#Qhatesthekids
- Ogilthorpe2

The other day he was yelling at TT on the side for not even being able to grow a decent mustache.

The other day he was yelling at TT on the side for not even being able to grow a decent mustache.
- HawkintheD

Knowing Q he'll banish him to purgatory.

Knowing Q he'll banish him to purgatory.
- paulr

You know the only reason he's even out there is cause of Stan.

#stanisarrogant

You know the only reason he's even out there is cause of Stan.

#stanisarrogant
- HawkintheD

Plus don't forget McD...he meddles an awful lot.

#thehawksfrontofficeisinchaos

Hey, if one of you sees Q, tell him you're welcome. Who knew he read the Ducks' blog comments here on HB merely a couple of hours before gametime?
- yzermaneely

The Toews/Kane combo is something that he has been doing in the playoffs in the WCF/SCF since 2009, but I'll tell him next time I see him that a gentleman 'Yzermaneely' will be invoicing him for his advice in the WCF

Knowing Q he'll banish him to purgatory.
- paulr

I don't know about that to be honest. I guess I am keeping the glass half full with this topic. But then again, I am always thinking glass half full with the Hawks nowadays, especially with all that team has went through since I was a young lad.

Sufficed to say, I think Q had a roster that basically gave him the ability to shun the young guys, for the Hawks roster was pretty much stacked from top to bottom for a few years. Q is at a point now where he doesn't have that type of roster anymore. I just feel that a coach such as Q who has been around for a long time and has maintained success with the Hawks knows that he has to teach the young guys. We cannot forget that a coach with as much success as Q just doesn't get tossed the keys to a Bentley. He had to start with a Kia to earn the Bentley.

I guess in this case, when you have been driving a Bentley for so long, do you treat the Bentley like a Kia, or do you just ditch the Kia? (Terrible analogy, but work is boring today and I am cutting down on my coffee.)

I don't know about that to be honest. I guess I am keeping the glass half full with this topic. But then again, I am always thinking glass half full with the Hawks nowadays, especially with all that team has went through since I was a young lad.

Sufficed to say, I think Q had a roster that basically gave him the ability to shun the young guys, for the Hawks roster was pretty much stacked from top to bottom for a few years. Q is at a point now where he doesn't have that type of roster anymore. I just feel that a coach such as Q who has been around for a long time and has maintained success with the Hawks knows that he has to teach the young guys. We cannot forget that a coach with as much success as Q just doesn't get tossed the keys to a Bentley. He had to start with a Kia to earn the Bentley.

I guess in this case, when you have been driving a Bentley for so long, do you treat the Bentley like a Kia, or do you just ditch the Kia? (Terrible analogy, but work is boring today and I am cutting down on my coffee.)
- purepone

If the front office agrees to a retool that may impact the competitiveness of the team then it allows Q to focus on development over team success. If the front office expect the Hawks to remain a contender then Q's focus can't and won't be on developing the younger players. This is a front office decision.

AGREED! Call them as the rulebook states. I think it would have been a quite different series.
- John Jaeckel

It would have been over in 5, and the OMG, top-4 D-men beaten to a pulp by the big, bad, mighty Ducks, would have over a weeks worth of rest.

Wrong again, troll.

I've seen several posts here saying calls were missed on both teams. There is no question though more non calls are favoring the quacks simply because of their size requiring a clutch and grab style.

The momentum shifting (or attempt to) call on Richards could have been called all night long - more so on the Ducks though. Just at the end I sit (the east goal) there had to be 3 more interference penalties that could have been called per period. Their picks and hooking are the only way they keep the cycle going. Hey, if Wes McCauley and Pollack are not going to whistle an obvious penalty - have at it until it is.

What is sad is Boudreaux and Perry's whining brought results. If it continues it puts the Hawks at a disadvantage Saturday. Another WCF influenced unnecesarily by subjective officiating will be a real shame.
- tredbrta

Wanna talk influence? Imagine the NBC wonks right now fretting a Bolts/Mallards SCF. Millions and millions of advertising dollars flushed right down the toilet.

Is a coach's patience tempered by the position he is in? With the roster Q has had since he got here, his focus was on winning, not on teaching a player the basics like how to position himself when defending. The prevailing argument of some posters here is that it was Quenneville's responsibility to work with players to teach them basic fundamentals that should have be learned at the lower levels of the sport. Yes he has to teach them how to play his system but they had to earn their position on the team with a certain skill set already in place, like Shaw or Kruger.

I have no idea if Quenneville has the ability to put winning aside for development? If he doesn't the question will be do these young players get developed in the minors or do the Hawks make a coaching change to get the right type of coach in? I'm guessing the players will be in the minors.
- paulr

Q's job is suppose to put the best team on ice to perform well in the playoffs. If that means giving some rookie ice time to prove himself or develop a game. Then that is what he is had to do. the tricky part, does Q change his strategy to get the best out of his players or try to get the players to play his game. But there is no denying, Q has a short leash on younger players.

the hawks have always been one injury or suspension away from being quite deficient in the defensemen category. They were so weak in dmen depth in 2010 playoffs that Big Buf even played defense in the first series. This year the gambles with KT was a big blunder. Also one can still say that the Versteeg and Runblad pickups from last year sucked too. could have really used the help last year.

I don't know about that to be honest. I guess I am keeping the glass half full with this topic. But then again, I am always thinking glass half full with the Hawks nowadays, especially with all that team has went through since I was a young lad.

Sufficed to say, I think Q had a roster that basically gave him the ability to shun the young guys, for the Hawks roster was pretty much stacked from top to bottom for a few years. Q is at a point now where he doesn't have that type of roster anymore. I just feel that a coach such as Q who has been around for a long time and has maintained success with the Hawks knows that he has to teach the young guys. We cannot forget that a coach with as much success as Q just doesn't get tossed the keys to a Bentley. He had to start with a Kia to earn the Bentley.

I guess in this case, when you have been driving a Bentley for so long, do you treat the Bentley like a Kia, or do you just ditch the Kia? (Terrible analogy, but work is boring today and I am cutting down on my coffee.)
- purepone

He didn't shun Hjalmarsson, Kruger, Shaw, Saad, TT, or TVR.

Q's job is suppose to put the best team on ice to perform well in the playoffs. If that means giving some rookie ice time to prove himself or develop a game. Then that is what he is had to do. the tricky part, does Q change his strategy to get the best out of his players or try to get the players to play his game. But there is no denying, Q has a short leash on younger players.

the hawks have always been one injury or suspension away from being quite deficient in the defensemen category. They were so weak in dmen depth in 2010 playoffs that Big Buf even played defense in the first series. This year the gambles with KT was a big blunder. Also one can still say that the Versteeg and Runblad pickups from last year sucked too. could have really used the help last year.
- Topshelf2010

Acquiring talent isn't the coach's job.

All NHL coaches of contending teams will not put up with a young player who doesn't quickly contribute to the sucess of the team. I blame Quenneville for not having the team better prepared to start game 5 but not because he didn't work with young defensemen (Clendenning or Dalhbeck) who were unable to crack the lineup or were minor contributers of teams who aren't contenders.

Trend??

Ducks blow 3-2 series lead in 2013 first round.

Ducks blow 3-2 series lead in 2014 second round.

Ducks blow 3-2 series lead in 2015 third round.

Trend??

Ducks blow 3-2 series lead in 2013 first round.

Ducks blow 3-2 series lead in 2014 second round.

Ducks blow 3-2 series lead in 2015 third round.


- blackhawk24

I like it for this season, but it means they blow it in the SCF next season.

Who said they were crappy?
- golfbard

Crappy? No.
Attempt to injure goon squaders like Kesler, Perry and Stoner? Yes, absolutely, with irrefutable proof documented in the last 6 games.

This... I think Q can be a good teacher, but the level of his patience is what concerns myself, and probably many of us on here.

That aside, after reading/catching up on the thread, I personally don't have much worry about the team next season. The hawks core is arguably top in the nhl, and the Hawks issues year in and year out has been forward depth.

I will be concerned when we see the huge production drop in Hossa
- purepone

Wanna trade out Q for a "kinder, gentler" teacher who will appreciate the greatness of the Hawk prospects?

Be careful what ya wish for . . . Seems to me that could be akin to throwing good money after bad.

He didn't shun Hjalmarsson, Kruger, Shaw, Saad, TT, or TVR.
- Ogilthorpe2

Ex-act-ly.

Crappy? No.
Attempt to injure goon squaders like Kesler, Perry and Stoner? Yes, absolutely, with irrefutable proof documented in the last 6 games.
- 35Tony0

I would say that's more accurate than crappy.

Wanna trade out Q for a "kinder, gentler" teacher who will appreciate the greatness of the Hawk prospects?

Be careful what ya wish for . . . Seems to me that could be akin to throwing good money after bad.
- John Jaeckel

Wasn't that person fired before Q was hired?

Wanna trade out Q for a "kinder, gentler" teacher who will appreciate the greatness of the Hawk prospects?

Be careful what ya wish for . . . Seems to me that could be akin to throwing good money after bad.
- John Jaeckel

In my opinion the teacher belongs in the AHL not the NHL.

I'll tell you this right now. NO

for the reason that Morin, very much like Pirri, was top 6 or bust.

His game wasnt tailored for bottom 6 checking and defensive responsibility. So if he wasnt scoring or creating offense, he wasnt playing

Danault on the other hand, while having some offensive upside being a first round pick and all, has always been pegged as a hustle, balls to the wall, gamer. A kruger/bolland type.

Danault has a motor that doesnt quit, as competitive as they come, and is better in his own end than the offensive zone. Danault will not have boom or bust expectations. He will be able to step in and be a depth role player because nobody will expect him to be and nobody is asking him to be a top 6 guy
- FourFeathers773

This!!! Phil Danault breaks camp with the Hawks next year as a L3 or L4 center. FF has it right. This kid is probably at home right now doing off-ice conditioning. He'll play in the NHL and have a solid career in a set role.

This!!! Phil Danault breaks camp with the Hawks next year as a L3 or L4 center. FF has it right. This kid is probably at home right now doing off-ice conditioning. He'll play in the NHL and have a solid career in a set role.
- kwolf68

Still need a 2C for next year...

Still need a 2C for next year...

- DMChi2010

Teuvo? He looks good on wing though. He'll need to eat some Wheaties this summer and get stronger.

Still need a 2C for next year...

- DMChi2010

If Phil ever makes it to 2C (with his supreme character who knows) it won't be next year.

2C will be a huge question going into next year (that's nothing new)...

probably be a holdover from this year (Richards)
a similar scrap heap veteran for cheap (Roy)
Current roster player (Shaw, Kruger, TT-personally think TT and Shaw are wings and Kruger is bottom 6)
Youngster acquired via trade (Lazar type prospect)

So basically NONE of the options look immediately promising.

Perry 30 as of 5/16
Getzlaf 30 as of 5/10
Kesler 30
Lindholm 21
Fowler 23
Vatanen 23
Silfverberg 24
Despres 23
Rakell 22
Palmieri 23
Andersen 25
Gibson 21
Sekac 22
Etem 22

Not even bothering with the other regulars that are 26-29, just the starters (other then Gibson) that are 25 and under. All under control of the Ducks.
- quackup

Funny thing about youthful defenseman...they either show improvement, then either rapid improvement or they plateau and stay at that "not there, showing the signs of being..." level, even after they get the bigger fatter deals.

and besides Silfverberg I am not so sure there are Duck forwards who really advance into good top six regulars, and here in Chicago we saw certainly plenty forwards who are still in the league but elsewhere because they can skate the hawks style, or didn't show that upward trend.

Not judging.

And you and I agree bashing posters to just bash them is silly, but when JJ puts the new blog up, I am coming for the commnets sniper11 made as rah-rah garbage that probably should have stayed in the Anaheim fan zones...