I am just waiting for another nine game losing streak to hit this team. Last year coach Q said that since the Hawks were winning early on and scoring at will that they over looked some of their issues in practice and got away from their game which ultimately led to the long losing streak. This years team is going down the same road. Everyone thinks things are perfect because they are winning, but the train can derail quickly and all of the problems the hawks have ( PP, SO etc..) will become magnified. Hate to be negative but this is pretty much the same team and I have seen this show before.
- waitforawhistle

I hate that shootout problem. Kills us in the playoffs every time.

- John Jaeckel

Kassian vs Kassian, the Vancouver games would be even better. From my understanding they're not related, but it would make for some fun - "my Kassian could beat up your Kassian" type stuff.

I am just waiting for another nine game losing streak to hit this team. Last year coach Q said that since the Hawks were winning early on and scoring at will that they over looked some of their issues in practice and got away from their game which ultimately led to the long losing streak. This years team is going down the same road. Everyone thinks things are perfect because they are winning, but the train can derail quickly and all of the problems the hawks have ( PP, SO etc..) will become magnified. Hate to be negative but this is pretty much the same team and I have seen this show before.
- waitforawhistle

Yup, death is near at hand for the Hawks. Its all a mirage, this team really stinks at most aspects of the game.

I am just waiting for another nine game losing streak to hit this team. Last year coach Q said that since the Hawks were winning early on and scoring at will that they over looked some of their issues in practice and got away from their game which ultimately led to the long losing streak. This years team is going down the same road. Everyone thinks things are perfect because they are winning, but the train can derail quickly and all of the problems the hawks have ( PP, SO etc..) will become magnified. Hate to be negative but this is pretty much the same team and I have seen this show before.
- waitforawhistle

Yup, death is near at hand for the Hawks. Its all a mirage, this team really stinks at most aspects of the game.

>Nice post. Really enjoy strategy talk.
>Would like to see the Hawks use the Czech national 1-3-1 formation much more often -- it provides the puck support Keenan mentions and makes rebound retrieval more effective
>Sometimes I feel the Hawks think if they control the puck, they have had a "good power play" -- when the objective MUST be -- score a goal any way you can
>Lastly, I'm beginning to think Toews is miscast as a "front of net" guy on the PP -- NOT saying he shouldn't be on the PP -- think he should be in the high slot in the 1-3-1
- SnapitUpstairs

Thanks. Big issue # 1 is lack of urgency on Unit 1. That's from Keith and Seabrook looking like idiots with the puck in our zone. Neither knows what to do with it. When Leddy is out on unit 2, teams know he's capable and WILL bring it up -- and back off a bit and Leddy does not hesitate to make a quick accurate pass. There's an urgency there.

The old saying of get the puck to the net any way you can because ANYTHING can happen is good, old advice. Had a teammate recently that scored 2 from side of the net -- just threw the puck to the front, hoping for a rebound or weird bounce. Got the weird bounce and 2 goals. The goals DON'T have to be highlight. They still count the same. I could care less if the puck crawls in at .001 mph or rockets through the back at over 100mph. It's what's on the scoreboard that matters!

Also would like to see some true creativity on the PP -- passing around the perimeter does nothing for me. And without side to side movement, will likely do nothing to put the puck in the net. Gotta have 2 guys in front -- like your idea of 3. More bodies really jams things up and even if a shot doesn't make it all the way through, pucks laying between the circles or lower have a better chance of finding their way to the net.

I have wondered this for several years now -- does Keith have pics of Q in his underwear or a clause in his mega-contract that requires him to see PP time? Keenan's philosophy (not that he's the only one) rewards guys for performance. If they're not cutting it, get someone else that would LOVE THE PP TIME.

Urgency. If I'm Keith and I know someone is waiting to take my PP time, I might, just MIGHT feel a little more compelled to do the job.

If the Hawks are like any team I've been on, there are guys sitting on the bench watching this crap saying I could easily play this crappy and get more TOI. Chances are, they're really thinking "I'd love to get out there and have a chance with a man advantage" and skate their balls off to make something happen. Iron Mike's reference to guys doing the dirty work has merit. Need guys HUNGRY to make it happen.

I'm sure more than a few of them would love to be given a chance at PP time.

Thanks for the cold shower...**sheessh*** Luck?? "others" think they should have a couple of regulation losses?? What about Sharps 6 post hits....luck??...if those go in Sharp is the talk of the town? Of course the great Ducks and the other teams they have played...luck has no role in the results of their games I guess.

Thanks. Big issue # 1 is lack of urgency on Unit 1. That's from Keith and Seabrook looking like idiots with the puck in our zone. Neither knows what to do with it. When Leddy is out on unit 2, teams know he's capable and WILL bring it up -- and back off a bit and Leddy does not hesitate to make a quick accurate pass. There's an urgency there.

