30
|
|
Post by mvr on Jun 7, 2022 6:32:54 GMT -6
One thing that struck me watching the Burke video was his revelation about the draft.
Basically all the scouts and general managers felt the same way about the top end picks. They all knew it was a historically poor draft. Stefan was going to be the first pick, and then the twins would go second and third. Nobody really wanted that fourth pick. Brendl had too many red flags.
My conclusion - teams need good scouts, no doubt. But there is no magic bullet here.
|
|
|
|
Post by BigT on Jun 7, 2022 7:08:20 GMT -6
One thing that struck me watching the Burke video was his revelation about the draft. Basically all the scouts and general managers felt the same way about the top end picks. They all knew it was a historically poor draft. Stefan was going to be the first pick, and then the twins would go second and third. Nobody really wanted that fourth pick. Brendl had too many red flags. My conclusion - teams need good scouts, no doubt. But there is no magic bullet here. As to Burke’s storey. He recognized that it was a weak draft. He talked to other GMs to get what he wanted. He even thought he was gonna get fired if the last trade with Atlanta didn’t go through and he got Pavel Brendl. But he made franchise changing moves and got the Sedins who’ll more than likely get in the Hall of Fame. If Burke doesn’t make those deals, the Canucks probably suck for a long time. He made a difference. Everyone’s moves make a difference. The gawd dam Hawks video coach made a horrible difference. It takes a village. It really does. People can make a difference in either a positive or negative light. It happens all the time. Q was great at matchups and finding chemistry for certain players. His blender wasn’t popular but the thing worked. Whether he knows enough to get out of the way, or knows enough to step in. Coaches and managers need to know their boundaries. So do players, scouts etc!!! |
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Jun 7, 2022 7:12:13 GMT -6
That's the thing.
There is no doubt that general managers and coaches can be very destructive forces. I just think we tend to overrate their ability to construct. We assume those in charge of successful organizations matter more than they do.
Burke gambled, and he got lucky in this instance that Atlanta made the deal.
|
|
|
|
Post by BigT on Jun 7, 2022 7:18:53 GMT -6
That's the thing. There is no doubt that general managers and coaches can be very destructive forces. I just think we tend to overrate their ability to construct. We assume those in charge of successful organizations matter more than they do. They do matter. Tallon let his prized #3 overall center and WJC hero Toews go back to College and develop. He was in no hurry and it wasn’t the right formula to bring him in. The next year he brings in this dynamic duo and the rest is history. Fast forward 13 years and the Hawks threw Dach in. He failed miserably. The level of incompetence was glaring. That could be a franchise defining moment. Scambo built a team on small perimeter players. Is that the players fault that the team wasn’t built for success? Gotta place the blame/kudos where they may lay!!! |
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Jun 7, 2022 8:44:46 GMT -6
Toews and his agent made that decision even before the draft. That wasn't about Tallon.
Tallon followed protocol and for the most part did what others would do. He and Dudley drafted kids where they had been slotted (and he had many early picks because his teams were terrible), and he allowed them to develop. Some made it, and others did not. Tallon benefited from a stacked prospect pool assembled largely under Mike Smith and Marshall Johnson. When Tallon stepped in, he had tremendous capital leverage because Smith had emptied the roster of expensive players in the years leading up the NHL lockout. He proceeded to blow his entire load on big name UFAs - Khabibulin, Lapointe, Aucoin, Cullimore, Huet - most of whom did not work out very well.
To my mind, Tallon succeeded largely in spite of his moves because the young talent assembled in Chicago was so good. Toews and Kane fell into his lap. Few other Tallon picks made it (and he had some high ones). To his credit, he did establish a culture where the players felt valued. The players liked him.
The big problem with Bowman is that he thought he was smarter than everyone else. He zigged while everyone else zagged. There is a good reason why no other team loads up on the small perimeter forward.
|
|
|
|
Post by BigT on Jun 7, 2022 9:50:48 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Jun 7, 2022 10:00:13 GMT -6
Don't get me wrong. I think Smith was just as terrible as the others.
If Tallon was in the background making some of those trade decisions (ie McCabe for Karpotsov etc), he was worse than I thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Jun 7, 2022 10:03:02 GMT -6
The Hawks were so terrible in the first decade of this century, they could not help but get better considering the high picks. Management drove the team into the ground.
|
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Jun 7, 2022 12:55:31 GMT -6
The Hawks were so terrible in the first decade of this century, they could not help but get better considering the high picks. Management drove the team into the ground. A LOT of team were as bad and just stayed bad,being bad is NO guarantee you’ll be good again as us and Leafs fan know/knew for half a decade. |
|
|
|
Post by BigT on Jun 7, 2022 13:06:35 GMT -6
The Hawks were so terrible in the first decade of this century, they could not help but get better considering the high picks. Management drove the team into the ground. Yes that is true. Smith was one of them. However, we’ve seen many teams with high picks never amount to anything let alone a generational team. 19/88 we’re not touted as franchise players. They developed them properly. Gave them enough rope to hang themselves. To make that many great moves in such a small amount of time is a solid GM. Again. Everyone has a role and if they don’t do it, the team will fail. Yes luck gets involved. But it’s not like it’s all luck. Tallon built two good teams in under 10 years. So it’s possible. Just gotta know what your doing!!! |
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Jun 7, 2022 14:01:35 GMT -6
The Hawks were so terrible in the first decade of this century, they could not help but get better considering the high picks. Management drove the team into the ground. A LOT of team were as bad and just stayed bad,being bad is NO guarantee you’ll be good again as us and Leafs fan know/knew for half a decade. We were very fortunate to watch Jonathan Toews, Duncan Keith, Brent Seabrook, Nik Hjalmarsson, Patrick Kane, Corey Crawford, Patrick Sharp and Hossa and the others emerge all together. How they all got here at the same time to my mind is mostly a matter of luck and circumstance..... not some genius general manager or superior coaching. The press will fawn over the guy in charge, Stan Bowman. Older fans with better memories will point to Tallon, or Smith, or Dudley. Others will recognize Quenneville, Savard, Yawney and even Bob Pulford and Rocky Wirtz. But to my mind, this is largely (though of course, not exclusively) about the players themselves, and especially the core eight. The leaders on the roster gelled those teams together largely despite the noise around them. The suits for the most part watched and took the credit. |
|
|
|
Post by nighbor on Jun 8, 2022 1:12:38 GMT -6
The way I read the artical when Smith was fired Pulford was named as interm GM where he remained until 2005 when he was replaced by Tallon. |
|
|
|
Post by galaxytrash on Jun 8, 2022 3:55:38 GMT -6
Here’s the list of GMs. Smith from Sept 2000 to October 2003 and he missed most of his last year due to his wife being sick and passing away. Tallon did pretty much everything!!! not that it matters much but according to mike smith's wiki page, his wife "succumbed to cancer in the fall of 2000". |
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Jun 8, 2022 5:30:52 GMT -6
Tallon worked in the front office with Bob Murray starting in 1998 as director of player personnel. Pulford fired Murray in December 1999, and soon after replaced him with Mike Smith, who had been a scout with the team a few years previously.
Smith took over in the spring of 2000, and quickly brought in many of his own guys from outside the organization.The Murray/Pulford guys who did not leave were pushed to the back.
Pulford fired Smith in 2003 and immediately promoted Tallon to be his right arm. A year or so later, Tallon was the general manager.
How much of a role did Tallon play during the Smith years? My guess is very little, especially after the disastrous 2000 draft. The two were in direct competition for the same role. Smith had his own guys and likely did not trust or value Tallon's opinion much. Tallon was a Bob Pulford crony.
Smith's best drafts were his last two, after he had fully gathered together his own trusted group.
|
|
|
|
Post by BigT on Jun 8, 2022 6:12:32 GMT -6
The way I read the artical when Smith was fired Pulford was named as interm GM where he remained until 2005 when he was replaced by Tallon. But like always, you fail to read between the lines. Look what Tallon did? As MVR pointed out, Smith didn’t want much input and wanted his own guys. As time went on. The Org was not happy Smith. Tallon got more and more control. He was basically the GM under Pully. Tallon did almost everything anyways. Pully was old 20 years ago. He’s ancient now. Pully was always a figure head for the org. An overseer. For those who were fans back then and lived through it understand. Believe what you will. Just don’t let the truth get in the way of a good story!!! |
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Jun 8, 2022 7:40:23 GMT -6
The way I read the artical when Smith was fired Pulford was named as interm GM where he remained until 2005 when he was replaced by Tallon. But like always, you fail to read between the lines. Look what Tallon did? As MVR pointed out, Smith didn’t want much input and wanted his own guys. As time went on. The Org was not happy Smith. Tallon got more and more control. He was basically the GM under Pully. Tallon did almost everything anyways. Pully was old 20 years ago. He’s ancient now. Pully was always a figure head for the org. An overseer. For those who were fans back then and lived through it understand. Believe what you will. Just don’t let the truth get in the way of a good story!!! I believe you can assume Tallon hands were all over the Cam Barker 2004 draft, which produced Bolland, Bickell and Brouwer among others. The Skille/Hjalmarsson draft in 2005 was not as successful, but it was not bad either. By that time, of course, Smith's hires were are purged from the decision making. The Toews and Kane drafts which followed produced one superstar from each draft but nothing else. I always felt that Pulford hired Mike Smith to do the dirty work - ie) cut payroll, trade away players, build back the farm system, in anticipation of the player lockout. Pulford was a smart guy politically. He knew what needed to be done but also recognized how venomously the fans would object. Hiring Smith shielded Pulford from the inevitable backlash. Firing the patsy Smith in 2003 was easy. The fans hated him and so did his coach and players. We all understand that Little Bowman sailed into his job with a stacked roster. But in fairness, Tallon came into the job with a small payroll, a loaded farm system (especially defencemen and goalies), and a huge surplus in draft picks. To my mind, the ugly part of the rebuild had already been done. |
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Jun 8, 2022 8:04:23 GMT -6
If we need to make a hero here, to my mind it is Bob Pulford. He was in charge and directed how the rebuild would go.
Older fans my age will remember he did the same thing in the mid 1970s, purging basically the entire roster of veteran players (Pit Martin, Dennis Hull etc) over the course of a couple of years and replacing them with young talent, including Denis Savard, Doug Wilson, Bob Murray etc.
Of course, I believe most of this is really just luck and circumstance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nikos on Jun 8, 2022 8:31:21 GMT -6
But like always, you fail to read between the lines. Look what Tallon did? As MVR pointed out, Smith didn’t want much input and wanted his own guys. As time went on. The Org was not happy Smith. Tallon got more and more control. He was basically the GM under Pully. Tallon did almost everything anyways. Pully was old 20 years ago. He’s ancient now. Pully was always a figure head for the org. An overseer. For those who were fans back then and lived through it understand. Believe what you will. Just don’t let the truth get in the way of a good story!!! I believe you can assume Tallon hands were all over the Cam Barker 2004 draft, which produced Bolland, Bickell and Brouwer among others. The Skille/Hjalmarsson draft in 2005 was not as successful, but it was not bad either. By that time, of course, Smith's hires were are purged from the decision making. The Toews and Kane drafts which followed produced one superstar from each draft but nothing else. I always felt that Pulford hired Mike Smith to do the dirty work - ie) cut payroll, trade away players, build back the farm system, in anticipation of the player lockout. Pulford was a smart guy politically. He knew what needed to be done but also recognized how venomously the fans would object. Hiring Smith shielded Pulford from the inevitable backlash. Firing the patsy Smith in 2003 was easy. The fans hated him and so did his coach and players. We all understand that Little Bowman sailed into his job with a stacked roster. But in fairness, Tallon came into the job with a small payroll, a loaded farm system (especially defencemen and goalies), and a huge surplus in draft picks. To my mind, the ugly part of the rebuild had already been done. Your assumption of Barker I believe is correct. In one of the convention panel discussions I asked Tallon directly if Barker was a mistake specifically lacking foot speed to play in the NHL and did he still believe Barker would be an impact dmen, while he did not answer the question specifically he did praise Barker on many levels in his response. |
|
|
|
Post by T-man2010 on Jun 8, 2022 9:39:15 GMT -6
Tallon worked in the front office with Bob Murray starting in 1998 as director of player personnel. Pulford fired Murray in December 1999, and soon after replaced him with Mike Smith, who had been a scout with the team a few years previously. Smith took over in the spring of 2000, and quickly brought in many of his own guys from outside the organization. The Murray/Pulford guys who did not leave were pushed to the back. Pulford fired Smith in 2003 and immediately promoted Tallon to be his right arm. A year or so later, Tallon was the general manager. How much of a role did Tallon play during the Smith years? My guess is very little, especially after the disastrous 2000 draft. The two were in direct competition for the same role. Smith had his own guys and likely did not trust or value Tallon's opinion much. Tallon was a Bob Pulford crony. Smith's best drafts were his last two, after he had fully gathered together his own trusted group. I beleive Tallon went back to the booth with Foley for a couple years then. Smith had an interview where he said he was not allowed to make any decisions because Pulford was still running the team. That's why they clashed. |
|
|
|
Post by nighbor on Jun 8, 2022 9:39:28 GMT -6
The way I read the artical when Smith was fired Pulford was named as interm GM where he remained until 2005 when he was replaced by Tallon. But like always, you fail to read between the lines. Look what Tallon did? As MVR pointed out, Smith didn’t want much input and wanted his own guys. As time went on. The Org was not happy Smith. Tallon got more and more control. He was basically the GM under Pully. Tallon did almost everything anyways. Pully was old 20 years ago. He’s ancient now. Pully was always a figure head for the org. An overseer. For those who were fans back then and lived through it understand. Believe what you will. Just don’t let the truth get in the way of a good story!!! Reading between the lines is just a way to put ones own spin on a story and doesn't make it true. I just wanted Stan to get credit for his contribution in helplng build the championship team along with everyone else involved but you want to dismiss the contribution of Smith and Pulford entirely to give Tallon credit for everything. In Smiths short 2.5 years he drafted-Keith Seabrook Crawford Byfuglien Burish and Matt Ellison who Tallon used in the trade for Sharp. Pulford added Bolland and Bickel both of the 2 goals in 17 second fame. I would say that wasn't a bad start to the rebuild for Tallon to complete. A great job by all. |
|
|
|
Post by OldTimeHawky on Jun 8, 2022 10:11:46 GMT -6
So this has turned into another GM thread, not surprised.
|
|
|
|
Post by T-man2010 on Jun 8, 2022 14:11:52 GMT -6
So this has turned into another GM thread, not surprised. All roads lead to stupidity |
|
|
|
Post by BigT on Jun 8, 2022 15:42:06 GMT -6
Last thing I’ll say on the GM front. Jay Zawaski and his crew have their podcast CHGO Blackhawks pod cast. They won’t even mention the last guys name or they have to put a dollar in a jar and they’re looking for a charity along the lines of anti nepotism. Hahahahaha. Pretty insightful pod they’ve got. Here’s a link to the show. I believe they talked about a Debrincat trade in this one!!! podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/chgo-chicago-blackhawks-podcast/id1080477414?i=1000565545127 |
|
|
|
Post by galaxytrash on Jun 8, 2022 19:30:33 GMT -6
Tallon worked in the front office with Bob Murray starting in 1998 as director of player personnel. Pulford fired Murray in December 1999, and soon after replaced him with Mike Smith, who had been a scout with the team a few years previously. Smith took over in the spring of 2000, and quickly brought in many of his own guys from outside the organization. The Murray/Pulford guys who did not leave were pushed to the back. Pulford fired Smith in 2003 and immediately promoted Tallon to be his right arm. A year or so later, Tallon was the general manager. How much of a role did Tallon play during the Smith years? My guess is very little, especially after the disastrous 2000 draft. The two were in direct competition for the same role. Smith had his own guys and likely did not trust or value Tallon's opinion much. Tallon was a Bob Pulford crony. Smith's best drafts were his last two, after he had fully gathered together his own trusted group. I beleive Tallon went back to the booth with Foley for a couple years then. according to wiki, tallon was hired to do color with foley for just the 2002/03 season. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chicago_Blackhawks_broadcasters |
|
|
|
Post by BigT on Jun 8, 2022 20:51:12 GMT -6
I think the problems all started with that rat bastard Tommy Ivan. He gave way to the first reign of terror of Pully. And every other GM gave way to Pully. Ivan lived to 1999. He had a few more years in him. Especially to avoid the tyranny of Pulford!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by nighbor on Jun 9, 2022 0:16:11 GMT -6
Independent opinion. Ryan Szporer in an artical for THW dated December 31, 2019 entitled NHL's Top 5 General Managers of the Decade he has Stan Bowman at #2. The last sentence contains the words and I quote "Bowman is a great GM".
|
|
|
|
Post by galaxytrash on Jun 9, 2022 0:41:19 GMT -6
nothing wrong with a bit of respectful discussion about the pros and cons of one stan bowman.
but i can say with a fairly high degree of certainty that both sides are dug in that hard that neither will budge.
i mean, it's been 225 days since he resigned and the discussion has gone on a long time before that...but you guys just go on keeping on trying. it keeps the post count ticking along here nicely if nothing else.
: )
|
|
|
|
Post by galaxytrash on Jun 9, 2022 3:54:01 GMT -6
they had a nice nesterenko bit at the start. they threw in a todd reirdon rumor for the coaching position. the lion's share of the broadcast was whether or not to change out chelsea dagger as the team's goal song, and that whether each player should pick their own goal song. never heard anything mentioned about d-cat. anyways...i'm not a big hockey podcast guy but this killed 65 minutes nicely. |
|
|
|
Post by BigT on Jun 9, 2022 6:10:28 GMT -6
they had a nice nesterenko bit at the start. they threw in a todd reirdon rumor for the coaching position. the lion's share of the broadcast was whether or not to change out chelsea dagger as the team's goal song, and that whether each player should pick their own goal song. never heard anything mentioned about d-cat. anyways...i'm not a big hockey podcast guy but this killed 65 minutes nicely. Even if you listen to the first 15-20 mins. They touch on all that trade stuff. Plus they have their moments where if they say the last GMs name, they gotta put a dollar in a jar!!! podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/chgo-chicago-blackhawks-podcast/id1080477414?i=1000565405703 |
|
|
|
Post by T-man2010 on Jun 9, 2022 6:24:54 GMT -6
nothing wrong with a bit of respectful discussion about the pros and cons of one stan bowman. but i can say with a fairly high degree of certainty that both sides are dug in that hard that neither will budge. i mean, it's been 225 days since he resigned and the discussion has gone on a long time before that...but you guys just go on keeping on trying. it keeps the post count ticking along here nicely if nothing else. : ) I wonder if I can monetize each comment from Proboards and get a penny for each Bowman comment? I'd have more money than Musk. |
|
