Well That Was Fun...

coolhand

Registered User
Jan 20, 2016
2,624
1,937
Streamwood, IL
This team right now is so hard to watch, and I'm in Texas watching games on first row sports on my computer mostly. The coaching is so bad, how can upper management have any confidence that Q and his team will change things? The PP continues to suck, the PK was good for most of the season until the final 2 months. The goalies were terrible. Not sure if Darling would have fared any better with our horrendous defense. We have $20 million in wasted roster space with Toews, Keith, and Seabrook. THIS is on Bowman.

Remember how mad he was after our disaster against Nashville, and they were going to fix it. Well, how did that work out? Now they assure us fans this time they will get it done. I'm not so sure. I think the Hawks have talent, it's just not being used in the right ways or the players being used to their advantage. That I put on Q and his team.

I'll always be a fan, and will continue to watch, but like in the early 2000's it won't be a priority.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChiHawks10

ChiHawks10

Registered User
Jul 7, 2009
28,101
21,428
Chicago 'Burbs
This team right now is so hard to watch, and I'm in Texas watching games on first row sports on my computer mostly. The coaching is so bad, how can upper management have any confidence that Q and his team will change things? The PP continues to suck, the PK was good for most of the season until the final 2 months. The goalies were terrible. Not sure if Darling would have fared any better with our horrendous defense. We have $20 million in wasted roster space with Toews, Keith, and Seabrook. THIS is on Bowman.

Remember how mad he was after our disaster against Nashville, and they were going to fix it. Well, how did that work out? Now they assure us fans this time they will get it done. I'm not so sure. I think the Hawks have talent, it's just not being used in the right ways or the players being used to their advantage. That I put on Q and his team.

I'll always be a fan, and will continue to watch, but like in the early 2000's it won't be a priority.

Only disagree on this, really.
Toews is about 5m in wasted cap. He's worth about 5 to 5.5m per at his current play. Seabrook is a total waste, honestly. He's worth maybe 2m as a bottom pairing guy. Keith? Really? His cap hit is like 5.25m and he's worth every penny.

There's about 10m in wasted salary. Not 20m...

And the PK was only good for most the season because of Crawford. An elite goalie masks a bad PK. They tend to do that a lot, actually.
 

LordKOTL

Abuse of Officials
Aug 15, 2014
3,525
768
Pacific NW
Okay, it's been a day. I've had a bit of time to cool off and digest everything about this season.

I had several problems with this season, but I'm going to try narrowing this post to just two, coaching and management.

The Athletic has an interesting article that was released in the last day or so about what the Hawks did wrong systematically. It's an interesting read and it points out multiple ways where the Hawks were less than efficient defensively. Reading it points out about of the flaws in Q's system and it's the biggest reason I'm mad about him staying on for next season.

Now if we're lucky, he'll have read the article, and watched how other teams with similar, but much more successful setups (like Tampa) play while he has all this free time until September. But I'm not counting on it. He has a history of stubbornness, and unless he's scared ****less of losing his Benny's endorsement position as head coach, I can't imagine he'll make many changes.

The other issue, like I said, is management. Q failed this season. But he didn't have much to work with, particularly on the back end.

Keith's play dropped once we were on the outside looking in, but he still played like a top pairing defensemen (who just sucks at scoring). Murphy and Rutta had lots of hills and valleys, and basically evened out to being #4s IMO. Seabrook, Gustafsson, and Oesterle are nothing more than a bunch of #6 defensemen.

That's one top 3 defensmen, a couple meh level guys, and a few too many liabilities. That's not anywhere close to being good enough. It's unacceptable for a team that wanted to win to have that type of defensive core.

But I understand why Bowman did it, at least to an extent. We were tight against the cap. We couldn't afford to have guys better that what we had.

But the 18/19 season should be different. That excuse of being tight up against the cap doesn't work anymore. I don't care that we re-signed Gustafsson for a million plus, nor do I care that Oesterle is still here. Neither of those guys should draw into a lineup that already has Seabrook weighing the group down. These guys won't just magically improve to being worth a damn defensively. At most, keep one of Oesterle/Gustafsson as a #7. Waive the other one.

This team needs Forsling to play like he did in November and sustain it for a whole season. It's asking a lot, but he's bound to continue to improve the more experience he gets (provided he can be healthy).

But that's just one guy. Unless the Hawks get Dahlin (fingers crossed), we need at least one other guy who can be not completely terrible out there. There are two guys available in free agency in John Moore and Calvin De Haan. De Haan might be a challenge to get, but Moore is a Chicagoland native, we have a clear advantage in being able to sign him.

