I think we should trade Towes and Crawford if possible. I think Crow is good, but we need the cap room. I think Towes is also great, but a player who makes the kind of money he does should not consistently have 20 game scoring droughts. At 10.5 per year he should be in top 5 in the NHL in overall production year after year. I think we could get someone who makes half that and would be just as good of a leader and put up more consistent numbers.

I think we should trade Towes and Crawford if possible. I think Crow is good, but we need the cap room. I think Towes is also great, but a player who makes the kind of money he does should not consistently have 20 game scoring droughts. At 10.5 per year he should be in top 5 in the NHL in overall production year after year. I think we could get someone who makes half that and would be just as good of a leader and put up more consistent numbers.
- ratpackid

While no one would disagree that Toews had an off year, would you trade for him right now?

JJ,

I know Q is a great HC. A HOF HC. But its more then health in play here in the series a$$ whooping to the Preds. The team appears disconnected and no fire to respond to what the Preds did. The year prior, Stan went out and obtained bottom 6 guys (Weise/Fleisch) because the bottom 6 prior to the playoffs was comedy. Q did very little with the new additions.

Im not seeing the ability for Q to change up what he is doing to think we improve going forward. The PP has been a joke for years. With the skill we have how is that possible? With how the game is now, the state of the roster and its aging core and what will no doubt be more young guys on this team I think we need a change.

So who comes out of the west? Blues, Preds, Oilers, or Ducks?
- RedRevenge

I guess I have to say



maybe the great preds...so they lose to the pens or caps in 4

I hope they don't participate.

Canada is awaiting word on Toews, Keith and Crawford. Would certainly add a great deal to World Championship roster. #TSNHockey

— Darren Dreger (@DarrenDreger) April 21, 2017

- DarthKane

hell no...

This is a joke. Every year its how they're old, beaten up, and slow and the number of games played is catching up. Nonsense. Other than 81, 2 and 7 the core is still under 30. And 81 and 2 are NOT the problem in the least.

No theory of anyone's has been able to come close to explaining the canyon sized discrepancy in play in these four games - none of us - not JJ, not anyone saw this coming. So you do not throw out ten years of history for a 4 game sample size.

Something is going on here between the ears of every player and staff. Everything else is deck chairs on the titanic.
- busmaster

you forgot the excuse, they didn't have any rest during the short summer because they won the cup. Hmmm, look at the Pens, they look pretty good at the moment even with several injuries. But SJ, not so much. lol

And good point, still no explanation from any of the beat reporters or insiders of what just happen.

This is a joke. Every year its how they're old, beaten up, and slow and the number of games played is catching up. Nonsense. Other than 81, 2 and 7 the core is still under 30. And 81 and 2 are NOT the problem in the least.

No theory of anyone's has been able to come close to explaining the canyon sized discrepancy in play in these four games - none of us - not JJ, not anyone saw this coming. So you do not throw out ten years of history for a 4 game sample size.

Something is going on here between the ears of every player and staff. Everything else is deck chairs on the titanic.
- busmaster

The bolded is key. Show me a team, any time in the NHL that has gone 10 years of sustained brilliance without some sort of major transition. Still, keep ragging others as "a joke" for their beliefs while telling yourself this so as to make you feel like nothing is wrong with the overall makeup of the team. Yep, its NOT attrition of good players? Nope, can't be that. Can't be players just getting to the point where they are not as fast, big and as strong relatively speaking as they used to be. Can't be that. And it surely can't be the lop-sided salary structure MINUS the requisite excellent players making chump change that has impacted the team. Nope, not that either. It's just a "mindset", because everything is peachy in Hawks land they just need to "try harder" next time.

Maybe the Hawks are not as bad as they "showed" in this playoffs ,but they are NOT as good as the 109 point team either.

Interesting thought.

I WILL JUST REPEAT, if i am Rocky Wirtz, I am finding the best hockey mind NOT PRESENTLY IN THE ORGANIZATION and asking for a top to bottom assessment.

And I'm gonna listen and act on it to the best of my ability.
- John Jaeckel

And who are the finest hockey minds outside the organization?

And who are the finest hockey minds outside the organization?
- walleyeb1

James Tanner.

I am still perplexed by the apologists who have watched: Patrick Sharp, Nick Leddy, Mike Frolik, Dave Bolland, Brandon Saad, Tuevo Teravanian, Phil Danault and Andrew Ladd (not to mention older losses like Buff and Brouwer) leave this organization for essentially nothing and there NOT be some type of regression?

