It is currently Thu Nov 21, 2024 3:49 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 43 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: John McDonough
PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 7:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 40641
Location: Everywhere
pizza_Place: giordanos
Not the same but even Theo says 10 years at a job is probably enough.

_________________
Elections have consequences.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: John McDonough
PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 7:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:55 pm
Posts: 33067
Location: Wrigley
pizza_Place: Warren Buffet of Cock
Then Toews should become a decent hockey player again. He only has himself to be pissed at. The Captain has been crap for several years running.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: John McDonough
PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 7:36 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79534
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
denisdman wrote:
Then Toews should become a decent hockey player again. He only has himself to be pissed at. The Captain has been crap for several years running.


CTE

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Elon, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: John McDonough
PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 7:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 55932
pizza_Place: Barstool One Bite Frozen
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
I don't really follow hockey but I have a Hawks guy with a lot of connections. As I'm sure most of you guys know, the writing for Q was on the wall once Kitchen got the axe.

Anyway, my guy says that Toews and Kane were almost as pissed as Q was. He said he will not be surprised if Kane requests a trade at the end of the season.

Then Toews hid it well, because while Kane sounded legitimately upset about it and beat himself up over it in remarks to the media, Toews was just like "well, you hate to see that, huh." I know, they're different people, but Kane, to whom I think we've all ascribed the depth of a puddle, at least came up with "what if I had played that game in Vancouver, what if I had tried harder," which is at least something.

_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: John McDonough
PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 7:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 55932
pizza_Place: Barstool One Bite Frozen
pittmike wrote:
Not the same but even Theo says 10 years at a job is probably enough.

Enough for Stan, maybe. The Danault and Hjalmarsson trades should have punched his ticket out (to say nothing of the Seabrook extension).

_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: John McDonough
PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 7:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 9:17 pm
Posts: 8010
pizza_Place: Rosati's
Cashman wrote:
but Stan has handed out terrible contracts, and the rumor was Seabrooks deals was McD's idea.


If that's true, then it adds to my theory that McD has some pull in Hockey Ops (which he should not), and if there is any truth to that rumor, then Stan should not be held accountable for the Seabrook deal.

This is increasingly sounding like the Crane Kenney/Sweaty Teddy sitch all over again.

I know the Hawks fans hate Stan these days, but the revisionist history on his tenure is laughable. Yes, he has made some bad deals - all GMs do, but he also came into a nearly impossible situation in trying to clean up Dale Tallon's salary cap mess.

_________________
Not a mult.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: John McDonough
PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 7:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 9:17 pm
Posts: 8010
pizza_Place: Rosati's
Curious Hair wrote:
pittmike wrote:
Not the same but even Theo says 10 years at a job is probably enough.

Enough for Stan, maybe. The Danault and Hjalmarsson trades should have punched his ticket out (to say nothing of the Seabrook extension).


Your Danault and Hammer love is blinding reality. Danault has done nothing this year, and as expected, Hammer only played half the season last year, and yes, his specialty is shot-blocking, but he is on pace for 5 whole points this season, provided he plays for 82 games.

Stan swung and missed on these deals, which were, again, cap-driven. He hasn't gained much (if anything) from them, but also really didn't lose much, either.

_________________
Not a mult.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: John McDonough
PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 8:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 6:55 am
Posts: 6549
pizza_Place: Giordano's
Shouldn't the bigger issue be, Rocky doesn't seem to know enough about hockey? And that until he does, the Bowmans will be here.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: John McDonough
PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 8:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 55932
pizza_Place: Barstool One Bite Frozen
Minooka Meatball wrote:
Your Danault and Hammer love is blinding reality. Danault has done nothing this year, and as expected, Hammer only played half the season last year, and yes, his specialty is shot-blocking, but he is on pace for 5 whole points this season, provided he plays for 82 games.

Stan swung and missed on these deals, which were, again, cap-driven. He hasn't gained much (if anything) from them, but also really didn't lose much, either.