This team will continue to suck next year unless Q makes smart adjustments to his system AND Bowman makes damn sure that our defensive core doesn't contain a bunch of liabilities on the back end. And for their sake, I hope they do fix their ****, because otherwise they'll each have a GDT dedicated to them next year. And it'll be savage as ****.

He did? I don't think so. For all of our current D-men (not Kempny), only Gus was a + (+1). Combined every D-man not named Keith was a -23. Keith was a -29. 10 of his 32 points were on the PP (0 SHP). Ergo, he contributed at least 22 ES points, and thus had to be on the ice for 51 ESGA or SHGA. Factor in the eyetest where he lost his position as much as Runblad and it it was bar none his worst year since his rookie year--and worse than his 2011 campaign. Not to mention he led the team in GvA.

IMHO Keith this past year was maybe a 3-4 *at best*. It was painfully obvious he was overused (fault on Q who didn't pressbox him like Seabs and cut his icetime--especially from the PP where he was breast augmentation on a zombie-level or worthless). But in no way shape or form was he a "top defenseman".

Further, Keith's play was bad for the bulk of the season--even before we were on the outside looking in he was still a -, couldn't hit the broadside of Rosie O'donnel, and the only reason his D-play didn't appear as-bad was because Crawford was bailing him out.
 

icekoob

4th Liner
May 16, 2010
2,111
133
VALPO/chicago
Think the long layoff will do the vets good and hopefully missing the PO's will light a bit more fire under their underachieving *****.
 

coolhand

Registered User
Jan 20, 2016
2,624
1,937
Streamwood, IL
Only disagree on this, really.
Toews is about 5m in wasted cap. He's worth about 5 to 5.5m per at his current play. Seabrook is a total waste, honestly. He's worth maybe 2m as a bottom pairing guy. Keith? Really? His cap hit is like 5.25m and he's worth every penny.

There's about 10m in wasted salary. Not 20m...

And the PK was only good for most the season because of Crawford. An elite goalie masks a bad PK. They tend to do that a lot, actually.

Have to disagree on Keith. Though you may think his salary is low for his experience, he's a terrible defensemen who is mostly out of position and can't clear the zone

As far as Seabrook it's funny, as I went to a game in Dallas, and Seabrook was the Hawks BEST defenseman that night. Even the Stars fans sitting near me thought so too. The Hawks lost that game in a shootout. But he's still a slug and should be traded though imho.
 

Ace Card Bedard

Back in Black, Red, and White
Feb 11, 2012
8,780
3,628
Good news:

Oilers passes us on teh last day so our odds of getting Dahlin increased from 6% to 6.5% !!!

Plan the parade.
 

ChiHawks10

Registered User
Jul 7, 2009
28,101
21,428
Chicago 'Burbs
Have to disagree on Keith. Though you may think his salary is low for his experience, he's a terrible defensemen who is mostly out of position and can't clear the zone

As far as Seabrook it's funny, as I went to a game in Dallas, and Seabrook was the Hawks BEST defenseman that night. Even the Stars fans sitting near me thought so too. The Hawks lost that game in a shootout. But he's still a slug and should be traded though imho.

Keith is far from a terrible defenseman, sorry. That's like saying Lidstrom is a terrible defenseman because he only put up 38 points in 2003-2004. :shakehead
 

Sarava

Registered User
May 9, 2010
17,173
2,713
West Dundee, IL
Keith is far from a terrible defenseman, sorry. That's like saying Lidstrom is a terrible defenseman because he only put up 38 points in 2003-2004. :shakehead

Keith's issues weren't about points. They were primarily defensively and costly mistakes that ended up in the Hawks net over and over.
 

Sarava

Registered User
May 9, 2010
17,173
2,713
West Dundee, IL
I wonder if Keith was mentally checked out, especially once the season started to become lost?He has admit in the past that it was hard to be motivated in certain situations. I recall him saying that during the 2011 season, after the first cup win.

Just from watching, unlike Seabrook, it doesn't appear to be a physical issue with him.
 

ChiHawks10

Registered User
Jul 7, 2009
28,101
21,428
Chicago 'Burbs
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on Keith. I would trade him in a New York minute.

Keith's issues weren't about points. They were primarily defensively and costly mistakes that ended up in the Hawks net over and over.

I guess I just forgot that a bad year for a player makes them a terrible player. Nevermind the 3x Cups, 2x Norris, Conn Smythe, 4x NHL All Star appearances, 2x NHL First All-Star Team, and 2x Olympic gold medals, plus the fact he's a guarantee for the HoF. He's just a terrible defenseman.

If you would trade Keith(talking to the first quote), then you're crazy.
 

