It seems over the years more and more business people have moved in and hockey minds have moved on.
- BetweenTheDots

Good hockey minds. Check Rick Dudley's record. Everywhere he's been that team starts to win. Worked for the hawks in the mid 2000's but got one whiff of McD and his crew and he gone. Not a coincidence he's been in Florida for the last little bit.

Carpenter and Gus have been removed from COVID protocol.
- DarthKane

Thank God

It seems that some here dislike Stan. I know, this is shocking to read. Some so want their narrative to be true that they cannot acknowledge ANY of the excellent moves Stan has made over the years. It seems like acknowledging any accomplishments destroys their position that Stan needs to go. News flash for those people....every GM has good and bad decisions, even the ones that get fired. Not being able to acknowledge the good moves does not enhance the narrative, it just decreases the credibility of the writer.
- mohel

https://twitter.com/BarstoolChief/status/1452264738080108546?t=B7-bEKvoilXF-a_06Z3sxQ&s=01

Hmmm seems to coincidental
- BetweenTheDots

I too think it seems coincidental. I’ll have to look further into this. Maybe between the two of us we can figure this out?

Thank God
- Ogilthorpe2

I know you red fonted it but I think this is definitive proof there is no God.

I know you red fonted it but I think this is definitive proof there is no God.
- HawkintheD

Or that She has sense of humor.

It seems that some here dislike Stan. I know, this is shocking to read. Some so want their narrative to be true that they cannot acknowledge ANY of the excellent moves Stan has made over the years. It seems like acknowledging any accomplishments destroys their position that Stan needs to go. News flash for those people....every GM has good and bad decisions, even the ones that get fired. Not being able to acknowledge the good moves does not enhance the narrative, it just decreases the credibility of the writer.
- mohel

Exactly, people need to give Stan the credit he deserves. The Hawks are 0-4-1 but without the massive change Stan orchestrated this summer the Hawks would surely be 0-5-0. We should be thankful for Stan’s efforts.

Or that She has sense of humor.
- StLBravesFan

“I don’t want to start any blasphemous rumors, but I think that God has a sick sense of humor…”

https://twitter.com/MarkP...Cc6fFKLxlXOtGkmgM1fA&s=01

Didn't realize this could be a record breaking team, excellent

https://twitter.com/MarkPotash/status/1452289462076166147?t=B-Cc6fFKLxlXOtGkmgM1fA&s=01

Didn't realize this could be a record breaking team, excellent
- BetweenTheDots

That would be awesome, let’s hope the team can pull this off.

via GIPHY

Exactly, people need to give Stan the credit he deserves. The Hawks are 0-4-1 but without the massive change Stan orchestrated this summer the Hawks would surely be 0-5-0. We should be thankful for Stan’s efforts.
- DarthKane

This guy gets it!

Exactly, people need to give Stan the credit he deserves. The Hawks are 0-4-1 but without the massive change Stan orchestrated this summer the Hawks would surely be 0-5-0. We should be thankful for Stan’s efforts.
- DarthKane

I think he switched to baked or low sodium chips, because, as you pointed out, his moves were excellent. Iffy timing, of course, but 1 point of difference.

That would be awesome, let’s hope the team can pull this off.

via GIPHY

- DarthKane

There’s only one man who can help us get there, Jeremy ‘Khaira gets top line minutes’ Colliton.

I’ve acknowledged Stan’s good moves before, Oduya, Vermette, the trade that sent Shaw away, and recently getting Fleury and Borgstrom were all brilliant moves. Stan has made plenty of above average moves as well, like getting anything for Gus, anything for Zadorov, etc.

However, he also has some all-time panic moves that have hobbled the team for entire seasons. The 2017 meltdown shattered any illusion that the success of 2009-2015 would not be the expectation anymore. No more ‘One Goal’ of getting to the cup. Simply getting near the playoffs would be success moving forward.

No team can dominate forever in this silly setup of a hard cap. Stan’s worst moves have been his giant contracts to players (Seabrook, Crawford, Bickell, Toews) who have not lived up to their value because of either injury or decline. An overpayment isn’t the end of the world, multiple overpayments very much is. His biggest blunder, in my opinion, was trading Panarin. A guy he acquired for nothing, who turned into the best Left Wing in hockey… Panarin was the ultimate value discovery for any GM for ten years in either direction. He was set to be paid $6 for two more years, and then hit UFA. Stan panicked, sent him to Columbus for a total savings of $0 with longer term.

