Blackhawks media thread

[RememberTheRoar]

In terms of harsh criticism, I think this is where you have the difference between beat writers and analysts. Laz and Powers do express criticism, I remember Laz really questioning the Q firing.

But they will only ever go so far because they have to face these folks regularly. You are likely not going to see them say something like the coach should be fired or X player traded because expressing those kinds of opinions regularly may make it impossible to interview these folks.

You need a distance, a neutrality. That's why you don't see the more decisive analysts in the locker rooms doing beat work. It's not just sports, politics too. You're not going to see Trump's biggest critics in the press conference, though White House beat reporters do ask critical questions. The real meat of the criticism comes from analysts who speak after the presser is done.

Also a reporter and an analyst isn’t the same job. I feel like most people who casually pay attention to media don’t necessarily know the difference — especially when it comes to politics, but also somewhat in sports.

 

[Kaners PPGs]

In terms of harsh criticism, I think this is where you have the difference between beat writers and analysts. Laz and Powers do express criticism, I remember Laz really questioning the Q firing.

But they will only ever go so far because they have to face these folks regularly. You are likely not going to see them say something like the coach should be fired or X player traded because expressing those kinds of opinions regularly may make it impossible to interview these folks.

You need a distance, a neutrality. That's why you don't see the more decisive analysts in the locker rooms doing beat work. It's not just sports, politics too. You're not going to see Trump's biggest critics in the press conference, though White House beat reporters do ask critical questions. The real meat of the criticism comes from analysts who speak after the presser is done.

I have definitely become more aware of this over the last couple years especially with most organizations having team reporters. While I don't particularly like Laurence Holmes's work on the Score, I do respect the fact that he makes a point to show up in the locker room periodically. Lazerus has mentioned this dynamic of his job multiple times. I suspect the reason he has been soft on criticizing Seabrook is for this exact reason. What grade did he give him a couple years ago? C- iirc. It was an absolute joke.
I used to follow Lazerus on Twitter but his defense of the team especially Seabrook was too much. We all know that Twitter intensifies emotion and when people Tweet in the moment it is often too extreme yet Lazerus engages these fans in his condescending, sarcastic ways including the shots he takes at them in articles. Just not a good look.

 

[Brightwing]

I swear I'm not making commission off of this, but if you want to subscribe to the Athletic for super cheap:

 

[Mrfenn92]

I swear I'm not making commission off of this, but if you want to subscribe to the Athletic for super cheap:

Are you mark lazerus in internet disguise?

 

[Brightwing]

Are you mark lazerus in internet disguise?

He wishes. I feel like he would be very happy to be a Canadian.

 

[BK]

The Athletic is worth it.

 

[Putt Pirate]

I used to subscribe. But though Laz was a waste of print. It is all about him and his agenda. and quite frankly that is not why I paid for the sub. Powers is OK. Other teams have much better coverage and reporters than the Hawks. It just wasn't my schtick and is for basically the Twitter gen of so many characters, headlines, not much substance usually. This is strictly for the Hawks. I specifically told them Laz blows donkeys when I cancelled. Because he does.

 

[Brightwing]

Oof. Bad article in the Athletic today called 'How we'd run the Blackhawks' quoting a whole bunch of hockey analysists with not one offering up any actual suggestions to improve the team beyond what is being done.

Phrases like "commit to the rebuild" without explaining how they would deal with the core's NMC and that 'early retirements' would give the Hawks financial flexibility. Ok. I'm sure Seabrook is going to walk away from millions to early retire. One author suggests a time machine to re-sign Lehner.

It seems like everyone has a criticism about how the Hawks are being run but no one actually has any ideas on how to do things differently.

 

[Kaners PPGs]

Oof. Bad article in the Athletic today called 'How we'd run the Blackhawks' quoting a whole bunch of hockey analysists with not one offering up any actual suggestions to improve the team beyond what is being done.

Phrases like "commit to the rebuild" without explaining how they would deal with the core's NMC and that 'early retirements' would give the Hawks financial flexibility. Ok. I'm sure Seabrook is going to walk away from millions to early retire. One author suggests a time machine to re-sign Lehner.