The Danault trade cost them this year's second-round pick in addition to depriving the Hawks of a center when they've been notoriously thin at center. That was not a cap trade, that was a shore-up-for-the-playoffs trade, and neither player in the return delivered. I'll give Quenneville some of the blame in never finding a place for Weise, but ultimately you can't call it anything but a bad trade. Hjalmarsson for Murphy was a "cap trade" that still brought back about 90% of Hjalmarsson's cap hit for someone who's not 90% the hockey player, who still has not dressed for a game this year and at this rate may not at all. That was Stan making the common mistake of thinking production on a bad-record southern team is ever anything but fool's gold.

_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: John McDonough
PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 8:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 40641
Location: Everywhere
pizza_Place: giordanos
Curious Hair wrote:
pittmike wrote:
Not the same but even Theo says 10 years at a job is probably enough.

Enough for Stan, maybe. The Danault and Hjalmarsson trades should have punched his ticket out (to say nothing of the Seabrook extension).


I am not fight for Stan. Not much I can do about it.

_________________
Elections have consequences.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: John McDonough
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2018 6:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 6:55 am
Posts: 6549
pizza_Place: Giordano's
Curious Hair wrote:
Minooka Meatball wrote:
Your Danault and Hammer love is blinding reality. Danault has done nothing this year, and as expected, Hammer only played half the season last year, and yes, his specialty is shot-blocking, but he is on pace for 5 whole points this season, provided he plays for 82 games.

Stan swung and missed on these deals, which were, again, cap-driven. He hasn't gained much (if anything) from them, but also really didn't lose much, either.


The Danault trade cost them this year's second-round pick in addition to depriving the Hawks of a center when they've been notoriously thin at center. That was not a cap trade, that was a shore-up-for-the-playoffs trade, and neither player in the return delivered. I'll give Quenneville some of the blame in never finding a place for Weise, but ultimately you can't call it anything but a bad trade. Hjalmarsson for Murphy was a "cap trade" that still brought back about 90% of Hjalmarsson's cap hit for someone who's not 90% the hockey player, who still has not dressed for a game this year and at this rate may not at all. That was Stan making the common mistake of thinking production on a bad-record southern team is ever anything but fool's gold.



I give Q 90% of the blame of that trade. The 2 players Stan traded for played on the same line together. They were supposed to protect TT and elevate his game. Q, decided to throw them in the dog house as soon as they were acquired.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: John McDonough
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2018 6:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 2:28 pm
Posts: 3899
Location: Tinley Park
pizza_Place: zzzzzz
Minooka Meatball wrote:
Curious Hair wrote:
pittmike wrote:
Not the same but even Theo says 10 years at a job is probably enough.

Enough for Stan, maybe. The Danault and Hjalmarsson trades should have punched his ticket out (to say nothing of the Seabrook extension).


Your Danault and Hammer love is blinding reality. Danault has done nothing this year, and as expected, Hammer only played half the season last year, and yes, his specialty is shot-blocking, but he is on pace for 5 whole points this season, provided he plays for 82 games.

Stan swung and missed on these deals, which were, again, cap-driven. He hasn't gained much (if anything) from them, but also really didn't lose much, either.


Danault is an above-average, 3rd line center but he is definitely not the one you cry for as the one who got away. And you're right about Hammer. Love the guy but he was hurt and bad last year while Murphy was arguably the Hawks best dman in spite of Q's vindictive deployments. If those are the worst mistakes that Bowman made then he's looking pretty good.

By the way, Duclair is having a nice season in Columbus. 12 pts in 19 games while getting 3rd line minutes. I'm so glad that Hawks saved that cap space that they are not using instead of keeping him. I know he make the unforgivable sin of making a comment about his minutes to the press.

_________________
Lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: John McDonough
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2018 6:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 6:55 am
Posts: 6549
pizza_Place: Giordano's
I wish they would of just traded Hammer for picks, just so they would of had the cap flexibility.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 43 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group