the HC thinks of him. Vlasic and Regula have some size but it's mostly beanpole-like. Nolander's the very same player who was demoted back to the A by two different coaches and I doubt the defensive-minded,no nonsense Ralph Krueger woulda had any more use for his sorry ass than his predecessors did. Krueger did indeed find a big use for the 20yro Henri Jokiharu though,his minutes increased as the year went on and Buffalo was able to unload Scandella and Bogosian's salaries because of it. Good to see ya back Bob. How was the fishing? Where did you go to? I know you probably said it but forget. What’s your thoughts on the series. I would love to hear about the size mismatch from you! Also, I posted a link to Spittin Chickletts, Keith was on and he talked about the Hawks size issues amongst other things. You should give it a listen, really cool interview!!! |
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Aug 16, 2020 16:08:29 GMT -6
Well put! I've been more gallery than peanut for a few weeks due to a fishing trip among other things but I believe McD's keeping a last placed team's barn full was doing his job........this hasn't been the case when the team was a cellar dweller in the past! I'm sure things went into the decision we're unaware of but it's Danny and Stanbo's team now. When it comes to team size,I'll post this as exhibit 'A'....... blackhawks.ice.nhl.com/club/roster.htm?type=prospect&location=/prospectsDoc mentioned the average size league-wide is now 6'2" and 200lbs. One forward over 6'0" OR 200lbs and he's back in Europe for good,Gilbert's the only D prospect over and we've seen what the HC thinks of him. Vlasic and Regula have some size but it's mostly beanpole-like. Nolander's the very same player who was demoted back to the A by two different coaches and I doubt the defensive-minded,no nonsense Ralph Krueger woulda had any more use for his sorry ass than his predecessors did. Krueger did indeed find a big use for the 20yro Henri Jokiharu though,his minutes increased as the year went on and Buffalo was able to unload Scandella and Bogosian's salaries because of it. Good to see ya back Bob. How was the fishing? Where did you go to? I know you probably said it but forget. What’s your thoughts on the series. I would love to hear about the size mismatch from you! Also, I posted a link to Spittin Chickletts, Keith was on and he talked about the Hawks size issues amongst other things. You should give it a listen, really cool interview!!! Hey T,not sure many share your sentiment. Fishin' was good up in northern MN,our group of 18 ten years go has shrunk to 7 but shit happens. Pulled the trigger on a new trailer to put on a spot I finally got at a great resort so I'll spend more time up there in summers to come......I'm officially trailer trash now!LOL! I thought the Oil series showed us some hope but I'm not sure how much after the LV series. I've been told I dwell too much on the size issue so I'll let others watch the outcome and figure out why it was. I'll give er a listen. |
|
|
|
Post by vadarx on Aug 16, 2020 21:51:10 GMT -6
Good to see ya back Bob. How was the fishing? Where did you go to? I know you probably said it but forget. What’s your thoughts on the series. I would love to hear about the size mismatch from you! Also, I posted a link to Spittin Chickletts, Keith was on and he talked about the Hawks size issues amongst other things. You should give it a listen, really cool interview!!! Hey T,not sure many share your sentiment. Fishin' was good up in northern MN,our group of 18 ten years go has shrunk to 7 but shit happens. Pulled the trigger on a new trailer to put on a spot I finally got at a great resort so I'll spend more time up there in summers to come......I'm officially trailer trash now!LOL! I thought the Oil series showed us some hope but I'm not sure how much after the LV series. I've been told I dwell too much on the size issue so I'll let others watch the outcome and figure out why it was. I'll give er a listen. are there any lunker pics in our future here or was it too warm to catch anything of size up there? I'm heading up next Saturday and hoping it start to cool off a bit so maybe they toothy critters will get a little mkre active. I could go out on the Big Lake and catch some kings, but I'd rather cast.... |
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Aug 17, 2020 6:14:46 GMT -6
