After tonight they're 9th lowest.
Without taking into account Florida having a better points percentage, if 3 teams above them all win the lottery, worst case, they pick at #12

great case, they move down another couple spots and only one team above them move into the top 3

Excellent case: they lose a ton and/or win the draft lottery. And/or Stan can trade up a couple spots
- Slofire94

If the Hawks are scheduled to draft 5-10 but move back a few spots in a trade that lands a second round pick...I could live with that. Assuming the Hawks get a guy they really want anyway.

Defeatism has set in for sure:

https://www.nhl.com/black...na/t-277437096/c-57677103

Disturbing to hear the "stay positive" and that they didn't really get pissed until the 3rd. I understand the importance of believing in self, but isn't it also important to acknowledge reality, get angry and embarrassed when warranted, and respond accordingly?

Who on the team is the one getting mad and saying "We are the f'ing Chicago Blackhawks. . .this is unacceptable. . .we are better than this. . .you are better than this. . .did I come here to lose? No! I came here to help this team win a Cup"

A little empty at this point, but was anyone doing that earlier in the year?

That's typical Quenneville twisting the knife......and I might add that this may be the main reason this team is a train wreck. .....Bowman vs Quenneville. ....and the team has basically quit on this BS that's been going on since the Danault/Fleish/Weiss debacle 3 years ago. ENOUGH already McD and Rocky.....clean this up over the summer or you'll be back to 8K season reservation holders quickly !!!!
- Hawkytalk

I don't know if we ever find out the deepness of pitfall between the coach and GM. Do they choose to air dirty laundry. Cue that music 1980's song "dirty laundry."

If the Hawks are scheduled to draft 5-10 but move back a few spots in a trade that lands a second round pick...I could live with that. Assuming the Hawks get a guy they really want anyway.
- DarthKane

I am not thrilled with that line of reasoning. I would rather try to move up and get the best defenseman or forward IF. YES IF the player is the sort whose style would be what the Chicago Blackhawks are sorely missing.

Defeatism has set in for sure:

https://www.nhl.com/black...na/t-277437096/c-57677103

Disturbing to hear the "stay positive" and that they didn't really get pissed until the 3rd. I understand the importance of believing in self, but isn't it also important to acknowledge reality, get angry and embarrassed when warranted, and respond accordingly?

Who on the team is the one getting made and saying "We are the f'ing Chicago Blackhawks. . .this is unacceptable. . .we are better than this. . .you are better than this. . .did I come here to lose? No! I came here to help this team win a Cup"

A little empty at this point, but was anyone doing that earlier in the year?
- pdx2ord

Except they are not better than this. Other teams are passing them by, other teams are deeper, more talented. The 60s Packers eventually fell off, the 90s Yankees fell off, the 80s Oilers fell off, the 70s Steelers fell off, the 90s Bulls fell off and yes the 2000s Hawks will meet (are meeting) that same fate....This is the reality of the situation. More teams than not have BETTER players 1 to 20 than the Hawks. This is the product OF the success, core guys getting old and can't play as well anymore, traded away resources to "make a run", salary cap pressures forcing young talent to be moved for nothing. It wasn't logical to think the Hawks could do what they did and maintain it. Fans should expect this. Because it's clear as day.

The question is HOW to respond? Put duct tape on this team and get 50 healthy and try another futile run? As other younger teams continue to get better and better? Our best "young players" are a Ghost formally known as Saad-father, a 5'6 kid, and a perimeter playing face/off deficient center. That's really it. Hartman is OK, Vinnie is OK, Hayden I think belongs in the NHL, but is he a true power forward who can pot 60 points? 88 is still outstanding and Crow too if healthy, but the defense is a dumpster fire and you can't pair Keith or Seabrook with inferior players anymore, because now they are inferior (well, at least Seabrook is) due to age and wear and tear. Toews is trying hard I believe, but he's lost something, not impressed with Duclair, AA should be traded, and Kampf is a fourth line center. Bouma and Wingels are checking line fodder.

On the farm, little help is on the way. The D-man they called up has not looked good, who else is down there? Highmore? Ok...another smallish kid who plays with tremendous grit who will goto the net. Upside is third line AT BEST. We have no Ekholms, Ehlers, Forsberb, MacKinnon, Monahan, Draisatl, etc....our "GREAT" players are those being paid as if they were great, but are simply not producing at the requisite clip anymore.

