13
|
|
Post by T-man2010 on Mar 19, 2023 12:18:05 GMT -6
Jaime basically has Jay Blunks old job. They never replaced McDonuts as President of Hockey Operations. Here is the heirarchy under KD: HOCKEY OPERATIONS LEADERSHIP Jeff Greenberg Associate General Manager Norm Maciver Associate General Manager Mark Eaton Asst. General Manager, Player Development Meghan Hunter Asst. General Manager, Hockey Operations Brian Campbell Advisor, Hockey Operations As I see it Greenberg and Maciver are on equal footing with KD. I believe Jay Blunk was VP of business opps,he never held the title of 'President' of business opps as Jaime Faulkner does......the team's only titled 'President'. I'm sure she more than has her hand's full with the business side of things and has little if any say in hockey or FO decisions but she is above the GM in the 'pecking-order' for whatever that matters. With only Danny Boy as his other superior. They're saving a LOT of money by not replacing McD-bag and with a first time GM and HC too. I mentioned the associate GM's in another post,how about baseball legend 'Hank Greenberg'(LOL!) climbing the 'pecking-order' so quickly.....he must be a natural! I remember their "Mental Health Coach" was the local bartender.... |
|
|
|
Post by jacksalmon on Mar 19, 2023 12:32:40 GMT -6
As I said, there is no doubt that Bowman made some moves in his time as GM. Shaw, Saad and Oduya are good examples of those good moves as well as Vermette. However, the true stars of the 2013 and 2015 Cup teams were brought to Chicago by other GMs. The Bowman players you mentioned, while good and very helpful in the Cup efforts, could have been replaced by others who would have been selected/obtained in their stead; whereas the core of the 2010 Cup plus Crawford could not have been so replaced. But, anyway, thanks for responding and providing the info you gave. Roszival and Handzus(who I thought was washed-up)both gave the team much needed physicality(along with Bickell)in the '13' PO's.....especially against Boston. I dunno if we win without the two big veterans but I do know it was a HELL of a lot easier with em! Winning in '15' without Richards and Vermette........I don't see it happening! Gotta give the 'devil' his due.....DAM devil!LOFL!!!!! As said, he did some good, but seemed to lose his "touch" after 2015; or did the players just get too old; or less effective for whatever reasons. |
|
|
|
Post by nighbor on Mar 19, 2023 14:03:38 GMT -6
Firstly add Crawford to the list of other GM's best players as Crawford would have made the 2010 Cup team if it was not for the fact Niemi had to clear waivers to go up and down to the AHL. This gives you 10 players but I believe you need 22 or 23 players on the bench to start the game. Niemi and Hjalmarsson were offer sheeted after the 2010 Cup season and Stan could only keep one so he re-signed Hjalmarsson. In 2010 Stan drafted Andrew Shaw who some considered the heart and soul of the team. In 2012 Stan drafted Saad who complimented Toews and Hossa and they dominated the offensive zone with their cycle game and all were a threat to score. Kruger and Frolik were good third line players and on the PK. Stan added Oduya from the Jets and he and Hjalmarsson were a great second pairing. Added to Keith and Seabrook our top four were the envy of the league. Handzus was a great depth pickup for the playoffs [3g-8a for 11 pts]. 2015 - Richards FA, Teravainen through the draft and Vermette TDL. They all contributed in the playoffs. As I said, there is no doubt that Bowman made some moves in his time as GM. Shaw, Saad and Oduya are good examples of those good moves as well as Vermette. However, the true stars of the 2013 and 2015 Cup teams were brought to Chicago by other GMs. The Bowman players you mentioned, while good and very helpful in the Cup efforts, could have been replaced by others who would have been selected/obtained in their stead; whereas the core of the 2010 Cup plus Crawford could not have been so replaced. But, anyway, thanks for responding and providing the info you gave. No one GM gets credit for the three cups as the star players we agreed upon were drafted and acquired by three different GM's starting in 2002. If the players previously mentioned were good enough to win in '10 '13 and '15 why didn't we win cups every year.? The simple answer is in the other years there was not enough supplemental scoring. As for the bolded area the fact is Stan provided certain players who contributed and were very helpful in '13 and '15 and there is no way to be certain that they could have been replaced with just anyone else and have had the same results. |
|
|
|
Post by LordKOTL on Mar 19, 2023 21:10:18 GMT -6