Hey T,not sure many share your sentiment. Fishin' was good up in northern MN,our group of 18 ten years go has shrunk to 7 but shit happens. Pulled the trigger on a new trailer to put on a spot I finally got at a great resort so I'll spend more time up there in summers to come......I'm officially trailer trash now!LOL! I thought the Oil series showed us some hope but I'm not sure how much after the LV series. I've been told I dwell too much on the size issue so I'll let others watch the outcome and figure out why it was. I'll give er a listen. are there any lunker pics in our future here or was it too warm to catch anything of size up there? I'm heading up next Saturday and hoping it start to cool off a bit so maybe they toothy critters will get a little mkre active. I could go out on the Big Lake and catch some kings, but I'd rather cast.... Cast and trolled one day,no ski's but some nice pike. No lunkers but we went home with a walleye limit,a lotta pike and good perch for the first time in years but no crappies like the last few years......zebra muscles change the lake's clarity and the fishing evolves. Where exactly are ya up there v? I fished Big Winnie mostly with a trip to Ball Club and one day 'huntin' on Little Winnie(where I put my new trailer). |
|
|
|
Post by creature on Aug 17, 2020 7:22:55 GMT -6
Must be nice having a good GM... I hear it is. Let’s hope we have that luxury one fine fine day!!! I have one small thought about all of this. The Vegas GM held the best hand of all and now so the Seattle GM. Why? They have nothing to lose. Every other GM had to protect players to keep and of course they keep the top players. Having said that how many players on those other teams had players ready to move up from the 3rd line or 2nd D pairing but couldn't because of having those top players? Something to think about. Also how many players did the GM's have to keep in the AHL or other leagues because if they played x amount of games they would be exposed to the draft? That hurts a lot of the development for the youth. And here we are again with another draft in 3 years and further hindering the youth to protect them from the draft. Not gonna get into the money or cap but the GM in Vegas didn't have to protect anything. He got into a high stakes poker game without having to ante. He had nothing to lose and everything to gain thus holding all the best cards. Let's see how he does with this upcoming expansion draft when he has to ante up. |
|
|
|
Post by galaxytrash on Aug 17, 2020 7:25:58 GMT -6
I hear it is. Let’s hope we have that luxury one fine fine day!!! I have one small thought about all of this. The Vegas GM held the best hand of all and now so the Seattle GM. Why? They have nothing to lose. Every other GM had to protect players to keep and of course they keep the top players. Having said that how many players on those other teams had players ready to move up from the 3rd line or 2nd D pairing but couldn't because of having those top players? Something to think about. Also how many players did the GM's have to keep in the AHL or other leagues because if they played x amount of games they would be exposed to the draft? That hurts a lot of the development for the youth. And here we are again with another draft in 3 years and further hindering the youth to protect them from the draft. Not gonna get into the money or cap but the GM in Vegas didn't have to protect anything. He got into a high stakes poker game without having to ante. He had nothing to lose and everything to gain thus holding all the best cards. Let's see how he does with this upcoming expansion draft when he has to ante up. vegas is exempt from the seattle expansion draft. |
|
|
|
Post by creature on Aug 17, 2020 7:42:16 GMT -6
are there any lunker pics in our future here or was it too warm to catch anything of size up there? I'm heading up next Saturday and hoping it start to cool off a bit so maybe they toothy critters will get a little mkre active. I could go out on the Big Lake and catch some kings, but I'd rather cast.... Cast and trolled one day,no ski's but some nice pike. No lunkers but we went home with a walleye limit,a lotta pike and good perch for the first time in years but no crappies like the last few years......zebra muscles change the lake's clarity and the fishing evolves. Where exactly are ya up there v? I fished Big Winnie mostly with a trip to Ball Club and one day 'huntin' on Little Winnie(where I put my new trailer). My brother lives up there in Effie MN just a stone's throw away from there. |
|
|
|
