JC's Change Tracker

[jls24]

i have a problem with Hayden being on the 1st like with Toews..... hayden is not a big scorer. furthermore, i would not put Perilini on the 2nd line

me i would put Perilini on the 1st and Stome on the 2nd with Cat.

The only hesitation I have with a Cat-Strome-Kane line would be on the defensive end. Admittedly I haven't really followed Strome so I don't know if those concerns are legit.

I see the 1st line as more of a Saad-Toews-xxx line. Try different guys and see if any click.

 

[LDF]

The only hesitation I have with a Cat-Strome-Kane line would be on the defensive end. Admittedly I haven't really followed Strome so I don't know if those concerns are legit.

I see the 1st line as more of a Saad-Toews-xxx line. Try different guys and see if any click.

you are 100% correct and i never even thought of this.

i was going on the idea of paring up Cat and Strome via there time in the minors.

great point.

 

[BobbyJet]

Proof that Bowman did a really ****ty job of getting good players that fit Q's type of game.

You're stretching it buddy. Schmaltz was not on the block then. Quit with the agenda already.

 

[BobbyJet]

for starters, you are not going to ice AA ??

If AA can't fetch fair value he can easily play bottom 6 center in the interim.

 

[Hawkaholic]

You're stretching it buddy. Schmaltz was not on the block then. Quit with the agenda already.

What agenda are you talking about?
Do you think Bowman got good players that fit Q's system in Manning, and Kunitz?

 

[HawksBeerFan]

I think the lines are going to be fascinating now. I'd like to try something like this...

Perlini - Toews - Kane
Saad - Strome - Debrincat
Fortin - Kampf - Kahun
Martinesn - Anisimov - Hayden
Kruger, Kunitz

 

[BobbyJet]

What agenda are you talking about?
Do you think Bowman got good players that fit Q's system in Manning, and Kunitz?

I depise the fact that SB claims that he blames Q for his doing .... of acquiring washed up veterans, and some here are buying into it. THAT'S HIS JOB TO DO, not the HC's.

 

[Hawkaholic]

I depise the fact that SB claims that he blames Q for his doing .... of acquiring washed up veterans, and some here are buying into it. THAT'S HIS JOB TO DO, not the HC's.

I completely agree. Why did you argue my post then?

 

[BobbyJet]

I completely agree. Why did you argue my post then?

I must have misinterpretted. Apologies.

 

[ClydeLee]

I depise the fact that SB claims that he blames Q for his doing .... of acquiring washed up veterans, and some here are buying into it. THAT'S HIS JOB TO DO, not the HC's.

These were clear and called Q desirable types of moves instantly. Those threads have plenty people stating it so. Anything said now doesnt change the obvious and isnt some new view.

I know you hate the notion of tanking, and this isnt that, but its playing for long term by just signing low impact short term guys the coach wants instead of risking a cap tying up deal. Maybe they're out upset at what is obviously long term development effort.

 

[HawksBeerFan]

I depise the fact that SB claims that he blames Q for his doing .... of acquiring washed up veterans, and some here are buying into it. THAT'S HIS JOB TO DO, not the HC's.

meh the coach and the GM need to be on the same page. The GM needs to have a style of play in mind and the head coach should agree with that vision. Problems arise when the two aren't aligned.

If you're a GM and you bring in players that don't fit the coach's vision, then you're going to have problem.

I think a great comparison is the Bears. Pace could try and bring in guys to please John Fox, but it's clear they just disagreed about how the team should play stylistically.

These things go hand in hand in the best organizations.

 

[BobbyJet]

meh the coach and the GM need to be on the same page. The GM needs to have a style of play in mind and the head coach should agree with that vision. Problems arise when the two aren't aligned.

If you're a GM and you bring in players that don't fit the coach's vision, then you're going to have problem.

I think a great comparison is the Bears. Pace could try and bring in guys to please John Fox, but it's clear they just disagreed about how the team should play stylistically.

These things go hand in hand in the best organizations.

I agree but it is the GM who does the assessing and pulls the plug.

