What Do You Think The Outcome Will Be For The Hawks At The Deadline?

[DewsSox79]

My prediction (and like all of my predictions, I hope to be proven wrong... )... I predict that you younger guys are going to see that all of that crowd love that extended to the entire community is basically all 'good will' there to be squandered (or spent if you'd rather call it that way).

It seems to me that a lot of people were under the delusion that the Hawks want 'multiple Stanley Cups' ... spend to the cap, get the players to make it happen, etc, eyc ...

what you may end up getting in the Bowman's is Pulford v 2.0 -) or rather the front office as a whole) -the Bowmans as hockey legends?! -yes, true enough (well Scotty, at leasy) - but the point is more like -Scotty was not a legend in Chicago -therefore -so what sort of emotional investment should Hawk fans have with the Bowmans? McD?

Anyways- I guess what I am saying is that I buy the part about the team isn't going to be in any appreciably better position than this. Other teams in the conference have gotten better. Where does that leave the Hawks?

So, consider this, prior to 2010 the team won in 1961 (and even that was a bit of a fluke) - what you may see is that this organization is more than content to have won a Stanley Cup -and you may not see another one for nearly another 50 years.

And in the end it really amounts to watching 'this space' where 'this space' = the Hawks -judge them by the front office's actions and not by BS marketing schemes ... meaning all of this - has the organization really changed their act, or are you younger guys going to be getting an education in the Organization.

Go prove me wrong Stan .... please.

Thats well written. In a business sense, they really dont have to win championships that often to make money. The hiring of MCD should have been the writing on the wall that most fans didnt pick up on. MCD has a track record and a good one of PR and marketing, that is what they will continue to do.

Stan is a puppet for his father, anyone who disagrees with that is flat out lying to themselves, scotty calls the shots. Now Scotty is a legend and is decorated, but dont think for a second that hockey wont pass him by. times are changing the era is changing, with every passing year the league becomes different. Can he adjust?

 

[DMelt36]

Thats well written. In a business sense, they really dont have to win championships that often to make money. The hiring of MCD should have been the writing on the wall that most fans didnt pick up on. MCD has a track record and a good one of PR and marketing, that is what they will continue to do.

Stan is a puppet for his father, anyone who disagrees with that is flat out lying to themselves, scotty calls the shots. Now Scotty is a legend and is decorated, but dont think for a second that hockey wont pass him by. times are changing the era is changing, with every passing year the league becomes different. Can he adjust?

Bowman won 9 Stanley Cups over a span of 30 years. He knows how to adjust rather well.

 

[Everyday I'm Byfuglien]

It seems to me that a lot of people were under the delusion that the Hawks want 'multiple Stanley Cups' ... spend to the cap, get the players to make it happen, etc, eyc ...

what you may end up getting in the Bowman's is Pulford v 2.0 -) or rather the front office as a whole)

Big flaw in your logic being that they have a full building and that means they more than have the money to spend to the cap.

For all the talk of business you make, it would be flat out bad business to not spend the money to keep the team competitive. Even the most PR/marketing focused stooge knows that you have to spend money to make money.

 

[DewsSox79]

Bowman won 9 Stanley Cups over a span of 30 years. He knows how to adjust rather well.

games pass coaches, GMs by all the time in sports...especially when those people get much older, they have a hard time adjusting. That is a fact of sports.

Why do you stick up for every aspect of this team? Is there anything wrong in your eyes with this team? serious question.

 

[southern_cross_116]

Big flaw in your logic being that they have a full building and that means they more than have the money to spend to the cap.

For all the talk of business you make, it would be flat out bad business to not spend the money to keep the team competitive. Even the most PR/marketing focused stooge knows that you have to spend money to make money.

Excepting 2 things... in the 80's and to the mid 90's there was no cap (ergo you could spend yourself silly), and the house was full too; the "business plan" was to make the playoffs and as long as that happened then the Organization got extra gates and was happy.

What I forgot to add, is that as long as the talent level is good enough to get to the playoffs then that was all that mattered.

