This is a SOFT, perimeter, aging and suddenly slow team, as constructed. That's not on Q, aside from losing Daley, which likely was on him.
- John Jaeckel

C'mon, really JJ?
Aside from?
Should we list the questionable decisions Q has made personnel wise?
I mean, the ones where he was either (frank)ing with Stan (like skating John Scott regularly when he more appropriately was a side-show fisticuff freak) or (frank)ing with us fan (skating Mashinter game-after-game-after-game to be the banger when he rarely, if ever caught up to any opponent to actually throw a check).

Or how about guys like Troy Brouwer?
That's not on Q for yanking him around like a little pull-toy, going from 1st line to 4th line to sitting on bench limiting his minutes when he was one of the few guys willing and ABLE to catch up to opponents and drill them.

There are others.
And likewise, there are some that no matter what they do, seem to be in Q's good graces.

This is maddening bs to me and many others.
If this isn't time to seriously consider Q's time being used up here, I don't know if that will ever happen.

Going out in Round 1 2nd yr in a row is bad enough.
Getting beat 4 straight is not good but if a team competes hard and loses that way (as the Sharks lost to the Hawks in 4 straight in the WCF -- as I recall, they were all 1 goal games), no shame there.

But to lose 4 straight AND to look like total crap doing it?
And to see NO strategy changes whatsoever over the course of 4 games?
Well, my friend, that IS cause to look at a big shakeup.
That's not merely adapting to a new style of play or different way a game is being called but rather an out-and-out blatant middle finger towards the ownership, the management, the players and the fans. That's how I see it. Q didn't even try. Evidenced in the play of his players.

If I'm one of them -- I might be thinking if the head guy can't make 1 or 2 changes in approach to try and beat these guys -- if he doesn't care, why should I? That's what I got out of it.

You have this habit of putting words in people's mouth - second time in a row. As a matter of fact I completely agree with JJ that this team is built too perimeter oriented, and I don't think the makeup and depth/maturity of depth of the team bodes well for playoff hockey against teams that have honed their trapping game like the Kings and Ducks and Coyotes and other teams that have given the Hawks most trouble.

My point remains that none of what you said can come close to explaining what we just saw, because the simple fact is, what happened, happened OVERNIGHT.
- busmaster

And I've said that too. Most people I think know this is a perimeter oriented team. My point still stands, the aging of our Defense is pronounced. It's obvious, it's there. If everyone thinks that's not an issue then so be it. I also think they have issues on their forward group (not a fan of our centers other than 19), but I think the larger issue is on the blueline.

And I contend this DID NOT happen overnight. They had one streak where they looked good. Early in the season they won games because of goaltending they were playing in a depleted West, Nashville had all kinds of injuries early in the season and had a brutal OT/shootout record. But by the end of the season they were the BETTER team than Chicago. Did that happen overnight? Not exactly, but it happened...all during the course of one season.

First time in NHL History a #1 seed was Swept by a #8 seed! Embarrassing and the Toews injury excuse makes me want to vomit. He didn't miss a game in 2017 so the phantom injury card is franking BS, IMO. MAJOR changes at the top of the Roster need to be made bc the Leadership group did not come ready to play and sure as hell didn't help the kids out at all. ONLY guys I wouldn't move are 88 + 2 (Bowman had 19 on that list for PR reasons). However, 19 has become arguably the most overpaid player in the NHL after the 2015 Cup Win. Better fix it fast as now the entire Big 3 Dman are 30+ and Hoss Boss is 40.

Blackhawks legend.

‘Canes re-sign blueliner Dahlbeck — one year, $850,000 https://t.co/8I7tPoBnrk

— NHL on NBC (@NHLonNBCSports) April 21, 2017

- DarthKane

The one that got away

Josi is a great player. The others (namely Johansen, Arvidsson, and Forsberg) haven't been tested in the playoffs. We'll see how they play moving forward, but they are too dependent on getting offense from their defensemen because they only have their first line to contribute offense. They don't have the scoring depth to roll out all their lines. They've made the most of their opportunities against the Hawks because they were slow, outworked, and didn't care as much as they should have. Don't expect that to happen against other younger, faster, hungrier teams like Edmonton or Anaheim.
- TommyHawk

It is the epitome of a poor winner to go on the losing teams blog and gloat.
You are either 10 years old or at least emotionally 10 years old.
Either way one can only hope wisdom one day decides to visit ...

Thats a very bad trade as the hawks are thin at center already.

The one that got away
- BlazinMike

He sucks so much.

First time in NHL History a #1 seed was Swept by a #8 seed! Embarrassing and the Toews injury excuse makes me want to vomit. He didn't miss a game in 2017 so the phantom injury card is franking BS, IMO. MAJOR changes at the top of the Roster need to be made bc the Leadership group did not come ready to play and sure as hell didn't help the kids out at all. ONLY guys I wouldn't move are 88 + 2 (Bowman had 19 on that list for PR reasons). However, 19 has become arguably the most overpaid player in the NHL after the 2015 Cup Win. Better fix it fast as now the entire Big 3 Dman are 30+ and Hoss Boss is 40.
- EnzoD

I don't trade 2, 81 or 88. (Recapture is a factor with 2 and 81) All others should be in play.
Keeping 7 because he is a no-brainer future coach prospect is also a possible consideration.
Edit: 81 is also a no-brainer future coach.

He had no leverage at that time, and they paid him like he did. THAT'S the point.

I have to be honest with you. If he didn't have an NMC, I'm not sure there's a huge market for him at $4.5 million per year for 4 more years. That's not a "bargain" for a guy with his skill set, who's about a 45-50 point player—ONLY when flanked by point a game guys.
- John Jaeckel

40 - 50 points gets you $4.5 million, that's fair market value. Look at the comparables:

Brandon Sutter - $4.375 million 34 points
Michael Frolik - $4.3 / 44
Nikolai Kulemin - $4.1875 / 23
Alex Killorn - $4.45 / 36
Troy Brouwer - $4.5 / 25
Mike Fisher - $4.4 / 42
Sean Courtier - $4.333 / 34
Patrick Hornqvist - $4.25 / 44
Craig Smith - $4.25 / 29
Justin Abdelkader - $4.25 / 21

If you don't feel $4.55 is fair for Anisimov, what do you think his cap hit should be? Anisimov isn't a perfect centre, he needs to improve on face offs (everyone knows that), but 45 points in 64 games (4th on the Hawks in PPG) for $4.55 seems reasonable to me.

I don't trade 2, 81 or 88. (Recapture is a factor with 2 and 81) All others should be in play.
Keeping 7 because he is a no-brainer future coach prospect is also a possible consideration.
Edit: 81 is also a no-brainer future coach.
- 35Tony0

There is a recapture on 2? Both are actually decent bargains capwise. Keith's mental game worries me, but if he can come back motivated then you have a great player still. I don't think Keith's best days are necessarily behind him, unless by choice.

40 - 50 points gets you $4.5 million, that's fair market value. Look at the comparables:

Brandon Sutter - $4.375 million 34 points
Michael Frolik - $4.3 / 44
Nikolai Kulemin - $4.1875 / 23
Alex Killorn - $4.45 / 36
Troy Brouwer - $4.5 / 25
Mike Fisher - $4.4 / 42
Sean Courtier - $4.333 / 34
Patrick Hornqvist - $4.25 / 44
Craig Smith - $4.25 / 29
Justin Abdelkader - $4.25 / 21

If you don't feel $4.55 is fair for Anisimov, what do you think his cap hit should be? Anisimov isn't a perfect centre, he needs to improve on face offs (everyone knows that), but 45 points in 64 games (4th on the Hawks in PPG) for $4.55 seems reasonable to me.
- DarthKane

Anisimov needs to improve on faceoffs? He is what 29 years old? At what point do you just admit he sucks at that part of the game. If he hasn't improved by now I wouldn't think he ever will. He stinks at faceoffs, always has and based on history always will.

I am fine with Anisimov...I'd rather him play wing or center line 3, on a defensive checking line. Since his line always starts chasing the puck anyway, put him on a defensive minded line (sorta like they did with Bolland who also never won faceoffs but was a dynamite defensive center, much better than AA, but they can still follow that model).

40 - 50 points gets you $4.5 million, that's fair market value. Look at the comparables:

Brandon Sutter - $4.375 million 34 points
Michael Frolik - $4.3 / 44
Nikolai Kulemin - $4.1875 / 23
Alex Killorn - $4.45 / 36
Troy Brouwer - $4.5 / 25
Mike Fisher - $4.4 / 42
Sean Courtier - $4.333 / 34
Patrick Hornqvist - $4.25 / 44
Craig Smith - $4.25 / 29
Justin Abdelkader - $4.25 / 21

If you don't feel $4.55 is fair for Anisimov, what do you think his cap hit should be? Anisimov isn't a perfect centre, he needs to improve on face offs (everyone knows that), but 45 points in 64 games (4th on the Hawks in PPG) for $4.55 seems reasonable to me.
- DarthKane

AA's contract is fair.

Unless his production falls off of a cliff, $4.5 per for 40-45 points isn't unreasonable.

AA's contract is fair.

Unless his production falls off of a cliff, $4.5 per for 40-45 points isn't unreasonable.
- BINGO!

I'd rather him center a lower line and play net presence on the PowerPlay. That's one area Q didn't exploit him as much. Not sure how much PP time he actually got. But his net presence is good and he can dig pretty good. He just isn't good on draws and isn't the greatest setup center ever, but has some size, skill and his ability to get to the net isn't exactly in long supply with the Hawks.

Isn't CC pretty much impossible to move now? This will be a buyers market with the likes of Bishop, Fleury/Murray, Elliot, Lehtonen, Conden ect all free agents on the golaie market. Why trade for CC massive contract and have to give something up when you could get any of these guys for shorter term and AAV?

James Tanner.
- kwolf68

I so dislike his diatribe...

Are you from planet earth? ANYTIME a team loses the focus of that team's fans will be on that team. No one cares about Nashville here. Most of us have given credit to them, they were better bla bla bla, but that's where it begins and ends. The real discussion is on the future of our own club.

Thanks for the lecture nontheless.
- kwolf68

I'm from planet earth. But I just must be from the part where sportsmanship exists. You don't have to care about Nashville, but your blogger didn't even mention the name of the team that just walloped his team in what was supposed to be a "recap". You've got a long off-season to discuss the future of the club.

Isn't CC pretty much impossible to move now? This will be a buyers market with the likes of Bishop, Fleury/Murray, Elliot, Lehtonen, Conden ect all free agents on the golaie market. Why trade for CC massive contract and have to give something up when you could get any of these guys for shorter term and AAV?
- Doc1200

Which of those goalies would a Cup contender have over Crawford? Fluery MAYBE...otherwise, because Lehtonen, Elliott or Murray is on the market won't impact Crow a single bit. Those guys are not in Crow's class.

I'd rather him center a lower line and play net presence on the PowerPlay. That's one area Q didn't exploit him as much. Not sure how much PP time he actually got. But his net presence is good and he can dig pretty good. He just isn't good on draws and isn't the greatest setup center ever, but has some size, skill and his ability to get to the net isn't exactly in long supply with the Hawks.
- kwolf68

Aside from face-offs there't not much to complain about with Anisimov. He goes to the net, plays well defensively, and it an overall important part of the PAK line.

Which of those goalies would a Cup contender have over Crawford? Fluery MAYBE...otherwise, because Lehtonen, Elliott or Murray is on the market won't impact Crow a single bit. Those guys are not in Crow's class.
- kwolf68

Cup contenders aren't really looking for goaltenders, though.

There is a recapture on 2? Both are actually decent bargains capwise. Keith's mental game worries me, but if he can come back motivated then you have a great player still. I don't think Keith's best days are necessarily behind him, unless by choice.
- kwolf68

Its Toews mental game that worries me - ever since he got involved with the self help guru who's mother is the dietician...

StanBo needs to insist they (2 as well) go back to a normal diet...

C'mon, really JJ?
Aside from?
Should we list the questionable decisions Q has made personnel wise?
I mean, the ones where he was either (frank)ing with Stan (like skating John Scott regularly when he more appropriately was a side-show fisticuff freak) or (frank)ing with us fan (skating Mashinter game-after-game-after-game to be the banger when he rarely, if ever caught up to any opponent to actually throw a check).

Or how about guys like Troy Brouwer?
That's not on Q for yanking him around like a little pull-toy, going from 1st line to 4th line to sitting on bench limiting his minutes when he was one of the few guys willing and ABLE to catch up to opponents and drill them.

There are others.
And likewise, there are some that no matter what they do, seem to be in Q's good graces.

This is maddening bs to me and many others.
If this isn't time to seriously consider Q's time being used up here, I don't know if that will ever happen.

Going out in Round 1 2nd yr in a row is bad enough.
Getting beat 4 straight is not good but if a team competes hard and loses that way (as the Sharks lost to the Hawks in 4 straight in the WCF -- as I recall, they were all 1 goal games), no shame there.

But to lose 4 straight AND to look like total crap doing it?
And to see NO strategy changes whatsoever over the course of 4 games?
Well, my friend, that IS cause to look at a big shakeup.
That's not merely adapting to a new style of play or different way a game is being called but rather an out-and-out blatant middle finger towards the ownership, the management, the players and the fans. That's how I see it. Q didn't even try.

Evidenced in the play of his players.

If I'm one of them -- I might be thinking if the head guy can't make 1 or 2 changes in approach to try and beat these guys -- if he doesn't care, why should I? That's what I got out of it.
- savvyone-1

I sure would like to see Brouwer back here

Which of those goalies would a Cup contender have over Crawford? Fluery MAYBE...otherwise, because Lehtonen, Elliott or Murray is on the market won't impact Crow a single bit. Those guys are not in Crow's class.
- kwolf68

What cup contenders have space for CC contract? I'd put Bishop over CC any day.

Aside from face-offs there't not much to complain about with Anisimov. He goes to the net, plays well defensively, and it an overall important part of the PAK line.
- DarthKane

His value on the PAK line is over-stated. Don't think for a moment any other comparable center with 50% faceoff skills wouldn't do just as well with those two wingers. He doesn't do anything unique for them. I wish they could let him play wing, where he can still get to the net (especially on the PowerPlay), play defense and score his routine 40 points a year that way.

I sure would like to see Brouwer back here
- jhawk159

No more retreads please (unless it's Frolik)....time to move forward with a new crop of Blackhawks.

I wonder about that too. I remember hearing awhile back he was into some strange health guru stuff. I'm not sure what it is all about, but almost sounds like some strange Scientology type stuff.
- walleyeb1

Toews has always played a very physical style - both dishing it out and taking it. Not cheap shot stuff but a lot of one on one battles along the boards and a lot of standing in front of the net getting cross checked over and over and it has to take a toll eventually. Toews isn't overly big/strong and it would seem that it would be inevitable that at some point he would sustain injuries to where he would never be 100% again.