A really high pick could help add a bluechip talent to the pool, a pool I argue that stands to get no more richer unless excess salary baggage can be shed.

All aboard the tank! CHOO CHOO!

Except they are not better than this. Other teams are passing them by, other teams are deeper, more talented. The 60s Packers eventually fell off, the 90s Yankees fell off, the 80s Oilers fell off, the 70s Steelers fell off, the 90s Bulls fell off and yes the 2000s Hawks will meet (are meeting) that same fate....This is the reality of the situation. More teams than not have BETTER players 1 to 20 than the Hawks. This is the product OF the success, core guys getting old and can't play as well anymore, traded away resources to "make a run", salary cap pressures forcing young talent to be moved for nothing. It wasn't logical to think the Hawks could do what they did and maintain it. Fans should expect this. Because it's clear as day.

The question is HOW to respond? Put duct tape on this team and get 50 healthy and try another futile run? As other younger teams continue to get better and better? Our best "young players" are a Ghost formally known as Saad-father, a 5'6 kid, and a perimeter playing face/off deficient center. That's really it. Hartman is OK, Vinnie is OK, Hayden I think belongs in the NHL, but is he a true power forward who can pot 60 points? 88 is still outstanding and Crow too if healthy, but the defense is a dumpster fire and you can't pair Keith or Seabrook with inferior players anymore, because now they are inferior (well, at least Seabrook is) due to age and wear and tear. Toews is trying hard I believe, but he's lost something, not impressed with Duclair, AA should be traded, and Kampf is a fourth line center. Bouma and Wingels are checking line fodder.

On the farm, little help is on the way. The D-man they called up has not looked good, who else is down there? Highmore? Ok...another smallish kid who plays with tremendous grit who will goto the net. Upside is third line AT BEST. We have no Ekholms, Ehlers, Forsberb, MacKinnon, Monahan, Draisatl, etc....our "GREAT" players are those being paid as if they were great, but are simply not producing at the requisite clip anymore.

A really high pick could help add a bluechip talent to the pool, a pool I argue that stands to get no more richer unless excess salary baggage can be shed.
- kwolf68

Print this- frame this it’s a 100% the truth

You think the Blackhawks are bad.

You have to feel sick if James Shields is the opening day White Sox pitcher.

Of course there are far more Cub fans so not too many care. Sorry 6628

Bowman needlessly and stupidly subtracted Panarin, Hammer and Darling while losing and not replacing Hossa. Now go ahead and fire Q. It's his fault.

You think the Blackhawks are bad.

You have to feel sick if James Shields is the opening day White Sox pitcher.

Of course there are far more Cub fans so not too many care. Sorry 6628
- jhawk59

I’m not a Sox fan but they finally have a plan and are going in the right direction. They are still in tank mode so that’s probably why Shields is starting.
Our Hawks on the other hand don’t appear to have a plan yet and I’m not even sure that they can “tank” as well as the Cubs Sox and Bulls have because of the cap and the crazy contracts Bowman has handed out. It’s not like they can trade guys like Seabs to a team that’s a cup contender. Who would take that contract? To me every guy on the team with the possible exception of Kane should be available and I hate to say it but if someone overwhelmed them with an offer they may want to consider moving him too.

Bowman needlessly and stupidly subtracted Panarin, Hammer and Darling while losing and not replacing Hossa. Now go ahead and fire Q. It's his fault.
- Savoy

Seems to me - thinking back - the Saad-Panarin deal was optimistically (if cautiously optimically) received by most of us - I still like the deal, especially considering the contract situations. I expect a comeback year for Saad next year.

Hammer had been on a downturn for at least a year, possibly more - lots of hard shot-blocking ice time. Hawks got younger and cheaper in the deal.

Darling has been a mess in Charlotte.

If you’re saying they didn’t replace Hossa’s skill and leadership - that would have been impossible. If you saying they didn’t use his LTIR cap space effectively - maybe.

I would guess they (like many of us) were expecting that after two long summers off, the likes of Toews, Seabrook, Keith, Sharp would bounce back and the “kids” would (after a year in the league) would be ready for a Cup run.