Sure there are full houses now, there were full houses after Jordan retired both times too...what I am saying (or not saying, but is there -is the Hawk fans turining against WWW in droves in the pre-Toews/Kane seasons was the exception to the rule.

I'm talking about the 80's mostly when the Hawks were competitive but not a championship class team.

I'm not talking about -not- spending money, but I am talking about spending just enough .. then no more. Sort of like buying a single powerball ticket -it generally never gets you anything but a bookmark.

 

[DMelt36]

games pass coaches, GMs by all the time in sports...especially when those people get much older, they have a hard time adjusting. That is a fact of sports.

Why do you stick up for every aspect of this team? Is there anything wrong in your eyes with this team? serious question.

Plenty wrong. Need another top 6 forward and another D-man.

Dale Tallon built a great team and ruined the salary cap at the time, almost crippling a dynasty. Stan Bowman made some moves in the offseason that looked good on paper but haven't worked out quite as well as initially thought.

I'm not a homer. You're just wrong a lot.

 

[DewsSox79]

Plenty wrong. Need another top 6 forward and another D-man.

Dale Tallon built a great team and ruined the salary cap at the time, almost crippling a dynasty. Stan Bowman made some moves in the offseason that looked good on paper but haven't worked out quite as well as initially thought.

I'm not a homer. You're just wrong a lot.

ok.

"name a team more skilled than the hawks" homer?

Why would you want another top 6 forward if you are asking me to name teams that are more skilled than the hawks. that makes no sense.

His offseason didnt even look good on paper.

Crippling a dynasty? please. You wouldnt even be discussing that word if it wasnt for tallon, his cap issues only really affected us last year.

 

[southern_cross_116]

Big flaw in your logic being that they have a full building and that means they more than have the money to spend to the cap.

For all the talk of business you make, it would be flat out bad business to not spend the money to keep the team competitive. Even the most PR/marketing focused stooge knows that you have to spend money to make money.

I had a think about this - and the bolded portion is exactly the point. They do, indeed , have that -and I never meant that they didn't have the money- I did mean that moves, or non-moves are going to show where they really are. WWW had loads of money, and he played the fans along. The current ownership group has their Stanley Cup; do they have any motivation to do any more? (It is a rhetorical question, in that only time will tell with that aspect.).

 

[DewsSox79]

I had a think about this - and the bolded portion is exactly the point. They do, indeed , have that -and I never meant that they didn't have the money- I did mean that moves, or non-moves are going to show where they really are. WWW had loads of money, and he played the fans along. The current ownership group has their Stanley Cup; do they have any motivation to do any more? (It is a rhetorical question, in that only time will tell with that aspect.).

the cup brought the fans back, now that they have the fans they have to maintain a team that gives "hope" while using marketing techniques to keep the fans coming.

 

[Capt. Serious]

Maybe it'll be a good time for some of the bandwagon clowns to go elsewhere & let the real fans that can't buy a ticket, come back to the UC.

 

[DMelt36]

ok.

"name a team more skilled than the hawks" homer?

Why would you want another top 6 forward if you are asking me to name teams that are more skilled than the hawks. that makes no sense.

His offseason didnt even look good on paper.

Crippling a dynasty? please. You wouldnt even be discussing that word if it wasnt for tallon, his cap issues only really affected us last year.

Okay, maybe crippled was too strong a word. Fine. But Tallon was too short-sighted in assembling the team he did and that's part of the reason why he's no longer GM. New team president probably the other (and bigger) reason. He was at least smart enough to realize the team was going to be cap-strapped and he pushed all his chips forward in that one season. It paid off with the ultimate prize. But who cares anymore? That's in the past. Tallon isn't going to be GMing the Hawks ever again, I'll bet.

Everything else I've already explained in other threads that you decided to walk away from, for whatever reason. But we'll do it again.

In Toews, Kane, Sharp, Keith, Hossa and Seabrook, the Hawks have a six players that have at least the same or more hockey skill than ANY OTHER team in the league. You named Detroit, Philly, and Vancouver. I'll give you equal, but that's it.

The Hawks need another center because 3 of those 4 forwards I listed are wings. Kane and Sharp have played center before, but they're better at wing where they can focus more on offense and less on defense.