It seems like everyone has a criticism about how the Hawks are being run but no one actually has any ideas on how to do things differently.

I agree. It was more of a "state-of-the-organization" article. Seemed like the audience was the rest of subscribers and not hardcore Hawks fans.

Most of my frustration about the Hawk articles on the Athletic is that they don't tell me anything I don't already know. Powers had an article recently about moving the core players. It was fine but nothing that knowledgeable Hawk fans didn't already know. How about analyzing trades of star players over the last 5 years and looking at that compensation? Compare 3 years of Kane and Toews versus the rental cost of players like Hall, Stone, and Karlsson. What would be the difference in return if the Hawks kept the maximum? Who are some possible trading partners and what could be the return? What are some bad contracts the Hawks could take back from contenders and who are their best young players the Hawks could ask for? Use Dom's player rating and draw that out over 3 years to show Kane and Toews's value to other teams. So many times the articles seem kinda lazy and an easy write. Go the extra mile.

 

[Kaners Bald Spot]

I agree. It was more of a "state-of-the-organization" article. Seemed like the audience was the rest of subscribers and not hardcore Hawks fans.

Most of my frustration about the Hawk articles on the Athletic is that they don't tell me anything I don't already know. Powers had an article recently about moving the core players. It was fine but nothing that knowledgeable Hawk fans didn't already know. How about analyzing trades of star players over the last 5 years and looking at that compensation? Compare 3 years of Kane and Toews versus the rental cost of players like Hall, Stone, and Karlsson. What would be the difference in return if the Hawks kept the maximum? Who are some possible trading partners and what could be the return? What are some bad contracts the Hawks could take back from contenders and who are their best young players the Hawks could ask for? Use Dom's player rating and draw that out over 3 years to show Kane and Toews's value to other teams. So many times the articles seem kinda lazy and an easy write. Go the extra mile.

What's scary is that there seems to be a lot of insinuation from league sources that Dach is a #2 C at best and Boqvist is a #3 offensive defenseman at best. I really like both players, but yeesh that's a reality check that I don't want to hear....that would mean that the Hawks have exactly zero long-term building blocks in the system.

I'm asking everyone...have I been overly optimistic about both players?

 

[Kaners PPGs]

What's scary is that there seems to be a lot of insinuation from league sources that Dach is a #2 C at best and Boqvist is a #3 offensive defenseman at best. I really like both players, but yeesh that's a reality check that I don't want to hear....that would mean that the Hawks have exactly zero long-term building blocks in the system.

I'm asking everyone...have I been overly optimistic about both players?

I think Dach will top out as a bottom half of the league #1 C which is still very good. I think Boqvist will top out as a Torey Krug/Tyson Barrie type player. He won't be a #1Dman but could be an excellent 2nd line dman, #1PP dman. He'll be in a tier below Dahlin, Hughes, and Makar. My question- who has the better career: Fox or Boqvist?

 

[Kaners Bald Spot]

I think Dach will top out as a bottom half of the league #1 C which is still very good. I think Boqvist will top out as a Torey Krug/Tyson Barrie type player. He won't be a #1Dman but could be an excellent 2nd line dman, #1PP dman. He'll be in a tier below Dahlin, Hughes, and Makar. My question- who has the better career: Fox or Boqvist?

I see Boqvist as having a John Klingberg ceiling. I've moved off the Karlsson stuff because I think he'd have shown more immediately if he was that good.
Do you remember Lubomir Visnovsky? That's about where I'm at with the most likely scenario for Boqvist.

I have trouble placing a ceiling on Dach yet....I don't think he's going to be a top 5 C in the NHL but I think he could put himself close......as of right now. I reserve the right to change my mind as I see more.

 

[Kaners PPGs]

I see Boqvist as having a John Klingberg ceiling. I've moved off the Karlsson stuff because I think he'd have shown more immediately if he was that good.
Do you remember Lubomir Visnovsky? That's about where I'm at with the most likely scenario for Boqvist.

I have trouble placing a ceiling on Dach yet....I don't think he's going to be a top 5 C in the NHL but I think he could put himself close......as of right now. I reserve the right to change my mind as I see more.

I can see Klingberg for Boqvist. I would be very surprised with a top 5 center rank for Dach. Look at these centers right now: McDavid, Draisitl, MacKinnon, Crosby, Mathews, Eichel, Point, Scheifele, Barkov, Malkin. I don't think Dach gets into that category. Hell, the next group is Aho, Tavares, O'Reilley, Bergeron, Stamkos, and Petersson. Being a top 10 center is being a HOF-quality player. I'd like to see it.

 

[Kaners Bald Spot]

I can see Klingberg for Boqvist. I would be very surprised with a top 5 center rank for Dach. Look at these centers right now: McDavid, Draisitl, MacKinnon, Crosby, Mathews, Eichel, Point, Scheifele, Barkov, Malkin. I don't think Dach gets into that category. Hell, the next group is Aho, Tavares, O'Reilley, Bergeron, Stamkos, and Petersson. Being a top 10 center is being a HOF-quality player. I'd like to see it.

I could totally see him in the Scheifele category. The guy he reminds me the most of is Kopitar, but worse at the dot.

It all depends on his development. Do they develop him as the 2 way beast or maximize him offensively?

Kopitar's average season is 25+47=72 with Selke level defense.

Scheifele has been around a ppg with 30-39 goals for a while. That's where I could see him if he goes the offensive route.

I said that I actually don't see him as a top 5 guy but I do see him in 6-15 territory.

 

[Brightwing]

Just got around to reading Ben Pope's article on in his interview with Colliton, which you can find here: Jeremy Colliton, entering third season as coach, hopes to nourish Blackhawks’ rediscovered work ethic

Looking back to the earlier part of the season, he said this about his famous 'it's not the line combos' comment:

‘‘The point that I was trying to make is work ethic and competitiveness and team-first decisions, that’s what helps you win,’’ Colliton said this week. ‘‘If you don’t have that as a base, nothing else matters.
‘‘Are [lines] important? Are they something we still talk about all the time? Yes. If they didn’t matter, we wouldn’t change things around, trying to look for a spark. But there is no spark if there is no work ethic.’’

And then a bit later ...

‘‘We weren’t competitive enough,’’ he said bluntly. ‘‘We didn’t have the commitment. We didn’t have the work ethic away from the puck. We didn’t have discipline with shift length and puck management and all those things. That’s what adds up to winning.
‘‘We took a step around Christmas. We improved. We got better as the second half went on, and then we took another step come summertime. We need the group we have [now] to continue that.’’

The article talks about the defensive shift they made at that time, opting for a higher risk/higher reward and then later in the article he talks about how he expects Janmark, Wallmark and Zadorov to help defensively.

I think I have the memory of a squirrel, but I'm trying to think back to those October and November games. When he talks about lack of discipline and lazy play, who is he talking about? What was the problem?

In case anyone is curious, here's the game sheet for the Oct. 24 game against Philly after which he made the comments: Philadelphia Flyers at Chicago Blackhawks Box Score — October 24, 2019 | Hockey-Reference.com

 

[Pez68]

I've never seen this before, and never heard this story. Apologies if it has been posted.

Report: Blackhawks almost traded Duncan Keith for Jeremy Roenick and Tony Amonte

What a clownshoes disaster that would have been.

 

[LavalPhantom]

‘‘We weren’t competitive enough,’’ he said bluntly. ‘‘We didn’t have the commitment. We didn’t have the work ethic away from the puck. We didn’t have discipline with shift length and puck management and all those things. That’s what adds up to winning.
‘‘We took a step around Christmas. We improved. We got better as the second half went on, and then we took another step come summertime. We need the group we have [now] to continue that.’’

“Not competitive enough “ to me it’s coach talk for “my stuff doesn’t work and I don’t know why”

 

[Pez68]

“Not competitive enough “ to me it’s coach talk for “my stuff doesn’t work and I don’t know why”

No. It means you've got a bunch of guys on this team that aren't willing to compete. They aren't willing to battle. They aren't willing to work hard, shift in, and shift out. This is obvious to ANYONE that has been watching this team over the last few seasons. They get outworked almost on a nightly basis. Too many floaters. Too many soft forwards. Too many guys not willing to pay a price. Too many guys who take shifts off.