The old saying of get the puck to the net any way you can because ANYTHING can happen is good, old advice. Had a teammate recently that scored 2 from side of the net -- just threw the puck to the front, hoping for a rebound or weird bounce. Got the weird bounce and 2 goals. The goals DON'T have to be highlight. They still count the same. I could care less if the puck crawls in at .001 mph or rockets through the back at over 100mph. It's what's on the scoreboard that matters!

Also would like to see some true creativity on the PP -- passing around the perimeter does nothing for me. And without side to side movement, will likely do nothing to put the puck in the net. Gotta have 2 guys in front -- like your idea of 3. More bodies really jams things up and even if a shot doesn't make it all the way through, pucks laying between the circles or lower have a better chance of finding their way to the net.

I have wondered this for several years now -- does Keith have pics of Q in his underwear or a clause in his mega-contract that requires him to see PP time? Keenan's philosophy (not that he's the only one) rewards guys for performance. If they're not cutting it, get someone else that would LOVE THE PP TIME.

Urgency. If I'm Keith and I know someone is waiting to take my PP time, I might, just MIGHT feel a little more compelled to do the job.

If the Hawks are like any team I've been on, there are guys sitting on the bench watching this crap saying I could easily play this crappy and get more TOI. Chances are, they're really thinking "I'd love to get out there and have a chance with a man advantage" and skate their balls off to make something happen. Iron Mike's reference to guys doing the dirty work has merit. Need guys HUNGRY to make it happen.

I'm sure more than a few of them would love to be given a chance at PP time.
- savvyone-1

>The big problem at the NHL level is that there is little real practice time on the ice -- with the compressed schedule -- even less -- that's why -- WHAT is practiced makes all the difference
>As you say -- the overall tempo set by the PP right now -- unless #8 is carrying the mail -- has regressed to slow and methodical
>They really need to work on everybody staying high tempo in everything they do on the PP
>And whoever is in front of the goalie -- needs to block his view
>When the PP rebound goals start to come (sure hope they do) things will be back on track

I, and most are not trying to be trade protagonists, we are rather just trying to be more measured given the circumstances.

Matt Hendricks is my guy though. Think he could be had and Washington has been a good trade partner in the past. This again down the road potentially.

What I rail against is this talk that SB or others know nothing and are not aware of what they need to do for the team.

I am also against this everything 2010 mentality. And don't buy into the idea that this team is 5 standard deviations away from it. Especially when 8 of the core top guys are still on this team. Anyways, will dwell on this later.
- TrueGrit

Do I appear to be unmeasured? I for the most part have refrained from naming specific players because there are too many variables, salary, cap hit, what goes the other way etc. So I have used general terms of what I think the Hawks need. I also have an idea of the roster player I believe are expendable in a trade situiation.

Do I say anything negative about SB?

As far as what I have said about the 2010 team, I have and will continue to use that team as a benchmark for what I believe the current team needs to do to be serious cup contenders. Namely I think they need two young big forwards who are physical can skate and play and who have reasonable contracts that can be accomodated by the Hawks. The reason is to give this team the same diversity and balance to allow it to play any type of game.

Do I appear to be unmeasured? I for the most part have refrained from naming specific players because their are too many variables, salary, cap hit, what goes the other way etc. So I have used general terms od what I think the Hawks need. I also have an idea of the roster player I believe are expendable in a trade situiation.

Do I say anything negative about SB?

As far as what I have said about the 2010 team, I have and will continue to use that team as a benchmark for what I believe the current team needs to do to be serious cup contenders. Namely I think they need two young big forwards who are physical can skate and play and who have reasonable contracts that can be accomodated by the Hawks. The reason is to give this team the same diversity and balance to allow it to play any type of game.
- paulr

Agreed

I am just waiting for another nine game losing streak to hit this team. Last year coach Q said that since the Hawks were winning early on and scoring at will that they over looked some of their issues in practice and got away from their game which ultimately led to the long losing streak. This years team is going down the same road. Everyone thinks things are perfect because they are winning, but the train can derail quickly and all of the problems the hawks have ( PP, SO etc..) will become magnified. Hate to be negative but this is pretty much the same team and I have seen this show before.
- waitforawhistle

No sense watching anymore, maybe someone will text you with the score!

I am just waiting for another nine game losing streak to hit this team. Last year coach Q said that since the Hawks were winning early on and scoring at will that they over looked some of their issues in practice and got away from their game which ultimately led to the long losing streak. This years team is going down the same road. Everyone thinks things are perfect because they are winning, but the train can derail quickly and all of the problems the hawks have ( PP, SO etc..) will become magnified. Hate to be negative but this is pretty much the same team and I have seen this show before.
- waitforawhistle

If you listen to the players, especially after last night's game, I don't get the feeling they feel they are playing perfectly.

