You forgot to add in signing Rutta and Gus last year for another 3.5 mildo.

For what: Galchenyuk, Patches, Skinner and RoR went for they could have definitely been players there. poop they probs could have flipped Schmaltz for chucky straight up and put 210lbs of goalscoring with Patrick Kane and given their us dev guys a hard on with Saad, Galchenyuk and Kane all on the same line.

For what Karlsson went for they could have absolutely added him and had space to resign him and then flipped one or two of the other kiddos to replenish picks or add forwards.

They've done a good job poaching guys in the early second round or late in the first (Saad, Debrincat, Jokiharju). But otherwise that front office is horrendous and its a shame one of the best coaches in NHL history (even with his faults) is going to get run out of town for their inability to manage the cap and acquire the appropriate assets.
- fattybeef

My question on Manning, Ward and Kunitz is did Q have any say in those signings. They "seem" like guys that Q likes (character, veterans, defensively tilted). Q has a bit of a history favoring those type of players. That's fine, if you have enough firepower around them to make up for it, but not on this team.

I'm totally with you on Stan's mess. The contracts given to Seabrook (good god the term), Rutta, Manning, Kunitz, and even Gustafsson are maddening.

I wish they could have made some smarter moves in the offseason. Since they haven't, I put it on Q to get the most out of this group. Don't try and make roast chicken when you have the ingredients for mac and cheese.

And all but one guy who I disagree with on a lot of stuff (Savoy...kudos), applauded the move at the time.

If Saad keeps playing the way he has, the move is ok. For all the complaining about who got paid and how much, what depth are you able to trot out there if you pay another guy $9M?
- HawkintheD

Fair point. It's just very tough to watch teams like Tampa, San Jose, etc. navigate the cap to make sure key depth and intrical pieces are retained and yet the Hawks give out two big contracts to two deserving players and they cant field a team for the life of them. Stan is not a hockey person, his dad was. He is now letting a third season get away from him and his job should soon follow.

Fair point. It's just very tough to watch teams like Tampa, San Jose, etc. navigate the cap to make sure key depth and intrical pieces are retained and yet the Hawks give out two big contracts to two deserving players and they cant field a team for the life of them. Stan is not a hockey person, his dad was. He is now letting a third season get away from him and his job should soon follow.
- nickmo2699

Good - let's pattern the Hawks after two teams who have never (in the hard salary cap era for one, ever for the other) won a Cup.

My question on Manning, Ward and Kunitz is did Q have any say in those signings. They "seem" like guys that Q likes (character, veterans, defensively tilted). Q has a bit of a history favoring those type of players. That's fine, if you have enough firepower around them to make up for it, but not on this team.

I'm totally with you on Stan's mess. The contracts given to Seabrook (good god the term), Rutta, Manning, Kunitz, and even Gustafsson are maddening.

I wish they could have made some smarter moves in the offseason. Since they haven't, I put it on Q to get the most out of this group. Don't try and make roast chicken when you have the ingredients for mac and cheese.
- Chunk

I don't even really mind the Ward signing. Especially if they needed to break in Delia or try Forsberg again. Having a guy who can carry the load and be just OK wasn't the worst thing they could have done.

The other ones are just terrible.

The thing I think is the big mess is the abhorrent pro scouting and their inability to accurately evaluate the talent on their team (like, overvalue big time), assess what they need to add, and get the player with the right skill set to do that.

Their amateur scouting and young guys aren't the problem. Bringing in the right veterans has been an issue.

The only two after Hossa that have played any kind of significant part are Brad Richards and Rozy as FA signings. And only two trades for pro players (not including Leddy for Barker cause Leddy wasn't a pro yet) was the Vermette deal and Oduya which took a year to work itself out. That is kind of bad. Not Tyler Hall for Adam Larsson bad but still pretty bad.
- fattybeef

No, just Panarin for Saad bad!

Some fans hate bowman so much they forget he pulled in panarin who was a relative nobody. He also turned Shaw into debrincat.

Hey realistically bowman added players to buy time this season because you can't just throw the young prospects in. All these players deals expire at key times within a year. Adding all these high end players everyone wanted wouldn't have made this team as dominate as ya think.

Funny note though hawks were better with Crawford on IR so might as well trade him at this point.

I don't even really mind the Ward signing. Especially if they needed to break in Delia or try Forsberg again. Having a guy who can carry the load and be just OK wasn't the worst thing they could have done.

The other ones are just terrible.
- fattybeef

I don't mind the idea of Ward (veteran backup), but he is not a good goalie at this point. He battles, and is a "good guy", but he's demonstrably not good.

I just don't understand what the direction was in signing these guys.

I don't even really mind the Ward signing. Especially if they needed to break in Delia or try Forsberg again. Having a guy who can carry the load and be just OK wasn't the worst thing they could have done.

The other ones are just terrible.
- fattybeef

Certainly the defense in front of him has been atrocious at times (or mostly) but:

In 8 games, he has allowed 2 goals once, 3 goals twice, and four or more five times.

