krutovsdonut
eeyore
- Sep 25, 2016
- 17,398
- 10,099
i think bowman inherited a core and as a gm did reasonably well complimenting it and holding it together in a cap stretched situation (arguably partly of his making due to his qualifying offer fiasco as an agm) but there really is not a sustained level of gm excellence in terms of trades and moves, and what he did is feed a machine he did not create.Bowman thought it was a good idea to trade for Jones when Keith left that same off-season to EDM via trade, and Kane/Toews were down to the final 2 years with Toews missing all of the covid shortened year with an illness. Not really the same guy coming back. That group's run was over and Not sure DCate/Dach were the guys to lead them back. I mean, most of their prospects going back to their last cup win in 2015 had not done much aside from DCat.
Is that the kind of decision making you want?
i do think though that the persona and ethos of the hawks of that era was absolutely ruthlessly focussed on winning and that obviously contributed to their success. i think bowman to some degree brought that and applied a version of his dad's attitude. i think it complimented guys like keith and kane who were almost faustian in their outlook on winning and who i believe carried toews and seabrook and others along with them.
i also suspect that is exactly what the oilers want from bowman. install the ruthless win at all costs attitude that bowmans are famous for. it is what they have been reaching for.
and i also think that what the oilers want from bowman contributed to the way the hawks handled aldrich. not only the timing of it but in the general approach of unsentimentally discarding and excising any weakness in the organization and protecting the team. they took care of themselves.
so there is, in my mind, an irony in the oilers seeking from bowman exactly the kind of attitude and approach that led to the hawks unleashing aldrich on kids.
i guess they really really want to win a cup.