Just going to make a prediction here, based on how the playoff-ending pressers of Joel Quenneville and Stan Bowman went in 2011 and 2012.
Next few days, we're going to be hearing some things like the following:
(BOWMAN)
"I'm disappointed. Was this team not good enough? I think we were. We got 109 points in the regular season (guaranteed, Bowman will allude to this). So we should have been good enough. We should have performed better in the playoffs. Everyone is accountable, the coaches, the players. But we have a lot of exciting prospects on the way . . . DeBrincat, Fortin, John Hayden. Robin Norell, and next year these players will get the chance to establish themselves along with Tyler Motte and Nick Schmaltz and Ryan Hartman, who were really amazing, breathtakingly amazing actually, this year. After all, we got 109 points in the regular season, and Richard Panik scored 22 goals. Did I say our prospects our breathtakingly amazing. Did I? Are you sure? Because they were."
QUENNEVILLE:
"We're going to have to get better. We need more speed and size and push."
Both men will be subtly pointing at the other.
Many of you don't like reading this I'm sure, but you're probably also forgetting how this played out after back to back first round exists 5-6 years ago. See above.
The difference now is the disappointment is greater, because expectations have been higher. Making matters worse, the organization has so much money tied up in (ostensibly at least) untradeable contracts, there doesn't appear to be an easy way out of this morass of unexpected, dare I say it, mediocrity.
Now, before getting too doom and gloom, there are extenuating circumstances: an injury to Artem Anisimov, and even possibly to Jonathan Toews.
But still, who's really hopeful about next year right now?
The argument raged a year ago, after the Hawks were dispatched by the Blues. Some felt it was a sign that the Hawks really had slipped back to the pack after winning their third Cup in 6 years the Spring prior. Others felt the Hawks were "that" close to getting by St. Louis, and the youth movement subsequently promised by Bowman would be enough to re-energize the team and vault it back into contention.
Uhhh, no.
Hey, a tight as a tick salary cap, a top-heavy salary structure, age, all that, is somewhat unavoidable after the success the Hawks have had. But, did anyone think the fall-off was going to be quite this soon or fast or dramatic?
(Or humiliating?)
I don't think so. And most importantly, I don't think Rocky Wirtz and John McDonough did (in fact, I heard the other day from a Hawk source that McDonough was "livid" after Game 3)—nor was it reflected in the bottom line income projections from a fairly long playoff run that was anticipated.
So if you're skeptical that Quenneville or Bowman might do some subtle deflecting or finger-pointing, maybe don't be.
In fact, this team's entire salary structure is built around a contending window of at least two more seasons. And keep that thought in mind.
Because the debate may have changed with this first round sweep—from "do you trade Marcus Kruger or Corey Crawford to accommodate Artemi Panarin's deal" to "do you take a broader, harder look at the roster and maybe some bigger, less popular but necessary moves?"
Yeah, I know some of the "experts on the tv" say Crawford isn't going anywhere. Well, some other people (not on the tv but more in position to know) have been saying that is a very real possibility, and there's more to that story than meets the eye.
But this morning, who knows? Because no one anticipated this beatdown at the hands of a team the Hawks were "supposed" to beat in 5 or 6 games.
How will it play out? Hard to say. I would expect some fairly significant change this summer. At least one "core" player (possibly Crawford, and/or someone else) traded.
In the mean time, keep your feet firmly planted on the ground and your eye on the horizon. It's about to get real "spinny" in here.
JJ
Chicago Blackhawks Blogger • 
Join the Discussion:
»