Sarava

Registered User
May 9, 2010
17,173
2,713
West Dundee, IL
I guess I just forgot that a bad year for a player makes them a terrible player. Nevermind the 3x Cups, 2x Norris, Conn Smythe, 4x NHL All Star appearances, 2x NHL First All-Star Team, and 2x Olympic gold medals, plus the fact he's a guarantee for the HoF. He's just a terrible defenseman.

If you would trade Keith(talking to the first quote), then you're crazy.

All I'm saying is he had a really bad year. And as I said, I suspect he might of mentally checked himself out. Obviously that could be corrected. I wouldn't trade him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChiHawks10

AmericanDream

Thank you Elon!
Oct 24, 2005
37,090
26,438
Chicago Manitoba
Have to disagree on Keith. Though you may think his salary is low for his experience, he's a terrible defensemen who is mostly out of position and can't clear the zone

As far as Seabrook it's funny, as I went to a game in Dallas, and Seabrook was the Hawks BEST defenseman that night. Even the Stars fans sitting near me thought so too. The Hawks lost that game in a shootout. But he's still a slug and should be traded though imho.

I agree that Keith is having a down year, but in no way, shape, or form is his contract not warranted and a Godsend..the man has earned every penny from it and still does - look at what top pairing defensemen make in this league and then look at Keith's contract - Jack Johnson was making close to Keith money- nuff' said.
 

ChiHawks10

Registered User
Jul 7, 2009
28,101
21,428
Chicago 'Burbs
I agree that Keith is having a down year, but in no way, shape, or form is his contract not warranted and a Godsend..the man has earned every penny from it and still does - look at what top pairing defensemen make in this league and then look at Keith's contract - Jack Johnson was making close to Keith money- nuff' said.

The hot takes on this site just keep getting hotter. They're at a boiling point by now. Gonna be surface-of-the-sun hot by the time the draft rolls around...
 

ChiHawks10

Registered User
Jul 7, 2009
28,101
21,428
Chicago 'Burbs
All I'm saying is he had a really bad year. And as I said, I suspect he might of mentally checked himself out. Obviously that could be corrected. I wouldn't trade him.

I wasn't really talking to you with my posts, just quoted you because you guys both addressed me. :thumbu:
 

coolhand

Registered User
Jan 20, 2016
2,624
1,937
Streamwood, IL
I guess I just forgot that a bad year for a player makes them a terrible player. Nevermind the 3x Cups, 2x Norris, Conn Smythe, 4x NHL All Star appearances, 2x NHL First All-Star Team, and 2x Olympic gold medals, plus the fact he's a guarantee for the HoF. He's just a terrible defenseman.

If you would trade Keith(talking to the first quote), then you're crazy.

You are talking about his past. I've noticed he hasn't been that good for the past couple of years at least. Makes bad decisions, doesn't check or cover in his end, and watch him on a dump in how long it takes him to turn. I just don't think he's a top defenseman anymore.

Like Seabrook, he's being rewarded for his past not his present performance. I'd still trade him.
 

ChiHawks10

Registered User
Jul 7, 2009
28,101
21,428
Chicago 'Burbs
You are talking about his past. I've noticed he hasn't been that good for the past couple of years at least. Makes bad decisions, doesn't check or cover in his end, and watch him on a dump in how long it takes him to turn. I just don't think he's a top defenseman anymore.

Like Seabrook, he's being rewarded for his past not his present performance. I'd still trade him.

He had one bad year. This season. This is crazy thinking, I'm sorry.

In 2016-2017(last season) he played 80 games, with 6 goals and 47 assists, 53 points. Was a +22, and only 16 PIMs. He played 25:37 ATOI, and he was a second team All Star, 11th in Lady Byng voting, and 4th in Norris voting.

In 2015-2016 he played 67 games, had 9 goals and 34 assists, 43 points, +13, and only 26 PIMs. He played 25:14 ATOI, and he was 11th in Norris voting, only because he missed 15 games to injury, IMO, or he's likely quite a bit lower on that Norris list. Probably top 5 again.

So no, it has been one bad year, this past season, on a damn gift of a contract with a cap hit of like 5.5m per year...
Most HoF D aren't coming in with that kind of cap hit... Connor Murphy's cap hit is 1.5m less... just to show you how ridiculous this thinking is on your part.

He needs a solid partner, and he's still a top pairing D. He's just not a Norris caliber, elite top pair guy, anymore.
 
Last edited:

AmericanDream

Thank you Elon!
Oct 24, 2005
37,090
26,438
Chicago Manitoba
You are talking about his past. I've noticed he hasn't been that good for the past couple of years at least. Makes bad decisions, doesn't check or cover in his end, and watch him on a dump in how long it takes him to turn. I just don't think he's a top defenseman anymore.

Like Seabrook, he's being rewarded for his past not his present performance. I'd still trade him.
If you are going to talk about Keith's contract and it being a problem, you have to include the past- you can't just leave out all those good years and focus on 1 poor year current or not. I have no problem with anyone saying Keith played bad this year and we should have some concerns on him as well, but his overall contract and value is not an issue to me at all. he is declining but still a top pair defensemen who needs a better D partner and less minutes which would help a lot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChiHawks10

coolhand

Registered User
Jan 20, 2016
2,624
1,937
Streamwood, IL
I don't see Keith declining. I see him going over the cliff. He's not a top 4 dman anymore, sorry, pathetic on the PP, and doesn't cover anyone in his own zone on the PK OR 5 on 5. He hesitates on every decision, and this has been going for the past couple of seasons, not just this year.
 

Blue Liner

Registered User
Dec 12, 2009
10,332
3,608
Chicago
I just don't really see what the plan is with the same coaching staff behind the bench. Feel like they're just spinning their wheels. It also amazes me how many out of town people (not just fans but hockey media) are adamant about Q being retained how dumb the organization would be for letting him go. It's truly outta-town stupid. I get big-picture how this season looks like just a one-off amidst a very successful run, but anyone that's truly been paying attention since 2015 knows otherwise. This didn't just happen out of no where. All of that talk and mentality is clearly people clinging to a reputation versus a reality.

Q very well could go somewhere else and have some success, but that doesn't mean he's the right fit for THIS club anymore. "Experts" should know the distinction there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: migi and ChiHawks10

ChiHawk21

Registered User
Jan 15, 2011
7,310
1,552
I just don't really see what the plan is with the same coaching staff behind the bench. Feel like they're just spinning their wheels. It also amazes me how many out of town people (not just fans but hockey media) are adamant about Q being retained how dumb the organization would be for letting him go. It's truly outta-town stupid. I get big-picture how this season looks like just a one-off amidst a very successful run, but anyone that's truly been paying attention since 2015 knows otherwise. This didn't just happen out of no where. All of that talk and mentality is clearly people clinging to a reputation versus a reality.

Q very well could go somewhere else and have some success, but that doesn't mean he's the right fit for THIS club anymore. "Experts" should know the distinction there.
the coaching wasnt the problem it was the play of our best players and the injury to crawford. There is nobody right now that is a better option and q is under contract for another 2 years at a high price. Its kind of a no brainer to keep him for at least another year and see if the players bounce back rather then sign a guy for the sake of "getting a new voice".
 

ChiHawks10

Registered User
Jul 7, 2009
28,101
21,428
Chicago 'Burbs
the coaching wasnt the problem it was the play of our best players and the injury to crawford. There is nobody right now that is a better option and q is under contract for another 2 years at a high price. Its kind of a no brainer to keep him for at least another year and see if the players bounce back rather then sign a guy for the sake of "getting a new voice".

No. The coaching was a huge problem. And it has been trending down every single year since 2015. I don't know how anyone who knows anything about hockey can argue that the coaching wasn't a problem...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Pez68 and migi

Robsker

Registered User
Nov 8, 2014
1,051
205
I don't see Keith declining. I see him going over the cliff. He's not a top 4 dman anymore, sorry, pathetic on the PP, and doesn't cover anyone in his own zone on the PK OR 5 on 5. He hesitates on every decision, and this has been going for the past couple of seasons, not just this year.

Wow. Your assessment has some merit... but is hyperbole. He should not be on the PP, true. He does hesitate constantly in terms of passing, shooting, and lining up for a shot --- true. That said, Keith is doubtless still a top 4 D-man overall. A D1 (meaning a top 31 D-man overall in the league)... no. A D-2 caliber guy (#32-62 overall D-man in the league) --- depending upon what you measure and what it is that you find most important for a D-man, then... maybe, or maybe not. Is he overall a D-3 caliber guy --- a #63-93 in the league as an overall D-man --- absolutely (at least).

To assert that Dunc's is a D-5 (or less) is way too harsh an assessment. He is doubtless a top4 D-man. Now, he may be our only one who is currently at that level, but he is a top4 D-man to be sure. Even Murphy is a possible top4 guy --- may be a below average D-4 type of guy (but maybe not --- maybe he is a high D5 caliber guy).

Overall, the D corps for the Hawks is a disaster --- one certain top4 guy (Keith; who is not D1 caliber) and then... maybe Murphy as a low-level D4 caliber guy. But these two are our best. the rest are all D5 or D6 caliber guys at present. Seabs is an above average D5 level guy. The rest are just... guys. Unfortunately, we have to play 2 of those guys in our top4 --- and that makes for a porous Defense... and one that does not activate the offense very well (not the Q's system is suited for offensive activation by D-men anyway).

So... until the D is addressed and massive input of talent comes aboard, the Hawks will struggle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: migi

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad