Excuses over. Barry Trotz available (no longer available)

[ChiHawks10]

I give up. Call it "Vindictive", say it's my 'M.O'?. It's neither. I just want to see Hawks play to their potential.

There's no reasoning with folks who don't (or refuse to) see the ineptness behind the bench .... and probably worse the dysfunctional organization. I just knew some would use Crawford's injury as the latest excuse to let Q off the hook. So here we go again; another season of futility behind the bench where it will be up to the players to pull a rabbit out of the hat despite the illogical roster decisions, the soft defense, the disorganized STs etc. That worked when the roster was stacked, not so much in the last 3 years.

Dude, I don't want Q here. I wanted him fired at the end of the season. His shelf life is long overdue with the Hawks. I don't want him to coach this team. He is no longer the best thing for this team.

My point was, you singled out my post as if I was saying Q needed to "groom" Colliton, and I was just explaining that's not what I meant by it. You just used my post as an excuse to rag on Q, as opposed to actually reading and comprehending what I was saying.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Nice raise for a big downgrade on talent from the Caps to Isles, especially if Tavares decides to bolt.

 

[BobbyJet]

Dude, I don't want Q here. I wanted him fired at the end of the season. His shelf life is long overdue with the Hawks. I don't want him to coach this team. He is no longer the best thing for this team.

My point was, you singled out my post as if I was saying Q needed to "groom" Colliton, and I was just explaining that's not what I meant by it. You just used my post as an excuse to rag on Q, as opposed to actually reading and comprehending what I was saying.

I comprehend "groom" just fine. There was only one guy in the Hawks org who would groom a rookie coach and that is Q. If you meant "develop" that's an entirely different situation.

Personally, I like the idea of Colliton being promoted to assistant coach in Chicago, under the tutelage of a guy like Trotz, but certainly not by Q ..... but that's not going to happen. Hence, as it stands now, better he stays in Rockford and develops on his own. So, in essence, we agree.

 

[Hawkaholic]

Coaches in the NHL don't groom coaches in the AHL.

 

[ChiHawks10]

I comprehend "groom" just fine. There was only one guy in the Hawks org who would groom a rookie coach and that is Q. If you meant "develop" that's an entirely different situation.

Personally, I like the idea of Colliton being promoted to assistant coach in Chicago, under the tutelage of a guy like Trotz, but certainly not by Q ..... but that's not going to happen. Hence, as it stands now, better he stays in Rockford and develops on his own. So, in essence, we agree.

Yeah, my next post said that I should have probably used the word "develop" as opposed to groom. So yeah, we agree.

 

[BobbyJet]

BobbyJet will just find something to complain about with the next coach, it’s kind of his M.O

Is that right?

I, and a few others recognized that Q was done long before most folks woke up to that fact around here. Now, if Rocky (or whoever is really calling the shots) would just grow some, we'd all be better off.

 

[LordKOTL]

Again, you're talking about wanting to have the team play to their potential and your solution is to fire Q and replace him with a coach of teams that **** the bed essentially every single year except this one (in no small part thanks to the Jackets being a one-line team and it taking them two games to realize that somehow, the Pens being gassed, the Bolts being their usual choker selves, and Vegas finally running out of Cinderella powder). I'm not suggesting that Trotz is a bad coach, but that just seems like a lateral move at the very best and one that'd make the old boys across the league stick up their noses for such a late canning.

For the record...I wasn't suggesting Trotz. I was commenting on how "there is not one legitimate reason to fire Q in the MIDDLE OF THE FREAKING SUMMER".

In a technicality, though, he should have been fired at the end of this season, but the legit reasons to have fired him was (a) the 2017 playoffs, and (b) the 2018 season.

I think the 'hawks statement that they are sticking with Stan+Q stands...but it doesn't negate that IMHO he should have been let go.

 

[ChiHawk21]

Is that right?

I, and a few others recognized that Q was done long before most folks woke up to that fact around here. Now, if Rocky (or whoever is really calling the shots) would just grow some, we'd all be better off.

grow some lol. 12 million dollars

 

[ChiHawks10]

grow some lol. 12 million dollars

What, Q's remaining contract $$? Rocky is a multi-billionaire. $12m is like weekend pocket-money for him. The decision to keep Q had nothing to do with money, I can assure you.

 

[ChiHawk21]

What, Q's remaining contract $$? Rocky is a multi-billionaire. $12m is like weekend pocket-money for him. The decision to keep Q had nothing to do with money, I can assure you.

lol oh you can? you dont think that was a consideration that he was under contract for 2 more years?? im not saying it was the main decision to keep him. but telling someone to grow some and throw away 12 million of someone elses money is absurd especially talking about the greatest coach in organizational history to the unknown.

