For 4 years, I watched this forum denigrate Quenneville...

[needle]

Second most wins in NHL history, 3 Cups in 6 years. Yet Q was the reason we didn't the Cup every year. I realize this is a forum geared towards prospects, but I found it absurd. Even as a casual hockey fan.

Time after time, Bowman's blunders were excused. Traded Buff for Morin (bust), Hayes (failed to sign him), and a bag of hockey pucks. Traded Ladd for a bag of hockey pucks. Signed Andrew Brunette, Sean O'Donnell, and Steve Montador (RIP). Traded Campbell for Olesz, sure a cap casualty, but what a miserable trade. Traded Leddy for a bag of hockey pucks. Traded Hammer for a bag of hockey pucks. Traded Panarin for Saad and a bag of hockey pucks. Signed guys like Khabibulin and Rundblad. Had to trade away guys like Teravainen and Versteeg (again) to make up for cap mismanagement. Signed Kane and Toews to ludicrous deals one year before free agency and one year before the Canadian dollar collapsed. Has given away guys like Pirri, Danault, Hartman, Daley, Hinostroza, and Schmaltz for absolutely nothing.

What a miserable GM. Literally living off daddy's name. But remember, it was all Q's fault... right? You guys should be ashamed of yourselves.

2018 Q: 6-6-2
2018 Babyface: 3-11-2

You can hope for the #1 pick, but this isn't basketball. Just ask the Oilers.

Click to read more...

 

[CallMeShaft]

Cool thread bro, but we already have a thread to shit on Bowman.

 

[BK]

You just complained about Pirri...nothing more needs to be said.

Has anyone ever complained about trading Pirri or the return?

 

[Bubba88]

You blame Bowman for not knowing that the Canadian dollar would collapse?

Btw Buff Trade was pretty good value.

 

[ChiHawks10]

What is this garbage?

 

[Blackhawks]

You blame Bowman for not knowing that the Canadian dollar would collapse?

Btw Buff Trade was pretty good value.

You should never sign players based on “speculation” that the cap will go up...

 

[Blackhawks]

Second most wins in NHL history, 3 Cups in 6 years. Yet Q was the reason we didn't the Cup every year. I realize this is a forum geared towards prospects, but I found it absurd. Even as a casual hockey fan.

Time after time, Bowman's blunders were excused. Traded Buff for Morin (bust), Hayes (failed to sign him), and a bag of hockey pucks. Traded Ladd for a bag of hockey pucks. Signed Andrew Brunette, Sean O'Donnell, and Steve Montador (RIP). Traded Campbell for Olesz, sure a cap casualty, but what a miserable trade. Traded Leddy for a bag of hockey pucks. Traded Hammer for a bag of hockey pucks. Traded Panarin for Saad and a bag of hockey pucks. Signed guys like Khabibulin and Rundblad. Had to trade away guys like Teravainen and Versteeg (again) to make up for cap mismanagement. Signed Kane and Toews to ludicrous deals one year before free agency and one year before the Canadian dollar collapsed. Has given away guys like Pirri, Danault, Hartman, Daley, Hinostroza, and Schmaltz for absolutely nothing.

What a miserable GM. Literally living off daddy's name. But remember, it was all Q's fault... right? You guys should be ashamed of yourselves.

2018 Q: 6-6-2
2018 Babyface: 3-11-2

You can hope for the #1 pick, but this isn't basketball. Just ask the Oilers.

Amen to this!


It’s funny those same people will still stick with their words even with hindsight lol

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Stan’s failings don’t excuse Q’s failings.

 

[Marotte Marauder]

You just complained about Pirri...nothing more needs to be said.

Has anyone ever complained about trading Pirri or the return?

I did.


But I was wrong about it.

 

[crazyhawk]

Well needle ... you harp on Stan but might one suggest looking a little further up the ladder? Who has kept him around? Oh and while all those great guys were being traded ( and don't get me wrong I loved big Buff and Ladd and even Frolik etc ) the boys still won two more cups!
How about .. it's really not any one person's fault the team now sucks ... it's natural,
good ole cause and effect ... you do see that LA is now sucking and even Pittsburgh too?
The mini dynasties can't stay at the top of the hill for ever you know!

 

[RememberTheRoar]

Stan’s failings don’t excuse Q’s failings.

This. Why is it always Stan vs. Q?

Just because Q got fired first doesn’t mean everyone has overlooked Stan’s mistakes.

Stan still has a job because he recently drafted four potential studs on defense. Henri Jokiharju, Ian Mitchell, and Adam Boqvist are saving his ass right now, imo.

 

[Blue Liner]

I don't even know where to begin with this. Good God.

