Follow JJ on Twitter @jaeckel!
So, I’ve been taken to task of late, here on the message board threads and quite publicly on Twitter, for being unfair to and inaccurate on John McDonough and Stan Bowman.
Now regular readers here will, I hope, recall that about once or twice a year I’ll post a blog that offers my take on how the Hawk front office functions, based on what I’ve heard and observed. I did that recently. In my opinion, some of what I wrote then was pretty charitable toward McDonough, but that was apparently ignored by some of this blog’s critics.
And what I’m about to write probably will be ignored as well. Because it will be fair and reasoned, and therefore hard to hang me on. So be it.
The truth is, in life, few of us are 100% guilty or 100% innocent. And this surely applies to John McDonough and probably Stan Bowman.
When the storm of criticism erupted a few days ago over some (somewhat taken out of context) message board comments I made about McDonough and Bowman, a top source of mine who knows both men and how they work contacted me.
What they had to say was, essentially, this:
McDonough does not overtly veto or overrule hockey decisions. But consistent with what the Team President, himself, has said in the past, he does ask that each decision of any significance be explained to him, sometimes in excruciating detail.
They also told me this—for whatever reasons, McDonough was as disappointed as anyone about the Hawks’ loss in the Western Conference Finals.
I think, and this is just my take, that it’s tough to say whether his approach is “meddlesome… or not. But anyone who’s worked in business knows that when your predecessor was fired—and rumor has it Dale Tallon was relieved of his duties for bot playing ball the way McDonough wanted—then you will probably avoid making the same mistakes.
Layer on to that, a perhaps ‘painstaking’ internal review of every move you’d like to make, including likely McDonough’s own handpicked hockey adviser (Al Mcisaac), and you have a recipe for a bit of reluctance or perhaps deliberation in action, when sometimes, being able to trust your gut and make a move is what’s necessary to get the job done. Trades aren't made in a vacuum. If you don't move on a deal, someone else likely will.
Longtime Hawk fans, or those over the age of 30, will recall the days before 2007, when the Hawk front office was glutted with functionaries and titles, and no small amount of internal power struggles: Bob Pulford, Mike Smith, Peter Wirtz, Tallon, Brian Sutter, etc. Rumor has it that although the names have changed, the situation today is quite similar.
But that is a rumor.
As I said on the blog threads recently, and has been thrown back at me by my critics. Results speak volumes. Yep, they do.
And yes, under Bowman’s "tenure," the Hawks have won two Cups.
But any idiot knows the table was completely set for him in 2010, when the only move he made to better the team was a midseason trade for Kim Johnsson—who basically didn’t play.
2013? Yes, you have to give him and his staff credit for some smaller, but smart moves that paid off: acquiring Michal Frolik, trading for Johnny Oduya, drafting Andrew Shaw, etc.
And has Bowman managed the cap well? Yep, but we sorta knew he could do that when he ascended to the GM job after being the assistant GM in charge of the cap. Still, the Hawks’ 2013 success can’t be separated from his stewardship of the contracts and dollars. No question.
But, it is really hard to say the Hawks would have won the Polar Dome Beer League in 2013 without the core assembled by Tallon and his predecessor Smith: Jonathan Toews, Patrick Kane, Patrick Sharp, Brent Seabrook, Duncan Keith, Dave Bolland, Marcus Kruger, Niklas Hjalmarsson, Marian Hossa, Corey Crawford, Bryan Bickell. So anyone giving Bowman that much credit for the 2013 Cup is also reaching. A lot.
Another fact remains. The 2010 team, if it had a weakness, lacked center depth. That weakness remained until 2014, and it cost the Hawks highly in the 2014 Western Conference Finals against the Kings. Bowman’s father, Hall of Famer Scotty Bowman, said as much a couple of weeks ago in an interview with espn.com.
It is my belief, borne out by the statements of the very men involved, that the Hawks make hockey decisions largely as a group. And so that group, including both Bowmans and quite possibly McDonough and McIsaac (among others) has to be held responsible for the failures to improve the team, as much as they are given credit for what they did after Tallon, not to mention Rick Dudley and Marshall Johnston (who discovered Dustin Byfuglien), left Chicago.
The current leadership had a great team, a huge collection of young talent (and, admittedly, a cap problem) in the summer of 2010.
Whether you choose to believe the rumor I reported here, first in 2012 and then again recently, that the Hawks had a shot at acquiring Jeff Carter from Columbus when the Kings swooped in and did the deal, almost doesn’t matter. But, the fact is, with his size/speed combination, Carter, as a center, devastated the Hawks and put them in a hole they ultimately could not climb out of in this year’s WCF.
Results speak volumes.
So those who argue that the Hawks shouldn’t “overpay… in terms of picks or prospects or young NHL players with upside to acquire a Ryan Kesler or a Jason Spezza, are in danger of fulfilling the very definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
The Kings, at the very least, will be formidable down the middle again next year. The Hawks parted ways last week with one of only 3 legitimate NHL centers they had in these past playoffs: Michal Handzus.
Do the math.
Some are willing to go with the 5’11… Shaw at center (who many hockey people believe is better on the wing), or 20 year old, 170 pound Finnish prospect Teuvo Teravainen (who many also think might be better at wing).
But predictably, those people don’t have to bet their jobs or careers on that decision. The Hawks’ window for winning more Cups is still open. But the hurdle they have to get over to do that is as plain as the red dots near each corner of the ice sheet.
They need more size and proficiency at the center position.
And like anything in life worth having, there’s a price. A market price—that the Kings, at least, were willing to pay for Carter on their way to 2 Cups in three years.
And the Hawks need legitimate centers who can really play the position at the NHL level, even if it costs them some shiny pennies from the prospect pipeline—few if any of whom will ever be as good as the players the Hawks have in their prime today.
If that hurdle isn’t overcome, and the Hawks settle in a “second tier… NHL club, very, very good, but not the best in their conference, then someone’s job(s) should depend on it.
Just my .02,
JJ