30
|
|
Post by ebonyraptor on Oct 25, 2020 13:33:20 GMT -6
The core-4 players were doing their jobs when they led the Hawks into the playoffs. Management has officially publicized a change in direction from "win now" to "build for the future with a youth movement". That change in direction is within the purview of management and incumbent upon the players to accept the redefinition of their job responsibilities from one of playing to win now to one of playing to lead young players in learning how to succeed in the NHL. The players don't have to like it, but they should accept it and do their best to meet their new job responsibilities or be honest with management that they can't buy into the new direction and would prefer to be traded. I'll acknowledge that I'm an old school believer in the critical need for hierarchical structure in achieving a missions objective - and as such maybe I'm out of step with the modern day way of doing things. If that's the case, then so be it because I'm in no position to do anything about it. But, I believe what I believe to be time honored truth and I'll not back down because it's unpopular. again, fair points, ER. I think the issue here is less some major disagreement between us and more of of a minor one, tbh. it is likely that I have yet to fully capture my main issue with this. that is: I don't agree with the way the people in charge are doing business. a hierarchy is needed for success. on that we absolutely agree. a hierarchy that doesn't take into account everyone's thoughts, feelings, concerns, etc is not a good way to maintain it, though, in my opinion. going out and saying: this is the way it is, like it or leave, is not the way I would handle things. of course, as you said, I have no say in so..... what can I do? rage about it here, I suppose. this isn't just a core 4 issue to me. this is a long term issue. how will this affect free agency? who will want to come here if it appears the players weren't treated with the respect (especially those that have surely earned it)? how will this affect working with other organizations? Bowman already seems to have a hard enough time trading as it is, he doesn't need the old school club that is the NHL front office looking down on him any more than they already do. mostly, however, it just seems like a shit way to try and fix this thing. outing things in the media, making hires that clearly go against the team's current situation, and then saying do it or piss off (essentially) is not how you get everyone pulling in the same direction without dooming it to failure down the road. pushing out those who have relevant complaints because they won't just go along with something they disagree with is not the way to sow trust amongst those who remain. it may work for a while, to varying degrees, but it isn't likely to lead to long term success. given that this is what they are purportedly aspiring to, long term and extended success, it is infuriating to me. they are saying they want one thing but are going about it in a way that seems shortsighted instead. I feel like a more collaborative approach to this would've been a better way of doing this. that doesn't mean the veteran players have some huge say in it, it just means they more say than do "do what we want or get out". The space between our positions seems to me to be the handling of communication by management to players - your position seems to be that it was handled poorly (at best), with one of the reasons being it was done publicly and caught the players by surprise. I'll assume I've more or less stated your position correctly and pursue this debate from that assumption - if that's incorrect please restate so I can better understand your position. If in fact the communication was mishandled, my position wouldn't significantly change because ultimately the management/player dynamic hasn't changed and I've already belabored that topic enough. The only concession I would make is that it's preferable that management seeks harmony rather than discord with these types of communications for a smoother mindset transition. That's not to say it's required - just that it's preferred when possible. However, I don't buy in to the notion that the players were totally blindsided with this youth movement new direction. Nor do I know with any certainty if, when and how much communication there was. The notion that not only did the players have no idea what was going on but also that management guarded their position like a state secret is preposterous to me. It seems much more plausible that it was communicated they were getting another shot to take a run at the Cup when Stan acquired Lehner but by the trade deadline it was apparent the team wasn't good enough so the trade of Lehner and Gustafsson was in and of itself communication that the "win now" direction was changing. There are assumptions being made by us fans as to how this all played out behind the scenes - but that's all they are - assumptions. My assumption is that management isn't the bogey man they are being portrayed to be and the players were well aware of what management was planning, at least at the macro level and the notion they were shocked and mistreated is BS. |
|
|
|
Post by vadarx on Oct 25, 2020 16:26:01 GMT -6
again, fair points, ER. I think the issue here is less some major disagreement between us and more of of a minor one, tbh. it is likely that I have yet to fully capture my main issue with this. that is: I don't agree with the way the people in charge are doing business. a hierarchy is needed for success. on that we absolutely agree. a hierarchy that doesn't take into account everyone's thoughts, feelings, concerns, etc is not a good way to maintain it, though, in my opinion. going out and saying: this is the way it is, like it or leave, is not the way I would handle things. of course, as you said, I have no say in so..... what can I do? rage about it here, I suppose. this isn't just a core 4 issue to me. this is a long term issue. how will this affect free agency? who will want to come here if it appears the players weren't treated with the respect (especially those that have surely earned it)? how will this affect working with other organizations? Bowman already seems to have a hard enough time trading as it is, he doesn't need the old school club that is the NHL front office looking down on him any more than they already do. mostly, however, it just seems like a shit way to try and fix this thing. outing things in the media, making hires that clearly go against the team's current situation, and then saying do it or piss off (essentially) is not how you get everyone pulling in the same direction without dooming it to failure down the road. pushing out those who have relevant complaints because they won't just go along with something they disagree with is not the way to sow trust amongst those who remain. it may work for a while, to varying degrees, but it isn't likely to lead to long term success. given that this is what they are purportedly aspiring to, long term and extended success, it is infuriating to me. they are saying they want one thing but are going about it in a way that seems shortsighted instead. I feel like a more collaborative approach to this would've been a better way of doing this. that doesn't mean the veteran players have some huge say in it, it just means they more say than do "do what we want or get out". The space between our positions seems to me to be the handling of communication by management to players - your position seems to be that it was handled poorly (at best), with one of the reasons being it was done publicly and caught the players by surprise. I'll assume I've more or less stated your position correctly and pursue this debate from that assumption - if that's incorrect please restate so I can better understand your position. If in fact the communication was mishandled, my position wouldn't significantly change because ultimately the management/player dynamic hasn't changed and I've already belabored that topic enough. The only concession I would make is that it's preferable that management seeks harmony rather than discord with these types of communications for a smoother mindset transition. That's not to say it's required - just that it's preferred when possible. However, I don't buy in to the notion that the players were totally blindsided with this youth movement new direction. Nor do I know with any certainty if, when and how much communication there was. The notion that not only did the players have no idea what was going on but also that management guarded their position like a state secret is preposterous to me. It seems much more plausible that it was communicated they were getting another shot to take a run at the Cup when Stan acquired Lehner but by the trade deadline it was apparent the team wasn't good enough so the trade of Lehner and Gustafsson was in and of itself communication that the "win now" direction was changing. There are assumptions being made by us fans as to how this all played out behind the scenes - but that's all they are - assumptions. My assumption is that management isn't the bogey man they are being portrayed to be and the players were well aware of what management was planning, at least at the macro level and the notion they were shocked and mistreated is BS. well.... yeah, we are just to have to agree to disagree. I don't see any point in typing out any more novels here when I know it wouldn't change your mind anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by ebonyraptor on Oct 25, 2020 17:13:45 GMT -6
The space between our positions seems to me to be the handling of communication by management to players - your position seems to be that it was handled poorly (at best), with one of the reasons being it was done publicly and caught the players by surprise. I'll assume I've more or less stated your position correctly and pursue this debate from that assumption - if that's incorrect please restate so I can better understand your position. If in fact the communication was mishandled, my position wouldn't significantly change because ultimately the management/player dynamic hasn't changed and I've already belabored that topic enough. The only concession I would make is that it's preferable that management seeks harmony rather than discord with these types of communications for a smoother mindset transition. That's not to say it's required - just that it's preferred when possible. However, I don't buy in to the notion that the players were totally blindsided with this youth movement new direction. Nor do I know with any certainty if, when and how much communication there was. The