That’s a significant improvement vs. what they’re trotting out there currently.
- scottak

improvement, likely. significant? lets calm down the expectations.

Keith and Seabs will be a year older.
DeHaan, hopefully he becomes an ironman. rooting for him
Maatta is as good as his pair
Murphy is Murphy, we've probably seen his best already
Boqvist, hopefully he doesn't get the sophomore jinx
Mitchell, what is the expectation on this guy? Like Cale Makar? Schultz? Butcher?

FOR THE RECORD ON PANARIN: This team would've not been able to afford him without trading Toews or Kane. That's why he was traded. How many teams have three players over 10m per year? I'm guessing less than 3.

It's a double edged sword, you want to find great players but not elite level. At least in the hawks current cap situation.

Trade chatter
Crawford to Colorado for 3rd round pick (from Toronto), or Colorado's 4th, in 2020 draft. I think Corey has seen enough of Colliton.

Trade chatter
Crawford to Colorado for 3rd round pick (from Toronto), or Colorado's 4th, in 2020 draft. I think Corey has seen enough of Colliton.
- MadHatter

Source?

Another problem bowman has ignored for too long the development of young players in rockford and other places. Pitt has a great development ly ahl affiliate bunch of 3rd and 4th liners contributing at the nhl level and pitt's prospects on paper are worse than the hawks but pitt has a system and preaches hard working culture which the hawks are greatly missing. Question who was the last player from Rockford that has contributed consistently and made a difference at the nhl level for the hawks over a period of time?
- Scott1977

To answer your question posed at the end of your post, only Keith and Crawford meet your criteria as far as current Hawks.

Seabrook, Saad, and Shaw never spent a full season in Rockford or Norfolk when the AHL team was in Virginia.

Source?
- catrisc

JJ’s sources

Trade chatter
Crawford to Colorado for 3rd round pick (from Toronto), or Colorado's 4th, in 2020 draft. I think Corey has seen enough of Colliton.
- MadHatter

Better be a prospect added or no deal

There was a study done in MLB some time back, that the most effective Managers are the ones on their second job. The theory was that they made their mistakes in their first job, literally learning on the job, and we’re much more ready to handle their 2nd assignment.
- scottak

I've also read that the manager / head coach who takes over an expansion team - or who takes over a rebuilding team - is not the coach who leads the team to the promised land. He is fired long before that.

Goes along with my theory that there are different coaching skills required for teams in various stages of "rebuild" - the coach who can develop a team of young players, prospects, etc. into a quality competitor is not necessarily (or even usually) the one who can get over the hump with a team that is expected to win into a very deep playoff run up to a Cup winner.

Lets pour cold water on this fallacy that it is the coaching that is the reason the team is where it is. The talent is not there. So that falls to Bowman and his staff, but I still would not fire him, and give him one more year (end of the contract) to try and fix this.

The Hawks are bad defensively, not because of systems etc., I can name at least 10 teams that run the same variation of the defense Colliton runs, it is because the Hawks forwards are not committed to the defensive end (same as Toronto, who changed coaches and how did that change how they played against the Pens the other night.

There is no way Buchnevich scores if Toews and or Cagiula was not puck watching. They were in position, but just had a better seat than we did watching the play. Also the Hawks are horrid in the most important part of the ice, 6 feet inside and 6 feet outside the defensive blueline. how many times do we turn the puck over in that area per game? That is taught by the time you are a pee-wee ADB is probably the worst forward, Kubalik the best, Gus is probably the worst defenseman, but almost ALL are sub par in that area. I think the main reason for that is for all the offensive creativity the players have, they have no hockey sense defensively. Systems can only work so much. This isn't football where a set play is run each time, it is fluid, and you have to have the smarts to know where to be defensively to break up a play.

We have a bunch of Bobby Douglasses on the team, great skills except the empty brain matter in the head.
- LAHawk

So you bring up not working in TOR...tell me about STL?

Tell me about PITT when they replaced Bylsma?

Should WASH not have hired Trotz after NASH let him go? Or the Isles after WASH all but didnt want him back (until he won a cup)?

Better be a prospect added or no deal
- Scott1977

or 2......

