Recalled/Assigned: The Morin Rockford Shuttle Tracker (Down - 11/26)

[bulletwwings]

And if we were down a goal with thirty seconds left and we iced Bollig - Kruger - Brookbank as the forward lineup and they managed to score would it have been a good decision? I mean, Jesus.

I agree with you. I can't stand when that line is playing late in a period as a "shut down" line. In VAN I watched that 4th line go out and ice the puck and Kruger lose the draw, I watched Bollig basically spin around in circles as VAN looked like they were on a PP. I sat there thinking great OT here we come, but Crow kept it out. I'm not saying I hate any of those players or they need to go I just think Q needs to find a more reliable, smarter way of defending that 1 goal lead situation.

 

[Salvaged Ship]

I dont agree with Bollig out there in the final minute, never said that. I am not a Bollig fan at all and would rather see Zus centering the 4th line (if he has to play) and Bollig passing out soap in the shower. I just can't get too emotional and call it idiotic if we keep winning. If Bolig is on the ice at the end we lose because of him I will get the torches and pitchforks myself and we can all head to Q's office.

 

[bulletwwings]

Never said you did, I just am trying to bring up the point that with all the weapons this team has, putting out the fourth line, while still maybe "one of the best in the league", that fourth line could be better and could actually be great at protecting those late game situations. As said before Q likes to play favorites and sometimes I shake my head sitting there watching these games. He likes to screw with the top 9 so much you think he'd screw with the fourth line, but he leaves it as it is. (when I say screws with the top 9, I mean we could probably write a book about all the line combinations we have seen in the past 4-6 years.)

 

[Nothingman*]

I guess when I see Zus I am glad we are not paying $7mm for basically the same thing like Minny is doing with Heatly.

I think we can all agree Bollig and Zus are the lowest performers for our team. I know we cannot afford 4 1st lines but when we have some youth that can do the job and develop in two of the positions over a season that won't harm us too much......and most likely can pretty handily outperform the two players above......why not play them? That is what is frustrating.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

I dont agree with Bollig out there in the final minute, never said that. I am not a Bollig fan at all and would rather see Zus centering the 4th line (if he has to play) and Bollig passing out soap in the shower. I just can't get too emotional and call it idiotic if we keep winning. If Bolig is on the ice at the end we lose because of him I will get the torches and pitchforks myself and we can all head to Q's office.

If Q was responsible for assembling the roster than sure, let him make weird coaching decisions. But he isn't. Any competent coach should win a lot of hockey games with this team. When Q was given a top heavy team with a mediocre supporting cast - 2011 - we had to backslide into the eight seed.

 

[Marotte Marauder]

I dont agree with Bollig out there in the final minute, never said that. I am not a Bollig fan at all and would rather see Zus centering the 4th line (if he has to play) and Bollig passing out soap in the shower. I just can't get too emotional and call it idiotic if we keep winning. If Bolig is on the ice at the end we lose because of him I will get the torches and pitchforks myself and we can all head to Q's office.

So as long as you can toss that firecracker before the fuse goes all the way down, you think it's OK to hold in your hand?

 

[Salvaged Ship]

You guys win, Q is an idiot. I am now convinced!

 

[bulletwwings]

I've lurked here for a couple years now and I've learned that half the threads are about strong-arming people to agree that Q is an idiot.

 

[Easton Modano Curve]

This is an awesome thread! One of my favorites. Really enjoy how heated and opinionated the debate is.

And the debate is really about who is going to play wing on our 4th or wing when someone gets injured! In all seriousness people, our biggest concern in Chicago right now (from reading HF) is the 4th line winger/extra guy. We have in good in Chicago.

Wouldn't be surprised if Bowman picked up a 4th liner vet with PK experience and this whole discussion fizzled.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

You guys win, Q is an idiot. I am now convinced!

Feel free to come up with something of substance other than LOL 2 Cups! 17-4-4!

You haven't refuted a single point I've made.