Panarin is now the face of the Rangers, and we could’ve moved out any of Crawford, Murphy, Anisimov, or any player below his ability without a full NMC to keep him.

When you have elite talent, you should do everything you can to hold on to it. It’s the reason we looked up Kane and Toews when they were elite, even though Toews has fallen off and been a sunk cost with his year off. Panarin is worth his large contract. He is certainly worth the combined money of Murphy+Johnson, or McCabe+de Haan+Connolly.

Every team has a fixed amount of capital they can utilize. The most capital efficient teams are typically in the top half of the league (Boston). The Blackhawks have not been a top fifteen team the last five years because they utilize portions of their cap on inefficient players. Ultimate 0 is when you have a Toews Seabrook or Shaw scenario, but the more glaring issues are when you’re overpaying someone to be a bad player. Connolly is buried in Rockford but still counts multiple million against the cap. Fleury is making $7 and has been well below replacement level. Toews is nowhere near his value and hasn’t been in some time. Strome doesn’t make that much but we could find dozens of players we’d rather pay that money to. They are adding to this inefficiency next season when Seth Jones gets a big raise. Stan also routinely takes his most efficient cap pieces (players on ELCs or bridge deals) and trades them in a win now, mistake correction, or panic move. Danault was a win now. TT was to fix the Bickell mistake. Saad, Panarin, Hjalmarsson were all panic moves.

Hard to win when you have multiple ‘worst contracts in the league’, even though we’re only five games in. And that falls entirely on Stan.

https://twitter.com/MarkPotash/status/1452289462076166147?t=B-Cc6fFKLxlXOtGkmgM1fA&s=01

Didn't realize this could be a record breaking team, excellent
- BetweenTheDots

Wow, the Golden Seals. Charley Finley, now there was an owner.

Fun piece of trivia, Finley’s mid-70s Oakland A’s are the only team, other than the Yankees, to win 3 or more consecutive World Series. They would have won more, but Charlie didn’t want to pay them, and sold off the players. Catfish Hunter, Reggie, Sal Brando, Bert Campaneris, ex-Cub Ken Holtzman, Joe Rudi, Vida Blue. One of the greatest MLB teams ever.

Don’t look now but Pius Suter does not have a point so far this year, cue the hat trick. The hockey Gods have it in for the Hawks, how can Gus and Carpenter come off Covid protocol within 24 hours, I was hoping that they would stay on there for a week or two, healthy but on Covid protocol.

“I don’t want to start any blasphemous rumors, but I think that God has a sick sense of humor…”
- Ogilthorpe2

One of Depeche's very best

One of Depeche's very best
- pdx2ord

Agreed.

There’s only one man who can help us get there, Jeremy ‘Khaira gets top line minutes’ Colliton.

I’ve acknowledged Stan’s good moves before, Oduya, Vermette, the trade that sent Shaw away, and recently getting Fleury and Borgstrom were all brilliant moves. Stan has made plenty of above average moves as well, like getting anything for Gus, anything for Zadorov, etc.

However, he also has some all-time panic moves that have hobbled the team for entire seasons. The 2017 meltdown shattered any illusion that the success of 2009-2015 would not be the expectation anymore. No more ‘One Goal’ of getting to the cup. Simply getting near the playoffs would be success moving forward.

No team can dominate forever in this silly setup of a hard cap. Stan’s worst moves have been his giant contracts to players (Seabrook, Crawford, Bickell, Toews) who have not lived up to their value because of either injury or decline. An overpayment isn’t the end of the world, multiple overpayments very much is. His biggest blunder, in my opinion, was trading Panarin. A guy he acquired for nothing, who turned into the best Left Wing in hockey… Panarin was the ultimate value discovery for any GM for ten years in either direction. He was set to be paid $6 for two more years, and then hit UFA. Stan panicked, sent him to Columbus for a total savings of $0 with longer term.

Panarin is now the face of the Rangers, and we could’ve moved out any of Crawford, Murphy, Anisimov, or any player below his ability without a full NMC to keep him.