 

[Enyaw]

Q who?

 

[Panzerspitze]

Full of wins:

"didn't the Cup"
"a casual hockey fan"

 

[Styles]

Yeah but at least Stan got the team plenty of pucks to practice with.

 

[Panzerspitze]

OP somehow missed Stanley signing Campoli and resigning Hanzus, which cost Quenneville another Cup or two...

 

[x Tame Impala]

2018 Q: 6-6-2
2018 Babyface: 3-11-2

Q was on a 5 game losing streak when he was fired. Prior to that, even with the Hawks “hot start” in the beginning of the year, they were still giving up 4-5 goals a game.

Go back to your Facebook comments section if you want people to agree with your hyperbole. Even the smallest in-depth analysis of Q the last 3 years shows you he was struggling to adapt his systems and couldn’t adjust to the new NHL.

Give me a break.

 

[kuzy]

Nice hot take there, OP

 

[BobbyJet]

Why is it that some people can't grasp that the Hawks problem is/was due to more than one factor?

Did folks really believe that any new coach entering the scene in November would turn things around in 16 games?
No, the team's poor performance is merely an excuse for some to try and exonerate Q from any of the team's struggles. It's something I'd expect from the casual fan but certainly not from a die-hard fan who follows the team closely and watches every game.

Fact is, the roster is weak and the coaching has not helped in the least. The jury is still out on JC as an NHL coach but it will take some time before his performance can be properly evaluated.

 

[RememberTheRoar]

Why is it that some people can't grasp that the Hawks problem is/was due to more than one factor?

Did folks really believe that any new coach entering the scene in November would turn things around in 16 games?
No, the team's poor performance is merely an excuse for some to try and exonerate Q from any of the team's struggles. It's something I'd expect from the casual fan but certainly not from a die-hard fan who follows the team closely and watches every game.

Fact is, the roster is weak and the coaching has not helped in the least. The jury is still out on JC as an NHL coach but it will take some time before his performance can be properly evaluated.

People living outside these set of facts are just pushing narratives.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

You should never sign players based on “speculation” that the cap will go up...

Every team does this. If you only sign based on where it's at now, then you either can't attract or retain free agents by not being able to offer enough or you make bigger cuts than necessary to make room.

If the Nuck Buck collapsed a couple of years later, a load of other teams would've done the same thing and get caught with the cap consequences. Just bad timing for us, and I certainly won't fault the Hawks organization for not anticipating a global economic shift that mainline economists didn't see coming when the league expectation was the cap continuing to rise.

 

[ChiHawk21]

Why is it that some people can't grasp that the Hawks problem is/was due to more than one factor?

Did folks really believe that any new coach entering the scene in November would turn things around in 16 games?
No, the team's poor performance is merely an excuse for some to try and exonerate Q from any of the team's struggles. It's something I'd expect from the casual fan but certainly not from a die-hard fan who follows the team closely and watches every game.

Fact is, the roster is weak and the coaching has not helped in the least. The jury is still out on JC as an NHL coach but it will take some time before his performance can be properly evaluated.

there have been plenty of examples of teams turning it around with a new coach right away...hitchcock is doing it right now. the coaching wasnt this teams issue tho. its the talent and roster bowman provided the last 2 years. and they have gotten much worse since..

 

[No Fun Shogun]

As for the OP, I was saying for a while that Q was not a net negative for years and that a lot of our issues was player-related and not system-related. I do think a new voice was needed, but we are seeing ample evidence that even taking into account the fact that we need to give C time the roster has issues that a mere system shift won't fix.

 

[ChiHawk21]

As for the OP, I was saying for a while that Q was not a net negative for years and that a lot of our issues was player-related and not system-related. I do think a new voice was needed, but we are seeing ample evidence that even taking into account the fact that we need to give C time the roster has issues that a mere system shift won't fix.

i can understand this point of view.

 

[nmgrbhfn]

I was thinking about the complaints concerning Stan's moves, and realized that educated fans contributing comments and insight to these threads have forgotten one thing - the Hawks don't have a suggestion box soliciting ideas on how the organization can make better decisions. When fans second-guess moves made/not made ultimately they have to realize they are arguing that another NHL executive would make "better" decisions than Stan.

That raises an interesting perspective. Is Stan a below replacement level NHL executive, a replacement level NHL executive, or an above replacement NHL level executive? From a replacement level perspective, are there available NHL executives who are superior to Stan and would do a better job? I am not as familiar with NHL executives as I am with players (that still isn't saying very much), but to those more knowledgeable than me that are unhappy with Stan's decisions, which available NHL executive would you replace him with? Why do you consider your candidate superior to Stan?