Neither happened (altho we should be encouraged by the improvement by Schmaltz, DeBrincat, Hinostroza, if not the disappointment it seasons of Hartman, Kempny, Rutta).

Seems to me - thinking back - the Saad-Panarin deal was optimistically (if cautiously optimically) received by most of us - I still like the deal, especially considering the contract situations. I expect a comeback year for Saad next year.

Hammer had been on a downturn for at least a year, possibly more - lots of hard shot-blocking ice time. Hawks got younger and cheaper in the deal.

Darling has been a mess in Charlotte.

If you’re saying they didn’t replace Hossa’s skill and leadership - that would have been impossible. If you saying they didn’t use his LTIR cap space effectively - maybe.

I would guess they (like many of us) were expecting that after two long summers off, the likes of Toews, Seabrook, Keith, Sharp would bounce back and the “kids” would (after a year in the league) would be ready for a Cup run.

Neither happened (altho we should be encouraged by the improvement by Schmaltz, DeBrincat, Hinostroza, if not the disappointment it seasons of Hartman, Kempny, Rutta).
- StLBravesFan

It may not have made much of a difference but why didn’t Bowman use the LTIR cap space?

I’m not a Sox fan but they finally have a plan and are going in the right direction. They are still in tank mode so that’s probably why Shields is starting.
Our Hawks on the other hand don’t appear to have a plan yet and I’m not even sure that they can “tank” as well as the Cubs Sox and Bulls have because of the cap and the crazy contracts Bowman has handed out. It’s not like they can trade guys like Seabs to a team that’s a cup contender. Who would take that contract? To me every guy on the team with the possible exception of Kane should be available and I hate to say it but if someone overwhelmed them with an offer they may want to consider moving him too.
- jhawk159

So what do you think fair value in players would be for #88?

I'm thinking there probably isn't one because the acquiring team would be negotiating on the basis they are doing the Hawks a huge favour taking that contract off their books.

Burish showing his friend bias not bashing the Hawks for the lack of fire and focus. They sure as (frank) look like they've given up to me.
- EnzoD

I was watching a bit of the pregame and Burish was really working up that they could get Crawford back...Crawford should be shut down right now. It's not worth it.

Hey how about Stan's goaltending duo - yet another stellar move by our GM. With Crawford's history the last two seasons you'd think Stan would have a solid backup but nope. Raanta - hmm gave him away for a song.

And how's that Murphy for Hammer trade looking...the defense is just brutal. Removing both Hammer and TVR killed the depth on the backend and we can see the result.

The other thing I've found funny was Stan opening up to the media saying we're going to have pretty much the same team next year. Translation I can't move any of these bad contracts I handed out so I'm stuck.

Powers over at the Atlantic had a piece mentioning Sikura might not sign and wait it out until this summer and become an FA. How bad would the optics look on that one. Can't wait. On to Vegas.

Look who the cat ( and I don't mean dinky!) dragged in!!!
How's the new gig?
Have really missed your insight from bobs neighbor

- dpard

Wait, you mean Dave Reid's jocksniffer? LOL.

New gig is . . . well, one more gig than you'll ever have. Think about that.

Bowman needlessly and stupidly subtracted Panarin, Hammer and Darling while losing and not replacing Hossa. Now go ahead and fire Q. It's his fault.
- Savoy

We can debate the Panarin and Hammer deals all day (because, in fairness to Bowman, even though this year Saad has tanked—you were right about that—there's also no question he was looking toward 2019 and beyond, too, and those deals may look a lot different then, especially if Saad comes back around and Panarin is making $9 million a year playing somewhere other than CBJ, but . . .).

On the flipside, ehhh, Darling ain't looking so great right now either.

BUT . . .

To fire Q for this mess would be a political kneejerk move.

On Oesterle's brutal turnover that led to goal #2, if he wasn't playing on his off-side, would that have been an easier play for him? By that, I mean going back up the boards using his fore-hand instead of going behind the goal?

On Oesterle's brutal turnover that led to goal #2, if he wasn't playing on his off-side, would that have been an easier play for him? By that, I mean going back up the boards using his fore-hand instead of going behind the goal?
- tvetter

Oesterle has come back down to earth.

He was not good, and hasn't been as strong as he was with his earlier play.