notion that not only did the players have no idea what was going on but also that management guarded their position like a state secret is preposterous to me. It seems much more plausible that it was communicated they were getting another shot to take a run at the Cup when Stan acquired Lehner but by the trade deadline it was apparent the team wasn't good enough so the trade of Lehner and Gustafsson was in and of itself communication that the "win now" direction was changing. There are assumptions being made by us fans as to how this all played out behind the scenes - but that's all they are - assumptions. My assumption is that management isn't the bogey man they are being portrayed to be and the players were well aware of what management was planning, at least at the macro level and the notion they were shocked and mistreated is BS. well.... yeah, we are just to have to agree to disagree. I don't see any point in typing out any more novels here when I know it wouldn't change your mind anyway. Ditto.  |
|
|
|
Post by galaxytrash on Oct 25, 2020 17:18:53 GMT -6
fair enough. I know if I was one of the core and someone who was younger and less accomplished than me acted like that, I wouldn't be happy. would you? would you just lay down and do exactly what you know they want you to do? to displace your family or the life you've built for over a decade? because that is pretty obviously what they want. they can preach the "it will be good for everyone" line all they want, but you and I both know that the likelihood of any of thsoe veterans reaping the spoils of this rebuild is probably slim to none and it would benefit both sides (from a hockey sense) if they moved on. so then, you're essentially called a liar by both the coach and GM. they are obviously painting you into a corner where if you do not do what they say, then you look like the bad guy. how would that make you feel? furthermore, other than Toews speaking out, what have the core done that indicates they haven't been onboard? they've been pretty good teammates and leaders from what I've seen. but, then you read his interview and him talking about disagreements on the bench. at what point have any of them not accepted their roles and executed? since when is it not OK to have disagreement with the coach, especially when you are vastly more experienced than they are? I agree, he is the head coach and he has to exert some control over the room. which, just makes the hiring of him that much more ridiculous, because who in their right mind would think a guy like him would fly with a core group that is either the same age or older than him and has accomplished more than he has? but, that aside, you are correct, he has to get everyone pulling the same direction and he absolutely cannot do that if the core isn't on board. I suppse I just don’t appreciate the way he comes off while doing it, because he sounds like a smug prick who knows that his boss has his back and he has all the leverage. his airing of business in the media is bullshit. he knows what his mentioning of players not agreeing with his decisions means to the vets. he is letting them know that he is in charge and, as you said, they better all get in line. does this seem like a good place to do that? does this not seem like it will just hurt things rather than help? and so, it brings me to this: it isn't that I hate JC or think he is the worst coach in the world. hell, I think that if given a few years and a younger team, he could prove to be a fair coach. I can't say that for certain, but I can't say he will be an utter failure either. I don't know. what I do know, is this treating the guys that actually did the dirty work to bring all of the glory to the Blackhawks Organization like crap is..... well, crap. there was a better way to do this. it didn't have to be subterfuge and underhanded. it could've been respectful. this is the problem I have with all of this. it is going to end with acrimony and it didn't have to. just like it didn't have to with Q, but we know how that went. we are all fans and, at least here, aren't idiots. this all would've been easier to swallow had we and the core and the HOF coach not be treated as such. all they had to do is be honest and they still refuse to do so. just come out and say it, Stan. rip the band-aid off and let's get on with it. Second, citing "someone who is younger and less accomplished" is problematic on two levels. First, it applies a false dichotomy where age and accomplishment trump youth and inexperience across distinctly different positions - player and manager. sorry....as soon as i read that i thought of this. : ) one of the best debate lines ever. |
|
|
|
Post by ebonyraptor on Oct 25, 2020 18:36:01 GMT -6
Second, citing "someone who is younger and less accomplished" is problematic on two levels. First, it applies a false dichotomy where age and accomplishment trump youth and inexperience across distinctly different positions - player and manager. sorry....as soon as i read that i thought of this. : ) one of the best debate lines ever. That was a classic. Even Mondale couldn't help but laugh. |
|
|
|
Post by Tater on Oct 26, 2020 1:36:35 GMT -6
sorry....as soon as i read that i thought of this. : ) one of the best debate lines ever. That was a classic. Even Mondale couldn't help but laugh. It sure was a classic.
