The Great John Hayden Debate (& other ex-Hawks): Volume 6

[JaegerDice]

And yet people still complained Q favored vets specifically being mad at when Nordstrom played over Morin... and Nordstrom was younger

I don't recall anybody having a problem with Nordstrom.

I specifically remember saying that I thought it was stupid to let Nordstrom go, just to pay Lance ****ing Bouma 1 million dollars to be objectively worse at hockey.

He was a 4th liner that played 4th line minutes on the 4th line.

The issue was when Q would show favoritism to players that were clearly worse at hockey and/or give his preferred players more ice time or responsibility than they warranted.

 

[Northernhawk]

So a 2020 final four of Vegas vs Dallas and Tampa Bay vs NYIslanders

Former Hawk defensive players

Lehner vs Johns and Rutta vs Leddy

Personally I'd love to see Lehner play his old team the Isles in the Finals...remember that schmoozal last summer?

 

[JaegerDice]

So a 2020 final four of Vegas vs Dallas and Tampa Bay vs NYIslanders

Former Hawk defensive players

Lehner vs Johns and Rutta vs Leddy

Personally I'd love to see Lehner play his old team the Isles in the Finals...remember that schmoozal last summer?

I feel like Leddy was the only guy here long enough that I'd actually feel happy for him as a former Blackhawk winning the cup.

Lehner I'd feel happy for due to his battles with mental health and speaking so candidly on the issue.

Johns had a massive concussion problem that he's fought back from... but is he even playing right now?

Rutta? Eh.

 

[Northernhawk]

Not sure if anyone's actually aware of this fact or not...only ONE player from all three of their Cup teams(2010,2013,2015) ever won a Cup again with another club...ONE...

Last year Joakim Nordstrom was oh so close with Boston...but...

So all of those great Hawks that have been shipped out over the years have won ZILCH...

Byfuglien, Bolland, Hjalmarsson, Sharp, Saad, Shaw, Niemi, Campbell, Oduya, Teravainen, Versteeg, Frolik, Leddy, Brouwer, Eager, etc etc

Even promising former Hawks that weren't on those Cup teams like Panarin, Schmaltz, Hartman, Danault and such have gone Cupless

Sure Trevor Daley won two with the Pens, but really, even when he was a Hawk, he wasn't...Coach Q didn't care for him, Michal Kempny with the Caps? Same scenario...not a Coach Q guy...

So while the Leddy deal was a bust, Bowman had to choose between Oduya or Leddy before the 2015 season started...Oduya won another Cup...with the Hawks, Leddy has not...forget the return in the Leddy deal(TJBrennan, Anders Nilsson...) because Chicago went on win again

I kinda liken Lehner to both Daley and Kempny, brief no discredit Hawk careers, heck Rutta as well...

Back to the question of which Blackhawk Cup winner is the only one to win it all again with another team?

Why Colin Fraser of course with the LA Kings...

Personally I'd like to see Lehner vs Islanders in the Final

First year I watched hockey(and fell in love with the Blackhawks) was 1982...the Islanders won their 3rd Cup in a row...they won their 4th the next season and then lost in the Finals to a young Oilers dynasty(which I hated for yrs) in 1984...so in a COVID season where the 12th seeded Hawks beat the 5th seeded Oilers in the qualifiers...it'd be great to see NYIslanders return to glory

That's all for now

 

[JaegerDice]

Fraser is a 3-time cup winner.

 

[ClydeLee]

Fraser is a 3-time cup winner.

He wasnt really on the 2014 team, he got knocked off the roster around the trade deadline and was under half of the season in games played with zero playoff games, is his name even on that cup?

 

[Northernhawk]

He wasnt really on the 2014 team, he got knocked off the roster around the trade deadline and was under half of the season in games played with zero playoff games, is his name even on that cup?

Much like Bryan Bickell, who won three Cups as well but for some reason is not associated with the other 3 Cupers Toews, Kane, Sharp, Hossa, Keith, Seabrook and Hjalmarsson...

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Much like Bryan Bickell, who won three Cups as well but for some reason is not associated with the other 3 Cupers Toews, Kane, Sharp, Hossa, Keith, Seabrook and Hjalmarsson...

Two of those cups came with the Kings.

 

[ChiHawk21]

Much like Bryan Bickell, who won three Cups as well but for some reason is not associated with the other 3 Cupers Toews, Kane, Sharp, Hossa, Keith, Seabrook and Hjalmarsson...

he was a black ace for the 1st cup...

 

[JaegerDice]

he was a black ace for the 1st cup...

True, though only because Q felt the need to dress Adam Burish for 15 of 22 playoff games. If Bickell plays those games instead - and rest assured, he was more than capable of providing what Burrish did at the time, and more - then he probably gets his name on the cup there too.

Ah well. I'm sure he's happy with 3 rings and 2 engravings.

 

[ChiHawk21]

True, though only because Q felt the need to dress Adam Burish for 15 of 22 playoff games. If Bickell plays those games instead - and rest assured, he was more than capable of providing what Burrish did at the time, and more - then he probably gets his name on the cup there too.

Ah well. I'm sure he's happy with 3 rings and 2 engravings.

lol. yea Q really messed up giving burish that 5 minutes and game and winning the cup. Can you just imagine if bryan bickell would have played the extra 30 min through the playoffs then just maybe they could have gotten the same result! (or lost)

 

[JaegerDice]

lol. yea Q really messed up giving burish that 5 minutes and game and winning the cup. Can you just imagine if bryan bickell would have played then just maybe they could have gotten the same result! (or lost)

One of the most simple parts of a coach's job is to ice the best lineup available.

