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

Status
Not open for further replies.

ClydeLee

Registered User
Mar 23, 2012
11,780
5,315
2017 they played a bad week of hockey and this is constantly used as a detriment to Q. They had a 2.4% shooting percentage in 4 games and played a hot team. The 2018 season the roster was terrrrrible because stan went into a half rebuild and crawford got injured. It was JF Berube, Jeff Glass, and Anton Forsberg for over half the season. The games crawford played they were 16-9-2 the games where he didnt they were 17-31-4.

The plug was pulled to early. We dont know if Q could rebuild the team because he was never given the opportunity. He was given Kunitz and Manning in the offseason and went .500 before getting canned.
It wasn't a bad week. They were a 1 line team being held up by that line and Crawford and it seemed to be a overwhelming thing agreed here. They weren't even worth a going all in like they did the previous season.

And part of the hold back was not sticking or allowing players that were better to play their way. Such as being anti Kempny because he carried the puck and pinched more.
 

ChiHawk21

Registered User
Jan 15, 2011
7,310
1,552
It wasn't a bad week. They were a 1 line team being held up by that line and Crawford and it seemed to be a overwhelming thing agreed here. They weren't even worth a going all in like they did the previous season.

And part of the hold back was not sticking or allowing players that were better to play their way. Such as being anti Kempny because he carried the puck and pinched more.

You dont luck into first place in the west and 109 points no matter how you guys want to say it was a fluke.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: sandyfalkirk

BK

"Goalie Apologist"
Feb 8, 2011
33,636
16,483
Minneapolis, MN
You dont luck into first place in the west and 109 points no matter how you guys want to say it was a fluke.

The numbers beg to differ with that team and showed how flawed it was for most of the season. They were not the best team in the west that year. It was pretty obvious when Bowman did nothing at the deadline (minus Oduya for nothing).
 

ClydeLee

Registered User
Mar 23, 2012
11,780
5,315
You dont luck into first place in the west and 109 points no matter how you guys want to say it was a fluke.
It was at the time. That was still a mostly Corsi era focus and they were outside the top 10 in team corsi, but along when expected goals came in vogue. Pittsburg was number 1, but the Hawks were still top 10 but 8th.

But even non stats people were saying it because they saw it. The top line was blanking outside the February hot stints of Toews Panik and Schmaltz.

The thing is defensively they were bad. They were 6th lowest in expected goals against, but were actually 8th in goals against, because Crawford & Darling were both great all that year. Hjalmarsson is a factor too but that's also when people pointed out down the stretch he was declining.

They were bad defensively, as the last several years of Q was, its not some JC caused thing. Had great goaltending covering that but had only 1 real consistent scoring line.
 

Northernhawk

Registered User
Feb 22, 2020
2,507
1,264
Nick Schmaltz with Yotes
149gp 26g 65a 91pts -6 38pim

Dylan Strome with Hawks
154gp 37g 67a 104pts -8 42pim
And 9 playoff games

Brendan Perlini with Hawks
47g 12g 3a 15pts -12 20pim
traded to Detroit for Alec Regula, whom we may see in these last four games

Schmaltz is costing the Yotes $5.8 million
Strome is costing the Hawks $3 million

Still a good trade for the Hawks
 

ChiHawk21

Registered User
Jan 15, 2011
7,310
1,552
Nick Schmaltz with Yotes
149gp 26g 65a 91pts -6 38pim

Dylan Strome with Hawks
154gp 37g 67a 104pts -8 42pim
And 9 playoff games

Brendan Perlini with Hawks
47g 12g 3a 15pts -12 20pim
traded to Detroit for Alec Regula, whom we may see in these last four games

Schmaltz is costing the Yotes $5.8 million
Strome is costing the Hawks $3 million

Still a good trade for the Hawks
looks even. regula being the x factor. the yotes giving that contract to schmaltz eek.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WeAreSoPucked

ChiHawk21

Registered User
Jan 15, 2011
7,310
1,552
The numbers beg to differ with that team and showed how flawed it was for most of the season. They were not the best team in the west that year. It was pretty obvious when Bowman did nothing at the deadline (minus Oduya for nothing).
what about when they had the most points in the western conference through 82 games.
 

ChiHawk21

Registered User
Jan 15, 2011
7,310
1,552
It was at the time. That was still a mostly Corsi era focus and they were outside the top 10 in team corsi, but along when expected goals came in vogue. Pittsburg was number 1, but the Hawks were still top 10 but 8th.

But even non stats people were saying it because they saw it. The top line was blanking outside the February hot stints of Toews Panik and Schmaltz.

The thing is defensively they were bad. They were 6th lowest in expected goals against, but were actually 8th in goals against, because Crawford & Darling were both great all that year. Hjalmarsson is a factor too but that's also when people pointed out down the stretch he was declining.

They were bad defensively, as the last several years of Q was, its not some JC caused thing. Had great goaltending covering that but had only 1 real consistent scoring line.
the goalies are part of the team. They had more then one scoring line they went into a shell to end the year because they had nothing to play for. Played a hot team and had a bad week with terrible puck luck and bad play. If they would have won the game 3 overtime game and not gotten swept i dont think bowman would have sold in the offseason.
 

BK

"Goalie Apologist"
Feb 8, 2011
33,636
16,483
Minneapolis, MN
what about when they had the most points in the western conference through 82 games.

That is fine but the numbers show what the team really was and then it happened in the playoffs.