This team is incredibly skilled but it's not complete. I don't see one team in the NHL that is, though. In fact, I don't see one complete team in any professional sports league. Some teams are just better at hiding those deficiencies than others. Frequently, the best team at that is called a champion. That's what sports are all about.

Now, go ahead and call me a homer again.

 

[DMelt36]

Big flaw in your logic being that they have a full building and that means they more than have the money to spend to the cap.

For all the talk of business you make, it would be flat out bad business to not spend the money to keep the team competitive. Even the most PR/marketing focused stooge knows that you have to spend money to make money.

And wasn't it reported that this team lost money in the Cup season? No idea how, but they did.

 

[southern_cross_116]

the cup brought the fans back, now that they have the fans they have to maintain a team that gives "hope" while using marketing techniques to keep the fans coming.

I'd contend that what happened that year exceded their (the Hawk's organization that is) wildest dreams. Their estimated '2 million' people at their victory parade ... I'm not joking when I've written in the past that Dan Roan would say (on TV mind you), that "there were only 20,000 hockey fans in the Chicago metropolitan area." - It was really that dismissive, and not that long ago.

So when all those people turned out wearing Indian heads all over the place...

I do get your point though ... and you know, walk the red carpet into the training room, the talk shows, the fan conventions, the bobble heads, the marketing .... is there a Hawks meal at McDonalds yet? (I hear the team trains on it ...) - - - get out there in the community.

But, all I am getting at really is that the actual product is on the ice -the other "stuff" is basically hologrammed wrapping paper. . .


And again on the spending thing .... I should say is summed up by could vs would when it comes to spending to the cap (and getting quality players in needs based positions). They have the money so that they could spend to the cap... but my point was the rhetorical question would they? Would they ever again?

There's your narrative for close of business Monday.

 

[DMelt36]

I'd contend that what happened that year exceded their (the Hawk's organization that is) wildest dreams. Their estimated '2 million' people at their victory parade ... I'm not joking when I've written in the past that Dan Roan would say (on TV mind you), that "there were only 20,000 hockey fans in the Chicago metropolitan area." - It was really that dismissive, and not that long ago.

So when all those people turned out wearing Indian heads all over the place...

I do get your point though ... and you know, walk the red carpet into the training room, the talk shows, the fan conventions, the bobble heads, the marketing .... is there a Hawks meal at McDonalds yet? (I hear the team trains on it ...) - - - get out there in the community.

But, all I am getting at really is that the actual product is on the ice -the other "stuff" is basically hologrammed wrapping paper. . .


And again on the spending thing .... I should say is summed up by could vs would when it comes to spending to the cap (and getting quality players in needs based positions). They have the money so that they could spend to the cap... but my point was the rhetorical question would they? Would they ever again?

There's your narrative for close of business Monday.

Well, there's never been better sports marketing than winning.

But your could/would theory ... I think we saw the difference between Dollar Bill and Rocky in the first two offseasons immediately following Rocky's promotion. First year, they dropped a boatload of money on Brian Campbell. Second year, it was Hossa. Granted, they didn't spend too much money in the previous offseason, but I don't think the demand was there like it was for Campbell, which led to his mega deal, and I don't think there was anywhere near the skill of Hossa on the market. Plus, they don't didn't have the cap space to throw that much money at a player again.

I think this team will spend money of they need to. I think the penny-pinching days are over. Almost seems like that has spread to other teams across the city, too. Hopefully it pays off equally as well, too.

 

[Everyday I'm Byfuglien]

And wasn't it reported that this team lost money in the Cup season? No idea how, but they did.

That was a tremendous load of shit.

 

[Everyday I'm Byfuglien]

I'd contend that what happened that year exceded their (the Hawk's organization that is) wildest dreams. Their estimated '2 million' people at their victory parade ... I'm not joking when I've written in the past that Dan Roan would say (on TV mind you), that "there were only 20,000 hockey fans in the Chicago metropolitan area." - It was really that dismissive, and not that long ago.

So when all those people turned out wearing Indian heads all over the place...

