Jump to content
The Official Site of the Chicago Blackhawks

squishy24

Full Member
  • Content Count

    6,925
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

squishy24 last won the day on July 15

squishy24 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,412 Excellent

About squishy24

  • Rank
    Hall of Famer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. squishy24

    Hawks Moves 2019-2020

    ^ one side cant argue the other? did he run over your dog? were you not happy that the Hawks won 2013 and 2015? or do you rather cling to the fantastical idea that any other decent GM would have been able to win the same or more? the previous state (pre-2015 win) keeps getting brought up because the non-supporters keep using the current state of the team to discredit those accomplishments. I dont see myself as SB supporter (i thought he could have done better than Handzus, i was skeptical about Oduya and Richards), but when they won the cup, my reaction was "holy crap, they actually worked, good job" the non-supporters reaction? "meh, they won because of the supercore. SB did so little for that cup outcome" and lots of non-sensical arguments and unproven theories being used as valid evidence in attempts to prove points.
  2. squishy24

    Hawks Moves 2019-2020

    paragraph 1, yes, assembling a super core is far harder and you say SB should get no credit for that, not arguing this. but assembling a supporting cast that won 2 cups also deserves a lot of credit. the supercore did not win 2011, 2012, and 2014. So the supercore alone does not win a cup. they still need a supporting cast that fit and you make it sound so easy by claiming any decent GM would have been able to duplicate, even surpass Stan's success. i was just pointing out how wrong this argument is because its based on nothing, cant be proven at all. my question was a baited one, same question was asked before the 2013 cup run, especially when campbell was traded out and the only 2C we have is Handzus. same question was also asked before 2015, Rozsival really? how happy were we when he got Vermette?, the Bowman non-supporters are so sure we wont see another cup, but whenever they win the cup, the non-supporters run to the same excuse, they minimize credit for his moves because of the supercore. i would agree also that post 2015, this team and GM are in a downward spiral, i wasnt arguing this. and to answer your question, just IMO, if they make the playoffs, even if they are swept in the first round, SB wont get fired. whats funny though, if he gets fired and a new GM comes in and wins a cup, would SB get credited for Dcat, Strome or Saad and any other player he brought in? what if Lehner, Dehaan/Maatta, Boqvist and Dach won the cup with a diff GM, how much credit SB gets for that?
  3. squishy24

    Hawks Moves 2019-2020

    just want to do a disclaimer here; 1- I don't credit him for 2010, 2- after 2015, he sucks, 3- the argument is his contribution to the 2013 and 2015 win. your argument that "in theory" others could have done the same thing, doesn't hold up, right? that's what we just talked about, there is no way to prove this one or the other. how good he was is not in question, I agree with you, its debatable. The fact that I mentioned is that his moves directly resulted to winning the cup (and for the other years, not winning the cup). would you agree that's a fact (or is this the part you don't disagree with)? and the argument "in theory" is your strongest argument against this fact? would you agree that a "theory" doesn't hold any value to change a fact? if were going to debate which of his moves did not result to winning a cup, that's a lot to debate lol. finding a 2C, top 4 D, bottom 6 players and back-up goalies that would fit aren't that easy. And claiming any other decent GM could have done the same (and more) is a reach wasnt just Handzus, and see my bolded statement above for more response as for the question, would they have won a cup with or without Stan, we have no way of knowing that, thats my entire point but to claim that without him, we could have won 2 or more? is just as invalid quick question for both of you - what if for some reason the Hawks win the cup this season, how would you view Stan after?
  4. squishy24

    Hawks Moves 2019-2020

    ^ youre absolutely correct. Im sorry to everyone if I seem like im repeating myself, but here it is again, how is an argument that cannot be proven one way or the other be used (by you in this case) to support your argument but discredit mine? if the argument is unproven and bs, then it shouldn't be an argument/evidence to prove any point at all. so if youre argument is invalid, and mine is invalid as well, regarding whether or not any decent GM can come in and win 2 or more cups. then there is no debate/argument, correct? That just leaves the fact that SB's GM moves won him 2 cups. So to use our invalid evidence to prove or disprove a fact, is asinine.
  5. squishy24

    Hawks Moves 2019-2020

    only if SB was fired after 2011 purge and replaced by any decent GM, they could have won 4 straight cups
  6. squishy24