As I said, there is no doubt that Bowman made some moves in his time as GM. Shaw, Saad and Oduya are good examples of those good moves as well as Vermette. However, the true stars of the 2013 and 2015 Cup teams were brought to Chicago by other GMs. The Bowman players you mentioned, while good and very helpful in the Cup efforts, could have been replaced by others who would have been selected/obtained in their stead; whereas the core of the 2010 Cup plus Crawford could not have been so replaced. But, anyway, thanks for responding and providing the info you gave. Roszival and Handzus(who I thought was washed-up)both gave the team much needed physicality(along with Bickell)in the '13' PO's.....especially against Boston. I dunno if we win without the two big veterans but I do know it was a HELL of a lot easier with em! Winning in '15' without Richards and Vermette........I don't see it happening! Gotta give the 'devil' his due.....DAM devil!LOFL!!!!! Stan did have some good moves, but a lot of his tenure as a GM was keeping a prebuilt core together and getting in supplemental players. Once the core started to age out, he was out of his depth; he wasn't a builder, he was a maintainer (and there' nothing wrong with that), but without some aspect of building, at some point maintaining doesn't work. It seemed to me like Stan never had a solid plan for trying to find the next core; it's like he tried to run everyone in the previous core as long as he could and constantly tried to fill in supplemental players to keep the old core as the guys rather than finding new guys. Any time the team looked like it was poised to eek into the playoffs post 2017 he flipped from rebuild to make a run. Is KD any better? I don't know, but he seems to be doing the things needed to actually build...so far. He's pulling in the guys now who need the most development. Will he pull it through? I'm not sure. I hope he does, but there's no guarantees. |
|
|
|
Post by jacksalmon on Mar 20, 2023 8:44:18 GMT -6
As I said, there is no doubt that Bowman made some moves in his time as GM. Shaw, Saad and Oduya are good examples of those good moves as well as Vermette. However, the true stars of the 2013 and 2015 Cup teams were brought to Chicago by other GMs. The Bowman players you mentioned, while good and very helpful in the Cup efforts, could have been replaced by others who would have been selected/obtained in their stead; whereas the core of the 2010 Cup plus Crawford could not have been so replaced. But, anyway, thanks for responding and providing the info you gave. No one GM gets credit for the three cups as the star players we agreed upon were drafted and acquired by three different GM's starting in 2002. If the players previously mentioned were good enough to win in '10 '13 and '15 why didn't we win cups every year.? The simple answer is in the other years there was not enough supplemental scoring. As for the bolded area the fact is Stan provided certain players who contributed and were very helpful in '13 and '15 and there is no way to be certain that they could have been replaced with just anyone else and have had the same results. :You are absolutely correct, but I will still maintain that the players selected by the pre-Bowman GMs were far more important to the 13 and 15 Cup wins than the Bowman obtained players. I'll admit that this "debate" is much ado about a matter that cannot be resolved with any certainty, but it is just my opinion and there is no doubt that Bowman made some good moves and that all dynasties come to an end. However, some dynasties just glide back down to land, while others hit nose first at an uncontrollable speed. Bowman's landing is more the latter than the former, although, it is not completely his fault. |
|
|
|
Post by jacksalmon on Mar 20, 2023 8:47:17 GMT -6
Roszival and Handzus(who I thought was washed-up)both gave the team much needed physicality(along with Bickell)in the '13' PO's.....especially against Boston. I dunno if we win without the two big veterans but I do know it was a HELL of a lot easier with em! Winning in '15' without Richards and Vermette........I don't see it happening! Gotta give the 'devil' his due.....DAM devil!LOFL!!!!! Stan did have some good moves, but a lot of his tenure as a GM was keeping a prebuilt core together and getting in supplemental players. Once the core started to age out, he was out of his depth; he wasn't a builder, he was a maintainer (and there' nothing wrong with that), but without some aspect of building, at some point maintaining doesn't work. It seemed to me like Stan never had a solid plan for trying to find the next core; it's like he tried to run everyone in the previous core as long as he could and constantly tried to fill in supplemental players to keep the old core as the guys rather than finding new guys. Any time the team looked like it was poised to