Things seemed some much more toned down back then... |
|
|
|
Post by acesandeights on Oct 27, 2020 7:40:46 GMT -6
Thanks for posting this. Reading Colliton's comment about working towards being an elite team and about the core helping the young guys along made me wonder about something. To be an elite team, they need high level talent. and it seems like Toews and Kane present Stan & Co. with a bit of a dilemma. Just the way I see it, if they stick around and help guide the young players, the core is still good enough, along with a few other good pieces, that the team would win just enough to miss out on high picks. Unless Subban totally unravels. This isn't an original idea but as unlikely as it is to happen, trading one of the core seems like about the only way they're going to get the high first rd. pick(s) or high level prospects they need to become serious contenders. Saad is now gone with no picks in return. They aren't going to become elite if they keep drafting mid first and getting Lukas Reichel's each year. And not all drafts will be as deep as this year's draft. Not to be negative on Reichel but he seems like a support piece for the future but not a difference maker type. Not that they don't need good support pieces but I don't see how else they're going to get a big boost in rebuilding except trading one of the core. Otherwise, as someone else said, they'll just continue to tread water. Maybe help and guidance from Toews and Kane will make stars out of Harpo and Groucho and the Pope.  |
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Oct 27, 2020 8:47:52 GMT -6
Thanks for posting this. Reading Colliton's comment about working towards being an elite team and about the core helping the young guys along made me wonder about something. To be an elite team, they need high level talent. and it seems like Toews and Kane present Stan & Co. with a bit of a dilemma. Just the way I see it, if they stick around and help guide the young players, the core is still good enough, along with a few other good pieces, that the team would win just enough to miss out on high picks. Unless Subban totally unravels. This isn't an original idea but as unlikely as it is to happen, trading one of the core seems like about the only way they're going to get the high first rd. pick(s) or high level prospects they need to become serious contenders. Saad is now gone with no picks in return. They aren't going to become elite if they keep drafting mid first and getting Lukas Reichel's each year. And not all drafts will be as deep as this year's draft. Not to be negative on Reichel but he seems like a support piece for the future but not a difference maker type. Not that they don't need good support pieces but I don't see how else they're going to get a big boost in rebuilding except trading one of the core. Otherwise, as someone else said, they'll just continue to tread water. Maybe help and guidance from Toews and Kane will make stars out of Harpo and Groucho and the Pope. Isn't Nolander one of those "high level prospects we needed"? I understand the mentoring aspect some mention but shouldn't one of the core forwards and one of the core D-men be enough and at what point does the staff start mentoring and teaching? Why bring in the Marks Bros if we're rebuilding,don't Kurashev and Entwhisle make the team younger as they stated and shouldn't a rebuilding team assess their young players in a timely fashion. This team will be just good enough to miss once again unless the goaltending is a disaster and that'll get ugly and help no player....especially the young ones. This is a self created dilemma because the FO is unwilling to bite the bullet and do unpopular things.....they want their cake and they want to eat it too or should I say they want their fans and they want them to drink their booze too? |
|
|
|
Post by acesandeights on Oct 27, 2020 12:53:13 GMT -6
Thanks for posting this. Reading Colliton's comment about working towards being an elite team and about the core helping the young guys along made me wonder about something. To be an elite team, they need high level talent. and it seems like Toews and Kane present Stan & Co. with a bit of a dilemma. Just the way I see it, if they stick around and help guide the young players, the core is still good enough, along with a few other good pieces, that the team would win just enough to miss out on high picks. Unless Subban totally unravels. This isn't an original idea but as unlikely as it is to happen, trading one of the core seems like about the only way they're going to get the high first rd. pick(s) or high level prospects they need to become serious contenders. Saad is now gone with no picks in return. They aren't going to become elite if they keep drafting mid first and getting Lukas Reichel's each year. And not all drafts will be as deep as this year's draft. Not to be negative on Reichel but he seems like a support piece for the future but not a difference maker type. Not that they don't need good support pieces but I don't see how else they're going to get a big boost in rebuilding except trading one of the core. Otherwise, as someone else said, they'll just continue to tread water. Maybe help and