Vegas=Optimism. This is a retool.

[BobbyJet]

Heaven forbid a coach who doesn't let players dictate how he does his job.

No prima donna player or players is going to displace him.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Matthews absolutely could run Babcock out of town.

 

[BK]

Heaven forbid a coach who doesn't let players dictate how he does his job.

No prima donna player or players is going to displace him.

That is not what is being said at all but ok.

 

[JaegerDice]

Babcock and Q are pretty similar.

They're both stubborn, egotistical, very good at the tactical side of the game and downright horrific at the roster management side. There's a reason Dubas is shipping all of Babcock's useless favorite toys like Polak, Martin and Komarov the hell out of town. Stan should take note and do the same for Q's favorite toys.

Both delusionally believe it's the role of the team in a cap league to provide the coach with all the talent in world, all perfectly suited to the roles and the system they employ, as opposed to it being the role of the coach to adapt their systems to maximize the strengths and minimize the weaknesses of the players the team can provide within the limitations of a cap system.

Babcock left a team that could not afford him the talent he demanded for a team that could. At least for now.

Q is more of a players coach, Babcock is more of an authoritarian. That's pretty much the only difference. Even their on-ice systems are remarkably similar. They think the game in the same way.

Babcock is absolutely catching heat in Toronto of late, and deservedly so. His roster management and decision making has been appallingly poor at times.

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

Babcock is a no-nonsense coach who wants to win and refuses to put a player above the rest of the team.

Sort of the opposite of a country club.

Except Cleary , Bertuzzi and Miller show this isn't case and that Babcock like all coaches have favorites who even when playing terribly get rewarded with ice time because they are "Babcock" guys

 

[BobbyJet]

Sorry but Q and Babcock in the same sentence does not compute. BWC seems to agree though. Nuff said.

 

[Hawkaholic]

So everyone was wrong about every player? Yeah that sounds reasonable.

Wonder how Q might have done with that roster.

Pretty much, yeah.

The majority of their roster is 1st and 2nd round picks IIRC. Most didn't get a lot of ice time with their old team. Now that they got a much bigger role their games all picked up and they built chemistry on the ice quickly.

 

[Hawkaholic]

Sorry but Q and Babcock in the same sentence does not compute. BWC seems to agree though. Nuff said.

Except almost every talking head and people who know the game much better than you put them in the same sentence all the time.

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

Also Vegas got a solid/established #1 goalie in draft

Outside of Beezer no modern expansion team was so lucky. Guys like Hebert , Puppa , Tugnutt , Fernandez and Dunham were not as good as a guy like Fleury. In case of Dunham , Fernandez and Hebert they were backups who got #1 shot thanks to expansion

 

[BobbyJet]

Except almost every talking head and people who know the game much better than you put them in the same sentence all the time.

Yeah right. And how many times does Q's name come up when it comes to head coaching teams in International tournaments? And Babcocks?

Answer: seldom and always

 

[Hawkaholic]

Yeah right. And how many times does Q's name come up when it comes to head coaching teams in International tournaments? And Babcocks?

Answer: seldom and always

I would bet he is the second choice if Babcock were to deny it. But since Babcock was the coach in 2010 when they won, he is still familiar with the majority of the players. Babcock was coming off a Cup when they put that team together which is why he was chosen for that team. Q was the assistant coach in the last Worlds tournament which basically puts them in the same sentence on its own.

 

[Marotte Marauder]

Quenneville was Canada's 2004 coach at the World Championships until he bowed out with health issues. Never led an international team again.

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

You know its also possible Q and others don't want to coach these teams and would rather spend times focusing on family life , etc

 

[Marotte Marauder]

You know its also possible Q and others don't want to coach these teams and would rather spend times focusing on family life , etc

Sure thing, might as well toss in quality time grooming the stache. These guys are A types and LIVE for those opportunities don't be ridiculous.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Yea, if Team Canada is calling about a coaching gig people are listening.

 

[JaegerDice]

Quenneville was Canada's 2004 coach at the World Championships until he bowed out with health issues. Never led an international team again.

Well yeah, cause by most of the accounts that have dribbled out, the 'health issues' were a mental breakdown, which they massaged into 'exhaustion' for the press release. I think Q even addressed it vaguely in interviews since then, though he also massaged into 'job-to-job stress' or something like that.

It seems pretty clear that he's not on Team Canada's list. Even with Babcock as HC, there are plenty of spots open as ACs or consultants that guys like Hitchcock and Lemaire filled. NHL HCs are happy to be ACs at the Olympic level. But Q was never offered a spot.

I don't think it has anything to do with their perception of his coaching ability, just that they feel he let them down when they needed him and gave him an opportunity. That and, well, when was the last time you heard of somebody being hospitalized for a polite, quiet, restrained mental breakdown? He probably made quite the scene, who knows in front of whom.

Which probably isn't entirely fair, but it's standard hockey culture thinking.

 

[ChiHawks10]

Well yeah, cause by most of the accounts that have dribbled out, the 'health issues' were a mental breakdown, which they massaged into 'exhaustion' for the press release. I think Q even addressed it vaguely in interviews since then, though he also massaged into 'job-to-job stress' or something like that.

It seems pretty clear that he's not on Team Canada's list. Even with Babcock as HC, there are plenty of spots open as ACs or consultants that guys like Hitchcock and Lemaire filled. NHL HCs are happy to be ACs at the Olympic level. But Q was never offered a spot.

I don't think it has anything to do with their perception of his coaching ability, just that they feel he let them down when they needed him and gave him an opportunity. That and, well, when was the last time you heard of somebody being hospitalized for a polite, quiet, restrained mental breakdown? He probably made quite the scene, who knows in front of whom.

Which probably isn't entirely fair, but it's standard hockey culture thinking.

He's an alcoholic, also. So I'm sure that had a lot to do with a "mental breakdown" and "exhaustion". He got popped for DUI in 2008.

 

[LordKOTL]

Durability is part of performance. IMO, Crow has the toughest road back. Head injuries are far more unpredictable. If you're not on the ice, you can't perform.

Injuries happen. Hell, look at what happened to Price in 2016. Crawford being injured is a much different can of worms than Toews under-performing for the 3rd year straight, Seabrook being old and slow, Kane not playing defense at all, and Saad & Keith crapping not only their own pants, but everyone else on the team's pants.

Crawford can't perform when not on the ice, but when he was on the ice he was performing and then some. Toews, Seabrook, and especially Saad and Keith weren't performing no matter how much they were on the ice.

 

[piteus]

Injuries happen. Hell, look at what happened to Price in 2016. Crawford being injured is a much different can of worms than Toews under-performing for the 3rd year straight, Seabrook being old and slow, Kane not playing defense at all, and Saad & Keith crapping not only their own pants, but everyone else on the team's pants.

Crawford can't perform when not on the ice, but when he was on the ice he was performing and then some. Toews, Seabrook, and especially Saad and Keith weren't performing no matter how much they were on the ice.

Unfortunately, this isn't just "an injury." This is career threatening. We have no clue how Crow will come back. IMO, Crow's uncertainty is even worse. Fans just happen to be more sympathetic to injuries.

 

[LordKOTL]

Unfortunately, this isn't just "an injury." This is career threatening. We have no clue how Crow will come back. IMO, Crow's uncertainty is even worse. Fans just happen to be more sympathetic to injuries.

It's not about being sympathetic to his injuries, it's about realism on the situation. Think Hossa. If a guy can't play anymore who was a major contributor to the team's success it's going to hurt.

That, IMHO is a far cry from the guys who simply played like utter crap last year.

Besides, if Crawford is done, he's done. If he's indeed done he went out playing the best goaltending the 'hawks have seen since Espo's 1972 season. It sucks, but his LTIR/Cap hit freed can help moving forward.

If Toews, Saad, Seabrook, and Keith continue on their current trajectories that's going to hurt harder and longer because we're still paying them to play well below their cap hit and can't do jack or squat about it.

 

[piteus]

It's not about being sympathetic to his injuries, it's about realism on the situation. Think Hossa. If a guy can't play anymore who was a major contributor to the team's success it's going to hurt.

That, IMHO is a far cry from the guys who simply played like utter crap last year.

Besides, if Crawford is done, he's done. If he's indeed done he went out playing the best goaltending the 'hawks have seen since Espo's 1972 season. It sucks, but his LTIR/Cap hit freed can help moving forward.

If Toews, Saad, Seabrook, and Keith continue on their current trajectories that's going to hurt harder and longer because we're still paying them to play well below their cap hit and can't do jack or squat about it.

Here's the thing: playing like utter crap vs. not being able to play are NOT much different. It hurts the team regardless. And as Hossa's LTIR proved last year, it doesn't help much. Crow potentially moving to LTIR won't help much either.

 

[LordKOTL]

Here's the thing: playing like utter crap vs. not being able to play are NOT much different. It hurts the team regardless. And as Hossa's LTIR proved last year, it doesn't help much. Crow potentially moving to LTIR won't help much either.

Hossa's LTIR didn't matter much because we have the type of GM who would pay 3M dollars for a below-average goalie and 2.25M dollars for a 6-7 D-man. That problem likely sorts itself out this off-season.

If Crawford is 100% done he's 100% done...that sorts itself out and the cap is recouped.

5 more years of the paychecks of Toews, Saad, Seabrook, and Keith with the skill of Arkhipov, Bochenski, Odelein, and Quint is going to hurt much, much more in the long ruin.

 

[piteus]

Hossa's LTIR didn't matter much because we have the type of GM who would pay 3M dollars for a below-average goalie and 2.25M dollars for a 6-7 D-man. That problem likely sorts itself out this off-season.

If Crawford is 100% done he's 100% done...that sorts itself out and the cap is recouped.

5 more years of the paychecks of Toews, Saad, Seabrook, and Keith with the skill of Arkhipov, Bochenski, Odelein, and Quint is going to hurt much, much more in the long ruin.

I don't think we're disagreeing at the core of the debate. It's more semantics than anything else.

 

[BK]

Hossa's LTIR didn't matter much because we have the type of GM who would pay 3M dollars for a below-average goalie and 2.25M dollars for a 6-7 D-man. That problem likely sorts itself out this off-season.

If Crawford is 100% done he's 100% done...that sorts itself out and the cap is recouped.

5 more years of the paychecks of Toews, Saad, Seabrook, and Keith with the skill of Arkhipov, Bochenski, Odelein, and Quint is going to hurt much, much more in the long ruin.

If you look at the lengths of the deals handed out it is obvious that the FO of the Hawks don't think they are competing for at least another year. The young D need to arrive (and IF they hit) the window opens right back up because this team can still score and will have a decent amount of cap space. Boqvist, HJ, Mitchell, etc. will be what make or breaks this team. 1-2 years is also when the Russian prospects we have will hit as well. I do think next year we will see the Hawk take a forward in the draft (Hughes after Uncle Jerry helps us out a bit). The team is rebuilding from within which is how you need to do it with the current CBA. I am in no way happy that the team will not be good this coming season but I am more than ok with the team rebuild via the draft opposed to free agency.

 

[LordKOTL]

I don't think we're disagreeing at the core of the debate. It's more semantics than anything else.

I agree on that.

My stance is more if Crawford comes back and regresses, he'd have to regress quite away before being a liability. Even taking a .010 hit on his SV% from his play last year puts him at his career average which is easily top 10 in the cap era and still well above both overall and starter's average.

Contrast to the rest of the core which have all be *below* their career norms and in the case of Toews, Kane, and especially Keith and Seabrook, don't have age on their side. Crawford hurt the team by receiving head trauma. The rest hurt the team by their on-ice play.

If you look at the lengths of the deals handed out it is obvious that the FO of the Hawks don't think they are competing for at least another year. The young D need to arrive (and IF they hit) the window opens right back up because this team can still score and will have a decent amount of cap space. Boqvist, HJ, Mitchell, etc. will be what make or breaks this team. 1-2 years is also when the Russian prospects we have will hit as well. I do think next year we will see the Hawk take a forward in the draft (Hughes after Uncle Jerry helps us out a bit). The team is rebuilding from within which is how you need to do it with the current CBA. I am in no way happy that the team will not be good this coming season but I am more than ok with the team rebuild via the draft opposed to free agency.

I'm not expecting much from this year either...barring future acquisitions this offseason of course.

Hell, we survived 2006 & 2007...why can't we survive 2018 and 2019?