I agree, point shots are worth nothing without net presence...i.e. tips, screens, etc.
- ikeane

Do Kane and Toews skills /handedness (and to a lesser degree Hossa's) nullify them being on the ice together dring pp? it seems like they're suited to play the same position in a traditonal pp setup. If one of them had the ability to stand in front of the goalie (Toews has some in the past but his effectiveness vs pounding may not be ideal) it would solve a lot. I"m not sure if you put one on the 2nd unit? I'm just brainstorming.

Do Kane and Toews skills /handedness (and to a lesser degree Hossa's) nullify them being on the ice together dring pp? it seems like they're suited to play the same position in a traditonal pp setup. If one of them had the ability to stand in front of the goalie (Toews has some in the past but his effectiveness vs pounding may not be ideal) it would solve a lot. I"m not sure if you put one on the 2nd unit? I'm just brainstorming.
- miked23

Toews and Kane don't have ths same role on a power play.
One plays the half wall and the other is on the goal line.

Toews and Kane don't have ths same role on a power play.
One plays the half wall and the other is on the goal line.
- Al

Can a case be made that toews is more suited to playing the half wall as opposed to the goal line?

Can a case be made that toews is more suited to playing the half wall as opposed to the goal line?
- miked23

Not for me compared to Kane. Toews has perfected the cut across move from the goal line and scores a lot of goals that way and if not provides an opportunity to score.

Toews is a great player but passing isn't his best attribute.

If the Hawks are to have a better PP Keith can''t take the majority of point shots and shoot 2.5%...especially without the necessary net front prescence.

Not for me compared to Kane. Toews has perfected the cut acroos move from the goal line and scores a lot of goals that way and if not provides an opportunity to score.

Toews is a great player but passing isn't his best attribute.

If the Hawks are to have a better PP Keith can''t take the majority of point shots and shoot 2.5%...especially without the necessary net front prescence.
- Al

That certainly makes a lot of sense. The point person seems to be the larger barometer of success. But doesnt the "Toews on goal line thing" lead to a lot of the backdoor passes to Sharp that so many fans hate?

Do Kane and Toews skills /handedness (and to a lesser degree Hossa's) nullify them being on the ice together dring pp? it seems like they're suited to play the same position in a traditonal pp setup. If one of them had the ability to stand in front of the goalie (Toews has some in the past but his effectiveness vs pounding may not be ideal) it would solve a lot. I"m not sure if you put one on the 2nd unit? I'm just brainstorming.
- miked23

Heres your PP units and roles as I would have them using today's roster.

1st unit:

Toews-take the faceoffs and go to a half board. Crash the net when shots go on.
Shaw- Sit in front of the goalie. Look for garbage.
Kane-Alt. Faceoff guy. Other half boards. Also use his wrister to try to score.
Leddy-Main Point Guy
Seabrook-Take some slap shots

2nd unit:

Bolland: take the faceoff (he won't win but he's just as likely to as anyone else who can play on the PP) sit in front of the goalie look for garbage.
Hossa: Half boards and strong shot. Maybe take the puck to the net once in a while.
Sharp: Shoot from the half boards
Oduya: Main Point Guy
Hammer: No shorties allowed. facilitate in the O-zone.

Also a few corrections to philosophy: If the goalie is facing you, try shooting it off the pads for a slot rebound. Don't dump it around the boards unless you absolutely have to. Too many times the hawks fail because they have their noses to the glass and lose the puck in a board battle. If you don't see a pass, try putting the puck on net. Even if its weak it might create a rebound opportunity.

Heres your PP units and roles as I would have them using today's roster.

1st unit:

Toews-take the faceoffs and go to a half board. Crash the net when shots go on.
Shaw- Sit in front of the goalie. Look for garbage.
Kane-Alt. Faceoff guy. Other half boards. Also use his wrister to try to score.
Leddy-Main Point Guy
Seabrook-Take some slap shots

2nd unit:

Bolland: take the faceoff (he won't win but he's just as likely to as anyone else who can play on the PP) sit in front of the goalie look for garbage.
Hossa: Half boards and strong shot. Maybe take the puck to the net once in a while.
Sharp: Shoot from the half boards
Oduya: Main Point Guy
Hammer: No shorties allowed. facilitate in the O-zone.