The results are the results so I get what you are saying.

The hockey gods work in weird ways sometimes.
 

ChiHawk21

Registered User
Jan 15, 2011
7,310
1,552
That is fine but the numbers show what the team really was and then it happened in the playoffs.

The results are the results so I get what you are saying.

The hockey gods work in weird ways sometimes.
you are talking out of both sides of your mouth tho, the numbers also show them being the best performing team throughout the season by record. your picking numbers that fit your narative. The result was they lost 4 games in a row when it mattered and that caused them to sell off two major pieces in the offseason. we have not been a playoff team since. id rather be in the playoffs with worse underlying numbers then a 20th-25th place team for years on end.
 

ClydeLee

Registered User
Mar 23, 2012
11,780
5,315
you are talking out of both sides of your mouth tho, the numbers also show them being the best performing team throughout the season by record. your picking numbers that fit your narative. The result was they lost 4 games in a row when it mattered and that caused them to sell off two major pieces in the offseason. we have not been a playoff team since. id rather be in the playoffs with worse underlying numbers then a 20th-25th place team for years on end.
What an odd desire. There would be no future on this team. I was happy they didn't want to stay in Detroit mode and keep a playoff streak alive to the detriment of 10 years.

They would have worst prospect potential all around, no Dach or Boqvist, and no future moving in to improve the team.

Then for some to compare this retooling then like to Tampa makes nonsense. There's timelines of nothing alike while Tampa still had a mostly young core of talent and that compares to the Hawks bot selling in 2011 or 2012 which people wanted Ala Miller for Kane talk
 

ChiHawk21

Registered User
Jan 15, 2011
7,310
1,552
What an odd desire. There would be no future on this team.

They would have worst prospect potential all around, no Dach or Boqvist, and no future moving in to improve the team.

Then for some to compare this retooling then like to Tampa makes nonsense. There's timelines of nothing alike while Tampa still had a mostly young core of talent and that compares to the Hawks bot selling in 2011 or 2012 which people wanted Ala Miller for Kane talk
The desire was to have 2-3 more years of relevance and then a full rebuild. We have been in a half rebuild for 3 years with no end in sight. You only have so many good years with Kane Toews and Keith.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BobbyJet

Northernhawk

Registered User
Feb 22, 2020
2,507
1,264
I'll just say, it's a good thing TB didn't sell after getting swept in the 1st round by CLB the year before last. Their GM didn't panic, unlike ours.
What? Do you remember 2011? After backing into thr playoffs, Vancouver had us down 3-0, if the Hawks hadn't of come back and forced a game seven(which they lost in OT) Bowman would have and could have gutted that team...that woulda meant no 2013 and 2015 Cups, and a 2014 game seven loss in the SFs...nevermind the cap purge after the 2010 Cup Bowman retooled in the fly getting pieces like Oduya, Handzus, Richards, Frolik, Vermette, drafting players like Saad and Shaw...Bowman has admitted to trying to sustain a level of competitiveness at the cost of that mid level aged player...
 
  • Like
Reactions: ClydeLee

Muffinalt

Registered User
Mar 1, 2016
3,752
3,921
Hungary
I will say, even though I understood and still understand the logic behind the Panarin trade, in hindsight it wasn't a good move.

Different cap situation and we know how Saad turned out, but knowing what I know today I wouldn't have done it. Probably Stan himself agrees.

Hammer as much as he was a favorite for me, is a different case coz of his age and point in career.
 

BK

"Goalie Apologist"
Feb 8, 2011
33,636
16,483
Minneapolis, MN
you are talking out of both sides of your mouth tho, the numbers also show them being the best performing team throughout the season by record. your picking numbers that fit your narative. The result was they lost 4 games in a row when it mattered and that caused them to sell off two major pieces in the offseason. we have not been a playoff team since. id rather be in the playoffs with worse underlying numbers then a 20th-25th place team for years on end.

Not at all and you are going to try to spin like I am so you can get out of here with that garbage. Record/points were the only numbers that had them as the top team.
 

Pez68

Registered User
Mar 18, 2010
18,485
25,438
Chicago, IL
I'll just say, it's a good thing TB didn't sell after getting swept in the 1st round by CLB the year before last. Their GM didn't panic, unlike ours.

It was pretty clearly time to start the rebuild after the Nashville series. Unfortunately, McDonough wouldn't let that happen.
 

SnakePlissken

Registered User
Jun 16, 2015
412
220

Points are like dollars - they only matter when you don't have enough of them.

In case anyone is ever wondering, the "good old days" is arguing whether your team with the most points in the conference is actually a legitimate Stanley Cup contender. Quite a contrast vs. discussing how many more years it will be until your team is a contender again.
 

Brightwing

Registered User
Oct 1, 2019
2,401
3,657
I will say, even though I understood and still understand the logic behind the Panarin trade, in hindsight it wasn't a good move.

Different cap situation and we know how Saad turned out, but knowing what I know today I wouldn't have done it. Probably Stan himself agrees.

Hammer as much as he was a favorite for me, is a different case coz of his age and point in career.

I'm with you. If they had been ok with a rebuild, they could have held Panarin and gotten a higher return or signed him.

To me, Hossa's retirement marked the end. But I don't think the Hawks recognized it at the time and were trying to fill holes that couldn't be filled.

I also seen the Shaw trade in the same vein, which in retrospect was a fairly big mistake.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad