I do think as Scotty got older and more out of touch it affected Stans ability to GM. I believe the 2 are tied together, does he ever hire Q to coach this team I'm certain that was all Scotty.
- BetweenTheDots

Q was hired by McD and Scotty and Tallon was still the GM.

Or maybe they didn't want to repeat what happened to the Bulls when Krause decided to rebuild after 98?
- LAHawk

That had more to do with it than people think.

Bowman also had a hard time evaluating defensemen. Other than Leddy and Oduya, they were mostly bad.
- wizardofi

He got too enthralled with the Keith Oduya type and not enough with the Seabrook type.

Q was hired by McD and Scotty and Tallon was still the GM.
- rpeters01

No he was hired by Scotty. McD had no say in it.

I do think as Scotty got older and more out of touch it affected Stans ability to GM. I believe the 2 are tied together, does he ever hire Q to coach this team I'm certain that was all Scotty.
- BetweenTheDots

Scotty bowman stop advicing after the 2015 cup win. And guess what happen after that bowman had to on his own and we all as fans saw what happen after that. No playoff wins no idea what lane to pick retool or rebuild signing old aged veterans when should been traded etc..

When Sharp was on the market, the story goes someone called Stan, offered up a trade and wanted a yes or no now. Stan didn't commit because he needed to consult Scotty and the trade didn't happen. I don't know if it was the long rumored 2 2nd round picks for Sharp.

No he was hired by Scotty. McD had no say in it.
- BetweenTheDots

McD went ballistic as he was known to do after the Hawks blew the third game of the season and Q who Scotty hired as a consultant was the coach that night. Q was always going to be the coach when Savard faltered.

KD will have a good trading partner in Edmonton now. Jones for Bouchard?
- DarthKane

Maybe Draisaitl is the piece coming back if he still wants out? Sign and trade?

Q was hired by McD and Scotty and Tallon was still the GM.
- rpeters01

You sure about that? It was Scotty and everyone knows that. Q came in early in the season in 08 and Savard was relieved of his coaching duties.

Actually yours is probably the more popular opinion if we were tallying votes. Idk that those deals (19 and 88) sunk the franchise as much as a) Toews physically falling off a cliff and b) resigning Seabrook.

All three actually took less than what they could've gotten in FA, though Seabs arguably got more term than maybe others would've given.

People seem to forget that after that Cup win in 2015, most GM's around the league tabbed Toews as the guy they would build their franchise around over Sid.

2016 was the start of Toews decline and other than one bounce back year he was never really the same player. The wear and tear and eventually whatever his illness was (later on) was just too much.

To LA's point, I agree and think McDonough would've been dead set against trading pretty much any of the Core until they absolutely had to (see Sharp).
- HawkintheD

I want to say that that opinion peaked in 2010 due to Babcock's praise... I don't think anyone seriously put Toews in Crosby's category long after that... Hoping that's not revisionism on my part but could be...

I generally don't give GMs credit for draft picks... That goes to scouts... I basically look at trades, signings and cap management...

For that... there's three really good signings by my tally (Hossa, Rosy and Oduya) and countless bad trades...

Just looking at all the capital they traded away not counting the 2010 fire sale... (Panarin, danault, TT, Leddy, Johns, Hartman, Joker, Hagel) Who did they get back including the picks, who moved the needle for more than half a season or a playoff series?

The grand total for me coming back: Saad, who was always meh away from Hossa and Toews, and Debrincat, for whom only the scouts would get credit for, and little at that since every team had a shot at him... Commesso and Moore TBD...

Injuries to 19 and 7 definitely sunk the team. But looking at the trades, they were all last minute cap urgency trades or value trades. He was known to overpay to make the team a popular destination but went way overboard IMO... He ultimately failed to establish, preserve or replenish a top end talent pipeline.

I want to say that that opinion peaked in 2010 due to Babcock's praise... I don't think anyone seriously put Toews in Crosby's category long after that... Hoping that's not revisionism on my part but could be...

I generally don't give GMs credit for draft picks... That goes to scouts... I basically look at trades, signings and cap management...

For that... there's three really good signings by my tally (Hossa, Rosy and Oduya) and countless bad trades...

Just looking at all the capital they traded away not counting the 2010 fire sale... (Panarin, danault, TT, Leddy, Johns, Hartman, Joker, Hagel) Who did they get back including the picks, who moved the needle for more than half a season or a playoff series?

The grand total for me coming back: Saad, who was always meh away from Hossa and Toews, and Debrincat, for whom only the scouts would get credit for, and little at that since every team had a shot at him... Commesso and Moore TBD...

Injuries to 19 and 7 definitely sunk the team. But looking at the trades, they were all last minute cap urgency trades or value trades. He was known to overpay to make the team a popular destination but went way overboard IMO... He ultimately failed to establish, preserve or replenish a top end talent pipeline.
- busmaster

Interesting you criticize StanBo trading away Panarin, but you do not give him credit for signing him in the first place?

Hagel was a KD trade. Moore is a KD pick.

I'm just glad Bowman wasn't hired in some capacity by the Blackhawks organization. I don't know what the Oilers are thinking but hey whatever.

I want to say that that opinion peaked in 2010 due to Babcock's praise... I don't think anyone seriously put Toews in Crosby's category long after that... Hoping that's not revisionism on my part but could be...

I generally don't give GMs credit for draft picks... That goes to scouts... I basically look at trades, signings and cap management...

For that... there's three really good signings by my tally (Hossa, Rosy and Oduya) and countless bad trades...

Just looking at all the capital they traded away not counting the 2010 fire sale... (Panarin, danault, TT, Leddy, Johns, Hartman, Joker, Hagel) Who did they get back including the picks, who moved the needle for more than half a season or a playoff series?

The grand total for me coming back: Saad, who was always meh away from Hossa and Toews, and Debrincat, for whom only the scouts would get credit for, and little at that since every team had a shot at him... Commesso and Moore TBD...

Injuries to 19 and 7 definitely sunk the team. But looking at the trades, they were all last minute cap urgency trades or value trades. He was known to overpay to make the team a popular destination but went way overboard IMO... He ultimately failed to establish, preserve or replenish a top end talent pipeline.
- busmaster

Somewhat revisionist and just not correct. The poll that produced that result (Toews being the poster boy for who you build your franchise around) was based largely on the strength of the Hawks winning SCF's in '13 and '15 and having gone to the WCF's in 5 out of 7 years (2009-2015).

At that point in time, the Pens had been to two SCF's and won one in 2009. The pendulum swinging back to Sid being the guy to build your team around happened after 2015 with the Pens winning two more Cups.

Stan didn't trade Hagel, he acquired him for nothing from Buffalo.

Also, Oduya they acquired from NJ for draft picks.

Who did he overpay to come here? It could be argued he overpaid some of his own players but that also goes back to the argument about paying for winning.

It's also hard to replenish top end talent when you aren't picking higher than 15-25 in any given year.

Granted the two times they did pick top 10 under Stan, those picks didn't pan out and it could be argued their farm system wasn't really developing their prospects, but at this point it doesn't really matter much now.

Not sure what EDM is thinking with hiring Bowman. They just got over the bad moves made by the idiot before Holland. Stan will likely do:
Ekholm for Murphy
Broberg for whoever signs Alex Nylander

His daddy behind the scenes was making decisions for his son. Bowman didn't build anything only thing he did is dismantle a dynasty team.
- Scott1977

Well then who gets credit for the team winning two more Cups? His father? Give bowman both credit and blame for the team’s performance after the first Cup win

Don't think it was accurate to say that (at the time) Panarin was clearly in it for the money. He'd just signed a multi-year contract at under 4 million per year, and without any NTC, essentially you signed an asset with a track record of performing at close to a point per game.

I mean going the 'cost-certainty' angle, like Stanbo used at the time, was pretty much a mistake given what he had. I can't imagine that trading a guy in the off season immediately after signing that guy to an extension, not sure that that simply wasn't squandering an asset for a Saad, a back up goalie idea, and spare parts - one of which was the re-return of Morin (I think) -who didn't last overly long.

The miscommunications with his coach (where he would deal for players his coach had little interest in). Vermette is the exception, but he did get the same treatment as others- shelved, after brought in, and only because he actually did something in the very brief chance he was given, did that change on the ice in the 2015 playoffs. The fact is, that during the regular season - after coming over after the Kane injury thing, he did not get much regular ice time. Q ended up doing something similar with the 2 forwards that Stanbo got from the Canadiens for Danault. Q just never played them - played Fleischmann more than the other guy -but it was a lot of meh, unless I was remembering that wrongly. To me, that was just another waste of an asset, for something that looked good on paper to one guy, and the guy charged with using those guys on the ice - just wasn't into it.

Maybe it's me, but that's just really poor management -and it was all from the GM end at that time. Sure, there was little point about making an issue of it at the time, because as a fan, you are pretty much relegated to sitting on your but in front of a TV or in the stands - and while hindsight - you can say is 20/20 - it's also: perspective. Good luck to Stanbo. But yeh I don't think it will result in much - a lot like the Rangers thinking that a couple of seasons ago - what they needed to get over the top -was a Kane-Panarin reunion - when what they actually needed was some defence.