How can one surmise that a team of core players who played WITH THOSE guys above and then now ALL those guys above are replaced in almost all cases with inferior players will sustain the same level of success. Further, why should it even be expected? I fully expect there to be a ride down and I believe this is it. Can it be minimized, mitigated? Yes it can. But just doing the same ole' same ole' will not suffice. They need to address the size and physical aspect of one of the leagues softest teams, team speed needs to be addressed, and they need to find some people who can goto the net, and please find centers who can win faceoffs. And addressing the ridiculous salary cap structure may also be needed. It's fine to have a few really bloated contracts, but the Hawks have too many.

James Tanner.
- kwolf68

I am still perplexed by the apologists who have watched: Patrick Sharp, Nick Leddy, Mike Frolik, Dave Bolland, Brandon Saad, Tuevo Teravanian, Phil Danault and Andrew Ladd (not to mention older losses like Buff and Brouwer) leave this organization for essentially nothing and there NOT be some type of regression?

How can one surmise that a team of core players who played WITH THOSE guys above and then now ALL those guys above are replaced in almost all cases with inferior players will sustain the same level of success. Further, why should it even be expected? I fully expect there to be a ride down and I believe this is it. Can it be minimized, mitigated? Yes it can. But just doing the same ole' same ole' will not suffice. They need to address the size and physical aspect, team speed, they need to find some people who can goto the net, and please find centers who can winfaceoffs.
- kwolf68

Frolik..... At least the picks the Hawks received for MF turned into Hayden (and Johnson).

Saad turned into Anisimov and (indirectly) Panik.

I wouldn't say these trades got nothing in return.

Sometimes teams DO just fall off the edge. As I said...the core IS AGING...that's a fact. But the real PROBLEM isn't their age, it's THEIR COST. Because of their salary the Hawks are not capable of putting quality around them:

-So you have retreads playing 4th line.
-Grizzled, injured vets playing third pair.
-You cant win faceoffs
-Once superstars seemingly incapble of impacting game (Toews, Keith)
-You can't find consistent top line wingers leaving Hawks with 1 scoring line
-Other team can focus on top line

If you believe this team is poised for another 3 or 4 years of runs to the Cup have at it, but barring some shrewd moves, this team is finished as a Cup contender AS IT SITS RIGHT NOW. As I said they CAN WIN more Cups with 19, 2, 7, 81 etc...but they have to find a way to adjust their salary model so they CAN add needed pieces to compliment the top guys. And that MEANS making hard choices.
- kwolf68

Great podcast by Scott Powers and crew with interesting insights into what went wrong with our team. The answer starts in the locker room.

https://twitter.com/bysco...status/855379393132322817

Frolik..... At least the picks the Hawks received for MF turned into Hayden (and Johnson).

Saad turned into Anisimov and (indirectly) Panik.

I wouldn't say these trades got nothing in return.
- DarthKane

Yea not nothing, mostly nothing. I do like Hayden a lot, but he's not there yet. If he can get his skating down he could be a real player.

Great podcast by Scott Powers and crew with interesting insights into what went wrong with our team. The answer starts in the locker room.

https://twitter.com/bysco...status/855379393132322817
- walleyeb1

Listening now. Outstanding analysis so far. Enjoying the take, objective...everyone needs to listen to this.

I think we should trade Towes and Crawford if possible. I think Crow is good, but we need the cap room. I think Towes is also great, but a player who makes the kind of money he does should not consistently have 20 game scoring droughts. At 10.5 per year he should be in top 5 in the NHL in overall production year after year. I think we could get someone who makes half that and would be just as good of a leader and put up more consistent numbers.
- ratpackid

It would be very hard to say goodbye to Tazer but I would offer him to Winnipeg along with Crow and Keith for Scheifele, Trouba and Hellebuyck. Obviously a huge gamble for both teams but it would be a ballsy trade.

We're talking about a guy who has been an OK 2nd/3rd line C (or LW, because he couldn't win draws anywhere else) his whole career. Not Crosby.

He's an OK to good player and has had good chemistry with Kane and Panarin. But it's not like no one else could. And he has a couple of noticeable flaws in his game.
- John Jaeckel

$4.5 mill is not Crosby money, though. A bona fide top 6 guy is going to cost more, unless the Hawks are lucky enough to find one in the draft or among undrafted free agents. I get that he has flaws. What comparable player at an annual cap hit of $4.5 mill were they going to get to center that line if they let him go in free agency? I wouldn't discount the chemistry he had with them, though. Being fluent in Russian probably helped, also. It's not like any middling center could be a part of Kane and Panarin winning hardware last year. He knew what his job was on that line, and that's not something every player readily accepts in such a situation. His biggest mistake this season, as I see it, was the injury. Had he kept doing what he had been doing before the injury, we're probably not discussing this right now.

And as I hinted at before, the bigger problem is the situations that cause the overpays, not the overpays themselves. When a player has leverage for having a unique skill set on a team, that is going to drive up his theoretical value to that team.

Blackhawks legend.

‘Canes re-sign blueliner Dahlbeck — one year, $850,000 https://t.co/8I7tPoBnrk

— NHL on NBC (@NHLonNBCSports) April 21, 2017

Us Hawks fans have been spoiled since 2009 having great teams in the playoffs and making deep runs consistently. I admit too like JJ that I bought into this team and thought they were going to make a deep run. Oduya and Campbell got old and slow really fast and the others weren't playing their normal hockey and almost all of the forwards were horrendous. Some thoughts on this playoffs and the future of the Hawks.

- It is pretty damning to me that Q in his presser said he wasn't happy with the effort. The players and coaches need to look themselves in the mirror and reflect on the pathetic showing they ALL had.
- I like Q as a coach, but has he reached his shelf life? He needs to adapt the schemes on the PP and PK for one, otherwise, he needs to be replaced.
- On the PP & PK again, the lack of urgency and "controlled chaos" displayed on the special teams is pathetic and boring to watch. The PP has no creativity and taking long shots from the point or looking for the one-timer 90% of the time is not going to consistently work. Also, remember when the Hawks PK was aggressive and they used to score quite a few SH goals? Ahhhh. I miss those times. The PK is a passive, lazy scheme. I want them to be more aggressive and not allow the other team to easily set up their PP.
- I'm fine with the Anisimov extension, but why the hell did he get a full NMC?
- If no one is traded from the D corp and TVR is going to Las Vegas, I want to see Keith, Seabs, Hammer, Kempny, Forsling, and a nasty dman who hits and is physical in the third pairing. Also, Q needs to let the guys throw their weight around a little and hit people. Enough of this stick check strategy.
- I say all forwards, but Toews, Kane, and Hossa are available and I'd look really hard at trading Kruger and Panarin and maybe Anisimov.
- I would rather keep CC, but because of the cap and team makeup reasons, I'd see what they could get for CC and roll with Darling.
- This would probably be hard to do, but I'd try to trade Seabrook. He's been a warrior for the Hawks for many years, however, that contract is going to hurt the Hawks.

This year was the most frustrating outcome I've had as a Hawks fan since their run. They could right this ship, but Stan will need to make many right decisions. Let's see if they are going to do this. I'm optimistic, but it will not be easy.

$4.5 mill is not Crosby money, though. A bona fide top 6 guy is going to cost more, unless the Hawks are lucky enough to find one in the draft or among undrafted free agents. I get that he has flaws. What comparable player at an annual cap hit of $4.5 mill were they going to get to center that line if they let him go in free agency? I wouldn't discount the chemistry he had with them, though. Being fluent in Russian probably helped, also. It's not like any middling center could be a part of Kane and Panarin winning hardware last year. He knew what his job was on that line, and that's not something every player readily accepts in such a situation. His biggest mistake this season, as I see it, was the injury. Had he kept doing what he had been doing before the injury, we're probably not discussing this right now.

And as I hinted at before, the bigger problem is the situations that cause the overpays, not the overpays themselves. When a player has leverage for having a unique skill set on a team, that is going to drive up his theoretical value to that team.
- 333inthe3rd

He had no leverage at that time, and they paid him like he did. THAT'S the point.

I have to be honest with you. If he didn't have an NMC, I'm not sure there's a huge market for him at $4.5 million per year for 4 more years. That's not a "bargain" for a guy with his skill set, who's about a 45-50 point player—ONLY when flanked by point a game guys.

The bolded is key. Show me a team, any time in the NHL that has gone 10 years of sustained brilliance without some sort of major transition. Still, keep ragging others as "a joke" for their beliefs while telling yourself this so as to make you feel like nothing is wrong with the overall makeup of the team. Yep, its NOT attrition of good players? Nope, can't be that. Can't be players just getting to the point where they are not as fast, big and as strong relatively speaking as they used to be. Can't be that. And it surely can't be the lop-sided salary structure MINUS the requisite excellent players making chump change that has impacted the team. Nope, not that either. It's just a "mindset", because everything is peachy in Hawks land they just need to "try harder" next time.

