Speculation: Who Gets Hired First Q or Stan?

Who gets hired first Q or Stan

  • Stan as GM

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    5
Status
Not open for further replies.

ChiHawks10

Registered User
Jul 7, 2009
27,916
21,138
Chicago 'Burbs
you can use the cups argument for bowman but it is a strawman argument for Q. you pick and choose times that benefits your opinions on the team even when it isnt a reality. really hurts your im smarter then everyone image you try to portray on here.

It really doesn't. See my post above that explains it. I'm not smarter than everyone. There are numerous people on here who know more about the game than me. And I'll admit it without a problem.(I just did, see?) You really think I care about an "I'm smarter than everyone" image on an anonymous hockey message board? Sorry, my self-confidence isn't that low, bud.
 

ChiHawk21

Registered User
Jan 15, 2011
7,310
1,552
so again nothing of substance from you..yawn..

I have better arguments with my 9 year old over Pokemon' than with you....
you just tried to bash me in your post...i dont think i need to respond to you calling me a Q homer and you saying that you judge Q and bowman equally when i very clearly laid out the ChiHawk10 does not do so.

theres no part of either of you that can admit what just happened? you both think there is zero contradiction? i dont believe you can think that.
 

AmericanDream

Thank you Elon!
Oct 24, 2005
36,959
26,269
Chicago Manitoba
you just tried to bash me in your post...i dont think i need to respond to you calling me a Q homer and you saying that you judge Q and bowman equally when i very clearly laid out the ChiHawk10 does not do so.
You are a Q homer...a pathetic one at that....

I can list Bowman's failures, you have yet to list/admit to your boy Q's...
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChiHawks10

ChiHawk21

Registered User
Jan 15, 2011
7,310
1,552
You are a Q homer...a pathetic one at that....

I can list Bowman's failures, you have yet to list/admit to your boy Q's...
iv done this for you before. iv bashed keith on the powerplay, iv bashed playing manning, i bashed not sitting kunitz etc.... you only see what you want.
 

ChiHawks10

Registered User
Jul 7, 2009
27,916
21,138
Chicago 'Burbs
JFC, it's like talking to a rock. Except the bonus with a rock, they can't respond with stupid **** all the time.

Read my post above where I explained how I'm not contradicting myself. Here's a more in depth explanation @ChiHawk21 since apparently you can't understand the difference.

Bowman rebuilt a team(an elite team multiple times) that Q coached to 3 Cups. They're equals in that regard. The difference is... the league didn't change in a way where Bowman has to change how he GMs. He just needs to continue to draft good players, sign good UFA contracts, and make more positive trades than negative ones. The same things he has always done, and did for 3 Cups winning teams. And he did those things very well for 7 years. Or do you disagree? His job is made harder now, by age catching up to his players sooner than he expected. Guys who should be great players on solid contracts are mediocre players on bad contracts. You can't predict that. So now the team is struggling because they lack the elite talent they used to have, but don't have the money to bring more elite talent in(they have to draft it and develop it, and sign it to ELCs.) Something he's in the process of doing. The salary cap is intended to do exactly this to a team. Exactly what you're seeing now with the Hawks.

Q, on the other hand, needed to evolve how he coached, evolve how he taught things, evolve how he did things, and evolve how his team played, to fit the direction the game was headed, and the new style of play that the majority of the teams in the league are using. Where Q refused to do that... Bowman doesn't have to change anything like that. Which is why Q won't get a pass, and Bowman will. Now do you understand how it's not a contradiction? (doubtful) Q dug his own grave with his stubbornness to not change and adapt to the new NHL.

you just tried to bash me in your post...i dont think i need to respond to you calling me a Q homer and you saying that you judge Q and bowman equally when i very clearly laid out the ChiHawk10 does not do so.

theres no part of either of you that can admit what just happened? you both think there is zero contradiction? i dont believe you can think that.

I do judge them equally, but I judge them in different ways because they're doing two different f***ing jobs. Is it really this f***ing hard to comprehend? My 10 year old daughter would understand this. I'll dumb it down for you. One guy is a police chief. One guy is a fire chief. Will you judge them the same way? No, you won't. Because they're doing two different f***ing jobs. :shakehead
I'm utterly amazed right now.

