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

I have never been a huge SB fan, the best part, he did not mess the team up too much too quickly so that the team was a part of 3 cup championships and did not waste the good years of Toews, Hossa, kane and Keith and Seabrook and Hjammer.

but he did make some obvious blunders and to name a few: Runblad, Huet, Turco, Brunette, Khabbulin (2nd signing) which could have cost us at least one more cup, but he did pick up some key players:
Handzous and Oduya (Round 1) and Vermette.

We really did need a face-off man and a shut down line would have been nice.

They should've picked up Mason when they had the chance

Hey Rain, you and Snap are all over it. Nice post.
- 6628

Thanks......

LIke you I enjoyed watching Nashville play. That's a fun team......can they adapt next round to a Blues team or beat San jOse/Edmonton/or ANh 4of 7? Unsure.

The fan in me wants Edm vs Nash....that would be an up temp series.

I think locker room cleanout should be tomorrow so always curious to hear those quotes......lot of accountability SHOULD be taken but will it? Time will tell........

As Hans Landa would say, "That's a bingo". Guys who, their entire careers, have given high effort in the playoffs all of a sudden show nothing. That tells me one of two things: they are either hurt or sending a signal to the guy who signs their checks that they have tuned out the message bringer in the locker room. And they can't all be hurt.......
- DMCsPulledHammy

I agree but regardless of senior Bowman around, to me Q and Stan are joined at the hip. 1 shouldn't stay over the other and McDonough need to make that decision.

Just like in LA.......Wirtz got 2 playoff gates, and they may get another year to right the ship, but something is terribly wrong and those 1 on 1 interviews today or tomorrow with players will reveal that..........

Good morning SIUP

--Exchanged texts last night with a reputable guy I know and he said similar....

--Agreed on Kane....I'd very much look at what price I could get for 72. I don't see the want "to" for a team prize vs the want to for individual glory. Very hard to respect a guy like that in the room.

--100% agreed on Keith. Many guys on this team need to actually put in the work to tweak their nuances and improve their games. The only one who seem to get BETTER each year is 88.

--On Tuesday, it was reported an off day by Q for players to "get away from each other". Is that a hint, a Freudian slip, or just a general quote? LIke you I 100% think there is more to this melt down then a failure of adapting to X/Os or injuries to guys......1st time this core or team since 19/88 era truly failed to raise game to compete level and truly mailed it in.

--I'd really look at who my captains are.....I'd make 88 an "A". Guy brings it every game, and takes blame when he fs up. He puts in the work......he's a leader.

--Lastly, it's the Hawks turn to adapt to todays' NHL vs then rest of the league adapting to them. They need to realize where the league is heading and adapt their roster, their system, and their organizational philosophy. Will the arrogance and egos allow this? Or will they think they just had "one bad week". That to me is the biggest tell going forward this summer.

--outside of 88, all guys I would listen to. Sometimes complacency sets in and a shake up is needed....not just with coaching. If "One goal" is truly organizational wide, then this result unprecedented in past decade, can't be tolerated or whisked away without a major move(s)
- SteveRain

>Howdy, Rainman
>100% agree on all points
>Playoff hockey is now a 200 foot game for all 5 players -- anyone who can't play that style isn't very useful
>This organization hypnotized itself into believing they were the best because they had been the best
>And the 2015 WCF performance (and all playoffs) by the Hawks D "4 horsemen" was incredible -- but not a sustainable way to win
>Yet, Bowman and Q continued down the "soft hockey" road anyway
>2 first round exits in a row is a trend
>And this year's ass-whooping shows every deficiency this team/org has
>But, it also shows what needs fixing
>Hope they can

John, We don't call it "spin" when we all (including you) bought into the team just ten days ago.

Most folks on this blog seem to completely forget all but the last four games. There is a larger body of evidence that this team is a credible, talented and competitive team that simply did not play with the same grit and determination, from coach to goalie, as the other team.

BECAUSE WE DID NOT SUDDENLY BECOME SLOWER AND LESS TALENTED THAN THE PREDS AND HALF THE LEAGUE OVERNIGHT.

The answer is in the locker room and the dysfunction within. This simply does not happen with a team of this pedigree so we need to know why and flesh it out.
- busmaster

I agree. The problem was mental more than physical(injuries, age). I'm wondering if there were rumors floating through the organization as to who was going to get traded in the off season, and star players were pissed.