Post by LordKOTL on Aug 17, 2020 11:00:38 GMT -6
Lord, To me, trying the be the "smartest guy in the room" when you shouldn't is akin to trying to overcome his lack of in-the-room hockey acumen. I can't wait until he's gone. Yeah, he's definitely compensating  . Honestly, I can't either and as I said before, Both he and Q should have gotten the heave-ho after 2018. I think part of the reason is that he's getting along on name recognition alone, but he can't see his own incompetence. |
|
|
|
Post by BigT on Aug 17, 2020 12:41:21 GMT -6
Lord, To me, trying the be the "smartest guy in the room" when you shouldn't is akin to trying to overcome his lack of in-the-room hockey acumen. I can't wait until he's gone. Yeah, he's definitely compensating . Honestly, I can't either and as I said before, Both he and Q should have gotten the heave-ho after 2018. I think part of the reason is that he's getting along on name recognition alone, but he can't see his own incompetence. I agree with this. Doesn’t matter who the GM is, they can’t see their failures and they think their plan is working out fine. I’m not a fan of keeping a guy around based on past accomplishments. Especially when those accomplishments weren’t really his doing. And before anyone comes down on that, Uncle Dale is a free agent now. I wouldn’t want him back either. We literally need a fresh set of eyes on this org, and head into a new direction, this direction will go on for decades, and it’s not worth it!!! |
|
|
|
Post by vadarx on Aug 17, 2020 20:14:48 GMT -6
are there any lunker pics in our future here or was it too warm to catch anything of size up there? I'm heading up next Saturday and hoping it start to cool off a bit so maybe they toothy critters will get a little mkre active. I could go out on the Big Lake and catch some kings, but I'd rather cast.... Cast and trolled one day,no ski's but some nice pike. No lunkers but we went home with a walleye limit,a lotta pike and good perch for the first time in years but no crappies like the last few years......zebra muscles change the lake's clarity and the fishing evolves. Where exactly are ya up there v? I fished Big Winnie mostly with a trip to Ball Club and one day 'huntin' on Little Winnie(where I put my new trailer). sounds like a good time to me! we will be up by Tahquamenon Falls, right on the shore of the Big Lake. |
|
|
|
Post by doogiew on Aug 18, 2020 6:06:22 GMT -6
Hey all really leading a busy life right now but check in lots to see what's new. Unfortunately not a lot. When your best player is a 24 year old rookie winger offensively then your club has issues. Either Kane isn't being used properly or he's starting to show some wear. I like the way Dach has stepped up and played for a kid in his first season I don't think you can ask for much more.
As for the size issue we have all been complaining about this for a while. The team has some size but it isn't utilized and the other teams that use their size simply wear the little Hawks down. Edmonton's D was porous to say the least and were taken advantage of to say the least. Now playing Vegas the Hawks are faced with actually having to out work the other team. There are no easy answer against a team without a glaring weakness. This is where it comes down to coaching and lack of size which we are aware the Hawks lack in spades.
I have like the Hawks D they have played well and been responsible with the exception of the first win the Kubalik show for pretty much every win since. They could use a few more Highmore's. I like the way the kid has elevated his game. Maybe he should be sharing his secret of hard work with his teammates.
Right now we can take away some positives but the glaring weakness is size and physical play. In order to win even another game It's a sad fact that the team will have to rely on a scoring defense and the likes of Kubalik, Dach, and Hihmore. Toews has been solid but in my opinion Kane has been almost invisible in many games. Maybe that Eichel trade scenario is starting to look better still love Kane but at some point you need to get something back from an old horse you stud him or ship him off to the glue factory.
Hope everyone stays well and the Hawks show some character and fight back like their lives depend on it. In my opinion the only way out of this now is on Crows back and I'm not certain he can still do that but he has three more games to show that he can. After all he's playing for a contract and that too should inspire him.