When you have elite talent, you should do everything you can to hold on to it. It’s the reason we looked up Kane and Toews when they were elite, even though Toews has fallen off and been a sunk cost with his year off. Panarin is worth his large contract. He is certainly worth the combined money of Murphy+Johnson, or McCabe+de Haan+Connolly.

Every team has a fixed amount of capital they can utilize. The most capital efficient teams are typically in the top half of the league (Boston). The Blackhawks have not been a top fifteen team the last five years because they utilize portions of their cap on inefficient players. Ultimate 0 is when you have a Toews Seabrook or Shaw scenario, but the more glaring issues are when you’re overpaying someone to be a bad player. Connolly is buried in Rockford but still counts multiple million against the cap. Fleury is making $7 and has been well below replacement level. Toews is nowhere near his value and hasn’t been in some time. Strome doesn’t make that much but we could find dozens of players we’d rather pay that money to. They are adding to this inefficiency next season when Seth Jones gets a big raise. Stan also routinely takes his most efficient cap pieces (players on ELCs or bridge deals) and trades them in a win now, mistake correction, or panic move. Danault was a win now. TT was to fix the Bickell mistake. Saad, Panarin, Hjalmarsson were all panic moves.

Hard to win when you have multiple ‘worst contracts in the league’, even though we’re only five games in. And that falls entirely on Stan.
- ObeseOprah

Excellent post - there seems to be a challenge with some on the board not recognizing nuance in others' opinions. If you say that it's probably time for Stan to go, you are saying he's never made any good moves. If you think JC should not be the coach, you are saying he's the worst coach ever, no better than "beer league." If you question a player's current contribution level, you are a terrible fan and don't acknowledge all they've given to the team.

Maybe it's to spark debate and discussion, maybe it's because some people are always black or white, with no shades of grey. Loyalty is never a bad thing, but it can lead to poor (or late) decision making.

From my seat, I think Stan has made some brilliant moves and some not-so-smart moves, like the quick trigger finger on players like Panarin you mention. My concern of late, and reason I question whether he should stay, is his challenge architecting a team. I understand drafting the best player available when your number is called in the 1st round. However, when you are bringing in players from outside the org, should you not be looking for pieces for an assembled puzzle? You can have the most coveted piece in the world, but if it doesn't fit in the puzzle, you're still lacking.

The coach can shuffle the pieces over and over again and we still don't have a roster that meshes in game. Maybe it will, and I hear the "it takes time," but why then aren't all teams who've had heavy roster turnover over the past few years in the same boat. With the hard cap, aren't all GM's presented with this dilemma? He did it very well after 2010, but since 2016-17?

There’s only one man who can help us get there, Jeremy ‘Khaira gets top line minutes’ Colliton.

I’ve acknowledged Stan’s good moves before, Oduya, Vermette, the trade that sent Shaw away, and recently getting Fleury and Borgstrom were all brilliant moves. Stan has made plenty of above average moves as well, like getting anything for Gus, anything for Zadorov, etc.

However, he also has some all-time panic moves that have hobbled the team for entire seasons. The 2017 meltdown shattered any illusion that the success of 2009-2015 would not be the expectation anymore. No more ‘One Goal’ of getting to the cup. Simply getting near the playoffs would be success moving forward.

No team can dominate forever in this silly setup of a hard cap. Stan’s worst moves have been his giant contracts to players (Seabrook, Crawford, Bickell, Toews) who have not lived up to their value because of either injury or decline. An overpayment isn’t the end of the world, multiple overpayments very much is. His biggest blunder, in my opinion, was trading Panarin. A guy he acquired for nothing, who turned into the best Left Wing in hockey… Panarin was the ultimate value discovery for any GM for ten years in either direction. He was set to be paid $6 for two more years, and then hit UFA. Stan panicked, sent him to Columbus for a total savings of $0 with longer term.

Panarin is now the face of the Rangers, and we could’ve moved out any of Crawford, Murphy, Anisimov, or any player below his ability without a full NMC to keep him.

When you have elite talent, you should do everything you can to hold on to it. It’s the reason we looked up Kane and Toews when they were elite, even though Toews has fallen off and been a sunk cost with his year off. Panarin is worth his large contract. He is certainly worth the combined money of Murphy+Johnson, or McCabe+de Haan+Connolly.

