The entire hockey world is kicking back with a cold drink at a quaint cottage by a lake right about now. I’m in the pickup line for my daughter’s marching band practice. So much for Gary Bettman’s beloved parity.
Anyway, on to Part 2 of my summer mailbag. Space (and my editors’ patience) is limited, so I did my best to keep the answers concise so I could get to as many of your complaints — er, questions — as possible.
It seems the consensus among fans, media, and the rest of the league is that the Blackhawks are bound for yet another lottery pick. I know the players believe they can be more successful than that, but I’m wondering what you’ve heard as far as the front office’s internal expectations, if anything. Does Kyle Davidson’s brain trust believe they can surprise people and be at least competitive, if not a playoff team? — Tom R
Call me a cynic, but I think the Blackhawks brass would be very happy either way. Despite fan frustration and bored pundits like me screaming for them to do something, the Blackhawks have positioned themselves in a way that makes this a no-lose season. Either the young players take a massive step toward something special (and it’ll have to be massive to get them out of 31st or 32nd place), or they’re as bad as the public expects and have a great shot at drafting Gavin McKenna. Either fits the plan just fine.
After the Blackhawks finished the 2023-2024 season with 52 points, I thought they should have had 70 points in the 2024-2025 season. They didn’t and ended up with only 61 points. How many points this season should the Blackhawks have to be considered a successful season? — Joshua B
Uh, I don’t know, 75? Doesn’t matter. The Blackhawks brass doesn’t care about their points total this year, so you shouldn’t, either. If Connor Bedard scores 35 goals and Frank Nazar posts 50-plus points and Sam Rinzel looks like he looked at the end of the season and Artyom Levshunov reins himself in without stifling his creativity and Kevin Korchinski settles into a permanent role and Oliver Moore does, too, then that’s all that matters. If they don’t, well …
Can you put the Crosby contract method in Connor Bedard’s head by asking him repeatedly (like a child on a road trip) about it? Nine-point-eight for the next 20 years is almost 200 million. Sounds fair to me. — Gregory E.
Good luck with that. In 20 years, $200 million might buy you a gallon of gas. Or, at the rate we’re going, guzzolene.
The 1901 project gets scrapped. The White Sox have been sold and relocated. The Bulls have a new standalone arena while the Bears win back-to-back Super Bowls in Arlington Heights. Danny Wirtz purchases then gets approval to demo the United Center to build a new hockey wonderland in its place. He leans on you to build a new hockey oasis. You have the creative mind. You have the travel experience for what does and does not work. You are also a parent trying to entertain your kid. From food, to the outside entertainment, to transportation, to the pregame video and anthem singer, to the goal song, to the press-box design and so on. Give us your dystopian Blackhawks Arena proposal for fans, staff, players, and reporters to create the most magical and over the top experience possible. — Grant M
Honestly? Just win. The food tastes better, the music sounds sweeter, the seats feel more comfortable, the insane prices seem more palatable and the kids become fans faster when the team is good. Nobody cares anymore that the Florida Panthers’ soulless arena is in an endless parking lot across from a mall, do they?
Did the Blackhawks make a strategic mistake by signing Patrick Kane and Jonathan Toews to identical long-term contracts? Did it tie up too much money in two players and prohibit them from building the type of team that Kane/Toews had around them before their large contracts? — Barry K
No, they didn’t make a mistake. Yes, it certainly made things difficult, and it’s true all three Stanley Cup wins came before those contracts kicked in. But the cap was supposed to keep rising forever, and they had no alternative. With their contracts coming due at the same time, the team couldn’t elevate one over the other, nor did one deserve to be elevated over the other. And they were 25-26 years old, in their absolute primes (Toews, at that point, was viewed by many as the second-best player on the planet) and in the midst of the greatest run in franchise history. They earned every cent of those contracts. Had the Blackhawks known the cap was going to flatten toward the end of those deals, they certainly would have rethought the price tag. But hindsight is always 20/20.
I was always curious about the awful Phillip Danault trade. Was that all Stan Bowman and was there an internal backlash over it? — Vince L
It was a horrible trade. We knew it right away. The worst one he made, really, even worse than the Artemi Panarin one. But what would you give to be in a situation in which the Blackhawks are making potentially reckless win-now trades like that at the deadline again? For the first time in my life as a Mets fan, I can tell you, it kind of rules.
What shifts are you seeing in engagement since you guys both do X/Twitter and Bluesky? What do you see from the creator sides? What should we be doing to help you with articles and tweets? — Anonymous
Click on links. Read stories to the end. Share them if you’re so inclined. It’s really that simple. That said, since my dad, I’ve only used Twitter (ugh, X) for story links and movie reviews. And I miss it a lot less than I thought I would. We’ll see if I have the self-control to stay away when hockey season begins. (Narrator: He won’t.) It’s a truly awful place these days, and while I have very thick skin, there are only so many times you can have someone tweet you a zoomed-in photo of your nose before you start losing interest.
Bluesky is nice and pleasant and there’s surprisingly good engagement over there from a population starving for sports coverage, but it’ll never replace Twitter because it’ll never have the real-time news that Twitter’s sheer scale creates. I’ve come to look at Twitter as a necessary evil. My Tweetdeck is constantly spinning like a slot machine. My Blue Deck is not. And unfortunately, I doubt it ever will.