I do get your point though ... and you know, walk the red carpet into the training room, the talk shows, the fan conventions, the bobble heads, the marketing .... is there a Hawks meal at McDonalds yet? (I hear the team trains on it ...) - - - get out there in the community.

But, all I am getting at really is that the actual product is on the ice -the other "stuff" is basically hologrammed wrapping paper. . .


And again on the spending thing .... I should say is summed up by could vs would when it comes to spending to the cap (and getting quality players in needs based positions). They have the money so that they could spend to the cap... but my point was the rhetorical question would they? Would they ever again?

There's your narrative for close of business Monday.

Jesus man. Here's the only thing I'm taking away from all your posts:

You don't like who's in charge and you are pessimistic about them actually giving a shit about the hockey.

That's fine. From what I've read and heard about the guys in charge- I don't like them either.

But the part about all your talk that makes my brain hurt is the assumption that they're going to let the team flounder legitimate cup contending players because what? Money? Or because they want to lose?

None of what you're saying makes sense... it's all with the assumption that they are totally incapable of simply making good hockey moves.

If that's what you want to say, you could have saved yourself a lot of key strokes. I get it

 

[southern_cross_116]

Not incapable - but rather may not feel the need to now.

 

[Chi_Sports_guy]

It's not looking to good for the hawks. I would be surprised of they go any further in the post season than last year. They don't any where near what they did in 2010. Stronger, faster players.


May the Force be with you.

 

[Everyday I'm Byfuglien]

Not incapable - but rather may not feel the need to now.

Right now as in this year? No, I don't think they feel that need either.

But I don't think that prohibits them from making moves at the deadline here. They're clearly not going to go all in and chase guys like Nash at the expense of the future- that's abundantly clear so far and it's not bad news.

And truthfully, they weren't really ALL IN when they won the cup. Campbell and Hossa were big signings (I'm not mentioning Huet) but the rest of that roster was just young guys they had developed. The cap hell came when all those guys were due to be paid.

I think that's what they're trying to do now- they have a lot of prospects they like and they take time to develop. Heck, even guys like Leddy, Kruger and now Hayes and Olsen. They're young and have potential but they're not there yet. I think management is content to let these guys grow into roster players on the Hawks and then run to the cup again. In the mean time, if they can surround the core with mercenaries and developing prospects and have some success- great.

Do I like this plan? I don't love it, but it's fairly realistic and low risk. The odds of repeating or even winning multiple cups in a short span are pretty bad in this league.

 

[DewsSox79]

Okay, maybe crippled was too strong a word. Fine. But Tallon was too short-sighted in assembling the team he did and that's part of the reason why he's no longer GM. New team president probably the other (and bigger) reason. He was at least smart enough to realize the team was going to be cap-strapped and he pushed all his chips forward in that one season. It paid off with the ultimate prize. But who cares anymore? That's in the past. Tallon isn't going to be GMing the Hawks ever again, I'll bet.

Everything else I've already explained in other threads that you decided to walk away from, for whatever reason. But we'll do it again.

In Toews, Kane, Sharp, Keith, Hossa and Seabrook, the Hawks have a six players that have at least the same or more hockey skill than ANY OTHER team in the league. You named Detroit, Philly, and Vancouver. I'll give you equal, but that's it.

The Hawks need another center because 3 of those 4 forwards I listed are wings. Kane and Sharp have played center before, but they're better at wing where they can focus more on offense and less on defense.

This team is incredibly skilled but it's not complete. I don't see one team in the NHL that is, though. In fact, I don't see one complete team in any professional sports league. Some teams are just better at hiding those deficiencies than others. Frequently, the best team at that is called a champion. That's what sports are all about.

Now, go ahead and call me a homer again.

We have had all these talks and never walked away, if there is a post that got buried that you want to discuss I have no issue debating it. I dont ignore posts or topics.

IMHO you can say what you want, we all have opinions, but if the hawks added a physical player and a dman, they are still not a stanley cup winning team imho. Just because skill is there, there is one element that has influence on any outcome, that element is execution which they have had a hard time doing. they rank 6th in shots per game in the NHL, so I would imagine the more pucks on net the more goals, hence why they are good in the GF column