Full Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


mvr last won the day on June 19

mvr had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,239 Excellent

About mvr

  • Rank
    Hall of Famer
  1. So if you didn't think the team could win with that lineup, and I didn't as well, it stands to reason that many others shared that view, including players, coaches and management. Nobody who follows the team closely should have been fooled. We all knew or should have known what was going to happen. I'm not making this argument in hindsight (as you know, I predicted pretty much exactly the outcome five months earlier). The real issue to me is the sudden change of course in March. Why add Oduya? Why demote and bench several of the kids and play the slugs? I'm not a "play the kids" advocate as a general rule. Obviously, no team is going far in the playoffs with a lineup of kids. But this is the direction Bowman committed the team to follow last March. He made the decision to stick with what he had. He decided to write the year off as a learning experience. Quenneville should have stuck with that plan, and screw the consequences. Obviously, the team would not have done any worse. Tootoo is not an NHL player. Rozsival is done, and so is Desjardins. Oduya on his own wasn't going to be enough. There was no justification for playing the old guys in March instead of the prospects.
  2. Some kids played. Others sat on their hands. The coach was fully committed to the youth plan until the trade deadline. Then he switched course. If the coach and general manager had "confidence in the squad as it stood," they should be fired. I don't think they did. I believe both were writing the year off, and the players knew it and responded accordingly. In all honesty, Granada, were you surprised with the outcome? Toews had one productive month the entire year, and it was when Quenneville changed his job description and got him away from the opponent's better players. It is obvious, at least to me, that can't do both jobs any longer. He needs to focus exclusively on scoring. Anisimov could not win a faceoff all year. The penalty kill was a disaster. The team had zero physical push back. Adding a couple of big bodies for the fourth line (ie Boyle) would have made an enormous difference in several respects. It did not happen.
  3. In the end, what we are really discussing is not why the Hawks lost, but how they did it. We all know (or should know) that the team last year was highly flawed. A team can't win without four legitimate lines. We are angry because they did not put up more of a fight. I am willing to give them a pass, given the three cups. In the end, who really cares that they didn't win a game or two to stretch out that series? What real difference does it make? When the team lost to Vancouver in seven (in 2011) the result was the same. That year, the boys left everything on the ice. This past year, they obviously did not. So what. Panarin - perhaps the worst offender - is now gone. I am furious that Hjalmarsson was also sent packing. He deserved better.
  4. Granada - You're reducing the argument here. I believe the players did not think they could beat Nashville given the roster provided for them. Without the confidence (or swagger or whatever you want to call it), they lost their edge. I did not think they had a chance in the playoffs given the "quality" of the fourth line especially. It was no surprise to me what happened. I started a thread about it last January. When the team had the division and conference locked, would it not have made more sense to use this time to play the kids more? Why not give the future players the experience? The only reason for the coach to turn to Roszival, Tootoo and Desjardins at this stage was because he felt more confident using them in the playoffs than the young players. Hinostroza, Motte and Forsling were in Rockford. Kempny was on the bench along with Jurco. Bowman said he wanted to see the kids play. Do you think he was happy to see Quenneville turn his back on this plan?
  5. This is my feeling, exactly. A few small moves at the deadline could have made a big difference. I suggested Bowman move out guys like Motte and Forsling for some legitimate bottom six forwards (which would allow Toews to get away -at least on occasion - from the opponent's star players. Bowman instead hyped his prospects (or wasn't willing to pay the price). Quenneville reversed course in March and played his slugs (Rozsival, Desjardins, Tootoo) - moving Toews back into a full time checking role. I do not believe Pittsburgh's core is better than Chicago's. I do believe all core players check out when they are not convinced they can win. The Penguins best players weren't there for them from 2010-2015. They are now. Confidence is everything. Motivation and effort can be a fleeting thing. We all think we give 100 % every day. We do not do it always. The Hawks' core were not confident in what Bowman provided for them (and Quenneville chose to assemble). The buck should stop at the top.
  6. In his defence, he had a plan. The coach had other ideas. The hot stretch occurred during the period when Toews was moved away from the first line checking assignment and concentrated solely on scoring.
  7. I believe we are dealing with some of that, Creature. The players have been "spoiled" somewhat. Without question, this is an issue. The coach and general manager set up this culture, rewarding guys like Panarin and Anisimov with big dollars (and prime time ice time) for accomplishing nothing.