Why is the San Jose Sharks’ rebuild viewed so much more favorably than the Hawks’ rebuild? The Sharks forwards might look better, but the Hawks have the advantage in better defenders that are closer to being full-time NHLers. — Kyle H
It’s vibes. That’s all. The Sharks are a year behind the Blackhawks in their teardown, so their fans aren’t as miserable yet. Also, don’t discount the general animus many other fan bases have toward the Blackhawks (some of it earned, let’s be honest), the inevitable resentment of Bedard because of the hype that was entirely out of his control, and the fact that Chicago fans were spoiled in the 2010s, leading to unmeetable expectations. Both teams are in the same boat, rowing down the same river. Both rebuilds likely will be judged against each other in the long run, but how fun would it be if they became the next two Western powers for another decade or so?
Connor Bedard for Macklin Celebrini: Who says no? — Jacob B
The Blackhawks. And the Sharks. Y’all are exhausting.
Lukas Reichel for Yegor Chinakhov: Who says no? — Rowen B
I would. But I’m starting to think I’m basically Tom Hanks in “Cast Away” out here on Reichel Island.
With all the losing and all the high picks, the Hawks have a lot of young guys. So far I haven’t seen anything from them that gives me a “that guy’s gonna be a superstar” vibe. I thought that might be Bedard but he’s having more trouble adjusting than I hoped he would. Who, if anyone, in the pipeline gives you that kind of vibe? I need someone to hang my hopes on. — Bryan H
Bedard will be a superstar. I’m long past having doubts about that. Dude just turned 20 a couple of weeks ago and has 128 points in 150 games playing mostly with bottom-sixers. Come on. Believe Nathan MacKinnon when he talks.
But if you’re looking for that je ne sais quoi that gave Kane a megastar aura even before his performance fully backed it up, it’s Nazar. He has a confidence, a swagger, an infectious personality that doesn’t come around very often in this milquetoast sport. And based on how he closed the season, then went off at Worlds, I think he might be the one you’re looking for. The kid’s got it.
Would you consider adjusting your definition of a dynasty if a league were to function in such a way that dynasties became dramatically less impressive, even just temporarily? Similarly, would you consider adjusting your definition if it seemed like dynasties could become a thing of the past entirely? Basically, I suppose I’m reopening the dynasty debate by asking you what it would take to make you change your definition. — Ally A
Sigh. Why can’t we just come up with new terms? Dynasties do not yield power for a year or two here or there while they’re on top. A dynasty is three straight championships or more. The end. Sorry, Edmonton. Sorry, New England. Sorry, Chicago.
Have you ever had any sort of confrontation or animosity from a player (or coach/exec) over something you’ve written? — Dan B
Certainly. It’s rarely been anything but respectful disagreement, though. We’re all grown-ups in there, for the most part. I once saw a player shove a reporter (not me!) up against a wall in the locker room, but that was more than 20 years ago — another beat, another lifetime. Besides, these days, it’s more likely to happen over an off-the-cuff tweet than a well-thought-out story. That actually happened a couple times this past season (again, not me!). I’m sure you all want details, but what gets F-bombed in the locker room stays in the locker room.
What other sports media do you regularly read/watch/listen to (besides Scott Powers’ pieces)? — Todd E
Scott who?
None, really, other than actual game broadcasts. Most people use sports as their escape, but when sports are your job, you seek other outlets. At least, I do. For me, it’s TV and movies. Perhaps unsurprisingly, my four most-listened-to podcasts (hundreds and hundreds of hours’ worth) are all pop-culture-related — “House of R,” “The Ringer-Verse,” “The Big Picture” and “The Watch.” I’m a huge nerd, is what I’m saying. I love what I love, and I love listening to people enjoy (and trenchantly critique) the things I love.
I read Hawks articles every day, even the stupid clickbait trade proposals. I listen to four different podcasts regularly. I’ve got a running spreadsheet of prospects on which I happily changed Nick Lardis’ height to 6-foot. Last week, I scoured payrolls for high-salary injured guys that could get us to the cap floor in ’26-’27. All this for a team that is clearly a minimum of four years away from being competitive. What the truck is wrong with me and do you have suggestions for other ways to occupy my time for the rest of the decade? — Stretch A
I do not. Please keep subscribing. Maniacal fans like you are the lifeblood of this place, and Scott and I very much enjoy being employed.
My son just graduated with a master’s in creative writing. He can clearly write. But that does not get him a job. Assuming he won’t write the next Harry Potter phenomenon, what is the job landscape for writing? The newspaper industry seems to be on life support. Where do you see the next generation of writers writing? — Warren C
Most students have been told by every teacher and journalist they see to run screaming from this industry, as fast and as far as they possibly can. I wholeheartedly disagree. Everything is writing these days. Journalism is writing. Filmmaking is writing. Video-game creation is writing. Advertising is writing. Public relations is writing. Even science is writing, especially as the competition ratchets up for what little grant money remains. Being able to tell a compelling story as a creative writer or being able to communicate clearly as a technical writer will help you in nearly every walk of life (short of having an actually useful skill like a trade).
As for journalism? There’s never been more good journalism than there is now. Unfortunately, there’s also never been more imitation journalism and poor journalism, and an increasingly media-illiterate populace is rapidly losing the ability to discern the difference. But there’s never been a greater need for good journalism than there is now. Work at a legacy paper. Work for an alt-weekly. Work for a website. Start a Substack. Create a deeply reported and well-written podcast. Good reporting, good journalism and, yes, good writing will find an audience. I have to believe that. And in this age of state-run media and worthless brain-rot AI, we need it more than ever.
(Photo of Connor Bedard: Michael Reaves / Getty Images)