Also a few corrections to philosophy: If the goalie is facing you, try shooting it off the pads for a slot rebound. Don't dump it around the boards unless you absolutely have to. Too many times the hawks fail because they have their noses to the glass and lose the puck in a board battle. If you don't see a pass, try putting the puck on net. Even if its weak it might create a rebound opportunity.
- Walky

He's lefty..tough to play on the the left side of the pp if you'r a lefty

That certainly makes a lot of sense. The point person seems to be the larger barometer of success. But doesnt the "Toews on goal line thing" lead to a lot of the backdoor passes to Sharp that so many fans hate?
- miked23

What it does, because Toews has the vison and the strength it gives two options...

Either he slides the puck across if Sharp is open or takes it to the net. The latter was more successful last season.

But the player, Toews, has to have a quick first step or two and the strength to get to the net and finish...and also not be afraid.

Toews and Kane don't have ths same role on a power play.
One plays the half wall and the other is on the goal line.
- Al

And Hossa is often on the point.

A lotof these suggestions seem like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

The power play started to look pretty good last year when none other than Clown Shoes was on the second unit. What did he do? Parked in front of the net.

The other thing about him is he is a pretty good righty point shot. If it's me, I let him try to earn his $2.7 million per on the PP. Either up top or down low.

Problems the Hawks have right now:

— who takes the FO's when Toews isn't out there.
— who are your four best guys on the point
— net front presence (again, Montador was actually pretty good there. Bickell? Stalberg? Shaw?)

A lotof these suggestions seem like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

The power play started to look pretty good last year when none other than Clown Shoes was on the second unit. What did he do? Parked in front of the net.

The other thing about him is he is a pretty good righty point shot. If it's me, I let him try to earn his $2.7 million per on the PP. Either up top or down low.

Problems the Hawks have right now:

— who takes the FO's when Toews isn't out there.
— who are your four best guys on the point
— net front presence (again, Montador was actually pretty good there. Bickell? Stalberg? Shaw?)
- John Jaeckel

Last year, especially playoff time, I liked Seabrook at the point 100% more than Keith. I don't know if I like Hoss QBing the thing. His wrister is more deadly than his slapper.

created after one particularly frustrating game this spring:



- InvisibleOrange

Can't miss....hey hey.....

Toliet Paper: Which is correct, Over or under? and Why? Discuss

A lotof these suggestions seem like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

The power play started to look pretty good last year when none other than Clown Shoes was on the second unit. What did he do? Parked in front of the net.

The other thing about him is he is a pretty good righty point shot. If it's me, I let him try to earn his $2.7 million per on the PP. Either up top or down low.

Problems the Hawks have right now:

— who takes the FO's when Toews isn't out there.
— who are your four best guys on the point
— net front presence (again, Montador was actually pretty good there. Bickell? Stalberg? Shaw?)
- John Jaeckel

....And unfortunately the same three questions which could have been asked this time last summer.

A lotof these suggestions seem like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

The power play started to look pretty good last year when none other than Clown Shoes was on the second unit. What did he do? Parked in front of the net.

The other thing about him is he is a pretty good righty point shot. If it's me, I let him try to earn his $2.7 million per on the PP. Either up top or down low.

Problems the Hawks have right now:

— who takes the FO's when Toews isn't out there.
— who are your four best guys on the point
— net front presence (again, Montador was actually pretty good there. Bickell? Stalberg? Shaw?)
- John Jaeckel

Definitely Shaw. I'd say Ben Smith if I expected him to be on the team. Montador could be an alternate. Bolland usually does well in close. Carcillo if he can avoid taking penalties would work in close.

Last year, especially playoff time, I liked Seabrook at the point 100% more than Keith. I don't know if I like Hoss QBing the thing. His wrister is more deadly than his slapper.
- JRoenick97

That's exactly so....And unless Keith has an epiphany and shoots better than I can from the point Leddy should take his place.

Actually Leddy has to be given more PP in any event.

Another misstep on the PP is giving Frolik 11 mins of total PP time all of last season. 11mins. That is insane.

I am generally in support of Q but his mismanagement of Frolik since we got him has been a big disappointment for me. I'm sure he will get traded this season and when he does he will become top line point producer. Then we will all wonder why he couldn't do that with us, ala versteeg, buff, wiz...

Another misstep on the PP is giving Frolik 11 mins of total PP time all of last season. 11mins. That is insane.

