can you imagine what the "old core" of toews, kane, seab, keith and craw are thinking right now....wooo doggy...

interviews today ought to be rip roaring "reading between the lines"...

Is this correct, Colliton has 1 yr coaching experience? http://www.hockeydb.com/i...ts/pdisplay.php?pid=62534
- Mr Ricochet

I'm seeing 5 years if you count his time in Swedish pro league.

Could see this coming at the end of last season but when the core played better this year I thought they’d hang on to Q for a while longer. Oh well. I really like the guy and wanted him to win another cup with Chicago.

But I don’t really see how Stan gets to keep his job after adding only Ward (good,) Kunitz, Manning, & Davidson last summer. Maybe drafting Joki last year and bringing over Kahn saved him? Overall the roster looks like Swiss cheese, that’s on Stan.

can we let pat foley and others go too?
- jt19

Weekly I listen to jr hockey broadcasters who are more prepared than Foley. Of all the employees in the organIzation nobody earns his paycheck less than Foley. .. A complete fraud in every sense.

Yes Q will join Scotty in the Hall of Fame. Both made great choices, always picking stacked teams to coach, leading to lots of wins.
- Z3Hawk

True
Q's resume was built on his time with the Hawks as he took over a loaded roster not by his time on other teams. If he goes to another team, he will pick his spot carefully. If he is as great as some suggest, let him pick a project like Ottawa and prove it.

Maybe these defencemen will be deployed appropriately by the new coaching staff and remember that Q did drive other defencemen out of town who experienced success elsewhere.
- 67hawks

Yes, Manning sucked in Philadelphia, and now has repeated his poor play in Chicago. So, you believe the issue is coaching, but not a lack of talent?

Face it, some guys will just never hit over .220, and no amount of coaching will help.

Ok, sorry, that’s just gross.
- HawkintheD

True
Q's resume was built on his time with the Hawks as he took over a loaded roster not by his time on other teams. If he goes to another team, he will pick his spot carefully. If he is as great as some suggest, let him pick a project like Ottawa and prove it.
- 67hawks

Agree completely

can you imagine what the "old core" of toews, kane, seab, keith and craw are thinking right now....wooo doggy...

interviews today ought to be rip roaring "reading between the lines"...
- bogiedoc

Or just bad lip reading. And I thought the video of the Senators players in the cab in Arizona was a tire fire this poopshow beats that by a country mile.

Could see this coming at the end of last season but when the core played better this year I thought they’d hang on to Q for a while longer. Oh well. I really like the guy and wanted him to win another cup with Chicago.

But I don’t really see how Stan gets to keep his job after adding only Ward (good,) Kunitz, Manning, & Davidson last summer. Maybe drafting Joki last year and bringing over Kahn saved him? Overall the roster looks like Swiss cheese, that’s on Stan.
- matt_ahrens

I will always thank Stan for his last offseason. Facing possible termination instead of trying to save his job with expensive or long term obligations he did the right thing, he did no harm.

Until the rebuild kids of the last 3 drafts are ready to contribute at the NHL level the Hawks will go nowhere. Do NOT impede that group when the time comes with bad/long term signings in the interem and Stan didn't.

can you imagine what the "old core" of toews, kane, seab, keith and craw are thinking right now....wooo doggy...

interviews today ought to be rip roaring "reading between the lines"...
- bogiedoc

I bet it's going to be an awful lot of guys blaming themselves for getting him fired. This could really light a fire under the team and piss them off. Like someone else said, everyone involved in this franchise was partially to blame for the way things went. Players, coaches, front office. When a players coach like Q gets the axe first, the players tend to get angry and play their asses off because they blame themselves. Hopefully that happens.

That's my thoughts as well Stevie Y I believe he is available and did a fantastic job in Tampa. He is very determined to not give out contracts with huge salaries and no movement clauses or trade clauses. Something Stan did frequently that has really cost this team .