guidance from Toews and Kane will make stars out of Harpo and Groucho and the Pope. Isn't Nolander one of those "high level prospects we needed"? I understand the mentoring aspect some mention but shouldn't one of the core forwards and one of the core D-men be enough and at what point does the staff start mentoring and teaching? Why bring in the Marks Bros if we're rebuilding,don't Kurashev and Entwhisle make the team younger as they stated and shouldn't a rebuilding team assess their young players in a timely fashion. This team will be just good enough to miss once again unless the goaltending is a disaster and that'll get ugly and help no player....especially the young ones. This is a self created dilemma because the FO is unwilling to bite the bullet and do unpopular things.....they want their cake and they want to eat it too or should I say they want their fans and they want them to drink their booze too? You make some good points. You're right about Nylander. He was an 8th overall pick and has a lot of offensive skill so at the time of the trade, the Hawks had to have seen him as a future top 6 high skilled F. You said it right in the last paragraph. It's as though they're trying to do a balancing act but it's hard to see them accomplishing what they want if they do things halfway and don't "bite the bullet", as you mention. |
|
|
|
Post by BigT on Oct 27, 2020 19:05:59 GMT -6
sorry....as soon as i read that i thought of this. : ) one of the best debate lines ever. That was a classic. Even Mondale couldn't help but laugh. Back when a debate could be a debate. Poor Mondale lost by such a large margin, I believe he only got 8 electoral college votes, to Reagan’s 531. Or something that outlandish. Possibly the worst we’ll ever see!!! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2020 20:15:43 GMT -6
Thanks for posting this. Reading Colliton's comment about working towards being an elite team and about the core helping the young guys along made me wonder about something. To be an elite team, they need high level talent. and it seems like Toews and Kane present Stan & Co. with a bit of a dilemma. Just the way I see it, if they stick around and help guide the young players, the core is still good enough, along with a few other good pieces, that the team would win just enough to miss out on high picks. Unless Subban totally unravels. This isn't an original idea but as unlikely as it is to happen, trading one of the core seems like about the only way they're going to get the high first rd. pick(s) or high level prospects they need to become serious contenders. Saad is now gone with no picks in return. They aren't going to become elite if they keep drafting mid first and getting Lukas Reichel's each year. And not all drafts will be as deep as this year's draft. Not to be negative on Reichel but he seems like a support piece for the future but not a difference maker type. Not that they don't need good support pieces but I don't see how else they're going to get a big boost in rebuilding except trading one of the core. Otherwise, as someone else said, they'll just continue to tread water. Maybe help and guidance from Toews and Kane will make stars out of Harpo and Groucho and the Pope. Isn't Nolander one of those "high level prospects we needed"? I understand the mentoring aspect some mention but shouldn't one of the core forwards and one of the core D-men be enough and at what point does the staff start mentoring and teaching? Why bring in the Marks Bros if we're rebuilding,don't Kurashev and Entwhisle make the team younger as they stated and shouldn't a rebuilding team assess their young players in a timely fashion. This team will be just good enough to miss once again unless the goaltending is a disaster and that'll get ugly and help no player....especially the young ones. This is a self created dilemma because the FO is unwilling to bite the bullet and do unpopular things..... they want their cake and they want to eat it too or should I say they want their fans and they want them to drink their booze too? Come on Bob, remember who's in charge....... they want their BEANS and they want to eat it too! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2020 20:18:00 GMT -6
That was a classic. Even Mondale couldn't help but laugh. Back when a debate could be a debate. Poor Mondale lost by such a large margin, I believe he only got 8 electoral college votes, to Reagan’s 531. Or something that outlandish. Possibly the worst we’ll ever see!!! 525 to 13......so it was a lot closer then you thought! lol |
|
|
|
Post by ebonyraptor on Oct 27, 2020 21:46:00 GMT -6
Back when a debate could be a debate. Poor Mondale lost by such a large margin, I believe he only got 8 electoral college votes, to Reagan’s 531. Or something that outlandish. Possibly the worst we’ll ever see!!! 525 to 13......so it was a lot closer then you thought! lol The only state Mondale won was his home state of Minnesota, and I think that was was close. Yikes! Mondale seemed like a nice guy - kinda felt sorry for him. |
|
|
|
Post by BigT on Oct 28, 2020 4:40:54 GMT -6