 

[sketch22]

Wouldn't be surprised if Bowman picked up a 4th liner vet with PK experience and this whole discussion fizzled.

Right up until the next game when Q sat Smith for Bollig.

 

[Blackhawks]

I really like our fourth line and too bad Morin is not playing with Smith and Kruger because that line would be an offensive threat every night, they do great work on the boards and you cant call any of them soft by any means as they do have a physical game as well.

Bollig:
Offense - Worst offensive player on the team
Defense - Worst Defensive player on the team
Physicality - Ok he might bring a bit of a physical aspect but nothing you cant live without

I just dont get what Bollig brings to the team. Morin should not be in the A right now as simple as that, he just can not improve any further down there. Ten minutes in the NHL is much better than 17 in the A. I also am not sure where this whole Morin is a bad at defense comes from, I have watched multiple games and he does just fine. Waive Bollig, let some team take a crack at him. With Bickel back we have Zeus, Morin, and Brookbank that can play 12th forward, if needed I am sure Alex Brodhurst can fill in some injury time and he will outperform Bollig no doubt.

 

[moose vasko]

Wouldn't be surprised if Bowman picked up a 4th liner vet with PK experience and this whole discussion fizzled.

Q has been holding auditions for PKer to play beside Kruger since game 1. Nordstrom was first and didn't get it done. Smith is current candidate and might be the guy. If not, I think he probably sticks with other guys on the roster (maybe Shaw again, or even Versteeg if he thinks he can handle the extra work). The roster seems pretty much set and cap space is tight, so I'd be surprised if we brought in anyone new.

 

[zac]

If Q was responsible for assembling the roster than sure, let him make weird coaching decisions. But he isn't. Any competent coach should win a lot of hockey games with this team. When Q was given a top heavy team with a mediocre supporting cast - 2011 - we had to backslide into the eight seed.

This.

Q doesn't have very many tough decisions to make with this team. "Hmmm....who do I put on my first two lines, Kane? Hossa? Sharp? Toews? Saad? Oh...it looks like I need a 2nd line center. Pirri has been playing great, but let's put a washed up Zus with Kane because I'm a ****ing Pejorative Slur". Seriously, how does he repeatedly make such bad decisions when the right ones are so obvious? Playing Brookbank any more than what's absolutely necessarily shows an obvious lack of brain power.

Several rosters have made Q look like a far better coach than what he is.

 

[Kurtosis]

I think his system is good, but his personnel and in-game shenanigans are irritating. Really, really irritating.

 

[Bubba88]

Is it your contention that those guys wouldn't have been the players they are today without Q running this team?

not really, but would you say they all would be the same players with Savy still coaching the team? Or Yawney or Barry Smith or whatever NHL assistant coach would be in Qs spot?
Just think about Kane and his defense....

Hjalmarsson & Versteeg were already on the Hawks when Q took over.
Crawford, Bickell, and Leddy all made the team after the 2010 cap hell sell off when there was NO ONE else around and Q didn't have a choice.
Not sure how you can put Bollig and developed together in the same thought process.
Krüger I would agree with except he made the team over Pirri despite Pirri outplaying him in the preseason that year, then outplaying him in the AHL the next year, and now again outplaying him in the NHL.
Shaw is what he is and I'm not sure how Q gets credit for that. Same with Smith. Neither was "developed" by Q.
Saad I understand, but anyone who expects other rookies to come in and just get "it" like he did is being unrealistic.

And it's not just young players. Q has made a litany of incomprehensible roster moves over his time with the Hawks.

ummm... Versteeg became a regular in the season we hired Q. Hjalmarsson became a regular and played his 1st NHL game with Q as his coach. Hjammer never played for a different coach in the NHL in fact.

If you can't see the progress Bollig has taken, there is no base for any further discussion. Same with Krüger, same with Shaw.
Saad is a better player this year than he was last and he improved during last year too. That's not only the experience he naturally gets for playing the games.

Bickell made the team because of his contract and body, but he is a much different player now. His D to start with was on the level Pirri is now. Now he is at least average in his own zone.

Q was not afraid of playing Smith in the Top6 as rookie in the POs against the Nucks. He is what he is, right?


What you say about Leddy is wrong too. Leddy made the team because Bowman wanted to and he improved in such many areas it's not even up for discussion IF Q had any influence in this.

How about Kane and Sharps development under Q? They got better and better in areas they weren't that good in the last years.



some others I didn't even wanted to bring up would be Brouwer, Niemi, Dowell and he wasn't afraid of putting in Olsen for more than 20 games.
Q gives every player his fair chances to make it, he may play his favorites because they help the team win and fill spots those other guys couldn't. That may, must may be a the reason why they play. I'm all for only playing offensiv minded players in all the 12 forward spots. You are, right?

 

[WarriorofTime]

not really, but would you say they all would be the same players with Savy still coaching the team? Or Yawney or Barry Smith or whatever NHL assistant coach would be in Qs spot?
Just think about Kane and his defense....



ummm... Versteeg became a regular in the season we hired Q. Hjalmarsson became a regular and played his 1st NHL game with Q as his coach. Hjammer never played for a different coach in the NHL in fact.

If you can't see the progress Bollig has taken, there is no base for any further discussion. Same with Krüger, same with Shaw.
Saad is a better player this year than he was last and he improved during last year too. That's not only the experience he naturally gets for playing the games.

Bickell made the team because of his contract and body, but he is a much different player now. His D to start with was on the level Pirri is now. Now he is at least average in his own zone.

Q was not afraid of playing Smith in the Top6 as rookie in the POs against the Nucks. He is what he is, right?


What you say about Leddy is wrong too. Leddy made the team because Bowman wanted to and he improved in such many areas it's not even up for discussion IF Q had any influence in this.

How about Kane and Sharps development under Q? They got better and better in areas they weren't that good in the last years.



some others I didn't even wanted to bring up would be Brouwer, Niemi, Dowell and he wasn't afraid of putting in Olsen for more than 20 games.
Q gives every player his fair chances to make it, he may play his favorites because they help the team win and fill spots those other guys couldn't. That may, must may be a the reason why they play. I'm all for only playing offensiv minded players in all the 12 forward spots. You are, right?

This is wrong. He played 13 games in 07-08 and the first game of 08-09 before getting sent down when Savard was still the coach.

 

[LandofLincoln*]

This is wrong. He played 13 games in 07-08 and the first game of 08-09 before getting sent down when Savard was still the coach.

that doesn't give you credibility just because you corrected a mistake

 

[here come the]

Obsession? Talk about a straw man argument. It made no sense to have Morin on the roster and to play Brookbank out of position over him. Refute that instead of shifting the argument and bringing up points I haven't argued against.

FOR THE MILLIONTH TIME - I think Q is a good coach. He is however prone to some seriously stupid decisions and plays favorites.

Reading through this thread, who in the NHL would you say is a better coach than Q and what would you're reasoning behind why they are better be?

 

[sketch22]

If you can't see the progress Bollig has taken, there is no base for any further discussion.

What progress has he made? He knew how to chip the puck out of the d-zone and how to dump it in before he got to the Hawks.

Same with Krüger,

I said that Krüger has made progress. The bad part is that it came at the expense of a better player.

same with Shaw.

Shaw's game is the same as it was when he broke into the NHL. He has improved some of the rough edges but I would chalk that up to experience and work ethic before coaching.

Saad is a better player this year than he was last and he improved during last year too. That's not only the experience he naturally gets for playing the games.

I gave Q full marks for Saad. All I said what that expecting every player to be like Saad was and improve like he has is unrealistic.

Bickell made the team because of his contract and body, but he is a much different player now. His D to start with was on the level Pirri is now.

Better than people gave him credit for? I agree.

Q was not afraid of playing Smith in the Top6 as rookie in the POs against the Nucks. He is what he is, right?

I don't get what your point is? He is a bottom six player that will play his heart out and do what he can to help the team (he is what he is). I don't see why Q should get credit for Smith being the player that he is when that is what he was before he got to Q.

Brouwer

The guy Q ping-ponged between the fourth line and the first. Not exactly a success story for him.

he wasn't afraid of putting in Olsen for more than 20 games.

Injuries and lackluster play from others forced his hand.

he may play his favorites because they help the team win and fill spots those other guys couldn't.

Really?
Putting John Scott on the PK over Monty....
Putting Leddy on the PK over Monty...
Or watching Bruno repeatedly drag down the other players on his line...
Or playing SoD into the ground instead of using Lepisto to give him a break...
And that is just what I can think of off the top of my head. I'm sure others can add to it.

That may, must may be a the reason why they play.

Or it could be that Q has an ego and likes things his way even if it isn't always the best move. Wouldn't be the first coach like that and won't be the last.

I'm all for only playing offensiv minded players in all the 12 forward spots.

Where did I say that at all?

 

[here come the]

I agree with you. I can't stand when that line is playing late in a period as a "shut down" line. In VAN I watched that 4th line go out and ice the puck and Kruger lose the draw, I watched Bollig basically spin around in circles as VAN looked like they were on a PP. I sat there thinking great OT here we come, but Crow kept it out. I'm not saying I hate any of those players or they need to go I just think Q needs to find a more reliable, smarter way of defending that 1 goal lead situation.

It's Kruger's line or Toews' line. Those are the two centers he trusts defensively, those are the two lines he used as defensive lines last year, and I imagine those are the two lines he will continue to use this year. Bollig's not good defensively, but he's pretty much a net neutral. Ideally though the 4th line will become 26-16-28

 

[Bubba88]

ideally the 4th line will see Bollig over Zeus because Zeus is worse than last year and older come PO time...

Ideally we get a better 4th liner than Bollig but they get paid much money in these days. Just look at Burish or Gordon.


Q has a success story of developing players and winning games and bringing new players to the NHL to a current roster. Like it or not. Those are facts.
another guy would be Campbell. His D was never as good as it was when he was with us. Not before and not now.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Reading through this thread, who in the NHL would you say is a better coach than Q and what would you're reasoning behind why they are better be?

It's really hard to quantify better when referring to coaching. Good enough to win cups with this team? At least a dozen.

 

[Hawkaholic]

..and all those coaches do the same **** Q does.

Babcock plays Cleary over young talent
Paul MacClean plays Kassian over young talent
Dave Tippet plays Paul Bissonette over young talent

Hmm, seems like every good-great coach does the exact same stuff Q does. Maybe, just maybe, they know more than you or I? Nahhhh, Q is an idiot.

 

[BobbyJet]

I think his system is good, but his personnel and in-game shenanigans are irritating. Really, really irritating.

And there you have it. Nicely summed up in one sentence.

I think Q just over thinks during a game. It’s almost like he gets bored. He has a habit of needlessly shuffling his lines during games and sometimes makes boneheaded decisions at crucial times (eg. after goals are scored either way and in the last moments of a period). If the unnecessary line shuffling and/or those questionable decisions are pointed out here, the rah rah gang often intervenes – usually with the mentality of “no harm, no foul” or Q has won 2 SC’s in Chicago etc. etc…. It’s easy to ignore them, especially in a winning effort. Too easy; with this roster we win a lot of games, but unfortunately these poor decisions can eventually burn the team, and at the most inopportune of times. Q is not a terrible coach, as Kurtosis stated, his systems work but sometimes he needs to be more patient, less stubborn and more logical on who he has on the ice at certain times in a game. Play the odds, if you will, such as the “what-if” game when it comes to who is on the ice for crucial face-offs.

Encouraging for me was in yesterday's interview, Q stated that the addition of Zus opens up many possibilities "some of which, haven't been explored yet". Hopefully that means Zus will be tried on the 4th line for a stint and see how that works out. If he does regain last year's form then perhaps he can move around as the need arises. I guess I shouldn't hold my breath though.