Hank3Henshaw

All good points but what the Pats have done is let key players go (Collins, Seymour, Malloy, Law, etc. etc. ) who are at the prime of their career for the betterment of the team. Instead of locking them up to long term deals - I think we'd all agree the Hawks have done too much of that.

^^^^THIS. 66 - wise and in insightful as usual!
Hoping for good and much needed theater. Change IS needed, but not solely for the sake of change.
- Marlowe

Thanks Marlowe for the kind words.
You'll notice that on this site sometimes a couple of posters will have a beef. Inevitably, one person will say something about the other being a bandwagon fan. Then the other person will instantly defend by saying something about remembering the 60's or 70's...
or something to that effect. Anyone involved at any level in the game of hockey seem to have one thing in common - pride. And that leads to a stubbornness, especially when they view their experience in the game more vast than the person they have the beef with.

I point this out to demonstrate the opinion that McD had better be careful when having his poopfit and pointing fingers. He's not an original hockey guy, and he would do well to let hockey guys make hockey decisions and stick to the marketing that he knows so well.

Handing out big money deals to retain talent is typically not going to make your team better. At best, it's keeping you at par, assuming you don't have to cut elsewhere to pay the player in question. Typically, the Hawks have had to cut elsewhere. So actually, the practice slowly erodes the overall quality of your roster.

this pretty much explains the situation and is the reality pill for those who think the Hawks lost to Nashville simply because they "did not try" hard enough

^^^this guy gets it
- BURDA13

First, I want to say I appreciate each of their Cup wins. I never thought I'd see one, let alone three.

But.....

For a team with as much talent as anyone in the league, they should be making cups runs, not two consecutive first round exits. You can't lean on the Cup wins forever. There is a failure somewhere along the way, and when you're window is open, they owe it to the fans to address that failure (hint: it wasn't talent). They owe it to us not to be complacent. You never hear the Pats talking about the last one, always the next one. The time is now, which is why I couldn't blame Bowman for forking over picks/prospects.

Another surprise: next year they will have a less talented team!

So, if you're okay with getting embarrassed out of the playoffs, you would be okay with the Hawks staying course. You might also be a Bears fan that still talks about the '85 SB.

In a somewhat note: in the '85 Bears 30 for 30 many of those players are still pissed they didn't win more than 1 SB

Gotta be careful what you wish for, but don't for a second believe that McD and the marketing gurus in the FO don't get whats going on. They will NOT bite off their nose to spite their face. As much as some players may be perceived as overpaid, especially #19 lately, the Hawks will not move them and risk another nightmare that was the late '90's early '00's. Winning certainly has something to do with the packed houses and season ticket waiting list, but if you trade away the faces of the organization like they did with Roenick, Chelios, etc. in the mid-late 90's, you alienate the fan base and drive them away. As long as the Hawks are "competitive" and they have players like Kane and Toews on the roster they will continue to draw. Hockey has a fickle and shallow fan base, you trade away the "stars" and are then not competitive they will disappear in droves.

Hank3Henshaw

All good points but what the Pats have done is let key players go (Collins, Seymour, Malloy, Law, etc. etc. ) who are at the prime of their career for the betterment of the team. Instead of locking them up to long term deals - I think we'd all agree the Hawks have done too much of that.
- innerquest

Oh, I'm all about cycling players in order to better the team.

It will be interesting to see what moves are made in the offseason and how the Expansion Draft goes.

All these issues we see now go back to the large AAV with NMC deals handed out by Bowman. It puts cap pressure on the rest of the roster, puts more pressure on kids not really ready, forces league-minimum deals and worse of all, forces the few remaining core to pick up the slack.

This is a cap-only post: I was excoriated for even suggesting the 'Hawks figure out a way to sell the experience of continued winning in lieu of higher AAV with NMC clauses. The optics totally changed with the last CBA. Small market owners got in Bettman's ear. Deals like Duncs and Hoss would no longer be allowed. That was HUGE. If you don't think so, look at cap recapture penalties of each of those deals....under the new CBA. Yikes.

Stan and Co didn't convince the stars to take low enough AAV. I know each of those guys could have received more, especially Toews and Kane, on the open market. I get it. However, through 2013's season, only one team won more than once in the cap era. IMO, that wasn't sold to the players. Big ratio, front-loaded deals can't be done as of Jan, 2013. The next thing is to try to lower the AAV, or dare I say, move at least one of the highest AAV's now.

If the kids were allowed to develop longer, even one season longer, how good could they become? Possibly better. And with lesser risk. How could they be allowed to develop longer? By managing the highest salaried players. And giving $4.55M to AA ASAP was taking a big risk.

Why is it CC most talked of being moved? Cuz of the modified NMC. I would bet that is a first order affect. He has grown to be a damned good goalie. And are the 'Hawks truly ready to hand the reigns to Darling? Perhaps, but they may be forced.

But ask yourself this. If the combo of 7, 15, 19, 50 & 88 AAV's were say, $4M less without full NMC's, how would the roster look?

Yes, there are other issues. But this one hits home for me.

Gotta be careful what you wish for, but don't for a second believe that McD and the marketing gurus in the FO don't get whats going on. They will NOT bite off their nose to spite their face. As much as some players may be perceived as overpaid, especially #19 lately, the Hawks will not move them and risk another nightmare that was the late '90's early '00's. Winning certainly has something to do with the packed houses and season ticket waiting list, but if you trade away the faces of the organization like they did with Roenick, Chelios, etc. in the mid-late 90's, you alienate the fan base and drive them away. As long as the Hawks are "competitive" and they have players like Kane and Toews on the roster they will continue to draw. Hockey has a fickle and shallow fan base, you trade away the "stars" and are then not competitive they will disappear in droves.
- TheTrob

I'd agree in regards to Kane, but more and more fans are getting agitated with whatever the hell it is going on with Toews. Personally, I like the guy but he's not worth the 10.5 mil he's getting payed and hasn't been for some time. That said, you're right...I doubt he's going anywhere

I Think that the complete no show by all (plenty of blame to go around) means that they can and should reexamine everything and everyone. It isn't a bad thing to do in general- as an individual or as an organization - because there are always things you can do better. The overall poor performance (admittedly in the playoffs not the regular season but face it the Hawks measure themselves in the postseason) gives Stan cover to ask anyone with a NMC/NTC that allows for submission of a list to submit one. Asking it if everyone gives you cover - player and FO side both. Just my 2 cents. Reassessing - if you are honest in doing so - might be the best thing to happen to the Hawks.
- Marlowe

Yep, that's the way to do it, very publicly, to ensure there are less lingering morale issues.

All these issues we see now go back to the large AAV with NMC deals handed out by Bowman. It puts cap pressure on the rest of the roster, puts more pressure on kids not really ready, forces league-minimum deals and worse of all, forces the few remaining core to pick up the slack.

This is a cap-only post: I was excoriated for even suggesting the 'Hawks figure out a way to sell the experience of continued winning in lieu of higher AAV with NMC clauses. The optics totally changed with the last CBA. Small market owners got in Bettman's ear. Deals like Duncs and Hoss would no longer be allowed. That was HUGE. If you don't think so, look at cap recapture penalties of each of those deals....under the new CBA. Yikes.

Stan and Co didn't convince the stars to take low enough AAV. I know each of those guys could have received more, especially Toews and Kane, on the open market. I get it. However, through 2013's season, only one team won more than once in the cap era. IMO, that wasn't sold to the players. Big ratio, front-loaded deals can't be done as of Jan, 2013. The next thing is to try to lower the AAV, or dare I say, move at least one of the highest AAV's now.

If the kids were allowed to develop longer, even one season longer, how good could they become? Possibly better. And with lesser risk. How could they be allowed to develop longer? By managing the highest salaried players. And giving $4.55M to AA ASAP was taking a big risk.

Why is it CC most talked of being moved? Cuz of the modified MNC. I would bet that is a first order affect. He has grown to be a damned good goalie. And are the 'Hawks truly ready to hand the reigns to Darling? Perhaps, but they may be forced.

But ask yourself this. If the combo of 7, 15, 19, 50 & 88 AAV's were say, $4M less without full NMC's, how would the roster look?

Yes, there are other issues. But this one hits home for me.
- blackhawk24

Great post and I agree. But I remember probably 90% of the posters here saying go for it this year and worry about next year next year for years now. Most have a short term outlook. Had Bowman tried to whittle them down at the time he would have been roasted for being "Dollar Bill Like". But now welcome to next year as you point out. I'll say again - SB has the toughest job in town. And it ain't gettin easier.

I'd agree in regards to Kane, but more and more fans are getting agitated with whatever the hell it is going on with Toews. Personally, I like the guy but he's not worth the 10.5 mil he's getting payed and hasn't been for some time. That said, you're right...I doubt he's going anywhere
- Murph76

But the average fan, and the majority of those that fill the seats in the UC now are not knowledgable fans like those that come on a hockey blog. They are lemmings that lap up all the "one goal" hype and the pre-game theatrics. They drove to the game in their Chevy, because thats what Kane and Toews drive, and they barely know the difference between Offsides and Icing. They can maybe tell you who Sidney Crosby is, but most likely can't name the top player on most of the other teams. These are the people that McD and the Hawks care about, because they allow them to continue to raise ticket prices and get premium $ for concessions, etc. Regardless of Toews' production, he is the face too many of the fans associate with the Hawks, and they won't risk the backlash of trading him.

After reading that blog, it sounds like a team who hasn't won a cup in 50 years and just finished at the bottom of the league.

2 years since last cup, 3rd best regular season record in league and a 1st round exit. Boy, to have those kind of problems....
- Glak18

It's all about expectation. The team should always be looking upwards. Saying things like, "I am sure glad we are not like 'xyz-team', they are terrible" is a sure-fire defeatist attitude.

First, I want to say I appreciate each of their Cup wins. I never thought I'd see one, let alone three.

But.....

For a team with as much talent as anyone in the league, they should be making cups runs, not two consecutive first round exits. You can't lean on the Cup wins forever. There is a failure somewhere along the way, and when you're window is open, they owe it to the fans to address that failure (hint: it wasn't talent). They owe it to us not to be complacent. You never hear the Pats talking about the last one, always the next one. The time is now, which is why I couldn't blame Bowman for forking over picks/prospects.

Another surprise: next year they will have a less talented team!

So, if you're okay with getting embarrassed out of the playoffs, you would be okay with the Hawks staying course. You might also be a Bears fan that still talks about the '85 SB.

In a somewhat note: in the '85 Bears 30 for 30 many of those players are still pissed they didn't win more than 1 SB
- Antz96

That's why watching all of the post-season exit interviews, specifically the veteran core, Q, and StanBo, was so interesting. All seemed to nail the fact that their compete level wasn't there, yet all seemed stymied as to why. Some seemed to genuinely be embarrassed and find the loss unacceptable and some almost seemed to accept it/shrug it off.

Personally, based on the NSH performance, those interviews, the fallout since, and what JJ said about Dineen, it seems like a complete meltdown of the team's camaraderie and its winning culture we were so proud of for so long. And, as you note, that's not a talent issue, it's between the ears.

That's why watching all of the post-season exit interviews, specifically the veteran core, Q, and StanBo, was so interesting. All seemed to nail the fact that their compete level wasn't there, yet all seemed stymied as to why. Some seemed to genuinely be embarrassed and find the loss unacceptable and some almost seemed to accept it/shrug it off.

Personally, based on the NSH performance, those interviews, the fallout since, and what JJ said about Dineen, it seems like a complete meltdown of the team's camaraderie and its winning culture we were so proud of for so long. And, as you note, that's not a talent issue, it's between the ears.
- pdx2ord

I think that as much as they will hate to admit it, Going to that well over and over again to compete is difficult. They know how tough it is to get to the end and sometimes no matter how deep you dig, you just can't find what is needed.

I think that as much as they will hate to admit it, Going to that well over and over again to compete is difficult. They know how tough it is to get to the end and sometimes no matter how deep you dig, you just can't find what is needed.
- TheTrob

Agreed, would definitely not be the first human to burnout in a job he/she once loved above all else. Often happens, in particular, for those who have had other things in life arise that are more important than a game.