525 to 13......so it was a lot closer then you thought! lol The only state Mondale won was his home state of Minnesota, and I think that was was close. Yikes! Mondale seemed like a nice guy - kinda felt sorry for him. I can’t say I felt sorry for him. I was only 6 or 7 when that happened. So it was years later when I found out about that election, we learned about it in high school. They teach us about the American system in high school in Canada. Then a few years later, the Simpson’s had a little dig at Mondale. They were in Australia and had to flee from the American embassy. The Marine says to homer “Sir, you will be airlifted to the USS Walter Mondale” Homer says “is that an aircraft carrier?” The Marine says “No sir, it is a laundry ship that will take you to safety”!!! |
|
|
|
Post by galaxytrash on Nov 11, 2020 18:45:46 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by vadarx on Nov 11, 2020 19:20:16 GMT -6
this made me feel two things: 1) I guess now it is cool to just acknowledge that the rebuild started years ago and not at all acknowledge that the front office totally lied about it to season ticket holders and fans. 2) it makes me even more angry that they didn't hire a vet for a couple seasons after Q and let JC work in the Rock. not only would've it been some more experience for him, it also would've allowed him to work with a group of players from which some would be familiar with him and help his transition into the NHL when they joined him in Chicago. |
|
|
|
Post by T-man2010 on Nov 12, 2020 12:03:24 GMT -6
this made me feel two things: 1) I guess now it is cool to just acknowledge that the rebuild started years ago and not at all acknowledge that the front office totally lied about it to season ticket holders and fans. 2) it makes me even more angry that they didn't hire a vet for a couple seasons after Q and let JC work in the Rock. not only would've it been some more experience for him, it also would've allowed him to work with a group of players from which some would be familiar with him and help his transition into the NHL when they joined him in Chicago. "Initially my thought process of coming over was to be around Stan and Joel Quenneville to just learn as much as I could," Colliton said. "Things happened quicker than I think anyone probably expected." That sounds just like what I have been saying since the JC bashing fest began. My old post about JC. I've said this before but I don't blame JC for the Hawks woes, that falls completely on SB and Hawks brass shoulders. Now was JC thrust into this position of HC too soon? Of course he was. I compare it a pre-school teacher 1 year and asked to teach a medical school grad class the next. A no win situation for him. Ideal world would have been JC and Q work together for 3-5 years as to what is needed for the franchise's future. They would instill a structure for the franchise similar to what the Pens and Bruins have with theirs. Assuming Q would retire after those 5 years and then JC would step in and have an easier transition. He would have better knowledge of what players can and cannot do. As well as learn from Q how to be a successful HC in the NHL. NOTE: These view points are my own and have no facts to back them, just dreaming. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2020 12:56:47 GMT -6
this made me feel two things: 1) I guess now it is cool to just acknowledge that the rebuild started years ago and not at all acknowledge that the front office totally lied about it to season ticket holders and fans. 2) it makes me even more angry that they didn't hire a vet for a couple seasons after Q and let JC work in the Rock. not only would've it been some more experience for him, it also would've allowed him to work with a group of players from which some would be familiar with him and help his transition into the NHL when they joined him in Chicago. "Initially my thought process of coming over was to be around Stan and Joel Quenneville to just learn as much as I could," Colliton said. "Things happened quicker than I think anyone probably expected." That sounds just like what I have been saying since the JC bashing fest began. My old post about JC. I've said this before but I don't blame JC for the Hawks woes, that falls completely on SB and Hawks brass shoulders. Now was JC thrust into this position of HC too soon? Of course he was. I compare it a pre-school teacher 1 year and asked to teach a medical school grad class the next. A no win situation for him. Ideal world would have been JC and Q work together for 3-5 years as to what is needed for the franchise's future. They would instill a structure for the franchise similar to what the Pens and Bruins have with theirs. Assuming Q would retire after those 5 years and then JC would step in and have an easier transition. He would have better knowledge of what players can and cannot do. As well as learn from Q how to be a successful HC in the NHL. NOTE: These view points are my own and have no facts to back them, just dreaming. Thing is that I don't think Bowman wanted Colliton to learn from Q, because he either didn't care for Q or he didn't like the system Q ran. So although Colliton may not have been aware it is possible this was Bowmans plan all along, bringing him in quickly and purging Q and his system.