The rumored return for O'Reilly is a roster player and a high-end prospect. I have been one of Bolland's biggest fans and I really think we would miss him Big-time during the playoffs, but I could see him going the other way. Of course I doubt we trade for ROR anyway.

Thanks for the cold shower...**sheessh*** Luck?? "others" think they should have a couple of regulation losses?? What about Sharps 6 post hits....luck??...if those go in Sharp is the talk of the town? Of course the great Ducks and the other teams they have played...luck has no role in the results of their games I guess.
- bogiedoc

I'm with you. The only time this team has come even close to losing in regulation was Calgary, but with the way Emery played I wouldn't say it was really that lucky. IMO the Hawks have yet to be outplayed by a team that is a legitimate threat in the conference.

Anyone else feel like Sharp should be a compliance buyout after next year? He has become a turnover machine, and when he isn't scoring, is a liability on the ice. IMO, he is definitely on the down slope of his career. Also, I have seen enough of Bolland at 2C to say he needs to be bumped back to 3C. I don't see how you give him a new deal after next year when he will look for a raise. Hossa, also, just isn't clicking with Saad; I think a subtle move of flip flopping Saad and Sharp may be in order to get Hossa and Sharp going. Saad may also be a good complimentary player to Kane's creativity.

Anyone else feel like Sharp should be a compliance buyout after next year? He has become a turnover machine, and when he isn't scoring, is a liability on the ice. IMO, he is definitely on the down slope of his career. Also, I have seen enough of Bolland at 2C to say he needs to be bumped back to 3C. I don't see how you give him a new deal after next year when he will look for a raise. Hossa, also, just isn't clicking with Saad; I think a subtle move of flip flopping Saad and Sharp may be in order to get Hossa and Sharp going. Saad may also be a good complimentary player to Kane's creativity.
- hawks2010

If Bowman were to buy Sharp out a year after signing him Wirtz would boot Bowman out the door. No, there is no chance at all Sharp is bought out. And in case you haven't looked he is almost a point per game player this year. I like Saad but right now Saad isn't close to the player Sharp is.

http://deadspin.com/59839...ter&utm_medium=socialflow

Anyone else feel like Sharp should be a compliance buyout after next year? He has become a turnover machine, and when he isn't scoring, is a liability on the ice. IMO, he is definitely on the down slope of his career. Also, I have seen enough of Bolland at 2C to say he needs to be bumped back to 3C. I don't see how you give him a new deal after next year when he will look for a raise. Hossa, also, just isn't clicking with Saad; I think a subtle move of flip flopping Saad and Sharp may be in order to get Hossa and Sharp going. Saad may also be a good complimentary player to Kane's creativity.
- hawks2010

Kane has had his share of turnovers this year as well. At least Sharp hustles back where Kane takes his time chasing down his turnover.

I hate that shootout problem. Kills us in the playoffs every time.
- PhatJoeSki

Lol.

But the power play will kill us in the playoffs.

Anyone else feel like Sharp should be a compliance buyout after next year? He has become a turnover machine, and when he isn't scoring, is a liability on the ice. IMO, he is definitely on the down slope of his career. Also, I have seen enough of Bolland at 2C to say he needs to be bumped back to 3C. I don't see how you give him a new deal after next year when he will look for a raise. Hossa, also, just isn't clicking with Saad; I think a subtle move of flip flopping Saad and Sharp may be in order to get Hossa and Sharp going. Saad may also be a good complimentary player to Kane's creativity.
- hawks2010

As most know, I think Sharp should never have been extended in the first place, but to buy him out now would not do Stan any favors when he's trying to re-sign players in the future. If you are #19 and you see Sharp get bought out one year after signing, how do you trust anything Stan says in your negotiations?

For better or worse, for richer or richer, in injury or in health...Stan is stuck with that contract for the foreseeable future.

If Bowman were to buy Sharp out a year after signing him Wirtz would boot Bowman out the door. No, there is no chance at all Sharp is bought out. And in case you haven't looked he is almost a point per game player this year. I like Saad but right now Saad isn't close to the player Sharp is.
- paulr

I want Saad OFF the top line and second line center remains a problem. Bolland is not now, nor will he ever be, a number 2 center.

Unfortunately, the Hawks remain short at center and I don't expect SB to make any changes. Organization seems to be waiting for the magic prospect to develop (Danault)

Lol.

But the power play will kill us in the playoffs.
- mrpaulish

It didn't kill Boston when they won the cup in 2011. Their powerplay was terrible.

