An alternate or sub- title for the blog I posted on Christmas Day might have been: "Injuries without depth spell trouble."
The same corollary to this blog might be: "So what are you gonna do about it?"
First, you can argue the Hawks are every bit as good (or better) than their record. The problem is, you can also make a compelling counter argument—that their early record was built on lights out goaltending and enough offense (and timely offense) to hide some fundamental flaws.
As I have said often in this sort of emotional roller coaster of a season, you can't get too up or too down at any given point about this team—it's a work in progress. But I've also felt (and said) that some fans (and some in the media and blogosphere) were getting a little out over their skis about how good the roster is, the success of the "youth movement," etc.
The truth is, the Hawks "youth movement" was not a wave of talent that forced its way into the NHL, rather it was a massive patch job forced by a salary structure and cap that's tighter than a tick.
That's important because if the cap situation weren't what it was, maybe 2 instead of 5 rookies would be logging minutes for the Hawks right now. And at least one significant roster hole would be filled by a proven veteran who fits the position.
That the youth movement has "succeeded" to the extent it has, with five rookies, some getting fairly big minutes and a couple being asked to play roles that may exceed even their longterm upside, is a nice surprise.
All that said, it would be wrong to "blame the kids" for the Hawks 3-game losing streak to less than the best teams in the league. But this is all relevant to one thought that is becoming increasingly clear: the Hawks have some great talent at the very top of their roster, a couple of near-generational superstars who have been in season-long slumps, and the rest of the roster is pretty pedestrian and largely inexperienced.
A poster wondered on the message board last night why Jonathan Toews' passes were either landing on his rookie linemates' blades, catching them unaware in prime scoring areas, or going into their skates. It's because those players are not used to playing with elite centers, and he is not used to playing with them.
It's because, in hockey, a great team is much greater than the sum of its parts.
At this point, on paper, all the Hawks are missing is the relatively ageless Marian Hossa. On the ice, they seem to be missing more than that, with a razor thin margin of error on even the best of nights, evidenced by a lot of late-game or 3-on-3 overtime comebacks after typically miserable starts.
The question is, if you're Stan Bowman and the Hawk front office is, what do you do about it?
In addition to, or on top of, the aforementioned cap issue, the team is trying to figure out how to extend another big fat contract to a current player this offseason—the price of keeping Artemi Panarin in Chicago. And if the team does figure out a way to free up the dollars and sign Panarin, it may well mean even more subtraction of veteran talent in some other area, like center (Marcus Kruger) or goalie (Corey Crawford). A formula that will—if you just do the basic math—push the team closer to the pack.
So Bowman may face some tough choices. It is possible the Hawks get their mojo back and cruise through the second half of the relative with relative success, and enjoy a nice long playoff run in a Western Conference that looks somewhat vulnerable this year. It is also possible that the team will settle or regress to a level that is more reflective of who they might really be and find themselves a couple of months from today wondering whether to buy or sell at the deadline.
Let's explore that for a moment. The Hawks as "sellers" at the deadline—even assuming they are in playoff position at that point?
As hard as that might be for some fans to stomach, or for the bean counters at 1901 W. Madison to accept in terms of potential lost playoff revenue, it might be the impetus of a real retool this team needs. Not "blowing up the roster," but a move or two that makes re-signing Panarin more feasible, and brings back an asset or two that fill another hole.
Setting aside no-movement or limited no-trade clauses for the moment—because anything is negotiable—there is an avenue out there where the Hawks decide to (for a change) take advantage of other teams' desperation at the deadline, put a cork in the champagne for this season and look the next 1-2 years out.
But no one has used the term "Cup window" more than I have and you have to recognize that Hossa, Duncan Keith, and Brent Seabrook will be that much further into their 30s (and Hossa near or at 40) at that point.
The other and frankly more likely scenario is the Hawks will ride it out with their current roster intact—as neither buyers (because they just won't have the cap room) nor sellers at the trade deadline. The mantra of the undyingly positive fans and likely the organization (outwardly anyway) will be "the kids are coming along, the roster will gel in time for the playoffs. Watch."
And that could be more than a mantra—it could be true.
Again, I'm not here to say that Vince Hinostroza, Tyler Motte, Ryan Hartman, Gustav Forsling, and Michal Kempny are "the problem." The problem is a depleted roster due to the salary cap and a lot—arguably too much— being expected of these rookies as a group and as individuals in a very short period of time to fill the gap.
Kempny is sitting most nights because of his inexperience, not because he lacks NHL talent. He has that. So when Forsling goes out and messes the bed as he did last night, as he has on a few other occasions, and Kempny is the only answer not named Rozsival, I don't think I need to fill in the rest for you.
You can point to Keith and Toews' doldrums as "the problem." But how many times have we used the term (and correctly so) "(fill in the blank) takes pressure off of Keith." The reality is, an NHL roster is lot like a set of dominoes. Put another way, proven veteran depth that you can rely on in numerous situations means less situations where your top players have to deliver, allowing them to shine—assuming they're fully healthy and ready to go.
And sure, it could be Toews' back issues just are what they are. But, then, when do they go away? Injuries happen in the NHL.
The point of all this is the team might need to decide at some point how realistic a Cup or even a long playoff run is this year—and at what price?
Can the team afford to kick the Panarin can out into the summer and end up with its back to the wall not unlike the situation with another gifted young left wing, Brandon Saad, in the summer of 2015? And where would signing Panarin leave the team overall next year, assuming it costs another key veteran?
Sure, the roster at present may well come together, without any exogenous changes, and with some good health and growth in the aforementioned rookies, end up being good enough to get the Hawks through the Western Conference.
Or maybe not. And then at what point, would the Hawks need to decide how to address that? And how?
Back to the present moment, I'll have a Nashville preview tomorrow. Thanks for reading,
JJ