Gallant is difficult to work with but a good coach. Laviolette has been fired year five at all his previous jobs.

Either would be better then a guy who is clearly clueless
- fattybeef

I agree with you. And I think Gallant got a hell of a lot out of the Knights. I don't know about anyone else but I never thought that team (after the expansion draft) had enough talent to make the playoffs anytime soon and yet they did two years in a row under him.

And as for Laviolette... He's won a Cup... Sure it's been 15 years since then (valid argument) but he's still got a pretty attractive resume compared to what we have now. He's made the playoffs 11 times in 16 seasons if I'm reading his numbers correctly.

I just don't see the downside to either one especially if Stan is still here.

I've heard that Gallant can be a problem child for upper management so as long as McD and Stan are here I don't see that happening since it seems like they want "yes men". Not sure how Laviolette is viewed.

There was a study done in MLB some time back, that the most effective Managers are the ones on their second job. The theory was that they made their mistakes in their first job, literally learning on the job, and we’re much more ready to handle their 2nd assignment.
- scottak

Then let's fire JC now then rehire him over the summer.

Source?
- catrisc

The source is me. Av's want another goalie, and we are or should be in SELL mode. It's time to start unloading. Yeah maybe they can throw in a prospect, but what other options does Colorado have ? Maybe the Rangers ?

Always enjoy your hyperbole.

Keith will be 74 years old. 37 actually, still a top 4 on every team in the league, and top pair on many
Boqvist isn't ready. He’ll have almost a full season under his belt, plus an off-season. Expect the next step forward.
Murphy is good. He’s OK
Mitchell has played zero pro games. Agreed
DeHaan is good for one solid hit. So is every other player in the league. He was better than Murphy while healthy
Seabrook can't get through an airport metal detector. Not true, there has been no discussion of joint replacements. And if he doesn’t make it back, 3rd pair guys are easier to replace
- scottak

Just having fun, Scottie. Keith will still be good. Agree on Boqvist. I think Murphy's a good player. Who knows on Mitchell, but I trust Elbows (don't tell him). Dehaan is good, but that shoulder is more susceptible to injury than most players. Seabs, who is a sports hero of mine, is a real question mark after three operations.

Adding to this:

@SBekovic

Colliton added they did some video and had some "individual discussions" saying the #Blackhawks need to respond better.
- Tyler Cameron

maybe some video of the 2010, 2013, 2015 cup runs...

Source?
- catrisc

Unnamed.

I've also read that the manager / head coach who takes over an expansion team - or who takes over a rebuilding team - is not the coach who leads the team to the promised land. He is fired long before that.

Goes along with my theory that there are different coaching skills required for teams in various stages of "rebuild" - the coach who can develop a team of young players, prospects, etc. into a quality competitor is not necessarily (or even usually) the one who can get over the hump with a team that is expected to win into a very deep playoff run up to a Cup winner.
- StLBravesFan

Spot on. Coaches have strengths and weaknesses like anyone else.

But what can we comfortably say Collitons strengths are thus far into his coaching career?

He doesn't seem to communicate well with the players (remember the Seabrook benching controversy). He isn't able to get the guys emotionally ready to play as evidenced by cancelling practice today to have discussions with the team about effort, when they're 4 days from the trade deadline and still (technically) in the hunt no less! I haven't seen much in the way of development... if anything Gus has gotten worse defensively and I can't think of any other young players who we would say has progressed from year 1 to year 2... The AHL guys all still look like AHL guys.

The only thing I can think of is that he's young so maybe he can easier relate to the "new core", but that's no reason to keep someone around if they cant do the other necessary parts of the job...

Unnamed.
- mohel

He should be banned

To answer your question posed at the end of your post, only Keith and Crawford meet your criteria as far as current Hawks.

Seabrook, Saad, and Shaw never spent a full season in Rockford or Norfolk when the AHL team was in Virginia.
- AEL_Fox

I probably should said recently over the past decade.

Spot on. Coaches have strengths and weaknesses like anyone else.

But what can we comfortably say Collitons strengths are thus far into his coaching career?