Maybe the Hawks are not as bad as they "showed" in this playoffs ,but they are NOT as good as the 109 point team either.
- kwolf68

You have this habit of putting words in people's mouth - second time in a row. As a matter of fact I completely agree with JJ that this team is built too perimeter oriented, and I don't think the makeup and depth/maturity of depth of the team bodes well for playoff hockey against teams that have honed their trapping game like the Kings and Ducks and Coyotes and other teams that have given the Hawks most trouble.

My point remains that none of what you said can come close to explaining what we just saw, because the simple fact is, what happened, happened OVERNIGHT.

Couldn't agree more JJ. We are going to expect the man who created this mess to now fix it? Sorry, but my confidence is lacking. Just a few things that come to mind that the esteemed Stan Bowman needs to answer:

Giving Seabrook - a slowly declining defenseman on the wrong side of 30 an 8 years contract for almost 7 million a year. I know some will say they had to pay him because another team would give him that much money or more. I don't buy it. Who would have given him that kind of money?

Giving Anisimov a 4.5 million dollar contract for 5 years before he even played a game for you. Even worse, was giving him a no trade clause. Seriously? A no trade clause for friggin Artem Anisimov.

Trading for Tomas Jurco. Yeah, I know we gave up nothing, but how many times did Bowman trade picks or decent assets for a guy that Q wouldn't even play? Same as last year when they traded for Weise, who almost never cracked the lineup and Fleishman, who played regularly at first, but then quickly was out of the lineup

Trading for Oduya. Did Bowman not learn that trading for an aging defenseman, especially one coming off of injury (think the guy they got from Philly whose name escapes me for some reason) was not a good idea.

The Sharp fiasco, where he waited too long to get anything for him, then had to throw in a decent player in Johns just to get someone to take him.

The Trevor Daley fiasco.

I could go on, but you get the point. I'm not saying Stan didn't make any good moves as a GM. He has, but to me, they are clearly outweighed or negated by some of these other moves. The big money contracts to some of these guys were bad enough, but then to give out no movement clauses to guys like Anisimov is just ridiculous. The only guys on that team that I can see having a no movement clause were Toews, Kane and Keith. Period.
- RetiredGoalie

All makes sense. Can add other mind blowing disasters:
1. Getting Timmonen for a bunch of picks
2. Getting Runblad for picks and giving him above minimum contract.
3. Giving away 2 decent backup goalies Ranta and Nielsen for free. How would GM not get anything reasonable in return is beyond comprehension.
4. In general, giving everyone their contract when they are on top of the peak, akin to buying dot com stocks in 1999. Cue recent Panerin contract after which his play dropped like a rock. Bickell right after he got hot, giving him again money he did not deserve unless short sample of games right before that contract. Same with Bollig but managed to weasel out of it.
5. Saad fiasco - why could not he hold him and negotiate like with Kucherov?
6. Give NMC only if getting team discount from core player, and this does qualify only #2 but not 19 or 88, in what world their contracts justify premium over Crossby and Ovechkin.

you forgot the excuse, they didn't have any rest during the short summer because they won the cup. Hmmm, look at the Pens, they look pretty good at the moment even with several injuries. But SJ, not so much. lol

And good point, still no explanation from any of the beat reporters or insiders of what just happen.
- Topshelf2010

People don't get it. EVERYTHING else that we're talking about here, has been complained about ad nauseum for YEARS.

Yet Hawks still won the west and NO ONE, I mean NO one, not JJ, NO ONE saw this coming.

This is a different beast altogether.

Blackhawks legend.

‘Canes re-sign blueliner Dahlbeck — one year, $850,000 https://t.co/8I7tPoBnrk

— NHL on NBC (@NHLonNBCSports) April 21, 2017

- DarthKane

Expansion draft protection for Faulk.

Yada yada yada ... everyone is disappointed and has an opinion, including me. My opinion is that the 2 main components of the Hawks success - Toews and Keith - simply aren't as good as they used to be. Keith hasn't fallen off much but I think there's been some fall off. Toews, on the other hand, is not even close to what he was a few years ago. It was painful to watch him lose board battles against the Preds that would win with regularity in seasons past. Is it because he's injured and there's hope he can return to his previous elite level of play or is it because the years of playing the physically demanding style that made him elite has taken a toll on his body and he's simply not capable of playing at that level now. I don't know the answer ... but I do know elite teams - Cup contending teams - have elite players in the most critical positions like #1 center and #1 d-man and the Hawks had neither during the Preds series.
- EbonyRaptor

I wonder about that too. I remember hearing awhile back he was into some strange health guru stuff. I'm not sure what it is all about, but almost sounds like some strange Scientology type stuff.