I remember how emotional Bolland was after the 2013 Cup because he knew that he was gone after the season. Players probably see these moves coming weeks before we do.

That's why there is only one lonely sole....
- FeartheFeathers

I get talking sh!t during a series, but once it's over, let that crap go. Guess that comes with inexperience.

Good morning SIUP

--Exchanged texts last night with a reputable guy I know and he said similar....

--Agreed on Kane....I'd very much look at what price I could get for 72. I don't see the want "to" for a team prize vs the want to for individual glory. Very hard to respect a guy like that in the room.

--100% agreed on Keith. Many guys on this team need to actually put in the work to tweak their nuances and improve their games. The only one who seem to get BETTER each year is 88.

--On Tuesday, it was reported an off day by Q for players to "get away from each other". Is that a hint, a Freudian slip, or just a general quote? LIke you I 100% think there is more to this melt down then a failure of adapting to X/Os or injuries to guys......1st time this core or team since 19/88 era truly failed to raise game to compete level and truly mailed it in.

--I'd really look at who my captains are.....I'd make 88 an "A". Guy brings it every game, and takes blame when he fs up. He puts in the work......he's a leader.

--Lastly, it's the Hawks turn to adapt to todays' NHL vs then rest of the league adapting to them. They need to realize where the league is heading and adapt their roster, their system, and their organizational philosophy. Will the arrogance and egos allow this? Or will they think they just had "one bad week". That to me is the biggest tell going forward this summer.

--outside of 88, all guys I would listen to. Sometimes complacency sets in and a shake up is needed....not just with coaching. If "One goal" is truly organizational wide, then this result unprecedented in past decade, can't be tolerated or whisked away without a major move(s)
- SteveRain

I noticed that too but NO ONE has brought it up. Why the dischord now? What has changed since last year's playoffs? The ONLY things I can think of are:

- the extension for 72

- allowing him to play the final regular season games the past 2 years in order to hit his bonus floor. Real or not, there is a sentiment that Shaw needed to go because Panarin hit his bonus in the final, meaningless game last year. Shaw was not only a fan favorite but a guy in the locker room who went, and mostly delivered, in the playoff battles. I'm sure there are guys in the room saying "I'm gone because 72 hit his hurdle this year in meaningless games but produced next to nothing in the playoffs the last two games."

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.

Good morning SIUP

--Exchanged texts last night with a reputable guy I know and he said similar....

--Agreed on Kane....I'd very much look at what price I could get for 72. I don't see the want "to" for a team prize vs the want to for individual glory. Very hard to respect a guy like that in the room.

--100% agreed on Keith. Many guys on this team need to actually put in the work to tweak their nuances and improve their games. The only one who seem to get BETTER each year is 88.

--On Tuesday, it was reported an off day by Q for players to "get away from each other". Is that a hint, a Freudian slip, or just a general quote? LIke you I 100% think there is more to this melt down then a failure of adapting to X/Os or injuries to guys......1st time this core or team since 19/88 era truly failed to raise game to compete level and truly mailed it in.

--I'd really look at who my captains are.....I'd make 88 an "A". Guy brings it every game, and takes blame when he fs up. He puts in the work......he's a leader.

--Lastly, it's the Hawks turn to adapt to todays' NHL vs then rest of the league adapting to them. They need to realize where the league is heading and adapt their roster, their system, and their organizational philosophy. Will the arrogance and egos allow this? Or will they think they just had "one bad week". That to me is the biggest tell going forward this summer.

--outside of 88, all guys I would listen to. Sometimes complacency sets in and a shake up is needed....not just with coaching. If "One goal" is truly organizational wide, then this result unprecedented in past decade, can't be tolerated or whisked away without a major move(s)
- SteveRain

Good points Steve. Agreed on 88 entirely.

If the Hawks are going to do a major overhaul, I'd look for Stan to go.
If they're looking to make some tweaks with players and system--Q could move upstairs. He appeared to be thoroughly out-coached to my eyes

I do wonder if some of the players apparent apathy wasn't a by-product of not feeling they had been prepared or that the staff had any answers (chicken vs egg dilemma). Dunno, but the coming weeks should tell us a lot.

