Its not really a tangent. I believe Barry Smith's title in the organization was Director of Player (or Talent) Evaluation.

So how much input did he have in some of the absurd acquisitions that the Hawks made or traded for. That includes Connor Murphy, Manning, Rutta, Ward and the 18 other defenceman they brought into the organization.
- RickJ

Most of what I've read (admittedly not much available) was that most of his talent evaluation was overseas. That's why I am curious just how much time he spent with Colliton, and what is overall qualifications are. I can read Wikipedia with the best of them, but it doesn't really paint the internal picture all that well.

many of has argued the same thing but as succinctly as you..but alas to no avail...

what is happening to hawks has happened most recently to redwings, the kings, and soon the penguins...not a damn thing any GM can do to prevent it..

how about those teams that were competitive with the hawks, had big contracts and have won zippo, nada, zero: nucks, ducks, sharks...they got their down cycle right in front of them or in the case of the nucks going through it now...
- bogiedoc

Yes.

The question is NOT who is to blame, I don't think - the question is who can best fix it and return the Hawks to Cup-competitive status.

Certainly we must look at history in this regard - and to me, Stan's history does not give me confidence in his ability to right the ship.

I agree with all you said - but I think Stan has only proven that he can fill in / retool around a quality core to maintain a championship team - as he did after 2010-11-12 to set up the next three year run here - he hasn't shown that he can lead a more major rebuild that I think is required now.

Yes.

The question is NOT who is to blame, I don't think - the question is who can best fix it and return the Hawks to Cup-competitive status.

Certainly we must look at history in this regard - and to me, Stan's history does not give me confidence in his ability to right the ship.

I agree with all you said - but I think Stan has only proven that he can fill in / retool around a quality core to maintain a championship team - as he did after 2010-11-12 to set up the next three year run here - he hasn't shown that he can lead a more major rebuild that I think is required now.
- StLBravesFan

Good point about who can fix it. Why do you think Bowman can't fix it? I have no idea if he can or can't simply because he has never been in the position to build from the bottom up.

Most of what I've read (admittedly not much available) was that most of his talent evaluation was overseas. That's why I am curious just how much time he spent with Colliton, and what is overall qualifications are. I can read Wikipedia with the best of them, but it doesn't really paint the internal picture all that well.
- Chunk

As Moe said to Curly in "Three Little Pirates" in the kingdom of Moronika:

"We shall see what we shall see."

Carving out a new blog as we speak.

Anyone have any questions or themes they want me to work in on Coach Q, Stan, Colliton, etc?
- Justin Lowe

Which of the big 5 asks/waives NTC to get moved first? Toews, Keith, Seabrook, Kane or Crawford

My bet...Kaner..within 2 years

I'm wondering after having listened to lots of talk about Q being let go yesterday, listening to the press conference, and everything, how long is Bowman's leash gonna be with this team?

We all assumed that Q and Bowman were gonna be tied together or at the very least if one goes the other would have a short period of time to turn it around until they will get the axe as well, but after the press conference we can clearly see that is NOT the case. So much so to the point that McD made a point of saying that this was Stan's first chance to even hire "his own" Head Coach for this team. It appears IMO, that McD is running the show 110% with the Bowman's working with him, but mostly following his lead (not so much on the hockey operations though, that's the Bowman's "expertise"). Idk where Rocky fits in this picture. Part of me is wondering how much he really has to do with the teams success. He made all the obvious moves. Put home games on TV, bring back Pat Foley, hire a very successful PR guy in McD to get fans to come back, bring in hockey "royalty" in Scotty Bowman to bring credibility to the front office. Idk could just be over thinking of this whole thing and how this is all gonna shake out. Which brings me to my next thought...

So how long does Stan get now? Colliton as well? Especially if the team starts playing better, but can't seem to get over the hump. If they don't play well, do they blow up the team in the next year or two before anyone goes so they can do a true rebuild or do they clean house again?

Maybe Justin can throw his two cents in on this either here or in his new blog but this is definitely something I am VERY curious to know

Which of the big 5 asks/waives NTC to get moved first?

My bet...Kaner..within 2 years
- PatShart

I'd bet Keith. He would be a top pairing deman on most contenders. Imagine what he'd do for the Leafs.

Good point about who can fix it. Why do you think Bowman can't fix it? I have no idea if he can or can't simply because he has never been in the position to build from the bottom up.
- paulr

And your good point.