Again, thinking of the possible power struggle Bowman wants this to be "HIS" team and needed to eliminate any remnants of the Tallon/Smith/Q regime.
|
|
|
|
Post by galaxytrash on Nov 21, 2020 19:09:22 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by T-man2010 on Nov 21, 2020 20:09:23 GMT -6
Will he be able to get the "work ethic" out of the kids and will the vets go along. |
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Nov 22, 2020 9:28:09 GMT -6
Will he be able to get the "work ethic" out of the kids and will the vets go along. Why wasn't a work ethic demanded from the get go and why would veterans who've worked hard and sacrificed their entire careers not go along? |
|
|
|
Post by T-man2010 on Nov 22, 2020 11:15:33 GMT -6
Will he be able to get the "work ethic" out of the kids and will the vets go along. Why wasn't a work ethic demanded from the get go and why would veterans who've worked hard and sacrificed their entire careers not go along? Very well could have been demanded and the players were not dedicated to it. Maybe that's why you kept seeing players that we "liked" moved for no reason. (Jokiharu)? Players have to buy into it, if they don't then it fails miserably. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2020 11:23:56 GMT -6
It was an epic failure to bring in a new coach that was either the same age, or younger, then a core of players who won Stanley Cups. I can't see how any of that core could have any respect, or want to buy into any plans, he would have. Bring in Trotz and the core may be all in. Bring in a coach who barely played in the NHL, and never sniffed a head coaching job in the NHL, and there's bound to be dissension. How does a guy like Colliton convince a core he's going to lead them back to the championship caliber?
I have to say I like what Theo Epstein said when he decided to walk away from his final year of the contract which meant walking away from $10 million. He said that maybe, based on both his tenure in Boston and Chicago, he was great at building teams, but not too good at maintaining them. Well here we have a GM that never built a team and has slowly torn it down. I'm not so sure Bowman can either build, or maintain, a championship caliber team. Come on Bowman, take a page out of Theo's book and walk away and let the Hawks get onto actually finding someone who can build.
|
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Nov 22, 2020 11:31:59 GMT -6
Why wasn't a work ethic demanded from the get go and why would veterans who've worked hard and sacrificed their entire careers not go along? Very well could have been demanded and the players were not dedicated to it. Maybe that's why you kept seeing players that we "liked" moved for no reason. (Jokiharu)? Players have to buy into it, if they don't then it fails miserably. Getting players to buy what a HC is selling is a HC's real job and Ralph Krueger had ZERO problems with his 20yro D-man and Krueger's as demanding as it gets. Did Nolander buy in here last year? |
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Nov 22, 2020 11:42:02 GMT -6
It was an epic failure to bring in a new coach that was either the same age, or younger, then a core of players who won Stanley Cups. I can't see how any of that core could have any respect, or want to buy into any plans, he would have. Bring in Trotz and the core may be all in. Bring in a coach who barely played in the NHL, and never sniffed a head coaching job in the NHL, and there's bound to be dissension. How does a guy like Colliton convince a core he's going to lead them back to the championship caliber? I have to say I like what Theo Epstein said when he decided to walk away from his final year of the contract which meant walking away from $10 million. He said that maybe, based on both his tenure in Boston and Chicago, he was great at building teams, but not too good at maintaining them. Well here we have a GM that never built a team and has slowly torn it down. I'm not so sure Bowman can either build, or maintain, a championship caliber team. Come on Bowman, take a page out of Theo's book and walk away and let the Hawks get onto actually finding someone who can build. JC's first season saw K&T both have their best years ever and Keith put up 40pts and a +13 also,that sounds like giving it their all to me. Your point about the inexperienced HC is well taken but K&T have remained the top two forwards,regular and post season and Keith the best D-man.......these guys have done their job regardless of having an overmatched HC. Getting the rest of the dreck to buy in has been problematic though. |
