OT: Would Q get credit if the team bounces back next year?

[ChiHawk21]

It seems that almost everyone on this board is done with Q. If the team bounces back into a playoff spot next year will Q get any of the credit or will it be played off as winning in spite of him.

What would the organization have to accomplish for him to get back into this boards good graces? If anything?

Click to read more...

 

[BK]

If he changed his systems and some of his roster management approach then he 100% should get credit. Unfortunately he has lost a lot of credibility on here (not that it matter and I am not implying it does).

He has really screwed the pooch the past few years in many ways.

He MUST adjust them teams transition and defensive zone philosophies.

 

[migi]

Some of here will ignore Q if Hawks make to playoffs and take a run at another Cup. They’ll say that it’s just because of the players, not the coach. Even though if there is a change in system.

And if we miss playoffs again, Q gets the blame with Stan. Even though there is a change in system. That’s how it goes.

 

[piteus]

Coaches get way too much credit when teams win and get way too much if the blame when teams lose.

Regardless of what happens, it's time for a change. The Hawks have to either turn the roster over OR change coaches. It's just human nature to tune out the leadership after a decade. Theo Epstein hit on this. Bill Belichick keeps the attention of his team by constantly turning over his roster minus Brady. Even Pops' Spurs started to sputter when Duncan retired.

I believe Scotty Bowman realized this and moved appropriately.

Sometimes, it's just time for change.

 

[BK]

Hockey coaches can have a bigger impact that a lot of people realize. Systems, in game adjustments, matchups, etc. have a huge impact on the game.

NBA is the opposite in my opinion because it is all about superstars.

 

[Fortyfives]

I’m one of the biggest detractors of Q on here but two years ago he played the rookies and gave them some rope. Even I couldn’t help but give him credit for the season. That is until he let the team coast for the last quarter of the season and benched Hino along with any speed the team had. Thus going back to the conservative approach which eventually led to getting swept by the preds.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

We blindly hate him remember?

 

[Kaners PPGs]

Odds are the team is going to be much better next season and will make the playoffs. You're going to have a lot of Q defenders beat their chest but the reality is that the Hawks this past year were unlucky with goal scoring and the Crawford injury showed how porous the defense it. Assuming Crawford is healthy and playing near his peak, Saad rebounds and some of the younger players take a step forward, the Hawks will be much improved. This will not change my opinion of Q. I have always thought he was overrated and that he was a good but not great coach that wins with talent.

 

[Robsker]

Like others... if he modernizes his system and then ices a team that has a voracious back-check, fore-check system in place and the system for the PP is re-designed and he holds players accountable --- then if all this happens the Hawks can bounce back. if so, Q would get much credit. That said, Q is very unlikely to change much of anything --- the Hawks are far more likely to not bounce back, and as a result Q is gone after next season. In all this, next year is almost certainly down the tubes. The only way to have changed that is to have canned Q at the end of last season.

 

[CallMeShaft]

If he fixes our systems and plays guys their appropriate amounts, then I would give him quite a bit of credit for a decent year.

I just don't see him making the necessary adjustments ATM.

 

[CourtneyDagger50]

It depends on what the systems look like.
And if he randomly gives up on players (See: Kempny)

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Sure. It's a results-oriented business.

 

[ChiHawk21]

seems to be if he changes his "systems" and they win people will give him credit. What happens if he coaches the same way he has always coached and the team plays better and has a good season. would last year be the one off season or do we stick with Qs systems and philosophy are outdated? just want to get this out in the open before hand in case this happens.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Effectively, Q's system didn't work for one calendar year, from April, 2017 to April, 2018 (not suggesting that everything was always perfect before that). There's certainly a chance to bounceback and just say that that year was an outlier, but it just seems far more likely that enough of the team had mileage catch up to them and they couldn't perform to a level necessary to make it work. It's not an inherent indictment against the practicality of the system per se, but recognition that you lack the tools to make it function is necessary.

That being said, the dual losses of Crow and Hossa can't be understated.

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

I expect this team to bounce back some, assuming Crow is healthy and with just better "luck". That said, without seeing to what degree they bounce back (if they do) and how it all plays out specifically, it's hard to say how much or little Q should get for that.

 

[x Tame Impala]

seems to be if he changes his "systems" and they win people will give him credit. What happens if he coaches the same way he has always coached and the team plays better and has a good season. would last year be the one off season or do we stick with Qs systems and philosophy are outdated? just want to get this out in the open before hand in case this happens.