I can only look at what I consider to be low returns in some of his deals: Leddy and Sharp (my understanding is that he waited too long to pull the triggers and the market dried up), the TDLs (which were largely - but not completely - ineffective), his return for Saad was ok but I think could have been better (Anisimov, Forsberg), I was ok with his bringing Saad back for Panarin, but his last offseason was certainly underwhelming, and not getting much of anything other than cap space for including TT in the Bickell move and Hinostroza in the Hossa move....

He has seemingly had some success in the draft, although so far, only AdB, Jokiharju, and maybe Schmaltz have had much proven success in the Show.

His other successes have been in picking up the likes of Emery, Oduya, Handzus, Desjardins, Vermette that led to the three-year run from 2013-15 - not stars but certainly contributors.

His most creative move so far has been to get Panarin in the first place.

But nothing in the above says to me that he can make the bold moves that return the replacements for the core - no top-6 to replace Hossa, Sharp - only Jokiharju so far to replace a diminished Seabrook, Hjalmarsson, Oduya....

If Q is like Phil Jackson (and I think he is - very good with high-quality teams, not very good with rebuilding teams), then I think Stan is like Krauss - very good at filling in around stars, not very good at building new rosters.

Which of the big 5 asks/waives NTC to get moved first? Toews, Keith, Seabrook, Kane or Crawford

My bet...Kaner..within 2 years
- PatShart

I bet Toews, Kane, Keith and Seabrook stay for the rest of their careers. Crawford actually could be great trade bait if the Hawks chose to make him available.

Colliton is stepping into a daunting position. He's replacing a HOF coach that has had tremendous success in Chicago. He's inheriting a core group of players who have been through the battles with Coach Q and have that band of brothers type camaraderie borne from shared experience, some of whom are the same age or older than Colliton.

I hope he's up to the task.

Which of the big 5 asks/waives NTC to get moved first? Toews, Keith, Seabrook, Kane or Crawford

My bet...Kaner..within 2 years
- PatShart

I think he willl too or sooner if this blows up. Maybe Keith by trade deadline. Not many moving parts, but there is blood in the water.

I think Crawford will be explored this year ...be asked to give his 10 team list and I think teams will ask about him.

Keith, I didnt think he'd go anywhere, but he's a huge competitor and may want 1 more kick at the cup can. If they spiral, I can now see him asking out quietly

Kane I think we may see outward frustration if things go south. Hes got a lot of hockey left and SHOULD be the entire focal point to build around, but I'm sure it'll still cater to "captain serious". Kane eventually says he wants out and wants to win/can't handle an AHL team in a NHL league.

Toews wont go anywhere. Why would he? Goes to Canada and he'll be exposed as not having it anymore. In CHI, he has the mystique of who he was and that's good enough for most and hes the face of the team

Seabrook I think would want to stay for the right reasons, but I can see the team convincing him to waive his NTC when Seattle comes along. And he'll do it to help the Hawks and because it's the classy thing he does

Which of the big 5 asks/waives NTC to get moved first? Toews, Keith, Seabrook, Kane or Crawford

My bet...Kaner..within 2 years
- PatShart

Crawford before the TDL
Then Seabrook

I think Crawford will be explored this year ...be asked to give his 10 team list and I think teams will ask about him.

Keith, I didnt think he'd go anywhere, but he's a huge competitor and may want 1 more kick at the cup can. If they spiral, I can now see him asking out quietly

Kane I think we may see outward frustration if things go south. Hes got a lot of hockey left and SHOULD be the entire focal point to build around, but I'm sure it'll still cater to "captain serious". Kane eventually says he wants out and wants to win/can't handle an AHL team in a NHL league.

Toews wont go anywhere. Why would he? Goes to Canada and he'll be exposed as not having it anymore. In CHI, he has the mystique of who he was and that's good enough for most and hes the face of the team

Seabrook I think would want to stay for the right reasons, but I can see the team convincing him to waive his NTC when Seattle comes along. And he'll do it to help the Hawks and because it's the classy thing he does
- PatShart

Someone speculated Q to the Peg. How about he brings the Captain with him?
For whatever reason, I could see Kane in Boston some day
Keith to the Leafs makes sense too

I think Crawford will be explored this year ...be asked to give his 10 team list and I think teams will ask about him.

Keith, I didnt think he'd go anywhere, but he's a huge competitor and may want 1 more kick at the cup can. If they spiral, I can now see him asking out quietly

Kane I think we may see outward frustration if things go south. Hes got a lot of hockey left and SHOULD be the entire focal point to build around, but I'm sure it'll still cater to "captain serious". Kane eventually says he wants out and wants to win/can't handle an AHL team in a NHL league.