But it sure doesn't make it easy on the team not having a decent powerplay. Also as pointed out earlier in the thread, if the Hawks powerplay is anemic other teams will take that opportunity to lay a physical beating on the Hawks without being to concerned about being penalized for it.

Lol.

But the power play will kill us in the playoffs.
- mrpaulish

A bad PP is a nuisance, but a great PK can win cups. I want both, but will settle for a top 5 PK unit...ala Boston.

Do I appear to be unmeasured? I for the most part have refrained from naming specific players because there are too many variables, salary, cap hit, what goes the other way etc. So I have used general terms of what I think the Hawks need. I also have an idea of the roster player I believe are expendable in a trade situiation.

Do I say anything negative about SB?

As far as what I have said about the 2010 team, I have and will continue to use that team as a benchmark for what I believe the current team needs to do to be serious cup contenders. Namely I think they need two young big forwards who are physical can skate and play and who have reasonable contracts that can be accomodated by the Hawks. The reason is to give this team the same diversity and balance to allow it to play any type of game.
- paulr

The 2010 team had Sopel and freaking Boynton on defence and Hammer was basically still a rookie - Roszival and Brookbank are at least their equal. Ladd missed 3 games in the final series, Colin Fraser and Burrish didn't even dress. Most of their playoff success came from Buff playing out of his mind; John Madden coming in and giving the team a veteran 4th center who could skate, kill penalties and check; Brouwer banging defenceman, even Ben Eager contributed significantly in spots etc.

This isn't the finished version of the team for 2013 IMO but it looks to me like their plan is to replicate a squad with similarities. But that means Stalberg has to be Versteeg, Bickell has to be Ladd, Kruger has to be Madden, Bollig or Carcillo have to be Eager. There is clearly no replacement for Buff & Brouwer is badly missed at playoff time.

It's easy to say they need 2 young, cheap, fast power forwards but that's near impossible to acquire without spending a king's ransom in youth and draft picks. Let me know if there is a Jordan Nolan out there for cheap, otherwise that leaves Jimmy Hayes, Ben Smith and Morin as internal solutions.

The West won't be easy to win. Although I don't see the Ducks as serious contenders overall, last night they showed they can play and have some excellent personnel. Vancouver will continue to drift upward in the standings when Kesler comes back and they keep playing those horrible dog teams in their division.

I see it boiling down to Vancouver vs Chicago to win the West. It will be interesting.

Do I appear to be unmeasured? I for the most part have refrained from naming specific players because there are too many variables, salary, cap hit, what goes the other way etc. So I have used general terms of what I think the Hawks need. I also have an idea of the roster player I believe are expendable in a trade situiation.

Do I say anything negative about SB?

As far as what I have said about the 2010 team, I have and will continue to use that team as a benchmark for what I believe the current team needs to do to be serious cup contenders. Namely I think they need two young big forwards who are physical can skate and play and who have reasonable contracts that can be accomodated by the Hawks. The reason is to give this team the same diversity and balance to allow it to play any type of game.
- paulr

The 2010 team had Sopel and freaking Boynton on defence and Hammer was basically still a rookie - Roszival and Brookbank are at least their equal. Ladd missed 3 games in the final series, Colin Fraser and Burrish didn't even dress. Most of their playoff success came from Buff playing out of his mind; John Madden coming in and giving the team a veteran 4th center who could skate, kill penalties and check; Brouwer banging defenceman, even Ben Eager contributed significantly in spots etc.

This isn't the finished version of the team for 2013 IMO but it looks to me like their plan is to replicate a squad with similarities. But that means Stalberg has to be Versteeg, Bickell has to be Ladd, Kruger has to be Madden, Bollig or Carcillo have to be Eager. There is clearly no replacement for Buff & Brouwer is badly missed at playoff time.

It's easy to say they need 2 young, cheap, fast power forwards but that's near impossible to acquire without spending a king's ransom in youth and draft picks. Let me know if there is a Jordan Nolan out there for cheap, otherwise that leaves Jimmy Hayes, Ben Smith and Morin as internal solutions.

The West won't be easy to win. Although I don't see the Ducks as serious contenders overall, last night they showed they can play and have some excellent personnel. Vancouver will continue to drift upward in the standings when Kesler comes back and they keep playing those horrible dog teams in their division.

I see it boiling down to Vancouver vs Chicago to win the West. It will be interesting.

I'm with you. The only time this team has come even close to losing in regulation was Calgary, but with the way Emery played I wouldn't say it was really that lucky. IMO the Hawks have yet to be outplayed by a team that is a legitimate threat in the conference.
- rollpards19

6 extra-time games out of 13: can't get much closer to losing in regulation than that.