Well then who gets credit for the team winning two more Cups? His father? Give bowman both credit and blame for the team’s performance after the first Cup win
- jhawk59

Pretty much it in a nutshell.

He gets credit for two more Cup wins that I guarantee you all the posters who tend to complain about his tenure are the same people who figured they were a one hit wonder and dead in the water after 2010.

He gets the blame for seemingly not having a real vision after 2015 and trying to squeeze blood from a turnip for a couple more seasons when they should've been retooling.

All that said, I still look at his tenure as a largely successful one. I mean FFS name a a more successful period in Hawk history. Was it all him? No, but he certainly deserves more credit than some will give.

When I see some of the mopey poop I read here, it makes me wonder how or if some of you were able to enjoy the lead up to any of the Cup wins; or was it the final 30 seconds of those seasons, the Cup presentation, the parade and the rest was just absolute anxiety.

Interesting you criticize StanBo trading away Panarin, but you do not give him credit for signing him in the first place?

Hagel was a KD trade. Moore is a KD pick.
- LAHawk

Right. Signing him is credit to scouts. Trading him is his bad cap management.

Right. Signing him is credit to scouts. Trading him is his bad cap management.
- busmaster

Resigning Panarin likely meant you'd have had to trade Kane.

Resigning Panarin likely meant you'd have had to trade Kane.
- HawkintheD

Blowman shoulda done that!

Interesting you criticize StanBo trading away Panarin, but you do not give him credit for signing him in the first place?

Hagel was a KD trade. Moore is a KD pick.
- LAHawk

Bowman went to Russia to recruit Panarin in person. Was the only GM to do it.

Blowman shoulda done that!
- paulr

I know this post is a goof but I remember after 2015 you and I talking about it and that was your thought is that Bowman needed to start trading aging members of the Core before they couldn't.

You didn't name Kane specifically but in hindsight, him, Keith at the time, Hossa and Hammer were probably the ones that would've brought back the most in trade.

Plus the amnesia of no Bowman(s), no Hossa as Tallon really wanted to sign Havlat long term.

Also as far as trying to extend the window, do you think the Head of Hockey operations at the time would allow a retool let alone a rebuild to occur ?
- LAHawk

They would have won in 2010 either way but the other two would have been debatable for sure.

Well then who gets credit for the team winning two more Cups? His father? Give bowman both credit and blame for the team’s performance after the first Cup win
- jhawk59

The first two cups are Tallons achievements the third cup I ll give to bowman.

I'm not in this forum too much these days, so maybe this is an unpopular opinion.. but I think the matching deals to 19 and 88 sunk this franchise since 2016. Its because of that, the constant drafting of smurf d-men, and the bean counter fixation on the value proposition of guys like Rundblad that I really hold him responsible for the plummeting...

Not to mention of course the Beach debacle, and IIFC, it was him that forgot to submit qualifying offers in 2010 and not Tallon...

I'll give you Hossa though...
- busmaster

Had to pay them. If they had Danault to take over the 2 C \ Dungeon shifts to help out Toews that is a huge difference there.

Extending AA straight away was pretty dumb.

Losing two Saad trades was hilarious.

They weren't terrible at drafting forwards they just sucked at drafting D and their professional scouting was abhorrent. Had less to do with Smurfs and more of making bad decisions. Fournier, Dahlstrom, Knott, Dalhbeck, Paliotta, Holl, Johns, Olsen, Gilbert - were all 3rd round or sooner and over 6ft and projected at over 200 lbs. And none of them worked out.

Perhaps they had some turnover somewhere because they have done better with Vlasic, EDM, Kaiser and Philips.

Whoever thought that Weise and Fleishman would be helpful contributors was clearly a moron.

Bringing Ladd back was not smart.

The Seabrook deal a year before it was even due was also not smart business.

Certainly they missed on Boqvist and they missed on Dach which should have been a reload. Bouchard or Dobson should have been taken there as a Seabrook replacement and that is one that everyone except Bowman and co agreed on. Zegras, Cozens or Caulfield would have been better there. Oops.

And then they got desperate and went hard after Jones.

Either way it was a lot of trash where it seemed like they thought they were smarter than everyone else when that couldn't have been further from the truth. Having some early trades pay off like the Nick Leddy deal probably didn't help the egos in the room.

The Penguins paying Crosby and Malkin were still able to make a second run. The Lightning have been relevant for a long time with some big money on the books. Certainly Vegas has been relevant and they are a cap team every year. The Panthers are probably going to take a dip but I think they were smart to let some guys on the wrong side of 30 like Montour walk even though still a very effective player. Gotta be a little ruthless.

Point being - a good GM will ruthlessly manage the cap and not keep guys around just because they played well with the club through their prime and certainly won't constantly reach because they think theyre smarter then everyone else.