What he said is 100% accurate, and it is crystal clear to those who know the game.

 

[BobbyJet]

No. It means you've got a bunch of guys on this team that aren't willing to compete. They aren't willing to battle. They aren't willing to work hard, shift in, and shift out. This is obvious to ANYONE that has been watching this team over the last few seasons. They get outworked almost on a nightly basis. Too many floaters. Too many soft forwards. Too many guys not willing to pay a price. Too many guys who take shifts off.

What he said is 100% accurate, and it is crystal clear to those who know the game.

It seems to me that Stan's drafting (as well as player acquisitions) are largely to blame. Hawks lack character more than anything - problem is character doesn't seem to be a Stan priority. Couple that with his preference to draft smurfs and here we are. A team with no drive.

 

[Pez68]

It seems to me that Stan's drafting (as well as player acquisitions) are largely to blame. Hawks lack character more than anything - problem is character doesn't seem to be a Stan priority. Couple that with his preference to draft smurfs and here we are. A team with no drive.

It's a culture problem, more than anything. Guys like Trotz and Torts come into an organization, and regardless of the players, get them to buy in, and outwork the opposition almost every night. There was a shitload of pushback from the "leaders" on this team when it came to the way Colliton wanted them to play. I mean, they more or less openly revolted, crying to McDonough about that, and the systems. It all starts with the leadership, and Blackhawks' leadership has grown soft and complacent, living in the glory days, where they could "flip the switch", and win on talent alone. Those days are long gone, and they need to realize that.

It will be interesting to see how the next season plays out, with McDonough out of the picture.

 

[LavalPhantom]

No. It means you've got a bunch of guys on this team that aren't willing to compete. They aren't willing to battle. They aren't willing to work hard, shift in, and shift out. This is obvious to ANYONE that has been watching this team over the last few seasons. They get outworked almost on a nightly basis. Too many floaters. Too many soft forwards. Too many guys not willing to pay a price. Too many guys who take shifts off.

What he said is 100% accurate, and it is crystal clear to those who know the game.

Why do you have to answer like an asshole? I have no issue with you disagreeing with what I said, but aren’t people entitled to their opinion anymore without getting belittled? I don’t have time to argue with people that don’t respect others so I’ll revert back to “read only” mode. Have fun.

 

[Pez68]

Why do you have to answer like an asshole? I have no issue with you disagreeing with what I said, but aren’t people entitled to their opinion anymore without getting belittled? I don’t have time to argue with people that don’t respect others so I’ll revert back to “read only” mode. Have fun.

Belittled? Lol.

You trashed Colliton based on a lack of comprehension for what he was saying. If you don't see that this team lacks compete, and gets outworked quite often, you're missing something when watching their games.

A lot of coaches say exactly what Colliton said. Compete is critical to being a good team in this league. Hockey is a sport where even a momentary lapse in intensity or compete can cost you a goal.

I mean, he even explained what "not competitive enough" means. Your post was a shot at Colliton, and nothing more.

I'm an asshole. Sorry.

 

[UsernameWasTaken]

I don't subscribe, just b/c I already subscribe to a lot of other stuff - and while there are articles they post i would like to read, i don't think i'd be a frequent enough reader to justify adding it on to my already overloaded media/podcast menu.

 

[BK]

Going through the Hawks podcasts and I can't help but comment how shit Blackhawks rinkcast is. It has got worse somehow. They literally just make shit up. Plus they have the nerve to say shit about Mario T who is actually a decent follow.

 

[RememberTheRoar]

Going through the Hawks podcasts and I can't help but comment how shit Blackhawks rinkcast is. It has got worse somehow. They literally just make shit up. Plus they have the nerve to say shit about Mario T who is actually a decent follow.

Why did he leave them? Is it because he actually took his work seriously and that didn’t fit the Rink culture?