That's why watching all of the post-season exit interviews, specifically the veteran core, Q, and StanBo, was so interesting. All seemed to nail the fact that their compete level wasn't there, yet all seemed stymied as to why. Some seemed to genuinely be embarrassed and find the loss unacceptable and some almost seemed to accept it/shrug it off.

Personally, based on the NSH performance, those interviews, the fallout since, and what JJ said about Dineen, it seems like a complete meltdown of the team's camaraderie and its winning culture we were so proud of for so long. And, as you note, that's not a talent issue, it's between the ears.
- pdx2ord

You don't, all of a sudden, lose camaraderie and the winning culture UNLESS the leaders in the locker room allow it to happen. I've said it before, the NE Patriots are the best organization in professional sports because their locker room has the best leader in sports, their coach is the best in football, and their front office knows when to give out contracts and when to cut bait.

So what has happened over the past year or so to the closeness of this organization?

A moment of silence for those of you who remember it fondly:

Jen‏ @NHLhistorygirl
On this date in 1994, #Blackhawks played their final game in Chicago Stadium.

First thing is you cannot stay good forever in the salary cap world. When you give $10.5 mil to 2 guys on your roster you hope to win with them. You did! Now you are stuck with them and you hope you develop well. I think Chicago has done a great job. If you can move a contract or two, it would help. I think Seabrook contract was a big mistake and will come back to haunt you.
- Champ

Your points are valid. the second half of the big contracts is you KNOW you must draft and develop in house talent to fill mid level roster spots. They did not draft well and they did not develop well. Most of the top young performers in recent years skipped the AHL. Dent can say all he wants, not every prospect sent through Rockford was a buster. Additionally, during the regular season young players need minutes. Every minute given to the three wheel cart AKA Soupy stunted the growth of a D man.

So:
1. Poor Drafting - On Bowman
2. Poor Development - On Dent
3. Poor Maturation Process - On Q

Everyone has skin in the game.

Long time reader, first time commentator, appreciate your blogs JJ, always look forward to reading them

Great post and I agree. But I remember probably 90% of the posters here saying go for it this year and worry about next year next year for years now. Most have a short term outlook. Had Bowman tried to whittle them down at the time he would have been roasted for being "Dollar Bill Like". But now welcome to next year as you point out. I'll say again - SB has the toughest job in town. And it ain't getting easier.
- 6628

All true and well stated, however we cannot overlook things that concurrently should have happened.

Brain fart here, but just thinking...

Even though I don't want them to win simply due to holding team bragging rights, I do think that if the Penguins repeat AND in the process, get their own 3rd Cup in the salary cap era, that would be competitive shot in the arm our veterans need.

Long time reader, first time commentator, appreciate your blogs JJ, always look forward to reading them
- WiscoReg

Welcome to the Loud House my friend!!!!

Ahh...good insight!

I thought JJ's point about submitting a list to teams where it would be difficult for him to be moved to--due to cap issues or no need for a goalie-- was interesting, too.

Guys with NMC seem like they can really hold all the cards.
- Hank3Henshaw

It depends on what's in the clause, unfortunately there's no place for fans to go to see that information. I remember seeing somewhere Hjalmarsson contract has a 19 team no trade list. But I don't really know what that means, are the teams already named or does he have to provide a list of 12 acceptable teams.

We have no idea how many teams Crawford has to name. If only five it'd be pretty easy for him to essentially block being traded.

That feeling when you look around and realize you've painted yourself into a corner.

Brain fart here, but just thinking...

Even though I don't want them to win simply due to holding team bragging rights, I do think that if the Penguins repeat AND in the process, get their own 3rd Cup in the salary cap era, that would be competitive shot in the arm our veterans need.
- pdx2ord

What about managment? They are the ones who let current Pens Coach Mike Sullivan go to Pit. With all the injuries he's had to deal with there's no question he has had to have the open mind I have referred to in previous posts. And they didn't recognize it.