Yes, there is zero contradiction. Read my quoted post here on why there is zero contradiction.

Guess what? I'm also critical of Colliton. Go read my posts in the GDT last night and you'll see that, also. :shakehead

You're wrong. You're wrong, and you're making yourself look foolish beyond belief. You may want to step away from the keyboard.
 

Blackhawks

Registered User
Jul 25, 2007
5,678
1,134
JFC, it's like talking to a rock. Except the bonus with a rock, they can't respond with stupid **** all the time.

Read my post above where I explained how I'm not contradicting myself. Here's more for you.

Bowman rebuilt a team(an elite team multiple times) that Q coached to 3 Cups. They're equals in that regard. The difference is... the league didn't change in a way where Bowman has to change how he GMs. He just needs to continue to draft good players, sign good UFA contracts, and make more positive trades than negative ones. The same things he has always done, and did for 3 Cups winning teams. And he did those things very well for 7 years. Or do you disagree?

Q, on the other hand, needed to evolve how he coached, evolve how he taught things, evolve how he did things, and evolve how his team played, to fit the direction the game was headed, and the new style of play that the majority of the teams in the league are using. Where Q refused to do that... Bowman doesn't have to change anything like that. Which is why Q won't get a pass, and Bowman will. Now do you understand how it's not a contradiction? (doubtful) Q dug his own grave with his stubbornness to not change and adapt to the new NHL.


That makes absolutely zero sense, so Q has to change but Stan doesn’t? Stan has destroyed this team these past 3 years and as we can see now the team is just garbage and it was not even Q’s fault the team is playing like this. JC Stan’s boy has stunk up the joint with better players on this team since we have two D back from injuries. If Stan is staying he sure hell has to change what he’s doing because all he has done is draft well and gone ahead and traded these drafted players away or signed core players to huge contracts that he can’t retain those drafted players anymore.

TT first rounder gone due to stupidity
Hartman gone
Danault gone
Panarin(equivalent to 1st overall gone)
Schmaltz(gone)

Whatever he has done well in free agency and drafting he has destroyed, this guy can’t be trusted with trades and giving money out. He’s too soft, he doesn’t know how to negotiate. Also why does he only trade with a handful of GM’s around the league if he is so “respected”? Mark my words he leaves Chicago he’s not getting a job anywhere else because everyone knows the core carried all those teams and he only had to make minor tweaks and when he was doing that the team was successful, as soon as he tried to make big trades the success went down the drain.


Let’s not mention his horrible cap management, it has been catestrophic to say the least...
 

ChiHawks10

Registered User
Jul 7, 2009
27,916
21,138
Chicago 'Burbs
That makes absolutely zero sense, so Q has to change but Stan doesn’t? Stan has destroyed this team these past 3 years and as we can see now the team is just garbage and it was not even Q’s fault the team is playing like this. JC Stan’s boy has stunk up the joint with better players on this team since we have two D back from injuries. If Stan is staying he sure hell has to change what he’s doing because all he has done is draft well and gone ahead and traded these drafted players away or signed core players to huge contracts that he can’t retain those drafted players anymore.

TT first rounder gone due to stupidity
Hartman gone
Danault gone
Panarin(equivalent to 1st overall gone)
Schmaltz(gone)

Whatever he has done well in free agency and drafting he has destroyed, this guy can’t be trusted with trades and giving money out. He’s too soft, he doesn’t know how to negotiate. Also why does he only trade with a handful of GM’s around the league if he is so “respected”? Mark my words he leaves Chicago he’s not getting a job anywhere else because everyone knows the core carried all those teams and he only had to make minor tweaks and when he was doing that the team was successful, as soon as he tried to make big trades the success went down the drain.


Let’s not mention his horrible cap management, it has been catestrophic to say the least...

My God. A second one that doesn't understand. Color me shocked that it was this person...

Yes, Q has to adapt to the changes of the game on the ice. Stan needs to only do the same things he did to build/rebuild the Cup teams... sign good contracts, draft well, bring in good UFAs on good contracts. He hasn't done that as well as he was during the Cup years, so that's not good. He needs to be better. He has made mistakes. I won't deny that at all.

JC has had a month, mid-season, to fix things. Significant progress takes longer than that, when players are unlearning 10 years of doing things a certain way. Stan has made some mistakes, but mark my words, the salary cap has done this to the team. Not Stan. It is working how it's intended.

Being "soft" has nothing to do with anything.

He trades with people who are willing to trade with him. Don't argue from speculation. It makes you look dumb.

Minor tweaks? :laugh: That's revisionist history by someone who has it out for Stan. His minor tweaks involved losing half a dozen critical players after each Cup to the cap... And not minor players either...:shakehead

Half their team was lost after 2010 in the purge. Ten players. Including Byfuglien, Eager, Sopel, Fraser, Versteeg, and Ladd. Had to match an offer sheet for Hammer, forcing them to lose Niemi.

In 2013 they had 9 players on that Cup team that they had from 2010. Toews, Kane, Sharp, Hossa, Keith, Seabs, Bolland, Hammer. They lost another 5 players after 2013.

Don't give me this "Bowman only had to make minor tweaks" bullshit. That's just blatantly false.
 
Last edited:

AmericanDream

Thank you Elon!
Oct 24, 2005
36,959
26,269
Chicago Manitoba
iv done this for you before. iv bashed keith on the powerplay, iv bashed playing manning, i bashed not sitting kunitz etc.... you only see what you want.
I will take your word for it, I guess, I only see what you post..if you stated any of that then I missed it..regardless, this has been talked to death and there just is no point anymore..

Bowman has swung and missed a number of times, he is on his last life...those of us who even remotely like what Bowman has done over the years can see and admit it...Q swung and missed far too much and his lifespan ran out here..it seems you and a few others cannot grasp that or come to terms with it..

I don't give a flying f*** who coaches this team or runs it, just win is all I care about..
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChiHawks10

ChiHawk21

Registered User
Jan 15, 2011
7,310
1,552
bowmans job is to predict the play of the aging players and send them out or make sure someone is there to fill there spot. his job is to sign good contracts, its to make more positive trades that negative ones. has he done this since the cups? i dont know how you can say hes done this since the 2016 season. why are you not calling for his head? will you understand that it is a contradiction (doubtful). in your opinion they have had the same timeline. good through the cups and fell off. you are giving one an excuse and blaming the other. Q cant win without a good roster. It starts with bowman and q fell on the sword for him. that hasnt worked in bowmans favor and may end up costing him his job earlier then predicted.
 

LordKOTL

Abuse of Officials
Aug 15, 2014
3,525
768
Pacific NW
Game passed Bowman by would be 100% valid but his drafting and Euro free agent signing showcase that he knows were it is going. Everyone he is drafted or signed have been great skaters that can play a two way game. Skill and speed are the new NHL and his moves reflect that.

Note: Manning and Kunitz do not reflect this but I don’t believe they were ever going to be part of the future (look at their deals).

They can? Could've fooled me. While not everyone is a medical-waste dumpster fire in the backed most of the guys on the roster right now wouldn't know defense if their lives depended on it.
 

BK

"Goalie Apologist"
Feb 8, 2011
33,636
16,483
Minneapolis, MN
They can? Could've fooled me. While not everyone is a medical-waste dumpster fire in the backed most of the guys on the roster right now wouldn't know defense if their lives depended on it.

Which draft pick or Euro signing can’t skate? Rutta isn’t the best skater. The rest can.

Which draft pick or Euro signing can’t play a two way game? Yes they all can.

You didn’t read my post. I was specific in who I was talking about. I clearly state Manning and Kunitz are not part of the future. They are stop gaps.
 

ChiHawk21

Registered User
Jan 15, 2011
7,310
1,552
My God. A second one that doesn't understand. Color me shocked that it was this person...

Yes, Q has to adapt to the changes of the game on the ice. Stan needs to only do the same things he did to build/rebuild the Cup teams... sign good contracts, draft well, bring in good UFAs on good contracts. JC has had a month, mid-season to fix things. Significant progress takes longer than that, when players are unlearning 10 years of doing things a certain way. Stan has made some mistakes, but mark my words, the salary cap has done this to the team. Not Stan. It is working how it's intended.