 

[ChiHawks10]

lol oh you can? you dont think that was a consideration that he was under contract for 2 more years?? im not saying it was the main decision to keep him. but telling someone to grow some and throw away 12 million of someone elses money is absurd especially talking about the greatest coach in organizational history to the unknown.

Yes. Because billionaires, making money hand over fist, don't blink an eye at $12m. Especially not when it's related to an investment like a sports team. These guys probably lose and gain more than that in a day just in the market... Retaining Q wasn't about the money. It was likely all about optics.

And I know you're not. I'm just pointing out that money doesn't mean much to someone who has more of it than their kid's, kid's, kid's, kid's will ever be able to spend.

 

[ChiHawk21]

Yes. Because billionaires, making money hand over fist, don't blink an eye at $12m. Especially not when it's related to an investment like a sports team. These guys probably lose and gain more than that in a day just in the market... Retaining Q wasn't about the money. It was likely all about optics.

And I know you're not. I'm just pointing out that money doesn't mean much to someone who has more of it than they know what to do with.

100%. but 12 million for no reason is still 12 million for no reason. There was just as much of an incentive to keep him as to get rid of him. Dont make moves just to make moves. optics, public opinion, marketing is huge in his investment as well.

if they continue to lose then the decision becomes easier for everyone..and if they bounce back everyone wins. Its really a no brainer.

 

[ChiHawks10]

100%. but 12 million for no reason is still 12 million for no reason. There was just as much of an incentive to keep him as to get rid of him. Dont make moves just to make moves. optics, public opinion, marketing is huge in his investment as well.

if they continue to lose then the decision becomes easier for everyone..and if they bounce back everyone wins. Its really a no brainer.

It wouldn't have been for no reason, though. It would have been to try and improve your team(investment). Just my opinion, obviously.

And yeah, all of those things would factor in. I just don't think money was more than even a blip on the radar for reasons why he was retained. All those other things were far more important.

 

[BobbyJet]

Good idea. Let's trade in a 3 time Stanley Cup Champion for an underachiever that managed to finally win the cup over a first year expansion team.

If you're referring to the Caps, yes they have had to deal with Pens pretty much every year and have had disappointments over the years but do you honestly look at Trotz as an underachiever?

 

[Hawkaholic]

Trotz never advanced to the Conference finals in his 18 year career (until this year). Q had 5 in 7? years.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

I think it's an acceptable opinion to have that the Hawks are past Q or should be past him and still think that Trotz wouldn't have been a good hire.

 

[AmericanDream]

I do not want Q here any longer, but Trotz is not the answer...trading one set of problems for another is not how this franchise rebounds.

Lets see what the entire team does the first month plus, if there is a spark/fire under guys like Toews, Keith, Seabs, Saad, etc...we should be in a good spot, if not and this coaching staff can no longer get the most out of these guys, fire Q and bring up Colliton...seems inevitable anyway.

 

[Hawkaholic]

I think it's an acceptable opinion to have that the Hawks are past Q or should be past him and still think that Trotz wouldn't have been a good hire.

I think it would be a sideways move at best, personally. If we are making a change, get the best option or wait for it. Trotz isn't the best option.

 

[Rick C137]

From what I’ve read from Caps fans, Trotz has a lot of similar deficiencies in his roster management as Q has. If we’re getting a new face behind the bench we need to go new wave and not another old 70s player. We should be looking for the next Mike Sullivan (Coilton?) and not the next Q.

I’m curious as to why the OP thinks Trotz is that much better of a coach than Q though. I’m not a big Q guy at this point but I agree with most posters in this thread in the fact that going from Q to Trotz is a lateral move at best.

 

[Toews2Bickell]

Funny how Trotz is the answer. Things changed pretty quickly since that preds series sweep.

 

[Callidusblackhawk]

IMO Trotz would have been a clear upgrade over Q just because he would bring modern systems. I watched a fair amount of their playoff games this year and from what I saw the Caps Dmen were actually allowed to carry the puck into the offensive zone and they were able to make quick counterattacks which are both things the Hawks lacked last season and made them so so easy to play against. If Q can update his systems he goes back to being the superior coach but until then he is actively handicapping this team.

 

[BrianE]

Just curious but don't ever recall seeing a coach leaving a team after winning a cup, has it happened before?

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Keenan after winning it with the Rags.

 

[ClydeLee]

Just curious but don't ever recall seeing a coach leaving a team after winning a cup, has it happened before?

Bowman did it twice too. Though the Detroit one was when he retired.

There was a list of coaches going around that did it. Like 2 others besides Scotty and Kenan I think.

 

[coolhand]

Just curious but don't ever recall seeing a coach leaving a team after winning a cup, has it happened before?

I would think the Caps would be throwing money at Trotz to keep him since they won their first cup ever. To let him leave now doesn't make any sense to me at this point unless they will be losing a lot of players and he knows it.