Wanna blog? Start your own hockey blog with My HockeyBuzz. Register for free today!
 

Bowman sets right tone. Now what?

April 23, 2017, 9:14 AM ET [806 Comments]
John Jaeckel
Chicago Blackhawks Blogger • RSSArchiveCONTACT



"Standing here April 22 is not the way we expected our season to end, and it's a complete failure when you measure it against the expectations that we have of ourselves. We did not come even close to reaching the standard we have set over the years here, and that's unacceptable."

—Blackhawk GM Stan Bowman


Give Stan Bowman credit. Yesterday morning, he stood in front of the Chicago hockey media, and properly articulated the anger, surprise, and disappointment of not just Hawk fans, but the organization itself, including his boss, Team President John McDonough.

As some will recall, I heard after Game 3 that McDonough was "livid" over the state of the Hawks' first round series versus the Predators at that point. What I heard this morning is, McDonough is "still p---ed." (And I don't mean "pumped")

I heard a little more—that one likely change will be new assistant coaches ("that's like changing the head coach, without changing the head coach"), and there will be more change to "send a message."

"The 'country club' atmosphere needs to go, which is a good thing."

The really big question is what those other changes will be—to a roster full of big salaries and no-movement clauses.

A total tear down and rebuild is not happening—nor should it. There's a lot of talent, much of it still in its prime, for Bowman to retool around.

But the nonsensical pattern of the last couple of seasons can't—and won't— be repeated. With proven veterans being parceled off in order to, on the other hand, throw more big money and no-movement clauses at other veterans—all while pinning way too much hope on unready prospects, because nothing else can be afforded.

Here, whether he owns up or not, Bowman deserves some blame. No one, outside of a sliver of the fan base best described as knucklehead fanboys, has hyped Blackhawk prospects as being NHL ready—worse still, ready to contribute to a Stanley Cup team—than Bowman himself has.

The truth is, you get the sense that the Hawk organization is finally aware of how intoxicated it's become on its own bathwater.

This, everyone needs to accept: the answer(s) that might get the Hawks back into contention next season probably don't lie on the Hawk roster or even within the Hawk organization today.

There's even less chance of Alex DeBrincat turning this team into playoff contender next year than Brian Campbell drinking virgin's blood and morphing back in a 28 year old version of himself.

Some fans, who lack enough perspective, will point to Patrick Kane making the jump from junior to the NHL in the 2007-08 season. But DeBrincat isn't Kane, regardless of some gaudy OHL numbers. And Kane himself was a work in progress on a team that didn't even make the playoffs that year.

DeBrincat, Alex Fortin, Gustav Forsling, Tyler Motte all likely have some NHL futures. But all likely still need some amount of seasoning in the AHL before they are ready to contribute anything consistently meaningful to a Stanley Cup-caliber team.

The other fallacy that the fan base should probably stop clinging to is that you can't get equal or greater value back for any of the great Hawk players or prospects in a trade—an idea held most dear by those who also think Bowman is an Infallible Genius.

Wait, what?

So, it's time for Bowman to show us how great he is, or can be.

I haven't heard enough to suggest in totality what the Hawks will do this summer. One thing I have heard is that Corey Crawford—the one higher paid Hawk veteran whose contract allows limited possibility of being traded—could be moved.

But that was before the humiliation of the playoffs, where Crawford was arguably one of the few competent Hawks. Hey, by the same rationale, you probably shouldn't move Marcus Kruger either. But that may happen, too.

The calculus is simple, who can you move (and yes, players with iron clad no-movement clauses can be moved if they choose to waive)? Who do you have in-house to offset that loss? What can you get in return (or with added cap space)?

The "terminology" you're hearing a lot right now is "push-back," "effort," "desire."

The other qualities you may see emphasized are speed and size.

And just to make it all a bit more challenging, a little pro experience would help.

More Chicken and Egg:

How great would it be to replace, say, Mike Kitchen with someone who can really set up and run an effective power play? But it's not that simple, because you also need the true power play quarterback from the point that the young Campbell referenced above sort of once was, and Duncan Keith has never been.

Joel Quenneville will be back—but will his favorites—like Trevor van Riemsdyk, whose lack of mobility was yet again thoroughly exploited by a fast, aggressive opponent in a first round loss?

Can Quenneville acclimate himself to the learning process necessary for a superior athlete like Michal Kempny?

There are needs. It's not going to be easy. And the moves necessary likely won't be completely popular.

Bowman is acknowledging that right now—which is great. But talking about it, and having the organizational fortitude to actually do something about it—and do the right something—is a different story.

I'll be back with more as I hear it.


JJ
Join the Discussion: » 806 Comments » Post New Comment
More from John Jaeckel
» Thanks and Farewell
» Where do we go from here?
» Preds at Hawks Breakdown
» "All Teams Have Flaws"
» The Games You Should Win