Regardless of the root cause, I can't see the way this went down as being even remotely acceptable to the front office

I noticed that too but NO ONE has brought it up. Why the dischord now? What has changed since last year's playoffs? The ONLY things I can think of are:

- the extension for 72

- allowing him to play the final regular season games the past 2 years in order to hit his bonus floor. Real or not, there is a sentiment that Shaw needed to go because Panarin hit his bonus in the final, meaningless game last year. Shaw was not only a fan favorite but a guy in the locker room who went, and mostly delivered, in the playoff battles. I'm sure there are guys in the room saying "I'm gone because 72 hit his hurdle this year in meaningless games but produced next to nothing in the playoffs the last two games."
- DMCsPulledHammy

On the flip side, what message would it send if 72 was held out of games when he was so close to hitting his numbers?

As Hans Landa would say, "That's a bingo". Guys who, their entire careers, have given high effort in the playoffs all of a sudden show nothing. That tells me one of two things: they are either hurt or sending a signal to the guy who signs their checks that they have tuned out the message bringer in the locker room. And they can't all be hurt.......
- DMCsPulledHammy

True, especially when you consider a guy like Bergeron continued to play hard in the SCF when he belonged in the nearest emergency room

On the flip side, what message would it send if 72 was held out of games when he was so close to hitting his numbers?
- 333inthe3rd

It was a dumb incentive...for all reasons stated. Basically it came down to his incentive was tied to Evgeni Malkin resting the last couple games for Pittsburgh.

They were not willing to give Saad 6 million, but they give this guy 6 million + a bonus. Saad had played a couple years at below market value and was instrumental in winning Cups. I guess the timing is different so I'll give them some leeway on this, but that's what many will see.

Here's another thought question:

Panarin + for Duchene/Landeskog + ???

The quickest way to inject new life into this team is to replace Q. This team was not prepared and the coaching staff did not adjust at all to what the Preds did. Total Failure there. This team is pampers soft and no longer has the 4 line skill to score/compensate for the lack of the other playoff requirement.

We may be forced to use alot of Rockford youth. We have two skilled D (Kempny/Forsling) waiting to step in. Let them play. For better/worse this year will help them and the Hawks long term. If this team goes status quo they are really done and have stuck their head in the sand.

Good god if the Bears can let Ditka go we can let Q go. All things come to an end. This is a business. Time to adjust and make changes. The league has drifted back to old habits with how the game is being played. Its back to the hook/hack/wack style and either adjust or go home in April. Not advocating goon hockey at all, but lets get the lines balanced with skill and some road graders who will dump it and make opposing D pay in the corners. Get some guys who will create chaos in front of opposing net minders. Get guys who will GO TO WAR.....

Ok.. I feel better now!

Good morning SIUP

--Exchanged texts last night with a reputable guy I know and he said similar....

--Agreed on Kane....I'd very much look at what price I could get for 72. I don't see the want "to" for a team prize vs the want to for individual glory. Very hard to respect a guy like that in the room.

--100% agreed on Keith. Many guys on this team need to actually put in the work to tweak their nuances and improve their games. The only one who seem to get BETTER each year is 88.

--On Tuesday, it was reported an off day by Q for players to "get away from each other". Is that a hint, a Freudian slip, or just a general quote? LIke you I 100% think there is more to this melt down then a failure of adapting to X/Os or injuries to guys......1st time this core or team since 19/88 era truly failed to raise game to compete level and truly mailed it in.

--I'd really look at who my captains are.....I'd make 88 an "A". Guy brings it every game, and takes blame when he fs up. He puts in the work......he's a leader.

--Lastly, it's the Hawks turn to adapt to todays' NHL vs then rest of the league adapting to them. They need to realize where the league is heading and adapt their roster, their system, and their organizational philosophy. Will the arrogance and egos allow this? Or will they think they just had "one bad week". That to me is the biggest tell going forward this summer.

--outside of 88, all guys I would listen to. Sometimes complacency sets in and a shake up is needed....not just with coaching. If "One goal" is truly organizational wide, then this result unprecedented in past decade, can't be tolerated or whisked away without a major move(s)
- SteveRain

As usual you are spot on.

We can all sit and contemplate whether the roster is too top heavy, who should be traded away, what so-and-so's "value" is in relation to his contract, etc. etc, etc. but the bottom line when you break it all down, is that in the last 8 years, since Q took over the reins, the Hawks have done very little to adapt their style of play.

They are NEVER going to be a physical team, even if they had the bodies to do it, it is not their style.

Under several different PP coaches, the approach has never really changed. Blame Dineen, Kompon, Torchetti or whomever you want, the style (or lack thereof) has never changed and thats because it is being dictated by Q.

You can trade Crow, Seabrook, Kruger, Panarin, Anisimov or anyone else on the roster but if the new additions play the same system, why expect different results?

I think the one thing this series did was maybe open Q's eyes a bit. Maybe it forces him to make changes finally in the approach. I still think he is one of the premier coaches in the league, but maybe he has gotten stale or complacent. Adapt to the roster and the style needed to win these days or be replaced.

Maybe the Hawks needed to adjust a little to the players on the roster. Look at some of the D-corps on the remaining teams. The Pens D is not great, but they have a philosophy to just get the puck out and let their forwards go get it and create. Fewer D to D passes and re-cycles, less standing and waiting, more up ice pressure. They know they don't defend well in their own zone, so they move the puck out quickly. They have a top heavy roster also, with 8 forwards making $750K or less.

You can win in this league a whole bunch of different ways, but the "way" changes and you have to be able to adjust and adapt when it does.

As usual you are spot on.

We can all sit and contemplate whether the roster is too top heavy, who should be traded away, what so-and-so's "value" is in relation to his contract, etc. etc, etc. but the bottom line when you break it all down, is that in the last 8 years, since Q took over the reins, the Hawks have done very little to adapt their style of play.

They are NEVER going to be a physical team, even if they had the bodies to do it, it is not their style.

Under several different PP coaches, the approach has never really changed. Blame Dineen, Kompon, Torchetti or whomever you want, the style (or lack thereof) has never changed and thats because it is being dictated by Q.

You can trade Crow, Seabrook, Kruger, Panarin, Anisimov or anyone else on the roster but if the new additions play the same system, why expect different results?

I think the one thing this series did was maybe open Q's eyes a bit. Maybe it forces him to make changes finally in the approach. I still think he is one of the premier coaches in the league, but maybe he has gotten stale or complacent. Adapt to the roster and the style needed to win these days or be replaced.

Maybe the Hawks needed to adjust a little to the players on the roster. Look at some of the D-corps on the remaining teams. The Pens D is not great, but they have a philosophy to just get the puck out and let their forwards go get it and create. Fewer D to D passes and re-cycles, less standing and waiting, more up ice pressure. They know they don't defend well in their own zone, so they move the puck out quickly. They have a top heavy roster also, with 8 forwards making $750K or less.

You can win in this league a whole bunch of different ways, but the "way" changes and you have to be able to adjust and adapt when it does.
- TheTrob

#NeedANewHC

#NeedANewHC
- z1990z

Or one willing to adapt the style.

As usual you are spot on.

We can all sit and contemplate whether the roster is too top heavy, who should be traded away, what so-and-so's "value" is in relation to his contract, etc. etc, etc. but the bottom line when you break it all down, is that in the last 8 years, since Q took over the reins, the Hawks have done very little to adapt their style of play.

They are NEVER going to be a physical team, even if they had the bodies to do it, it is not their style.

Under several different PP coaches, the approach has never really changed. Blame Dineen, Kompon, Torchetti or whomever you want, the style (or lack thereof) has never changed and thats because it is being dictated by Q.

You can trade Crow, Seabrook, Kruger, Panarin, Anisimov or anyone else on the roster but if the new additions play the same system, why expect different results?

I think the one thing this series did was maybe open Q's eyes a bit. Maybe it forces him to make changes finally in the approach. I still think he is one of the premier coaches in the league, but maybe he has gotten stale or complacent. Adapt to the roster and the style needed to win these days or be replaced.

Maybe the Hawks needed to adjust a little to the players on the roster. Look at some of the D-corps on the remaining teams. The Pens D is not great, but they have a philosophy to just get the puck out and let their forwards go get it and create. Fewer D to D passes and re-cycles, less standing and waiting, more up ice pressure. They know they don't defend well in their own zone, so they move the puck out quickly. They have a top heavy roster also, with 8 forwards making $750K or less.

You can win in this league a whole bunch of different ways, but the "way" changes and you have to be able to adjust and adapt when it does.
- TheTrob

I was just about to post something similar. The Pens have kind of the same make up yet they have seen a resurgence...the difference? New coach. I'm not saying the 'hawks should absolutely replace Q, but to my eye, the same star players are on the team (+Kessel) but only the coach is different.

>Howdy, Rainman
>100% agree on all points
>Playoff hockey is now a 200 foot game for all 5 players -- anyone who can't play that style isn't very useful
>This organization hypnotized itself into believing they were the best because they had been the best
>And the 2015 WCF performance (and all playoffs) by the Hawks D "4 horsemen" was incredible -- but not a sustainable way to win
>Yet, Bowman and Q continued down the "soft hockey" road anyway
>2 first round exits in a row is a trend
>And this year's ass-whooping shows every deficiency this team/org has
>But, it also shows what needs fixing
>Hope they can
- SnapitUpstairs

Agreed...failure to adapt has killed them and they need to get big......not pre lockout big and slow, but not small and fast either.

First true test for ths team. I hope they can as well.

Or one willing to adapt the style.
- TheTrob

He hasnt since he took over in 2009. Aint happening now. It should have been obvious after the game 2 arse whooping and he did not adjust. He is as stubborn as it gets. Its simply time to make a change.

I noticed that too but NO ONE has brought it up. Why the dischord now? What has changed since last year's playoffs? The ONLY things I can think of are:

- the extension for 72

- allowing him to play the final regular season games the past 2 years in order to hit his bonus floor. Real or not, there is a sentiment that Shaw needed to go because Panarin hit his bonus in the final, meaningless game last year. Shaw was not only a fan favorite but a guy in the locker room who went, and mostly delivered, in the playoff battles. I'm sure there are guys in the room saying "I'm gone because 72 hit his hurdle this year in meaningless games but produced next to nothing in the playoffs the last two games."
- DMCsPulledHammy

I agree....and I can't wrap my head around it......

The 72 bonus things is an icey slop.....incentives are there to hit but it's not about Q sitting him, more as 72 killing himself to get those points and empting the tank for that vs the team goal of winning.

Good points Steve. Agreed on 88 entirely.

If the Hawks are going to do a major overhaul, I'd look for Stan to go.
If they're looking to make some tweaks with players and system--Q could move upstairs. He appeared to be thoroughly out-coached to my eyes

I do wonder if some of the players apparent apathy wasn't a by-product of not feeling they had been prepared or that the staff had any answers (chicken vs egg dilemma). Dunno, but the coming weeks should tell us a lot.

Regardless of the root cause, I can't see the way this went down as being even remotely acceptable to the front office
- grinder10

I'd love to be a fly on the wall in that office.

Bowman had a plan for this offseason, and now wonder if that plan is crapped entirely over what happened this past week. That's the game changer.

Its not about panicking but I don't think you can ignore this series and pretend it was a fluke. This was a systematical @ss whipping.

JJ, these past few blogs have been incredible. Hawks fans should feel fortunate to have you. Keep up the great work!

The quickest way to inject new life into this team is to replace Q. This team was not prepared and the coaching staff did not adjust at all to what the Preds did. Total Failure there. This team is pampers soft and no longer has the 4 line skill to score/compensate for the lack of the other playoff requirement.

We may be forced to use alot of Rockford youth. We have two skilled D (Kempny/Forsling) waiting to step in. Let them play. For better/worse this year will help them and the Hawks long term. If this team goes status quo they are really done and have stuck their head in the sand.

Good god if the Bears can let Ditka go we can let Q go. All things come to an end. This is a business. Time to adjust and make changes. The league has drifted back to old habits with how the game is being played. Its back to the hook/hack/wack style and either adjust or go home in April. Not advocating goon hockey at all, but lets get the lines balanced with skill and some road graders who will dump it and make opposing D pay in the corners. Get some guys who will create chaos in front of opposing net minders. Get guys who will GO TO WAR.....

Ok.. I feel better now!
- z1990z

Very keen observation. Now here is a question. If the league is going to drift back and forth on style of play, a team can't change wholesale to be a bruising team/ swift team every few years. So a team has to decide what it wants to be. The Blackhawks have moved to a skill team that doesn't punish opponents. I think that is the Stan/Q formula. I would like the Blackhawks to be a punishing team first, with added speed here and there (meaning a few small skilled guys). If you are not going to win every year, I would much rather see a team that hit and was tough to play against (even in defeat) that a team that just lost round 1.