I am generally in support of Q but his mismanagement of Frolik since we got him has been a big disappointment for me. I'm sure he will get traded this season and when he does he will become top line point producer. Then we will all wonder why he couldn't do that with us, ala versteeg, buff, wiz...
- Bhawks35

You know, I've always liked Frolik. he tries hard and has a nose for the net. He really did well in the playoffs when he got better time also. Q doesn't give him much of a shot. Maybe he has a bad attitude?

You know, I've always liked Frolik. he tries hard and has a nose for the net. He really did well in the playoffs when he got better time also. Q doesn't give him much of a shot. Maybe he has a bad attitude?
- JRoenick97

I really have no idea but I would think he must have a pretty good attitude. He was thrown out of place in a checking role as soon as he got here and a healthy scratch a number of games, and we never heard a peep about him complaining or anything like that. Like you said, when he finally did get back in the lineup in the playoffs, he was probably our most noticeable forward on the ice those 3 games. So, its not as if he sulked or packed it in. He came back harder. I can't imagine a player like that having a bad attitude but it's just my guess.

I really have no idea but I would think he must have a pretty good attitude. He was thrown out of place in a checking role as soon as he got here and a healthy scratch a number of games, and we never heard a peep about him complaining or anything like that. Like you said, when he finally did get back in the lineup in the playoffs, he was probably our most noticeable forward on the ice those 3 games. So, its not as if he sulked or packed it in. He came back harder. I can't imagine a player like that having a bad attitude but it's just my guess.
- Bhawks35

Maybe he's just one more skill guy on a team full of skill guys. That's what I felt about Versteeg. I'm sure Frolik could be a top 6 guy, but we have a lot of top 6 talent, so he gets relegated to the checking line. I would like to see him get some better ice time and show what he can do though.

You know, I've always liked Frolik. he tries hard and has a nose for the net. He really did well in the playoffs when he got better time also. Q doesn't give him much of a shot. Maybe he has a bad attitude?
- JRoenick97

Frolik has played a lot of hockey in his NHL career so far but he's still really a kid at age 24. I always think he'd older but he just started playing young. I firmly believe Q hasn't used Frolik properly and I hope that changes this season, but Frolik needs to step up and be more consistent as well. Maybe its a maturity issue?

Maybe he's just one more skill guy on a team full of skill guys. That's what I felt about Versteeg. I'm sure Frolik could be a top 6 guy, but we have a lot of top 6 talent, so he gets relegated to the checking line. I would like to see him get some better ice time and show what he can do though.
- JRoenick97

Absolutely. Couldn't agree more. I know a lot of ppl on here think Frolik sucks and is overpaid but he just has had no chance to show anything with us.
I'm with you though, give him more ice time and a legitimate chance to succeed and see what he can do. If nothing else, it can only increase his trade value.

Absolutely. Couldn't agree more. I know a lot of ppl on here think Frolik sucks and is overpaid but he just has had no chance to show anything with us.
I'm with you though, give him more ice time and a legitimate chance to succeed and see what he can do. If nothing else, it can only increase his trade value.
- Bhawks35

This is probably the best idea. Throw him in with Hoss every once in a while and let him rack up some points. Then he will garner a good return in trade. There's really not doubting the kid has talent. Let him use it.

Frolik has played a lot of hockey in his NHL career so far but he's still really a kid at age 24. I always think he'd older but he just started playing young. I firmly believe Q hasn't used Frolik properly and I hope that changes this season, but Frolik needs to step up and be more consistent as well. Maybe its a maturity issue?
- DarthKane

Could be maturity or motivation. Maybe he's just a streaky player. It's hard to know when he gets shuffled around so much. I've never been a huge fan of Q's shuffling of lines, and i think it takes away from certain players, especially Frolik. He hasn't had time to develop and chemistry with a good playmaker like Kane or Hoss.

Could be maturity or motivation. Maybe he's just a streaky player. It's hard to know when he gets shuffled around so much. I've never been a huge fan of Q's shuffling of lines, and i think it takes away from certain players, especially Frolik. He hasn't had time to develop and chemistry with a good playmaker like Kane or Hoss.
- JRoenick97

I like Frolik alot based on what I think is potential. But have we all forgotten he scored like 5 goals all year and a couple were into empty nets? And his shot wouldn't have broken a pane of glass last season, so he was no offensive threat at all. What was Q supposed to do, put him with Kane and Toews and hope he got going?

I'm loooking for a much better year from him because I think he can play.