eek into the playoffs post 2017 he flipped from rebuild to make a run. Is KD any better? I don't know, but he seems to be doing the things needed to actually build...so far. He's pulling in the guys now who need the most development. Will he pull it through? I'm not sure. I hope he does, but there's no guarantees. I think you stated a good assessment of Stan. As for KD, he has a monumental task ahead of him. Because of that fact and his lack of experience and hockey background, I believe he will not succeed. Of course, that is just my opinion, time will tell. I just wish that, in this case, time would speed up, but at least I always have other "diversions" that will occupy my time and mind while the Hawk story plays out over the course of the next 10 years. |
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Mar 20, 2023 9:00:19 GMT -6
Roszival and Handzus(who I thought was washed-up)both gave the team much needed physicality(along with Bickell)in the '13' PO's.....especially against Boston. I dunno if we win without the two big veterans but I do know it was a HELL of a lot easier with em! Winning in '15' without Richards and Vermette........I don't see it happening! Gotta give the 'devil' his due.....DAM devil!LOFL!!!!! As said, he did some good, but seemed to lose his "touch" after 2015; or did the players just get too old; or less effective for whatever reasons. We can't forget the 'MEAT GRINDERS' those guys went through to bring us so much pride and joy my friend.........I still pinch myself at times jack! I thought the last GM supported the players pretty well up to a point,either panic or the complacency of job security and a promotion after Q's dismissal took it's toll with many mis-guided decisions to follow IMO. On one hand,we've seen Boston,Tampa,Pittsburgh,LA and the Caps all stay relevant or better,all have kept and in some cases even extended their star players,some of those star players are older than ours were and they all take-up a massive % of their team's cap-space. On the other hand,I don't think ownwership did the last GM any favors either. Whether a guy thought Q shoulda been booted or not,or was just ready for the new voice,I think all would admit he was a long-tenured,successful,veteran hockey influence in the Org that wasn't replaced. If the last GM is retained at this point,it should have been with a 'short-leash' and a veteran hockey exec brought in to keep it short but votes of confidence and promotions followed instead and that 'LONG-leash' was problematic. As displeased as I became with the last GM,I still believe he was smart enough to know the team needed to rebuild a few years ago too,and even publicly announced a 'youth movement' back in Sept of 20. Eight months later and we see massive money and precious draft picks spent on veterans S Jones and MAF,veteran McCabe is signed also......I believe McDabg and ownership may have intervened. This is where the last GM might have benefitted from having a veteran hockey exec between him and ownership vs a pitchman IMO. Either way,his time had come! |
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Mar 20, 2023 9:21:00 GMT -6
As I said, there is no doubt that Bowman made some moves in his time as GM. Shaw, Saad and Oduya are good examples of those good moves as well as Vermette. However, the true stars of the 2013 and 2015 Cup teams were brought to Chicago by other GMs. The Bowman players you mentioned, while good and very helpful in the Cup efforts, could have been replaced by others who would have been selected/obtained in their stead; whereas the core of the 2010 Cup plus Crawford could not have been so replaced. But, anyway, thanks for responding and providing the info you gave. No one GM gets credit for the three cups as the star players we agreed upon were drafted and acquired by three different GM's starting in 2002. If the players previously mentioned were good enough to win in '10 '13 and '15 why didn't we win cups every year.? The simple answer is in the other years there was not enough supplemental scoring. As for the bolded area the fact is Stan provided certain players who contributed and were very helpful in '13 and '15 and there is no way to be certain that they could have been replaced with just anyone else and have had the same results. The last time a team won cups every year was back when Montreal owned an entire major JR's league with the term 'cap-space' yet to be invented. Tampa and the Pens' back-back's,LA's 2 in 3 years and our bad bounce away from a three-peat might be as close as it gets in the 'cap-era'. The one thing I'll add about Saad,Shaw and Kruger too,is how little development they needed. All three made an almost immediate impact @20 and were very instrumental in the last two cups. There's no way NOT to credit the GM who drafted these young forwards in the 2nd round or later AND the HC who stuck em in there and gave em important roles right from the start. |
