No more retired numbers for now
As I wrote earlier in the week, the Hawks retiring jersey No. 3 for Pierre Pilote and Keith Magnuson was long overdue.
The question now is, who's next? I know a lot of you have been talking this back and forth the last few days, and Comcast ran a poll during Wednesday's telecast with the winner being Chris Chelios.
Should the Hawks retire Cheli's No. 7? That's a tough one. First of all, did Chelios play here long enough? Maybe he did, but my answer would be no to retiring his jersey. Chelios was a great Hawk from1990 until 1999, but he asked to be traded because the Hawks were falling on hard times and wouldn't give him a new contract.
When we think of Chris Chelios, do we think of him as a Blackhawk above anything else? I don't. He has now been with the Red Wings almost as long as he was with the Hawks.
I'm tough when it comes to retiring numbers. You just don't put anyone up there forever. I would say no to Chelios. I might even lean more to retiring No. 24 for Doug Wilson or No. 28 for Steve Larmer ahead of Chelios.
And what about those guys from way back, such as Bill Mosienko, Mush March, Doug Bentley, Earl Siebert and Charlie Gardiner? You can't forget about them. All but March are in the Hall of Fame.
It was a club rule of the late Bill Wirtz that a player had to be a Hall of Famer to have his number retired. So March, Larmer and Wilson wouldn't qualify. Magnuson, of course, was a special circimstance, honored as much for what he did off the ice for the Hawks as on it.
Those seven names hanging in the United Center rafters are pretty special. Why not just leave it this way for now and wait the more than two decades for when No. 19 and No. 88 go up together.
to hire chelios as assistant coach (or perhaps even bring him back as a player), all will be forgiven and his number will eventually hang from the UC's rafters.
It would be interesting if Tim Sassone or Barry Rozner took a poll: 1). who would attend a ceremony for retired jersey of Chellios and Roenick; and 2). In favor or not with the shootout?
It was ridiculous last night that two teams with a lot of offensive talent had no goal scored in the shootout through five rounds (then, a defenseman - Goligoski - wins it). Then, too, you have players performing moves and shots that would never be done in a game situation. This is not how the game was designed to be played. I would venture to guess that this addresses the issue of the purity of the game itself. Sort of like if you favor the DH rule in baseball. Interesting that no tie is allowed in the NBA, major league baseball, and NFL football is the same policy as the NHL. We know why the NHL decided to go with the shootout: to generate excitement and draw more fans. The shootout is no longer needed. The five minute OT is enough. Even an eight minute OT to suggest ties are not desired, but no shootout. Enough already, Mr Bettman.
How about who can spell Chelios?
I nominate Jim Wiste (#18). NO ONE served a Too Many Men on the Ice Penalty better.
Do you people not remember this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9kZbdnzMRQ
Dude broke my heart when I was 14 by going to Detroit. Instead of retiring his jersey, they should hold a quasi 'disco demolition night' where if you bring in an old Cheli jersey, you get in free. Then they throw all the jerseys in a pile on center ice and light them on fire in between periods.
Even to make matters worse, I remember watching a Bears vs. Packers Monday night game a couple years ago, and Chelli was on the Packers sideline hanging out with his friend Brett Favre! Seriously people!!!
Was at the ceremony on Wednesday night...nice, long and they are starting to be a little much.
I think the focus should be on winning now rather than retiring another number! Cheli, no. JR, no.
Anyone with a retired number should have at least 1 Chicago Blackhawk Stanley Cup ring to show for the efforts...Let's not totally make this a frozen Wrigley Field!
Or 3 1/2 for the old building where you could slip the Andy Frain a $5 bill and get in on any night.
The banner wouldn't be allowed in Canada though.
All of his best offensive years were with the Blackhawks, and he was definitely the most electrifying player of the post-Savard years. He will almost certainly be a hall-of-famer seeing as he's got more than 500 goals. If his number isn't retired with the Hawks, who would retire it? I can't see Phoenix or Philly doing it, and San Jose sure wouldn't.
--------------------
4 8 15 16 23 42
Chelios was a great Hawk from 1990 until 1999, but he asked to be traded because the Hawks were falling on hard times and wouldn't give him a new contract.
I believe he asked to be traded because the disOrganization at the time wouldn't commit to renewing his contract (due to his age), which left him vulnerable to being relocated which he didn't want to do. If memory serves, he asked to be traded specifically to the Red Wings because of proximity.
Tim, I believe you reported the story this way at the time. Do you agree he was another victim of the Dark Years?
That said, I agree. Cheli doesn't fit the criteria for having his number retired.
People like to say that Cheli demanded a trade to Detroit and that made him a traitor. I, as you Noble Hawk, remember that WWW was not in the least interested in extending Cheli long term. That's what he wanted. I guess the rub is that previously, Cheli had stated he would never play for the hated Evil Red Menace. I think dealing with the "Dark Side" caused him to change his tune. I still wear my Cheli #7 proudly.