Adam Burrish brought literally nothing. Bickell played 4 playoff games and scored more points (granted, a low bar since Burrish scored ZERO points), and played an average of 13 minutes per night versus Burrish's all important 5 minutes.

A coach that opts to play Adam Burrish in the Stanley Cup Playoffs is a coach making a poor lineup decision. Period. The fact that said coach has enough talent as his disposal to overcome that doesn't not magically, retroactively make it a good decision. It makes him fortunate.

If a player is good enough to play 13 minutes for you, he's damn sure good enough to play 5.

Q was doing one of his boys a favor. A trend during his tenure here. In 2013 and 2015 the front office did a good job of Q-proofing the roster. In 2011, 2012 and 2014, not so much. 2014 was the heartbreak. A choice as simple as icing the best lineup available instead of playing favorites, and we're likely looking at another cup.

Ah well.

 

[BK]

I thought Bickell got hurt?

 

[GaryU]

Much like Bryan Bickell, who won three Cups as well but for some reason is not associated with the other 3 Cupers Toews, Kane, Sharp, Hossa, Keith, Seabrook and Hjalmarsson...

Bickell's name did not make it on the 2010 Cup.

 

[JaegerDice]

I thought Bickell got hurt?

If he was hurt in 2010, I can't find any record of it. Would make a lot of sense tho.

 

[Hawkaholic]

One of the most simple parts of a coach's job is to ice the best lineup available..

Sometimes your best lineup doesn't always have what the fans think is the best lineup.

 

[BK]

If he was hurt in 2010, I can't find any record of it. Would make a lot of sense tho.

I believe it was a wrist injury.

 

[ChiHawk21]

One of the most simple parts of a coach's job is to ice the best lineup available.

Adam Burrish brought literally nothing. Bickell played 4 playoff games and scored more points (granted, a low bar since Burrish scored ZERO points), and played an average of 13 minutes per night versus Burrish's all important 5 minutes.

A coach that opts to play Adam Burrish in the Stanley Cup Playoffs is a coach making a poor lineup decision. Period. The fact that said coach has enough talent as his disposal to overcome that doesn't not magically, retroactively make it a good decision. It makes him fortunate.

If a player is good enough to play 13 minutes for you, he's damn sure good enough to play 5.

Q was doing one of his boys a favor. A trend during his tenure here. In 2013 and 2015 the front office did a good job of Q-proofing the roster. In 2011, 2012 and 2014, not so much. 2014 was the heartbreak. A choice as simple as icing the best lineup available instead of playing favorites, and we're likely looking at another cup.

Ah well.

this is just dumb. everything about this is stupid. the last game he played was a blowout against the canucks and bickell was terrible. Q switched him out and they won the next three games lol. burish was a 4th liner who created energy he didnt need to be in the flow of the game to do his job. he was trusted to eat a few minutes and gave the big time players more ice. we have zero idea if playing bickell over burish would have resulted in a stanley cup and we know for a fact that playing burish did result in a stanley cup. this is just complaining to complain.

 

[Giovi]

True, though only because Q felt the need to dress Adam Burish for 15 of 22 playoff games. If Bickell plays those games instead - and rest assured, he was more than capable of providing what Burrish did at the time, and more - then he probably gets his name on the cup there too.

Ah well. I'm sure he's happy with 3 rings and 2 engravings.

Are you really second guessing a lineup that won a cup?

 

[JaegerDice]

Are you really second guessing a lineup that won a cup?

Are you really suggesting that Adam Burrish had literally any positive impact on that cup win?

Hell, are you really suggesting that our 4th line had an impact on that cup win, outside of Madden on the PK?

The Blackhawks won a cup in 2010 with 3 lines. That's a testament to the team's talent, not to the coach's lineup decisions.

The idea that any mistake that was overcome was therefor a mistake that needed to be made is nonsensical.

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

Burish was fine 4th liner who knew his role and played solid all around hockey

And the Hawks won cup with 4 lines in 2010 playoffs. Q shortened bench as most coaches do in finals at pivotal moments

You say the 4th line had no impact outside of Madden ,, who scored GWG in game 2 of finals?

Also your continued hatred for Q and refusal to give him credit for anything in Chicago is laughable

Do you remember what Hawks looked like under Savard? The were pond hockey with no structure or system

Hawks never win anything without coaching change

 

[clydesdale line]

Burish was pretty damn good in the '09 run prior. Can't blame Q on riding with him in the following playoff season.

 

[ClydeLee]

It seems to be forgotten Bicks was just in that role replacing Buff who was playing D the whole Nashville series. Fraiser played the first 3 games then, never again, and Bickell played as a winger some with T&K there. He was fine but once Byfuglien was back he would of had to be on that 4th energy line. He wouldn't of brought much else there. He played game 1 vs Vancouver then went out.

Q probably also wanted the agitators to try ans draw out the dumbness of Vancouver and make them take penalties too.

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

Burish was pretty damn good in the '09 run prior. Can't blame Q on riding with him in the following playoff season.

He really didn't recover from knee injury until following year

Part of me wonders if he rushed back in 2010 too early

 

[BobbyJet]

One thing certain in my mind. Bickell was underrated by people here. When healthy he was a valuable performer at playoff time. I wasn't surprised.... but I know that more than some were surprised by how effective he was ... and that's what it is all about, elevating your game at crunch time.