|
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Aug 18, 2020 9:48:13 GMT -6
Cast and trolled one day,no ski's but some nice pike. No lunkers but we went home with a walleye limit,a lotta pike and good perch for the first time in years but no crappies like the last few years......zebra muscles change the lake's clarity and the fishing evolves. Where exactly are ya up there v? I fished Big Winnie mostly with a trip to Ball Club and one day 'huntin' on Little Winnie(where I put my new trailer). My brother lives up there in Effie MN just a stone's throw away from there. Thirty miles would be a hell of a toss but yeah,a hop,skip and a jump up there. |
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Aug 18, 2020 10:02:45 GMT -6
Cast and trolled one day,no ski's but some nice pike. No lunkers but we went home with a walleye limit,a lotta pike and good perch for the first time in years but no crappies like the last few years......zebra muscles change the lake's clarity and the fishing evolves. Where exactly are ya up there v? I fished Big Winnie mostly with a trip to Ball Club and one day 'huntin' on Little Winnie(where I put my new trailer). sounds like a good time to me! we will be up by Tahquamenon Falls, right on the shore of the Big Lake. Good luck on 'Gichigami',it can get pretty angry so I assume you'd stay in Whitefish bay. |
|
|
|
Post by vadarx on Aug 18, 2020 11:26:36 GMT -6
sounds like a good time to me! we will be up by Tahquamenon Falls, right on the shore of the Big Lake. Good luck on 'Gichigami',it can get pretty angry so I assume you'd stay in Whitefish bay. ha! that she can! we stay a little ways west of whitefish point (in da UP) depending on the weather in the morning, sometimes we head out and catch a laker or 3 if it is calm. otherwise I stick to the little lake that we are on on the other side of the place. cabin sits in between Superior and the little lake (which is a safe harbor for smaller craft). lotta perch on each end of the channel out to the big lake. lately the walleye fishing has been real good on the little lake, which keeps me from having to go to one of 2 others about 5 minutes away. lots of northerns (some small, some eating size, some picture/wall worthy) in the little lake and also around both the channel and the river mouth (two-hearted) just a mile or two down the shoreline. mayyybbeeee if my buddy comes up with his boat we will hit the Taq river and see if we can get any big girls to chase a lure or two around..... weather has been warm and finally started to cool off the last day or two. hopefully the action will pick up some when I get there, or at least at some point during the 3 weeks we will be there. |
|
|
|
Post by creature on Aug 18, 2020 19:48:25 GMT -6
I have one small thought about all of this. The Vegas GM held the best hand of all and now so the Seattle GM. Why? They have nothing to lose. Every other GM had to protect players to keep and of course they keep the top players. Having said that how many players on those other teams had players ready to move up from the 3rd line or 2nd D pairing but couldn't because of having those top players? Something to think about. Also how many players did the GM's have to keep in the AHL or other leagues because if they played x amount of games they would be exposed to the draft? That hurts a lot of the development for the youth. And here we are again with another draft in 3 years and further hindering the youth to protect them from the draft. Not gonna get into the money or cap but the GM in Vegas didn't have to protect anything. He got into a high stakes poker game without having to ante. He had nothing to lose and everything to gain thus holding all the best cards. Let's see how he does with this upcoming expansion draft when he has to ante up. vegas is exempt from the seattle expansion draft. Well of course they would be exempt. I'm looking at the expansion teams as the NHL children born with silver spoons. |
|
|
|
Post by BigT on Aug 18, 2020 20:46:47 GMT -6
vegas is exempt from the seattle expansion draft. Well of course they would be exempt. I'm looking at the expansion teams as the NHL children born with silver spoons. Hahahahaha, I could just see the look on your face while saying that!!! |
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Aug 19, 2020 9:14:57 GMT -6
Well since we see fingers pointed at Kane and Toews who LED this team in regular AND postseason scoring and leadership as their often maligned salaries suggest they should and a 37yro Keith who's still required to cover the opponent's best for 25+ minutes a night because we have no one else remotely capable,let's take a look at the 'heirs apparent'.......I got fingers too.
Kubalik had one good game and WTF is a career AHL'er doin' skatin' on that line while Kane skated on every line but that one with the exception of a desperation shift or two late?
Dach did look a bit quicker and stronger and I expect improvement from him but we also need improvement from him. One tally despite dozens of glorious chances and less than a 1/3 of FO's won is problematic.....no? Not sure why he skated right into MAF Sunday night and Lehner again last night when he had a chance to shoot from in close,let's hope his development goes better than the rest of the kids like D-Cat and Strome who regressed under the supervision of the current staff.
Strome and D-Cat exhibited the chemistry they had last year on the 2nd goal and could have done so during the year also if they were allowed to.
I know Boqvist just turned 20 but he looked more lost than ever,Joker's a bigger,better D-man @20 and should NEVER have been moved. The fact that he was and for a useless,unreliable castoff should be the final nail in somebody's career here!
Carlsson saw one game so it's hard to say but it wasn't a good one.
Maybe the 173lb Mitchell and the 168lb Beaudin are the team's saving grace but how do either get a chance to prove it with this logjam at D? How would either fare against a big team like LV if we do see more PO action?
|
|
.