32 goals in eight games, a save percentage of .887. Only all of the OT games kept his GPG average below 4.

In front of a just-as-bad defense last season, Forsberg, in 35 games, had a better GPF average (2.97) and save percentage (.908).

Now, all of this is hindsight, but would it have hurt to have Forsberg backing up Crawford this season, giving him more experience and seeing what they really had in one of the pieces coming back for Panarin?

Thank you, was getting ready to address that but you saved me some keystrokes. I stopped reading after that. As I mentioned there is an inability to discern the forest for the trees there.
- HawkintheD

Speaking of trees, we need a couple of them planted in front of a goalie while on the PP. Instead what we have is a couple of daffodils planted way far away from the danger zone. Never going to score with that type of garden.

Im not a Q hater but Barry Trotz, Travis Green and Claude Julien are looking pretty smart right now coaching rosters not significantly better than what the Hawks have.

I don't mind the idea of Ward (veteran backup), but he is not a good goalie at this point. He battles, and is a "good guy", but he's demonstrably not good.

I just don't understand what the direction was in signing these guys.
- Chunk

I think lilmookie's post above yours is a pretty good explanation. I agree they weren't great signings but most seem to be the placeholder variety to let the Utes develop.

I tend to think we need a clean slate. if you look at Stans record since we won the last cup its been pretty bad. the part I have a problem with is all the young players he has given up when the league is getting younger (also younger players are cost controlled) Q not willing to adjust to the new speed of the game and adapting schemes to match the players and the playing favorites thing with him gets old. I also tend to think having Scotty and MCD involved in personal decision's is a mistake I would love to hear who pushed that Seabs contract thru when 95% of the people in the NHL are left scratching there head the day it was signed.

Good - let's pattern the Hawks after two teams who have never (in the hard salary cap era for one, ever for the other) won a Cup.
- StLBravesFan

Did I say they won the cup Genius? I was talking about how they navigate the cap and retain important pieces.

Some fans hate bowman so much they forget he pulled in panarin who was a relative nobody. He also turned Shaw into debrincat.

Hey realistically bowman added players to buy time this season because you can't just throw the young prospects in. All these players deals expire at key times within a year. Adding all these high end players everyone wanted wouldn't have made this team as dominate as ya think.

Funny note though hawks were better with Crawford on IR so might as well trade him at this point.
- lilmookie630

I think most recognize that Stan brought him in. The problem is that he hasn't managed his assets well at all.

Ward hasn't been a good goalie in a long time. Manning was a bottom pairing guy in Philly, so why give him that contract? What has Rutta shown to earn the contract he has? What does playing Kunitz over anyone in Rockford get you?

Hasn't Crawford been on IR since last year? They most certainly are not better without Crawford.

Did I say they won the cup Genius? I was talking about how they navigate the cap and retain important pieces.
- nickmo2699

Yes but a large part of that ability is because they haven't won anything. You win...pay up.

I think most recognize that Stan brought him in. The problem is that he hasn't managed his assets well at all.

Ward hasn't been a good goalie in a long time. Manning was a bottom pairing guy in Philly, so why give him that contract? What has Rutta shown to earn the contract he has? What does playing Kunitz over anyone in Rockford get you?

Hasn't Crawford been on IR since last year? They most certainly are not better without Crawford.
- Chunk

His point was pure sarcasm.

Did I say they won the cup Genius? I was talking about how they navigate the cap and retain important pieces.
- nickmo2699

Much easier to navigate the cap when you don't have to reward players for actually winning something, Star.

How can you be irresponsible in winning two Stanley Cups?

Would it have been more responsible to NOT WIN the two Cups but perhaps have a better team now?

This may be the most ridiculous comment ever made on the board.
- StLBravesFan

The GMs job is to bring in the best possible players and manage the current players contracts , just because you win 2 more cups while being oblivious to your teams future health, salaries, personnel doesn't give him a pass to be stupid.

Drafting and developing players whom can be successful in any role their position is.


So yes my statement can be true , Stan was irresponsible. It's not like they just one day said hey we want to keep toews, Kane, Keith, Seabrook ? Those conversations and decisions were long made knowing these players ages and amount of games played at taxing levels.

Stan is the clear winner with the personnel of this team and he should be the first to go and allow a new GM to make the right or best decisions based on improving this team from the farm team,to the nhl level not based on some past bubble or commitment to keep aging or underperforming players.

I think lilmookie's post above yours is a pretty good explanation. I agree they weren't great signings but most seem to be the placeholder variety to let the Utes develop.
- HawkintheD

I get that, but I personally don't understand the purpose of "placeholders" (not that anyone does or should care). If they aren't going to help you win, then they are just getting in the way of development. I'd rather have a rotating shuttle of young kids coming up to see if they can cut it instead of guys that have been in the league for a while that don't provide anything.

