Agreed on Panik, who also spent some time in Q's dog-house. Again... Weise by himself is not the point of the post, he's one example of the overlying problem of Q completely mismanaging his assets. If the Hawks run their best 4 possible lines all 7 games, I think we are still playing.
- Frenchy4488

I agree. And that's why Q's comments that the team didn't want it enough are infuriating, as a fan, so I can only imagine how the players felt. Q didn't give them the best tools to succeed/handicapped them for the first few games, then says it's their fault when they don't save his ass like every other year when he's started with a terrible lineup and then adjusted as the games/series went on?! I doubt Toews was pleased

The way TBL are going Stamkos might be back in time for the finals to help them win a cup
- hawkeytalkman

And Stevie Y will look like a genius in that scenario. Still, I would have moved him at the TDL if an extension was not reached. Can you imagine letting Kane/Toews get to Unrestricted Free Agency???

I agree. And that's why Q's comments that the team didn't want it enough are infuriating, as a fan, so I can only imagine how the players felt. Q didn't give them the best tools to succeed/handicapped them for the first few games, then says it's their fault when they don't save his ass like every other year when he's started with a terrible lineup and then adjusted as the games/series went on?! I doubt Toews was pleased
- maria_wyeth

Agree 100%... Him saying they couldn't run 4 lines is insulting to us a fans. The ONLY "problem" with our depth was that it was sitting in the press-box for most of the series...

Agreed on Panik, who also spent some time in Q's dog-house. Again... Weise by himself is not the point of the post, he's one example of the overlying problem of Q completely mismanaging his assets. If the Hawks run their best 4 possible lines all 7 games, I think we are still playing.
- Frenchy4488

We will never know, but when I saw that yellow belly, gutless Rundblad in the lineup for Game 7 ahead of Rosy or even Svedburg, I just concluded Q was on the 3rday of a bad bender. And yes, I think the team will regret that St.Louis series and giving away 2 games on home ice. But wasn't that the way it played out all season vs the Blues, no matter who was in the lineup?

And Stevie Y will look like a genius in that scenario. Still, I would have moved him at the TDL if an extension was not reached. Can you imagine letting Kane/Toews get to Unrestricted Free Agency???
- EnzoD

We should have. They are a couple of hacks!

We will never know, but when I saw that yellow belly, gutless Rundblad in the lineup for Game 7 ahead of Rosy or even Svedburg, I just concluded Q was on the 3rday of a bad bender. And yes, I think the team will regret that St.Louis series and giving away 2 games on home ice. But wasn't that the way it played out all season vs the Blues, no matter who was in the lineup?
- RickJ

Agreed 100% on Runblad... He had no business being on the ice; his inclusion was as much a mystery as any other Q decisions.

\

I wish they could move Hossa.
- Hank3Henshaw

Hossa WILL get dealt after next year, likely to a team that needs to reach the floor. His salary is only one million per year for the final four years of his contract, though his cap hit is $5.5M. Wouldn't he look good in Arizona, mentoring their kids at a low cost, and them needing to reach the floor?!

Agreed on Panik, who also spent some time in Q's dog-house. Again... Weise by himself is not the point of the post, he's one example of the overlying problem of Q completely mismanaging his assets. If the Hawks run their best 4 possible lines all 7 games, I think we are still playing.
- Frenchy4488

Maybe Panik should show up to games/pre game skates on time when he's traded to a team with the expectations of Chicago. Q isn't a babysitter

And Weise didn't do squat - he earned NOTHING, which apparently players don't need to earn it from a HOF coach.

I agree. And that's why Q's comments that the team didn't want it enough are infuriating, as a fan, so I can only imagine how the players felt. Q didn't give them the best tools to succeed/handicapped them for the first few games, then says it's their fault when they don't save his ass like every other year when he's started with a terrible lineup and then adjusted as the games/series went on?! I doubt Toews was pleased
- maria_wyeth

I doubt the Hawks were pleased paying a guy 13.8mil dollars, paying a guy 14.8% of their cap - for 59pts in the regular season and 0g in the playoffs.

Maybe Toews should worry about that and his power play failures - when he's on the ice with the best players - more than who was in the lineup a few of the games?

We will never know, but when I saw that yellow belly, gutless Rundblad in the lineup for Game 7 ahead of Rosy or even Svedburg, I just concluded Q was on the 3rday of a bad bender. And yes, I think the team will regret that St.Louis series and giving away 2 games on home ice. But wasn't that the way it played out all season vs the Blues, no matter who was in the lineup?
- RickJ

Yellow belly? Gutless?

You're better than that, aren't you Rick?

Hossa WILL get dealt after next year, likely to a team that needs to reach the floor. His salary is only one million per year for the final four years of his contract, though his cap hit is $5.5M. Wouldn't he look good in Arizona, mentoring their kids at a low cost, and them needing to reach the floor?!
- hawks2010

And the cap recapture penalty that hits the Hawks when Hossa decides that $1MM per year isn't enough to skate in the desert....

I think Hossa plays until he's making $1 in real salary and finds a nice doctor who says he's physically unable to play anymore and is LTIR'd... I'd love to see him stay with the Hawks because he's the type of guy that would be huge to keep around the organization. An all-pro player (on and off the ice) who did it right for many years... Lots of good things to pass onto up and coming players

And the cap recapture penalty that hits the Hawks when Hossa decides that $1MM per year isn't enough to skate in the desert....
- StLBravesFan

This is the worst rule in the CBA. The contracts this rule applies to were approved by the NHL under the old CBA. Why is it fair to penalize these teams because they agreed to a completely on-side contract with a player? Damn small market teams moan and groaned then got their way on this.

This is the worst rule in the CBA. The contracts this rule applies to were approved by the NHL under the old CBA. Why is it fair to penalize these teams because they agreed to a completely on-side contract with a player? Damn small market teams moan and groaned then got their way on this.
- DarthKane

This 100%... It's crazy that the NHL can approve those contracts and then penalize teams after-the-fact... If they didn't like the contract they shouldn't have approved it in the first place.

This is the worst rule in the CBA. The contracts this rule applies to were approved by the NHL under the old CBA. Why is it fair to penalize these teams because they agreed to a completely on-side contract with a player? Damn small market teams moan and groaned then got their way on this.
- DarthKane

At the very least these contracts that were made prior should have been grandfathered in to the new CBA

This is the worst rule in the CBA. The contracts this rule applies to were approved by the NHL under the old CBA. Why is it fair to penalize these teams because they agreed to a completely on-side contract with a player? Damn small market teams moan and groaned then got their way on this.
- DarthKane

I still call it a bluff, so no new contracts would be signed like that. Part of the CBA says that the contract cannot be renegotiated, so how does that work? The player and team never signed a new contract under the NEW CBA, so therefore the contract is still active under the old CBA.

I doubt the Hawks were pleased paying a guy 13.8mil dollars, paying a guy 14.8% of their cap - for 59pts in the regular season and 0g in the playoffs.

Maybe Toews should worry about that and his power play failures - when he's on the ice with the best players - more than who was in the lineup a few of the games?
- PatShart

I know you hate Toews but I'm not going to ignore his contributions to the team because he had a poopty year while injured for at least part of it. Without Toews they don't have 3 cups. There's a reason when they ask GMs if they could build a team around one current player they all pick Toews and not Crosby or Ovie or Stamkos or other players that have consistently put up more points than Toews.

You've been extremely clear about your thoughts on him, so I know you feel differently, and I think we should just agree to disagree

ETA: and my point wasn't even about Toews worrying about the lineup. My point was that Q throwing the players under the bus for something that was his own doing was lame

At the very least these contracts that were made prior should have been grandfathered in to the new CBA
- maria_wyeth

Talk to the owners (and the PA) who approve this piece of the CBA - including everyone's second favorite Rocky (the Flying Squirrel is first, IMO).

Talk to the owners (and the PA) who approve this piece of the CBA - including everyone's second favorite Rocky (the Flying Squirrel is first, IMO).
- StLBravesFan

I've always despised contract law and the CBA seems even worse than your standard ones

Talk to the owners (and the PA) who approve this piece of the CBA - including everyone's second favorite Rocky (the Flying Squirrel is first, IMO).
- StLBravesFan

I know some smaller market teams like SJ were lobbying for this rule.

I know some smaller market teams like SJ were lobbying for this rule.
- DarthKane

I don't mind the rule, going forward - it's the ex post facto aspect of it that's so disturbing - especially since (besides that it concerns the Hawks) it applies to only two contracts, IIRC - Hossa's and one othe, I forget whose.

rippn on toews for his low production this year is really a riot...

he essentially was 10.5 mil 3rd line center with the mess he played with all year...hossa production fell off the cliff; can't finish...

and here is who the hawks put on left wing this year: tinkenov, garbutt, shaw, panik, tt, fleisch, ladd, desi, even 29 was up there for a game or 2....did i miss anybody

toews needs finishers...he not a scorer like 88

I don't mind the rule, going forward - it's the ex post facto aspect of it that's so disturbing - especially since (besides that it concerns the Hawks) it applies to only two contracts, IIRC - Hossa's and one othe, I forget whose.
- StLBravesFan

keith

I know some smaller market teams like SJ were lobbying for this rule.
- DarthKane

Def could see that... "The Great Equalizer" mentality. Just sucks that it def burns teams who operated 100% within the rules (with league approval) PRIOR to the CBA... though I suppose I'll gladly take multiple cups whilst reaping the benefit of those contracts to deal with it now 100x over again haha. No matter who we have to deal now, we'll still be a heck of a lot better to watch than our Hawks of the early 2000's 👍🍻🎊🎉

rippn on toews for his low production this year is really a riot...

he essentially was 10.5 mil 3rd line center with the mess he played with all year...hossa production fell off the cliff; can't finish...

and here is who the hawks put on left wing this year: tinkenov, garbutt, shaw, panik, tt, fleisch, ladd, desi, even 29 was up there for a game or 2....did i miss anybody

toews needs finishers...he not a scorer like 88
- bogiedoc

I'm with ya dude. Imagine what Toews' points would have been if he was centering Panarin and Kane...

And if there's a player besides Kane who is gonna do whatever he can to improve in the offseason it's Toews.