Coach Q wasn't the problem , it's clear Stan is the bigger issue , with his personnel signings and his finger prints all over this team and his hiringmulf and dineen....
- Taylorst1

Not quite. 9 players on TBL with NTC/NMC's. Perception is not reality.

You want Bowman fired - fine - I wouldn't disagree.

But I doubt any team that has been mismanaged for the last 10 years ever won a Cup, let alone three.
- StLBravesFan

Bowman never built anything, he did very well maintaining what was there when he took over as GM, and filling in around it. In all his time as GM he has never been able to add a core piece. Crow, Toews, Kane, Sharp, Hossa, Seabs, Keith all were here already when he took over.

The best player he added was Panarin. But he didn't add Panarin. Barry Smith did. He had coached in Russia and had contacts there, went over and spoke with Panarin and convinced him to sign with the Hawks. Giving Stan credit for Panarin is like giving me credit for the stock market run because I live in the USA. Stan did great subtracting Panarin, a true superstar, from the team though, to get a guy with the exact same salary as Panarin for two years. Cost certainty? Cost equality. There was no reason to move the guy for two more years.

The best player Stan has brought to the Hawks was probably Teuvo and he gave him away to get rid of Bickell's contract which Stan gave to him.

Not saying Q was perfect. He wasn't. The team has been on a decline since the St Louis first round 7 game loss. But Stan has done more to accelerate that decline than anyone.

I know this has been beaten to death, but I have 2 words for you (and everyone who says it's the GM and not the coach), Las Vegas. Here were players that were deemed not good enough for their current teams, and were "given" to Vegas. So it was a team of "bad" players. The majority of people say that the coach was the reason that The Golden Nights went all the way to the SC final. So, what is it? Can a coach get results with bad players? The league has had 10 years to learn Q's system, and they have. Q has had 10 years to design a new system, and he hasn't. Enough said! ByeBye Q (and coaching staff). Time for new blood.
And if Q gets hired by a new team and wins the cup with that team, then he belongs in the HOF. Good for him.
- powerenforcer

I'm sorry, I can't let this go. You've said on a number of occasions that the league "gifted" Vegas a good team with the draft rules. Now you are saying that they were "bad players" and the coach got everything out of them. You can't have it both ways.

Not to mention, you are now implying that Gallant can do great things with inferior talent. Where were those great things in Cbus or Florida?

I'm not debating about the move to dump Q, because I think he was a notable part of the problem, but please be consistent in your arguments.

Agree completely
- 6628

Ottawa will barely pay their players, Melnyk will never pay Q money.

True
Q's resume was built on his time with the Hawks as he took over a loaded roster not by his time on other teams. If he goes to another team, he will pick his spot carefully. If he is as great as some suggest, let him pick a project like Ottawa and prove it.
- 67hawks

Why can't people understand that coaches can be great in certain situations but not in others.

Some coaches are great at building / rebuilding teams into competitors - but can't get them over the top to a championship.

Others are great at taking quality teams and getting them to the next (championship) level. Phil Jackson.

I would guess that there are very few who could do both.

Look forward to the next wave of Craig Hartsburg, Dirk Graham, Lorne Molleken, Pully, Alpo, Brian Sutter, Yawney, Savard....the same list of clowns it took between actual coaches Darryl Sutter and Q

First idiot up..Colliton. Only 6 more coaches and 13 more years to go to get it right again!

Immediate look at what may change as far as personnel and or strategy: https://dobberhockey.com/...ckhawks-fire-quenneville/

Why can't people understand that coaches can be great in certain situations but not in others.

Some coaches are great at building / rebuilding teams into competitors - but can't get them over the top to a championship.

Others are great at taking quality teams and getting them to the next (championship) level. Phil Jackson.

I would guess that there are very few who could do both.
- StLBravesFan

Well said sir, and this applies to GM's as well.

Q was not THE problem, but he was A problem. Stan is not THE problem, but A problem. The players are not THE problem but A problem.

For the last three years, we have seen this team play exactly the same way and they got the results you would expect. Poor PK, PP, and defense (i.e. poor shot suppression) have been trademarks for a long time. That is on Q. If you don't have the players to run your system, you alter the system (there is no other option).

Stan has mismanaged several contracts and trades. I will give him credit where it is due (finding Panarin and such), but he has been late to the party several times and come up woefully short in finding replacements to high caliber players.

The players are the ones responsible for their actions on the ice. Q and Stan can't ensure the forward covers for the pinching D or takes a shot when they are 10 feet out in the slot. Q can yell about it, and Stan can try to find "responsible" players, but they have to do it on the ice.

I hope I am wrong, but I don't think giving Colliton interim coach was a great idea. I get the feeling that they are hoping to catch lightning in a bottle with him. If he falters the rest of this year, then what? you send him back down to Rockford? Insert Granato, or one of the available coaches and let the rest of this season play out.
- Chunk

Your opening paragraph sums it up perfectly. There are multiple issues with the team and Q and his coaching style were simply not effective with this group of players.

Baby steps.

I bet it's going to be an awful lot of guys blaming themselves for getting him fired. This could really light a fire under the team and piss them off. Like someone else said, everyone involved in this franchise was partially to blame for the way things went. Players, coaches, front office. When a players coach like Q gets the axe first, the players tend to get angry and play their asses off because they blame themselves. Hopefully that happens.
- Hawks_49

publically yes...but there is whole lotta inner locker room context we know nothing about and probably never will..

After the way this road trip went and once the Kings fired their coach, I told my buddy yesterday that I thought Q very well could be the next one to go...that didn't take long.

We may be in for a bumpy ride while the team adjusts. I know some folks around here were hoping for his for some time. I guess we'll get to find out how the team responds long term. I really hope we don't go down the rabbit hole of coaches again like we did for so many years before Q.

Not surprised to see Smith in there as I think he is a lot of history with Scotty Bowman.

publically yes...but there is whole lotta inner locker room context we know nothing about and probably never will..
- bogiedoc

Absolutely.

Why can't people understand that coaches can be great in certain situations but not in others.

Some coaches are great at building / rebuilding teams into competitors - but can't get them over the top to a championship.

Others are great at taking quality teams and getting them to the next (championship) level. Phil Jackson.

I would guess that there are very few who could do both.
- StLBravesFan

I was going to say something about this. I believe last year was the first time a Q coached team missed the playoffs. While not a huge accomplishment being that half the league does, that is notable. He is not a terrible coach. He is a coach that is not suited for building a team back up.

Bowman never built anything, he did very well maintaining what was there when he took over as GM, and filling in around it. In all his time as GM he has never been able to add a core piece. Crow, Toews, Kane, Sharp, Hossa, Seabs, Keith all were here already when he took over.

The best player he added was Panarin. But he didn't add Panarin. Barry Smith did. He had coached in Russia and had contacts there, went over and spoke with Panarin and convinced him to sign with the Hawks. Giving Stan credit for Panarin is like giving me credit for the stock market run because I live in the USA. Stan did great subtracting Panarin, a true superstar, from the team though, to get a guy with the exact same salary as Panarin for two years. Cost certainty? Cost equality. There was no reason to move the guy for two more years.

The best player Stan has brought to the Hawks was probably Teuvo and he gave him away to get rid of Bickell's contract which Stan gave to him.

Not saying Q was perfect. He wasn't. The team has been on a decline since the St Louis first round 7 game loss. But Stan has done more to accelerate that decline than anyone.
- hereismike1

Exactly.

But all he had to do was maintain - fill in - not muck up a championship team - and he succeeded.

Like coaches, GMs that are very good at one thing (like Jerry Krauss filling in around Jordan, forgetting his miserable paranoid personality) are terrible at another.

Neither Stan nor Q (IMO) are the right type of GM / coach for where the team is now. But that doesn't mean that they didn't contribute - in their own ways - to the three Cup winners.

I'd bet that no one here could have done either job with the Hawks of the 2009-2015 seasons, no matter how easy we may think they had it.