 

[nmgrbhfn]

If you wanted to submarine Q, you couldn't have done it any better way than by bringing in a gritty Q-type player like Manning. You know what they say - be careful what you wish for. Kunitz wasn't a terrible move if he repeated his year from Tampa Bay this year (score a little and not hurt the team in +/-). But with a guy his age there's ever-increasing odds you come up snake eyes and he washes out. If Q in any way lobbied for these guys, I gotta ask whether he has lost his touch for properly evaluating talent and whether he has any appreciation for risk. Bowman goes to Rocky and makes the simple argument that two Q dog-house d-men went on to win Stanley Cups with their next team and Q is lobbying for players like Manning! Looks like there are two clashing talent evaluation entities in the organization when there should be only one, and one of them has been doing a really bad job lately in an area of the game he's supposed to know a lot about.

 

[LDF]

If AA can't fetch fair value he can easily play bottom 6 center in the interim.

with all due respect, i am answer your post b/c it deserve a reply.

i really don't necessary agree with most of what is being written i would rather refrain from some post. i will have to do a wait and see approach.

not that most of the replies are wrong, probably b/c my thought process is off. see i am still pissed that the Bhawks didn't get a draft with this trade.

 

[LDF]

If you wanted to submarine Q, you couldn't have done it any better way than by bringing in a gritty Q-type player like Manning. You know what they say - be careful what you wish for. Kunitz wasn't a terrible move if he repeated his year from Tampa Bay this year (score a little and not hurt the team in +/-). But with a guy his age there's ever-increasing odds you come up snake eyes and he washes out. If Q in any way lobbied for these guys, I gotta ask whether he has lost his touch for properly evaluating talent and whether he has any appreciation for risk. Bowman goes to Rocky and makes the simple argument that two Q dog-house d-men went on to win Stanley Cups with their next team and Q is lobbying for players like Manning! Looks like there are two clashing talent evaluation entities in the organization when there should be only one, and one of them has been doing a really bad job lately in an area of the game he's supposed to know a lot about.

i too was waiting for the FO to start submarinering Q, as you mention. i was surprise it too this long for it to happen. i really thought that the whole Org personnel and their press hacks would be doing the "Blame Game" on why every more was needed. a classy org, in my mind would not have to delve into that kind of bashing.

 

[RememberTheRoar]

 

[Hattrick Kane]

There’s a logjam at D, im assuming there’s another trade coming?

 

[Kevin Musto]

There’s a logjam at D, im assuming there’s another trade coming?

Ship Rutta out for a 4th or 5th. Seems like the easiest move to make.

 

[Hattrick Kane]

Ship Rutta out for a 4th or 5th. Seems like the easiest move to make.

Ship Manning to the Penticton Pigeons.

 

[Styles]

We will finally see DeBrincat and Kane together.

 

[Hawkaholic]

We will finally see DeBrincat and Kane together.

It happened last game for half the game, and not much happened. Hopefully they build some chemistry together here.

 

[clydesdale line]

Colliton must be really liking Forsling's game lately (and I don't blame him. IMO, Forsling has been our best defensemen the past couple of games). He's got him riding shotgun with Keith there.

 

[Hawkaholic]

Colliton must be really liking Forsling's game lately (and I don't blame him. IMO, Forsling has been our best defensemen the past couple of games). He's got him riding shotgun with Keith there.

IMO, they should put Keith on his weak side, and put Forsling on his strong side. Too much for a young kid to learn the game on his wrong side, Keith can adapt.

 

[BK]

IMO, they should put Keith on his weak side, and put Forsling on his strong side. Too much for a young kid to learn the game on his wrong side, Keith can adapt.

I don’t think Keith has the hands for it anymore.

 

[ClydeLee]

IMO, they should put Keith on his weak side, and put Forsling on his strong side. Too much for a young kid to learn the game on his wrong side, Keith can adapt.

Yet old vets struggle a lot to change too.

Are people missing that Forsling has had better games his games here at RD than LD? He also had a couple assists throwing stretch passes from out on that right side last game. Hes not struggling but actually preforming better... why not keep him at least where hes succeeding while hes succeeding?