|
|
|
Post by Nikos on Mar 20, 2023 14:27:58 GMT -6
No one GM gets credit for the three cups as the star players we agreed upon were drafted and acquired by three different GM's starting in 2002. If the players previously mentioned were good enough to win in '10 '13 and '15 why didn't we win cups every year.? The simple answer is in the other years there was not enough supplemental scoring. As for the bolded area the fact is Stan provided certain players who contributed and were very helpful in '13 and '15 and there is no way to be certain that they could have been replaced with just anyone else and have had the same results. :You are absolutely correct, but I will still maintain that the players selected by the pre-Bowman GMs were far more important to the 13 and 15 Cup wins than the Bowman obtained players. I'll admit that this "debate" is much ado about a matter that cannot be resolved with any certainty, but it is just my opinion and there is no doubt that Bowman made some good moves and that all dynasties come to an end. However, some dynasties just glide back down to land, while others hit nose first at an uncontrollable speed. Bowman's landing is more the latter than the former, although, it is not completely his fault. Definitely not a soft landing by all accounts. |
|
|
|
Post by jacksalmon on Mar 20, 2023 17:46:22 GMT -6
As said, he did some good, but seemed to lose his "touch" after 2015; or did the players just get too old; or less effective for whatever reasons. We can't forget the 'MEAT GRINDERS' those guys went through to bring us so much pride and joy my friend.........I still pinch myself at times jack! I thought the last GM supported the players pretty well up to a point,either panic or the complacency of job security and a promotion after Q's dismissal took it's toll with many mis-guided decisions to follow IMO. On one hand,we've seen Boston,Tampa,Pittsburgh,LA and the Caps all stay relevant or better,all have kept and in some cases even extended their star players,some of those star players are older than ours were and they all take-up a massive % of their team's cap-space.
On the other hand,I don't think ownwership did the last GM any favors either. Whether a guy thought Q shoulda been booted or not,or was just ready for the new voice,I think all would admit he was a long-tenured,successful,veteran hockey influence in the Org that wasn't replaced. If the last GM is retained at this point,it should have been with a 'short-leash' and a veteran hockey exec brought in to keep it short but votes of confidence and promotions followed instead and that 'LONG-leash' was problematic. As displeased as I became with the last GM,I still believe he was smart enough to know the team needed to rebuild a few years ago too,and even publicly announced a 'youth movement' back in Sept of 20. Eight months later and we see massive money and precious draft picks spent on veterans S Jones and MAF,veteran McCabe is signed also......I believe McDabg and ownership may have intervened. This is where the last GM might have benefitted from having a veteran hockey exec between him and ownership vs a pitchman IMO. Either way,his time had come! I am only writing to emphasize how much I agree with the highlighted portion of your post. Also, Q was replaced, but by Harry Potter who should have remained in la la land, instead of going to the NHL. |
|
|
|
Post by LordKOTL on Mar 21, 2023 21:50:04 GMT -6
Stan did have some good moves, but a lot of his tenure as a GM was keeping a prebuilt core together and getting in supplemental players. Once the core started to age out, he was out of his depth; he wasn't a builder, he was a maintainer (and there' nothing wrong with that), but without some aspect of building, at some point maintaining doesn't work. It seemed to me like Stan never had a solid plan for trying to find the next core; it's like he tried to run everyone in the previous core as long as he could and constantly tried to fill in supplemental players to keep the old core as the guys rather than finding new guys. Any time the team looked like it was poised to eek into the playoffs post 2017 he flipped from rebuild to make a run. Is KD any better? I don't know, but he seems to be doing the things needed to actually build...so far. He's pulling in the guys now who need the most development. Will he pull it through? I'm not sure. I hope he does, but there's no guarantees. I think you stated a good assessment of Stan. As for KD, he has a monumental task ahead of him. Because of that fact and his lack of experience and hockey background, I believe he will not succeed. Of