Toews wont go anywhere. Why would he? Goes to Canada and he'll be exposed as not having it anymore. In CHI, he has the mystique of who he was and that's good enough for most and hes the face of the team

Seabrook I think would want to stay for the right reasons, but I can see the team convincing him to waive his NTC when Seattle comes along. And he'll do it to help the Hawks and because it's the classy thing he does
- PatShart

Keith's contract and his current play makes him easiest to move.

Kane's contract would make it difficult to move him to a contender whoi probably don't have the cap space to acquire him.

Toews' contract and contract value makes it hard to move him.

Seabrook's contract make him almost impossible to move him.

Trouble ahead

https://www.secondcityhoc...smith-new-assistant-coach

Although Stan Bowman said during Tuesday’s press conference that there was never a power struggle between he and Quenneville, there is significant evidence to the contrary.

One of the more well-known incidents occurred back in 2012, while the Hawks were afflicted with an awful power play during another subpar season (sound familiar?). In March, a member of the Hakws hockey operations staff started appearing at practices, focusing on work with the Chicago power play. It’s been widely reported that this led to a furious Quenneville confronting Stan Bowman, because Quenneville was never informed of this practice addition and did not approve of it.

Who was that staff member? None other than Smith.

Hey gang - I couldn't get to everyone's questions... but here is my latest:

https://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=95783


Let's do another mailbag type blog soon. Looks like you all have as many questions as I do.

Which of the big 5 asks/waives NTC to get moved first? Toews, Keith, Seabrook, Kane or Crawford

My bet...Kaner..within 2 years
- PatShart

I will go with CC if he plays well and the Hawks are out of it by early 2019.

Duclair has another goal tonight. 6 in 15 games, On pace for 31 but we could not afford 1.5 mil for a really fast 22 year old that scored 20 goals at 19. That made no sense to me. We’re trying to get faster and younger. I thought we should have given it 1 more year.
- kmw4631

Duclair was an easy target for Q. As soon a Q questioned Duclair’s hussle he was done. At the Press Conference yesterday Bowman talked of what a wonderful relationship he has had with Q all along. I almost fell off my chair. This was an absolutely huge lie.

And your good point.

I can only look at what I consider to be low returns in some of his deals: Leddy and Sharp (my understanding is that he waited too long to pull the triggers and the market dried up), the TDLs (which were largely - but not completely - ineffective), his return for Saad was ok but I think could have been better (Anisimov, Forsberg), I was ok with his bringing Saad back for Panarin, but his last offseason was certainly underwhelming, and not getting much of anything other than cap space for including TT in the Bickell move and Hinostroza in the Hossa move....

He has seemingly had some success in the draft, although so far, only AdB, Jokiharju, and maybe Schmaltz have had much proven success in the Show.

His other successes have been in picking up the likes of Emery, Oduya, Handzus, Desjardins, Vermette that led to the three-year run from 2013-15 - not stars but certainly contributors.

His most creative move so far has been to get Panarin in the first place.

But nothing in the above says to me that he can make the bold moves that return the replacements for the core - no top-6 to replace Hossa, Sharp - only Jokiharju so far to replace a diminished Seabrook, Hjalmarsson, Oduya....

If Q is like Phil Jackson (and I think he is - very good with high-quality teams, not very good with rebuilding teams), then I think Stan is like Krauss - very good at filling in around stars, not very good at building new rosters.
- StLBravesFan

Barry Smith is responsible for Panarin, at least that's what I heard

I think Crawford will be explored this year ...be asked to give his 10 team list and I think teams will ask about him.

Keith, I didnt think he'd go anywhere, but he's a huge competitor and may want 1 more kick at the cup can. If they spiral, I can now see him asking out quietly

Kane I think we may see outward frustration if things go south. Hes got a lot of hockey left and SHOULD be the entire focal point to build around, but I'm sure it'll still cater to "captain serious". Kane eventually says he wants out and wants to win/can't handle an AHL team in a NHL league.

Toews wont go anywhere. Why would he? Goes to Canada and he'll be exposed as not having it anymore. In CHI, he has the mystique of who he was and that's good enough for most and hes the face of the team

Seabrook I think would want to stay for the right reasons, but I can see the team convincing him to waive his NTC when Seattle comes along. And he'll do it to help the Hawks and because it's the classy thing he does
- PatShart

Kane might do what you suggest, that's what Chelios did. Couldnt take losing. If he goes I hope it's home to Buffalo.
Seabrook is from the Vancouver area so Seattle would be like going home as well.