Being "soft" has nothing to do with anything.

He trades with people who are willing to trade with him.

Minor tweaks? :laugh: That's revisionist history by someone who has it out for Stan. His minor tweaks involved losing half a dozen players after each Cup to the cap... :shakehead

IM SO SMART!

"It's the typical strawman argument we see from the huge Q supporters on here. "Hur dur, 3 Cups! 2nd winningest coach ever!"
ChiHawks10, Aug 21, 2018

"Because he believes Stan is a terrible GM. Because terrible GMs build/help build 3 Stanley Cup Championships and navigate the cap the way he did for almost a decade. :laugh:"
ChiHawk10
 

ChiHawk21

Registered User
Jan 15, 2011
7,310
1,552
You have the self-awareness of a ****ing potato. Just keep posting, so I can keep making you look dumber and dumber with each one. I'm enjoying it. Anyone with 1/4 of a brain would have read my posts and chalked it up as a loss a long time ago. Not you. You're too dumb to realize when you're WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY out of your league.

"You really think I care about an "I'm smarter than everyone" image on an anonymous hockey message board? Sorry, my self-confidence isn't that low, bud."
ChiHawk10
 

Blue Liner

Registered User
Dec 12, 2009
10,332
3,608
Chicago
bowmans job is to predict the play of the aging players and send them out or make sure someone is there to fill there spot. his job is to sign good contracts, its to make more positive trades that negative ones. has he done this since the cups? i dont know how you can say hes done this since the 2016 season. why are you not calling for his head? will you understand that it is a contradiction (doubtful). in your opinion they have had the same timeline. good through the cups and fell off. you are giving one an excuse and blaming the other. Q cant win without a good roster. It starts with bowman and q fell on the sword for him. that hasnt worked in bowmans favor and may end up costing him his job earlier then predicted.

The roster was better than the performance last season and the season prior to that. It wasn't a Cup winning roster, but it was better than a miss the playoffs and get thoroughly embarrassed in the 1st round roster. Is that all on Quenneville? No. But add to that the changing dynamic and direction of this roster (getting younger and younger) and the game continuing to evolve, and Bowman did exactly what you ask him to do of the players; he predicted his current coach was not the fit going forward for this team and he replaced him. Time will tell if he chose the right guy and that will 100% be on him. You can also very fairly argue that the timing was bad for a multitude of reasons. If this was going to happen, it should have last summer. It's a better look and exit for Quenneville, and it gives your new head coach the proper time to prepare, have a training camp, and come in fresh. Bowman set up Colliton terribly in this scenario and the optics are pretty bad, and that's squarely on him. He wears that.

As for Bowman, a fair debate can be made that he could have been canned last summer as well. With that said, a coach generally goes before an exec, and the upper crust obviously thought enough of the fact that Bowman has drafted very well with many talented young players imminently joining the NHL ranks and done some things to instill the confidence to be able to crawl out of this AND choose his own coach to lead the way, that they allowed for him some time to rectify this and get back to contending again. Will it happen? Who knows? How long will he get? Who knows?

Personally, I am okay with him being retained and being given full control of fixing this. That includes moving on with a new voice in a head coach, which takes absolutely nothing away from what that head coach did previously or what he may do somewhere else. Here in Chicago...it was time. I have a hard time really seeing how anyone sees otherwise, but to each their own. It wasn't working anymore, and the shelf life had expired. Unfortunately, it was done at the wrong time, but that's on Bowman as well. With all of that said, if there isn't a significant step forward made in the results next season, that should be it for him. They don't need to win a Cup next season, but there needs to be significant, significant steps forward. He doesn't get much time, for me. The reality is, you need to give your head coach the time as well and he'll need a full off-season, fresh training camp, etc. to move forward with that. There's enough youth imminently on the way, upcoming cap space, and continued production out of some of your core members, that I am ok with moving forward with Bowman getting his ONE final chance to right this ship. If this team is middling or treading water at this point next season from the beginning, feel free to get out the ax.

This is the most reasonable way I can present how and why this makes sense. Certainly isn't foolproof and can be absolutely be debated, but it's where I'm at and why I think a move at head coach was sensible and also extremely complicated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BK and ChiHawks10
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->