course, that is just my opinion, time will tell. I just wish that, in this case, time would speed up, but at least I always have other "diversions" that will occupy my time and mind while the Hawk story plays out over the course of the next 10 years. Truth be told Stan had no hockey background, either. He was an accountant by trade. Further, no one is an expert at everything. A great hockey mind as a GM might lack the financial skills also needed as a GM. Lacking good fiscal sense can kill a franchise as well as lacking hockey sense. In my observations and opinion, the thing that absolutely killed Stan near the end was that he thought he was the smartest guy in the room and knew everything about the entire gamut of Hockey. Not even his old man knew everything about hockey. His back-and-forth with Q epitomized that. KD, to my knowledge, is an analytics guy. That's fine to have as a GM; he just needs to know that analytics != Hockey at the ice level. That being the case he needs to listen to his advisors and assistants who *do* know hockey. Mark Eaton played. Brian Campbell played. Maciver played. If KD is not listening to them and getting their input on what's happening on the ice with the players, then yeah, he'll fail like Burish in a hockey fight (except that one time...). However, that's just good management 101: if your subordinates know more than you do on a topic you listen to them and take their advice and apply it as needed. If you don't, you're a shitty boss: the type that people quit jobs over. Stan, in the later years, didn't listen to any hockey minds from what it looked like from my fan-level "air-conditioner-ballast" level of hockey knowledge. We don't know if KD is or not. If he is listening to his advisors as well as LR then he may just pull this off. If not, he'll definitely fail. I hope he succeeds. But, as the Mythbusters™ said, "Failure is always an option." |
|
|
|
Post by LordKOTL on Mar 21, 2023 21:57:30 GMT -6
As said, he did some good, but seemed to lose his "touch" after 2015; or did the players just get too old; or less effective for whatever reasons. We can't forget the 'MEAT GRINDERS' those guys went through to bring us so much pride and joy my friend.........I still pinch myself at times jack! I thought the last GM supported the players pretty well up to a point,either panic or the complacency of job security and a promotion after Q's dismissal took it's toll with many mis-guided decisions to follow IMO. On one hand,we've seen Boston,Tampa,Pittsburgh,LA and the Caps all stay relevant or better,all have kept and in some cases even extended their star players,some of those star players are older than ours were and they all take-up a massive % of their team's cap-space. On the other hand,I don't think ownwership did the last GM any favors either. Whether a guy thought Q shoulda been booted or not,or was just ready for the new voice,I think all would admit he was a long-tenured,successful,veteran hockey influence in the Org that wasn't replaced. If the last GM is retained at this point,it should have been with a 'short-leash' and a veteran hockey exec brought in to keep it short but votes of confidence and promotions followed instead and that 'LONG-leash' was problematic. As displeased as I became with the last GM,I still believe he was smart enough to know the team needed to rebuild a few years ago too,and even publicly announced a 'youth movement' back in Sept of 20. Eight months later and we see massive money and precious draft picks spent on veterans S Jones and MAF,veteran McCabe is signed also......I believe McDabg and ownership may have intervened. This is where the last GM might have benefitted from having a veteran hockey exec between him and ownership vs a pitchman IMO. Either way,his time had come! Keep in mind Pittsburgh had a GM change in 2014; between the 2009 and 2016 cups. For all we know if Shero stayed beyond 2014 Pittsburgh doesn't win in 2016 or 2017. Speculation on my part, but I think if the 'hawks cleaned house in the summer of 2018 like I hoped they would have after the clusterfucks that were the 2017 playoffs and the 2018 season, with the right GM and coach it's possible we could have had a resurgence. Possible is the key word there. |
|
|
|
Post by galaxytrash on Mar 31, 2023 22:26:15 GMT -6
Home now. Traded some pavement for gravel and got home 6 miles quicker. Anyways...i was listening to WGN postgame the last couple miles on the bike when battery life on the phone didnt matter and they said it was chicago's first regulation win against nashville in 17 games. Anyways...now that i'm back watching live a long streak of losing is imminent.tbh, i kind've made that remark as a joke... anyways...0-7-0, outscored 31-10 since i got home. edit: just call me nostradumbass. |
|