Every team has a fixed amount of capital they can utilize. The most capital efficient teams are typically in the top half of the league (Boston). The Blackhawks have not been a top fifteen team the last five years because they utilize portions of their cap on inefficient players. Ultimate 0 is when you have a Toews Seabrook or Shaw scenario, but the more glaring issues are when you’re overpaying someone to be a bad player. Connolly is buried in Rockford but still counts multiple million against the cap. Fleury is making $7 and has been well below replacement level. Toews is nowhere near his value and hasn’t been in some time. Strome doesn’t make that much but we could find dozens of players we’d rather pay that money to. They are adding to this inefficiency next season when Seth Jones gets a big raise. Stan also routinely takes his most efficient cap pieces (players on ELCs or bridge deals) and trades them in a win now, mistake correction, or panic move. Danault was a win now. TT was to fix the Bickell mistake. Saad, Panarin, Hjalmarsson were all panic moves.

Hard to win when you have multiple ‘worst contracts in the league’, even though we’re only five games in. And that falls entirely on Stan.
- ObeseOprah

Keeping Panarin or letting him go would have amounted to the same thing. A team who have no cap space to add depth to win. We complain about the depth now. Can you imagine another high priced player eating up cap space? If the team had Panarin today they wouldn’t be able to afford guys like Khaira, DeHaan, and McCabe and with the tenth rate talent we could afford we’d be clambering for those players.

Excellent post - there seems to be a challenge with some on the board not recognizing nuance in others' opinions. If you say that it's probably time for Stan to go, you are saying he's never made any good moves. If you think JC should not the coach, you are saying he's the worst coach ever, no better than "beer league." If you question a player's current contribution level, you are a terrible fan and don't acknowledge all they've given to the team.

Maybe it's to spark debate and discussion, maybe it's because some people are always black or white, with no shades of grey. Loyalty is never a bad thing, but it can lead to poor (or late) decision making.

From my seat, I think Stan has made some brilliant moves and some not-so-smart moves, like the quick trigger finger on players like Panarin you mention. My concern of late, and reason I question whether he should stay, is his challenge architecting a team. I understand drafting the best player available when your number is called in the 1st round. However, when you are bringing in players from outside the org, should you not be looking for pieces for an assembled puzzle? You can have the most coveted piece in the world, but if it doesn't fit in the puzzle, you're still lacking.

The coach can shuffle the pieces over and over again and we still don't have a roster that meshes in game. Maybe it will, and I hear the "it takes time," but why then aren't all teams who've had heavy roster turnover over the past few years in the same boat. With the hard cap, aren't all GM's presented with this dilemma? He did it very well after 2010, but since 2016-17?
- pdx2ord

Maybe for some but largely not true. If you try to provide any context to some of Stan's moves vs looking at them in a vaccuum while employing hindsight or give him any credit for Cup wins, you run the risk of being labelled a Stanbo apologist.

I and a number of others who've generally been supporters have also said it may be time for a different set of eyes in the GM chair.

There’s only one man who can help us get there, Jeremy ‘Khaira gets top line minutes’ Colliton.

I’ve acknowledged Stan’s good moves before, Oduya, Vermette, the trade that sent Shaw away, and recently getting Fleury and Borgstrom were all brilliant moves. Stan has made plenty of above average moves as well, like getting anything for Gus, anything for Zadorov, etc.

However, he also has some all-time panic moves that have hobbled the team for entire seasons. The 2017 meltdown shattered any illusion that the success of 2009-2015 would not be the expectation anymore. No more ‘One Goal’ of getting to the cup. Simply getting near the playoffs would be success moving forward.

No team can dominate forever in this silly setup of a hard cap. Stan’s worst moves have been his giant contracts to players (Seabrook, Crawford, Bickell, Toews) who have not lived up to their value because of either injury or decline. An overpayment isn’t the end of the world, multiple overpayments very much is. His biggest blunder, in my opinion, was trading Panarin. A guy he acquired for nothing, who turned into the best Left Wing in hockey… Panarin was the ultimate value discovery for any GM for ten years in either direction. He was set to be paid $6 for two more years, and then hit UFA. Stan panicked, sent him to Columbus for a total savings of $0 with longer term.