If they "play better and have a good season" but still get royally out-coached and bounced early in the playoffs (like exactly what happened in the NSH series) then what difference does it make?

 

[ChiHawk21]

If they "play better and have a good season" but still get royally out-coached and bounced early in the playoffs (like exactly what happened in the NSH series) then what difference does it make?

what if they get a new coach and get bounced early in the playoffs? what if they win every game and lose in game 7 of the finals? what difference does any of it make.

they were top 4 odds on favorites to win the cup last year. they ran into a verrry good preds team in the first round. i feel like you think they will win the cup every single year. the goal is to put themselves in position to win every year. they were in that position last year no matter how much u want to diminish it because you dont like the coach.

 

[Panzerspitze]

I will settle for Quenneville getting them to show up for an average of 30 minutes a game. Hah, who am I kidding? I don't even see that happening.

 

[CourtneyDagger50]

If the PP actually performs, sure. I don't even care who actually runs the PP. The Head Coach has to have some say with HOW BAD it was

 

[Dont Toews Me Bro]

Not on this board he would but from most other fans who don't only bash the team he would.

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

Most of the hockey world would give him credit as would his players and media

Only Hawk fans would bash him and refuse to acknowledge anything positive. We see that very clearly with how several people dismiss his role in Cups and claim he was not even a factor in why teams won those 3 cups

Sad reality is Hawk fans will glorify an overrated coach like Keenan and yearn for those days while bashing the best coach we have ever had in franchise history and one of the greatest coaches in NHL history

Its pathetic really

 

[Kaners Bald Spot]

Most of the hockey world would give him credit as would his players and media

Only Hawk fans would bash him and refuse to acknowledge anything positive. We see that very clearly with how several people dismiss his role in Cups and claim he was not even a factor in why teams won those 3 cups

Sad reality is Hawk fans will glorify an overrated coach like Keenan and yearn for those days while bashing the best coach we have ever had in franchise history and one of the greatest coaches in NHL history

Its pathetic really

Q is a master tactician, and he coached circles around everyone in the cup seasons. When surrounded by the right talent, he is unquestionably the best active coach in the NHL. Not that he isn't without his faults though. I hate how he plays favorites with plugs and stifles growth in young players by NHL experience. Kempny and Murphy were probably the Hawks two best defensemen for most of the season. He banished one to the press box until he asked for a trade and healthy scratched the other 10 times at least for reasons unbeknownst to most fans. 2/7 were garbage this past season and he still trusted them to carry the load, when it was obvious that others needed to step up. His unwillingness to banish the corpse of Handzus to the press box in 2014 cost them the WCF and Cup. Q gets rid of players in his doghouse by benching them whenever they make a mistake, then they play scared, and eventually it leads to them getting a one way ticket out of Chicago.

Q is a hell of a coach, and a HOF, when he has the following 1. HIS GUYS and 2. HIS GUYS ARE ALSO GOOD AT HOCKEY. Note that 1 and 2 are are not necessarily always one and the same. The issue comes when he has players who are good at hockey that he puts in the doghouse and players who are bad at hockey who are his guys. That happened way too much in 2017-18, and we saw the results. I'm not complaining about the 3 Cups he won, because he earned each of them, but I am complaining about the one he left on the table because of his favoritism and stubbornness.

 

[ChiHawks10]

Most of the hockey world would give him credit as would his players and media

Only Hawk fans would bash him and refuse to acknowledge anything positive. We see that very clearly with how several people dismiss his role in Cups and claim he was not even a factor in why teams won those 3 cups

Sad reality is Hawk fans will glorify an overrated coach like Keenan and yearn for those days while bashing the best coach we have ever had in franchise history and one of the greatest coaches in NHL history

Its pathetic really

Why do you continue to make things up, and tell blatant lies? No one has said any of the bolded. Like... ever.

 

[chrispw1]

In Chicago many fans love the fire and brimstone type coaches which is why Keenan is glorified even though he pretty much sucked everywhere he went post 1994 Rangers and Bears fans think Ditka was the greatest coach ever when he won only one Super Bowl with a team that probably should have won two or three. Also, it seems many fans were expecting or envisioning a Bulls like run of dominance which given the differences with the hard cap and the difference in how hockey is played compared to basketball wasn't all that realistic

 

[Hawkaholic]

Why do you continue to make things up, and tell blatant lies? No one has said any of the bolded. Like... ever.

There have definitely been a few who have said we could have won with any coach behind the bench. And another poster who wants to bring back Keenan.