In his presser, Q said he had a "rough game" and did everything he could not to throw him under media bus.

I would expect him to be scratched next game or at least moved down to the bottom pairing.

Seems to me - thinking back - the Saad-Panarin deal was optimistically (if cautiously optimically) received by most of us - I still like the deal, especially considering the contract situations. I expect a comeback year for Saad next year.

Hammer had been on a downturn for at least a year, possibly more - lots of hard shot-blocking ice time. Hawks got younger and cheaper in the deal.

Darling has been a mess in Charlotte.

If you’re saying they didn’t replace Hossa’s skill and leadership - that would have been impossible. If you saying they didn’t use his LTIR cap space effectively - maybe.

I would guess they (like many of us) were expecting that after two long summers off, the likes of Toews, Seabrook, Keith, Sharp would bounce back and the “kids” would (after a year in the league) would be ready for a Cup run.

Neither happened (altho we should be encouraged by the improvement by Schmaltz, DeBrincat, Hinostroza, if not the disappointment it seasons of Hartman, Kempny, Rutta).
- StLBravesFan

It's like a Wing fan saying they were pissed that Ken Holland didn't have a ready made replacement for Lidstrom when he retired. A little bit apples to oranges but similar enough.

There's no timetable for player's falling off a cliff and yes Toews has looked off the last few years but how many people expected him to become somewhat ordinary before he turned 30? I thought Sharp might be rejuvinated for one more run and Seabs might look a bit better with a more consistent partner.

Even at his age the one I wasn't expecting was Keith, but age catches up to them all at some point.

We can debate the Panarin and Hammer deals all day (because, in fairness to Bowman, even though this year Saad has tanked—you were right about that—there's also no question he was looking toward 2019 and beyond, too, and those deals may look a lot different then, especially if Saad comes back around and Panarin is making $9 million a year playing somewhere other than CBJ, but . . .).

On the flipside, ehhh, Darling ain't looking so great right now either.

BUT . . .

To fire Q for this mess would be a political kneejerk move.
- John Jaeckel

Sorry JJ but its time. Q has shown little ability to adapt. This team still runs the same do nothing PP. Has zero push back when players get run. Zero changes to his schemes to adapt to his players abilities. He coddles his Vets when they need to sit. Jerks his players around with line combos to the point nobody has a clue WTH is happening. The game has changed. If there ever was a team that needed new life with a coaching change, its this Hawks team.

How does a HC not call a time out and undress his team at the bench for last nights are you f'n kidding me display of hockey. The neon flashing light of change is on.

We can debate the Panarin and Hammer deals all day (because, in fairness to Bowman, even though this year Saad has tanked—you were right about that—there's also no question he was looking toward 2019 and beyond, too, and those deals may look a lot different then, especially if Saad comes back around and Panarin is making $9 million a year playing somewhere other than CBJ, but . . .).

On the flipside, ehhh, Darling ain't looking so great right now either.

BUT . . .

To fire Q for this mess would be a political kneejerk move.
- John Jaeckel

Which is exactly why it’ll probably happen!

Oesterle has come back down to earth.

He was not good, and hasn't been as strong as he was with his earlier play.

In his presser, Q said he had a "rough game" and did everything he could not to throw him under media bus.

I would expect him to be scratched next game or at least moved down to the bottom pairing.
- Justin Lowe

Q!? What ever. He had no issues doing that to Gus after the playoff loss to the Blues. Another classic example of being in the Q club. If he likes you, you can do no wrong. If he doesn't? Well we know how that goes.

Everyone keeps complaining about the NMC on this team and how this is hurting the team. To the contrary, I think players are lining up to waive them to get the hell off this team.

Q is going to be a causality of the BS sports theme where you can't fire the players, so the coach and his staff gets the axe.

Q is no the problem in my opinion--nor had he been.

A lot of guys think a "fresh" approach behind the bench will fix the team I get that to a certain degree, but it doesn't matter who is the coach, if they play like this, they're not going to win.

Everyone keeps complaining about the NMC on this team and how this is hurting the team. To the contrary, I think players are lining up to waive them to get the hell off this team.
- isu83boo

I don't see anyone lining up to waive their NMC. Wish 2, 7 and 19 would do it.