People tend to forget that Q has blatantly not played two defenseman who went on to be contributors on cup teams. But let's blame bowman for trading guys who were just healthy scratches every night. Let's blame bowman for the team consistently not playing a 60 minute effort and showing more excitement. Let's blame bowman for the horrible powerplay. Q has such a bad hand with players who two years ago were 3 of the top 100 players ever to play the game?

I am not against cleaning house, but this team no matter what talent bowman brought in Q plays them so unusual. He takes murphy and puts him on his off side all season. He played Jeff Glass over Forsberg for some reason even though Forsberg should've played every game when Crawford went down. He healthy scratched Daley to the point we had to give him away and same with Kempny.

A few things...

Rutta and Manning are easy to call overpays. The unfortunate thing is that that was the going rate for a mediocre defenseman this past offseason. Gus is a bargain signing in the relative scheme of things.

Not knowing the inner workings of the Hawk front office, I would like to know who was behind drafting Jokiharju and DeBrincat. And then who was behind drafting (insert name of underachiever here). Then figure out from there who should be running the operation side.

The guys that were signed to one or two year deals who haven't done much, I get the criticism for it. I look at them as placeholders. My guess is there is some kind of longer range plan in place, and they don't want to tie themselves down with more longer term deals. What will become of Boqvist and Beaudin and other prospects? I don't know the answer to that, but if enough of them are slated to make the big club next year or the year after and make an impact, making a few free agent splashes would have been ill advised over the past summer.

I get that, but I personally don't understand the purpose of "placeholders" (not that anyone does or should care). If they aren't going to help you win, then they are just getting in the way of development. I'd rather have a rotating shuttle of young kids coming up to see if they can cut it instead of guys that have been in the league for a while that don't provide anything.
- Chunk

Concept of a placeholder is to take pressure off young kids, because some are not physically mature enough to step right in. Like rare prospects come in at 18/19 even 20. What we've seen in the past 2-3 years is very unusual. If you allow players to develop slowly gain confidence in lower leagues and gain strength in that time allows them to play when ready.

Plus look at the hawks cap space in 2019-2020. The time you add in free agency is when it puts ya over the top. Sometimes the best money is one not spent. Hawks splurged on Hossa because it got them over the top. So you add cheap 1 year deal to delay so the young kids can mature and step in.

Bowman needs to go. His hand prints are ALL over this team. From the roster to the assistant coaches, this mess is his responsibility. They should let him go and let Norm Maciver take over for the rest of the year. Let him make a few trades to clear some roster spots (Rutta, Davidson, Kunitz, etc.) and give a few of the kids a shot.

Give Q the respect as one of the best coaches of all time to finish the year out with this team. See if the interim GM and a few minor moves or a major one for help now and see if it can give the team some new life. If it doesn't work out, then look to trade what you can by the deadline and at the end of the year let Q step away on his own to work in the organization or retire. He deserves at least that after what he's helped accomplish and the pile of crap Bowman has given him the past few years.

It's clear at this point that this team needs to shake things up and go in a new direction if we wanna have any chance of being a relevant team anytime soon while Kane and Toews still have something left.

Much easier to navigate the cap when you don't have to reward players for actually winning something, Star.
- StLBravesFan

You got me. That makes sense, just tired of watching this dumpster fire year after year. Living in Dallas I watch a lot of the Stars and at least I have some hockey to take in that doesn't make me want to vomit.

Justin, Great article!

All, what are our top 3 choices for GM mid-season? No red font entries please...
- riozzo

I’ll admit I’m not smart enough to know the answer to that question, but I know there are a few out there. I’d be looking for more of a temporary place holder. Either Norm Maciver or Al MacIsaac, I’d lean towards Maciver.

It’d make sense to move Q at the same time. Again I’d be looking at a placeholder, either Dineen or Granato. I have come around to kinda leaning towards Granato.

Concept of a placeholder is to take pressure off young kids, because some are not physically mature enough to step right in. Like rare prospects come in at 18/19 even 20. What we've seen in the past 2-3 years is very unusual. If you allow players to develop slowly gain confidence in lower leagues and gain strength in that time allows them to play when ready.

Plus look at the hawks cap space in 2019-2020. The time you add in free agency is when it puts ya over the top. Sometimes the best money is one not spent. Hawks splurged on Hossa because it got them over the top. So you add cheap 1 year deal to delay so the young kids can mature and step in.
- lilmookie630

Disagree. Young players coming in all over the league, over a period of the past 2-3 years means it's no longer unusual. Times have changed, and young players today, who are following advanced diets, strength training and attending skill camps and have private skills and skating tutors are far more developed than young players in prior years.

A good GM would have one or two young players in each position group coming in each year to supplement the core (unlike Hawks 6 Dmen high draft picks over last 2 years) and not waste Toews/Kane/Keith/Crow remaining good years.

Stanbo has been a disaster, and Q is stuck in his ways. Both need to go immediately. I'd like to see Colliton promoted before we lose him to another team. As to GM, I'd bring in someone from outside who has had nothing to do with Stanbo or his 85 year old father.