    Hawks Moves 2019-2020

    we can debate which moves were worthless and which moves worked out. but at the end of the day those are his moves, right? not some hypothetical decent GM. it won 2 cups and didn't work out on 3. the top end roster was so loaded, any decent GM could/would/should? have won with 2 or more, its that easy? the hardest trophy in sports, could have been won by any decent GM with that super core? this is essentially your whole argument, and in the end, this is merely an opinion based on coulda-woulda-shoulda. the reality is, Stan's move won 2 cups. by the way, SB was fired after the 11-12 season and was replaced by Yzerman, the Blackhawks won 3 straight cups 13 to 15. oh wait no, that never happened, but it could have! and because of this fantasy, SB should get less credit for his wins
  7. squishy24

    Hawks Moves 2019-2020

    ^ how can you even prove this? is it really that easy to assemble a Stanley cup team? SB got two cups (not counting 2010) with the given core, youre saying others would have done the same, and maybe more? Im not going to start a debate, as there is no way to prove one way or another, it will all just be a matter of opinion. Just mentioning it because it is so easily and casually use as if its 100% valid. dynasties, how long do they last? both Kings and Pens (2008-09 ECF teams) dynasty (the other two that comes close to a dynasty in salary cap era) have crashed and burned way faster than the Hawks did.
  8. squishy24

    Around The League - Other Teams' News

    there are reports that Bill Guerin was the runner-up for that Wild GM position last year before they signed Fenton instead. weird stuff going on in Wild mgmt.
  9. squishy24

    Around The League - Other Teams' News

    RFAs in this case have little leverage. This whole playing for Europe seems like the only threat they can do (which also isn't much of a threat). There are reports that even Rantanen's camp hasn't spoken to Sakic for two months. crazy really and definitely a big discussion for the next CBA
  10. squishy24

    Hawks Moves 2019-2020

    by design or not, wasn't the argument and by design or not, he was still a big part of that run. anyway, I digress, truly. if we ever come across at UC, I owe you a beer. (no joke)
  11. squishy24

    Hawks Moves 2019-2020

    not making it controversial, I have to rebutt your argument, right? If Rutherford had his way and got Fleury move, would they have won the cup? A "yes" answer to that would be an absolute garbage argument. A "No" answer that, would also be an absolute garbage argument, except they won the cup with him. There is no single fact that would prove either way, youre even the person who said that this cannot be proven and yet this is an argument you use to prove a point and discredit mine. my apologies though, I have to admit, I am getting riled up. lol. no offense
  12. squishy24

    Hawks Moves 2019-2020

    actually im not counting the Huet/Niemi in my favor. you changed my mind on that one. so the count goes 6 for high price goalie, 4 for not (Niemi, Quick, CC, Binnington). the last of our debate depends on Fleury, you say he shouldnt count, i say he's a big part of the 16 and 17 cup teams. ^bolded = pure speculation of "what ifs" fantasy, the fact is he won 9 games and that's the reality - see my point on how facts are being twisted?
  13. squishy24

    Hawks Moves 2019-2020

    ^ yes, based on the statistics, I will say you need to have a high priced goalie in your goalie tandem. BUT i never said they have to suck (of course not, who wants that?). initially I said give Lehner 8mx5yr no NMC/NTC max if he steals #1 and get nominated for an award, otherwise walk away the only exception to what you were saying were Huet and Fleury. I agree on Huet but not on Fleury, this guy won 9 out of the required 16 wins for the cup. we'll disagree how this guy is important is their cup run. I say he was, youre saying no
  14. squishy24

    Hawks Moves 2019-2020

    "some teams won" 1, maybe 2. my argument is house of cards but yours ^ is based on pure speculation, backed by "they had direct or no direct bearing" and "impossible to gauge" is a solid brick argument against mine. LOL OK. You win this one but I wont let you build my house.
  15. squishy24

    Hawks Moves 2019-2020

    ^ my argument (teams that have no high priced goalies are less likely to win the cup compare to teams that has them) are based on facts (6 out of 10 Stanley cup goalies are highly paid), youre the one making it "unsubstantiated" and subjective by adding in speculations and "impossible to gauge" values. Even you can't directly or indirectly prove their "bearing" to these teams. We cant prove it, right? Why are you using that as an argument to support you, and use it against mine?
×