  8. The general manager did nothing to fill the obvious holes in the lineup -- which told the players he had no confidence in them. The coach dressed a gladiator in game one, then a Rockford prospect in game two -- which told the players he'd rather be taking shots at management as opposed to dressing the best possible lineup. Bowman said the team was going to play the kids; the coach did the exact opposite. The team's leaders obviously didn't think the team was going to do much. There was no direction. The players have been to the buffet many times now. The food on the table didn't excite or appeal to them. They weren't very hungry. Professional or not, they are human.
  9. I did not think the team had the forward scoring depth to be competitive in the playoffs. Obviously, the core agreed. These are the same guys who had made huge sacrifices in the past to get the three cups. They knew there wasn't enough there to do it again. They took the easy way out, especially in games two and four. It might not have been the professional thing to do, but these guys are human. There were as likely to have been just as disappointed as I was that Bowman couldn't find a centre for the third line and a scoring winger. They saw Tootoo in the lineup in game one, and Hinostroza in game two. Like me, they must have been shaking their heads as well. You point the finger at the players. I blame the coach and general manager.
  10. Lord - I remember a different first round. The first and third games were very close and turned on one or two plays. They came out flat in game two, and they didn't bother in game four. I believe the veterans took Nashville for granted and weren't in the right mindset at the beginning. They assumed they could turn it on and obviously they did not. It did not help that Quenneville started Tootoo and made some other questionable lineup decisions throughout (ie dressing Hinostroza after not playing him for over a month). Some of the players (Panarin and Seabrook especially) looked like they had run out of gas towards the end of the season (perhaps from overuse during the latter stages of the regular season). Nashville was a very good team who went to the finals. This team won the Western Conference last year. They had a bad week. They did not have the forward depth to compete.
  11. They will make the playoffs. They had 107 points last year, and not that much has changed in the meantime. They should be a contender. They won't be without some secondary scoring. I was mad at the trade deadline last year, but not at the end of the first round. I don't blame Toews and the other players like some do here. Given what Bowman provided, they didn't stand a chance.
  12. If Landeskog is actually available, he might make some sense in a buy-low type deal. I don't think Colorado moves him for the kinds of players you're listing above. Debrincat, Forsling and a first/second, however, might get it done. Is he worth it? Perhaps. I would prefer the short term "band-aid" approach while keeping the prospects and picks. Nevertheless, we all know Jagr is not coming here, and neither is Landeskog, Vanek or anyone else. Tootoo will be in the lineup most nights, and so will Wingels and Bouma. Toews will be used as a checker, and his scoring numbers will again disappoint most here. Sharp or Hartman will be wasted playing with slugs on the third line. There will be little scoring (once again) outside of the Patrick Kane line. Teams can't win playoff series without some secondary scoring from the bottom lines. This team as it stands has none.
  13. If Bouma and Wingels both make it, surely the coach does not need Tootoo as well. This is the upgrade.
  14. Thomas Vanek has not signed anywhere. He delivered 48 points last year. I wonder how much he would command at this stage. The Red Wings paid him $2.6 M last year (and he won't get that much now). Iginla, Stafford and Doan also have no homes yet. It is now late in the off-season. If these guys want to stay in the league, they will have to take what they can get or retire. I look at the Hawks present collection of the bottom six candidates - Jurco, Wingels, Bouma, Hinostroza, Tootoo, Kero (and one of Sharp or Hartman). This is not good enough. We've been down this road before. Teams can't win without some offence from this part of the roster. The game has changed. Most of the unsigned veterans named above are major upgrades (even if they are far past their best-before dates).
  15. Jagr makes sense to me because of the cost and the financial flexibility. I do not believe there is an impact UFA available who will produce more for the money. He would sign for one year, which is ideal given the cap uncertainty long term. Any trade would require a subtraction. The Hawks have few surplus pieces to move other than perhaps HInostroza. Adding Jagr for $1 M plus incentives leaves plenty of space for another impact player or two towards the deadline. A forward likely will not be required. Hayden with some grooming in the AHL should be ready for a role by next February. Debrincat could be as well. The upgrade on defence could be someone like Cody Franson (who also won't cost much) and would not cost an asset to acquire. There might be other veteran defencemen invited to camp on a "show me" type deal. There are always top four defencemen available as rentals every February. The defence will be just fine until then.