Panarin is now the face of the Rangers, and we could’ve moved out any of Crawford, Murphy, Anisimov, or any player below his ability without a full NMC to keep him.

When you have elite talent, you should do everything you can to hold on to it. It’s the reason we looked up Kane and Toews when they were elite, even though Toews has fallen off and been a sunk cost with his year off. Panarin is worth his large contract. He is certainly worth the combined money of Murphy+Johnson, or McCabe+de Haan+Connolly.

Every team has a fixed amount of capital they can utilize. The most capital efficient teams are typically in the top half of the league (Boston). The Blackhawks have not been a top fifteen team the last five years because they utilize portions of their cap on inefficient players. Ultimate 0 is when you have a Toews Seabrook or Shaw scenario, but the more glaring issues are when you’re overpaying someone to be a bad player. Connolly is buried in Rockford but still counts multiple million against the cap. Fleury is making $7 and has been well below replacement level. Toews is nowhere near his value and hasn’t been in some time. Strome doesn’t make that much but we could find dozens of players we’d rather pay that money to. They are adding to this inefficiency next season when Seth Jones gets a big raise. Stan also routinely takes his most efficient cap pieces (players on ELCs or bridge deals) and trades them in a win now, mistake correction, or panic move. Danault was a win now. TT was to fix the Bickell mistake. Saad, Panarin, Hjalmarsson were all panic moves.

Hard to win when you have multiple ‘worst contracts in the league’, even though we’re only five games in. And that falls entirely on Stan.
- ObeseOprah

Bickell's contract would have been fine had the big dummy not developed MS. In order to fit Panarin's money under the Cap, it's more likely you'd have had to trade his buddy PK on the right side.

Excellent post - there seems to be a challenge with some on the board not recognizing nuance in others' opinions. If you say that it's probably time for Stan to go, you are saying he's never made any good moves. If you think JC should not be the coach, you are saying he's the worst coach ever, no better than "beer league." If you question a player's current contribution level, you are a terrible fan and don't acknowledge all they've given to the team.

Maybe it's to spark debate and discussion, maybe it's because some people are always black or white, with no shades of grey. Loyalty is never a bad thing, but it can lead to poor (or late) decision making.

From my seat, I think Stan has made some brilliant moves and some not-so-smart moves, like the quick trigger finger on players like Panarin you mention. My concern of late, and reason I question whether he should stay, is his challenge architecting a team. I understand drafting the best player available when your number is called in the 1st round. However, when you are bringing in players from outside the org, should you not be looking for pieces for an assembled puzzle? You can have the most coveted piece in the world, but if it doesn't fit in the puzzle, you're still lacking.

The coach can shuffle the pieces over and over again and we still don't have a roster that meshes in game. Maybe it will, and I hear the "it takes time," but why then aren't all teams who've had heavy roster turnover over the past few years in the same boat. With the hard cap, aren't all GM's presented with this dilemma? He did it very well after 2010, but since 2016-17?
- pdx2ord

The bolded is exactly the opposite. There are lots of posters here who reflexively say everything Stan does is wrong, and won't acknowledge positive moves. This is not a current phenomenon; it's been that way since the beloved Uncle Dale was fired. I wrote about this earlier, as I'm sure you know. Perhaps you missed the nuance.

One of Depeche's very best
- pdx2ord

Great to hear them live in concert.

Great to hear them live in concert.
- Theo Fox

They were incredible - wish I'd seen them back in the 80s, but they'd always bypass Portland.

The bolded is exactly the opposite. There are lots of posters here who reflexively say everything Stan does is wrong, and won't acknowledge positive moves. This is not a current phenomenon; it's been that way since the beloved Uncle Dale was fired. I wrote about this earlier, as I'm sure you know. Perhaps you missed the nuance.
- mohel

Said "some" and you're right, there are black/white on the other side, too. Have seen both here, though I tend to be hit with the behavior I specifically mentioned. Extreme positions is a common tactic on a lot of chat boards because it engenders more response. Is it that, or do the posters truly believe the "Stan is awful always" and "Stan is a genius and should be treated as one" line of thinking? Who knows?