He doesn't seem to communicate well with the players (remember the Seabrook benching controversy). He isn't able to get the guys emotionally ready to play as evidenced by cancelling practice today to have discussions with the team about effort, when they're 4 days from the trade deadline and still (technically) in the hunt no less! I haven't seen much in the way of development... if anything Gus has gotten worse defensively and I can't think of any other young players who we would say has progressed from year 1 to year 2... The AHL guys all still look like AHL guys.

The only thing I can think of is that he's young so maybe he can easier relate to the "new core", but that's no reason to keep someone around if they cant do the other necessary parts of the job...
- Toew Drags 4 Daze

Hawks have a new core?

Always enjoy your hyperbole.

Keith will be 74 years old. 37 actually, still a top 4 on every team in the league, and top pair on many
Boqvist isn't ready. He’ll have almost a full season under his belt, plus an off-season. Expect the next step forward.
Murphy is good. He’s OK
Mitchell has played zero pro games. Agreed
DeHaan is good for one solid hit. So is every other player in the league. He was better than Murphy while healthy
Seabrook can't get through an airport metal detector. Not true, there has been no discussion of joint replacements. And if he doesn’t make it back, 3rd pair guys are easier to replace
- scottak

I think he was being sarcastic

Maatta is not going to get shipped out. I would be surprised if he is.

Next year's roster will be more of the same. Minus probably Gus, Smith and one of the two goalies.

more of the same means another season down the toilet. This team and the management need a big BIG change
- squishy24

Maatta is a mixed bag with fans on this site (I guess a bunch of players are). Personally, I am fine with him on the blueline next season as long as the supporting cast is upgraded.

The Hawks will need an experienced veteran in the event de Haan and/or Seabrook are not fully healthy by the fall or beyond. Koekkoek is okay if he can continue to improve. No to Seeler, please.

Otherwise, the youth movement in the backend will be in full swing with Boqvist and Mitchell plus at least one of Gilbert, Carlsson, and/or McCoshen (if he is renewed). Beaudin and Krys are still another year away.

Even with the injuries to deHaan and Seabrook - the current defensive lineup (Keith, Boqvist, Maatta, Koekkoek, Gustafsson, Murphy, Seeler,) - should the defensive numbers be as bad as they are? How much (and I think a lot) is on the forwards to be much, much better at not allowing opponents to get inside of them and be in good position to challenge the goalie?
- StLBravesFan

Agree, forward support is much needed for overall team defense to improve. Can't all rest on the blueliners.

He should be banned
- paulr

Again?

Lets pour cold water on this fallacy that it is the coaching that is the reason the team is where it is. The talent is not there. So that falls to Bowman and his staff, but I still would not fire him, and give him one more year (end of the contract) to try and fix this.

The Hawks are bad defensively, not because of systems etc., I can name at least 10 teams that run the same variation of the defense Colliton runs, it is because the Hawks forwards are not committed to the defensive end (same as Toronto, who changed coaches and how did that change how they played against the Pens the other night.

There is no way Buchnevich scores if Toews and or Cagiula was not puck watching. They were in position, but just had a better seat than we did watching the play. Also the Hawks are horrid in the most important part of the ice, 6 feet inside and 6 feet outside the defensive blueline. how many times do we turn the puck over in that area per game? That is taught by the time you are a pee-wee ADB is probably the worst forward, Kubalik the best, Gus is probably the worst defenseman, but almost ALL are sub par in that area. I think the main reason for that is for all the offensive creativity the players have, they have no hockey sense defensively. Systems can only work so much. This isn't football where a set play is run each time, it is fluid, and you have to have the smarts to know where to be defensively to break up a play.

We have a bunch of Bobby Douglasses on the team, great skills except the empty brain matter in the head.
- LAHawk

No team on the NHL has their defenders chasing guys above the circles or abandoning the front of the goal to go after a player with their back to the ice on the half boards.

There Hawks have just as much talent as the Islanders, Jackets, Jets, Coyotes, Wild if not more in some cases.

Their problems are the guy behind the bench is giving bad instructions, making poor roster decisions, has no clue how to make adjustments and behaves like a smug wiener. Which could be cool if he ever won anything of note.

Even with the flawed roster the biggest problem is behind the bench.