|
|
|
Post by T-man2010 on Nov 22, 2020 11:42:58 GMT -6
Very well could have been demanded and the players were not dedicated to it. Maybe that's why you kept seeing players that we "liked" moved for no reason. (Jokiharu)? Players have to buy into it, if they don't then it fails miserably. Getting players to buy what a HC is selling is a HC's real job and Ralph Krueger had ZERO problems with his 20yro D-man and Krueger's as demanding as it gets. Did Nolander buy in here last year? Wish we were a fly on the wall in practice to see what kind of work ethic they show. Doesn't always manifest itself as success during a game. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2020 11:45:47 GMT -6
It was an epic failure to bring in a new coach that was either the same age, or younger, then a core of players who won Stanley Cups. I can't see how any of that core could have any respect, or want to buy into any plans, he would have. Bring in Trotz and the core may be all in. Bring in a coach who barely played in the NHL, and never sniffed a head coaching job in the NHL, and there's bound to be dissension. How does a guy like Colliton convince a core he's going to lead them back to the championship caliber? I have to say I like what Theo Epstein said when he decided to walk away from his final year of the contract which meant walking away from $10 million. He said that maybe, based on both his tenure in Boston and Chicago, he was great at building teams, but not too good at maintaining them. Well here we have a GM that never built a team and has slowly torn it down. I'm not so sure Bowman can either build, or maintain, a championship caliber team. Come on Bowman, take a page out of Theo's book and walk away and let the Hawks get onto actually finding someone who can build. JC's first season saw K&T both have their best years ever and Keith put up 40pts and a +13 also,that sounds like giving it their all to me. Your point about the inexperienced HC is well taken but K&T have remained the top two forwards,regular and post season and Keith the best D-man.......these guys have done their job regardless of having an overmatched HC. Getting the rest of the dreck to buy in has been problematic though. But the question is did they all actually buy in to Colliton, or was it just them playing up to their normal high levels in spite of Colliton? I'd tend to lead towards the latter. These guys have pride in their play, and as Toews recently said he always comes to camp looking for a championship run. I just don't think these guys can give the respect to a rookie coach around their age as they would an experienced coach, especially after playing for a HOF coach with the 2nd most wins in NHL history. |
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Nov 22, 2020 12:00:50 GMT -6
JC's first season saw K&T both have their best years ever and Keith put up 40pts and a +13 also,that sounds like giving it their all to me. Your point about the inexperienced HC is well taken but K&T have remained the top two forwards,regular and post season and Keith the best D-man.......these guys have done their job regardless of having an overmatched HC. Getting the rest of the dreck to buy in has been problematic though. But the question is did they all actually buy in to Colliton, or was it just them playing up to their normal high levels in spite of Colliton? I'd tend to lead towards the latter. These guys have pride in their play, and as Toews recently said he always comes to camp looking for a championship run. I just don't think these guys can give the respect to a rookie coach around their age as they would an experienced coach, especially after playing for a HOF coach with the 2nd most wins in NHL history. Your point's well taken Phil,they probably just played up to their "normal high levels". I'm NOT giving JC credit for it,just pointing out the two didn't 'dog' it either. |
|
|
|
Post by galaxytrash on Jan 12, 2021 7:28:43 GMT -6
JC extended until 2022/23.
we shall see.
i hope he has succeeds.
|
|
|
|
Post by LordKOTL on Jan 12, 2021 8:46:09 GMT -6
JC extended until 2022/23. we shall see. i hope he has succeeds. I think we all hope he succeeds...but I'm not getting that vibe. I think his successes in "development" are more like the players just being that good (like Koob's 2020 and Debrincat's 2019 campaign). We'll have to see though. Is he a good development coach 1st or is he a bowman cleft-presser 1st? |
|
