LOL

Weird how they are all using the "thinking too much" comments, isn't it?
- pdx2ord

I'm sure they talk about it. It's a natural thing to do if you care at all about your job. They might be right, too. The big question is how long until they don't have to think so much.

I'm sure they talk about it. It's a natural thing to do if you care at all about your job. They might be right, too. The big question is how long until they don't have to think so much.
- mohel

oh for sure

I think Kane might be the only one who hasn't said it outright. But, then, he has always towed the PR "don't rock the boat" mode in interviews.

Data:

Kubalik - 13 GP, 3G, 3A, -1, 37 SOG
Toews - 14 GP, 2G, 4A, -4 28 SOG

Who needs a rest and some feedback?????
Whose play has "dropped off a bit"????


- Return of the Roar

Not debating Toews vs Kubalik, but some additional insight on the decision:


Ben Pope‏ @BenPopeCST

My opinion: Scratching Kubalik is not inexplicable.

Over the 4-game road trip, he was on ice for 10 scoring chances for & 26 against. His shot is his best attribute, and he's not shooting enough, with 5 SOG in the 4 games.

And a day off isn't the worst thing for a rookie.


Maybe he is falling into that trap of deferring too much. He's had a number of line mates the last few games, so who knows. I did notice that he has missed a few one-timers from the right circle the past couple games. Maybe he is not anticipating well enough or, like others, "thinking too much".

Nobody is picking up that salary for 2 seasons. At best, Bowman would have to take back another team's overpaid junk.

That said, the Hawks should grab Nic Petan off waivers from Toronto. Then JC could turn another good offensive player into a dump and chase checker.
- RickJ

I'll admit it's a long shot but, last season we didn't think Stan would be able to unload Brandon Manning.

Sounds more like opinion than fact, which is fine. Could be it was the start of a rebuild and he wanted a coach who seems to relate well to young players. That's another opinion. There's certainly more theories out there.
- mohel

Whatever his rationale was for hiring Colliton, I doubt any other GM in the NHL would have made that hire. Maybe Bowman had some off the record conversations with other coaches and just wasn't impressed.

Hiring a head coach with very limited or no NHL credentials is risky business for a GM - guys like Phil Housley, Dave Hakstol, Dallas Eakins, Dave Lewis, Eddie O and many others all failed in their first gigs.

Bowman may just have put his own neck on the chopping block with JC. At the same time, I think he has been doing an excellent job of restocking the shelves with young kids. But they need coaches that can develop them.

Ek - "Robin Lehner could be the Big Fish at the Deadline"

Certainty - "Hawks sign Lehner to a long term extension"
- DarthKane

to further the point -- I mean it isn't like the Hawks will have any NHL goalies next season since isn't 50 a UFA as well, then?

'Trade Lehner for a big haul at the deadline' ... ok so with this 'big haul', they'd get back an NHL goalie? If not - what would the point be? And if so - would there be one being traded that would be of a similar quality?

None of that actually makes much sense - well, to me at least ... I imagine they have talks during these season to try to get an extension done ... and if they decide it can't happen - only then the trade scenario happens.

Just because a team under-performs expectations, doesn't mean that you ditch all of your assets at the deadline. Unless, of course they weren't going to be an asset after that season.

Imo everyone is to blame for this debacle. Rocky mcego and bowman all signed off on the Seabrook contract when he shoulda been traded right after the last cup win. Firing q in season instead of in the offseason and bowman hiring a coach who clearly is not ready to coach in the nhl. Bowman trading AA for smith which made no sense. If jc system is man to ma defense and dump and chase offense the bowman shoulda acquire those type of players. Players underperforming and whining and pouting like little kids who are not getting their way. List goes on, so who should let go first bowman or jc? Imo bowman should go first the last 4 years have been horrible now he has done some good things but the bad has out weigh the good similar to pace of the bears. Thoughts opinions are welcomed.

Canucks line up for tonight:

Pearson-Horvat-Gaudette
Miller-Pettersson-Boeser
Leivo-Sutter-Virtanen
Schaller-Beagle-Eriksson

Edler-Myers
Hughes-Tanev
Benn-Stecher

Markstrom

Whatever his rationale was for hiring Colliton, I doubt any other GM in the NHL would have made that hire. Maybe Bowman had some off the record conversations with other coaches and just wasn't impressed.

Hiring a head coach with very limited or no NHL credentials is risky business for a GM - guys like Phil Housley, Dave Hakstol, Dallas Eakins, Dave Lewis, Eddie O and many others all failed in their first gigs.

Bowman may just have put his own neck on the chopping block with JC. At the same time, I think he has been doing an excellent job of restocking the shelves with young kids. But they need coaches that can develop them.
- RickJ

Good points. I suspect Stan is very good at office politics- he's survived quite a while with McD, after all. I am guessing he got buy in for a long term goal before the hire. Purely speculation on my part. And doesn't mean he can't or won't get whacked anyway.

Not debating Toews vs Kubalik, but some additional insight on the decision:


Ben Pope‏ @BenPopeCST

My opinion: Scratching Kubalik is not inexplicable.

Over the 4-game road trip, he was on ice for 10 scoring chances for & 26 against. His shot is his best attribute, and he's not shooting enough, with 5 SOG in the 4 games.

And a day off isn't the worst thing for a rookie.


Maybe he is falling into that trap of deferring too much. He's had a number of line mates the last few games, so who knows. I did notice that he has missed a few one-timers from the right circle the past couple games. Maybe he is not anticipating well enough or, like others, "thinking too much".
- Chunk

So was the rest of the team.... benching him for a worse player makes no sense. Tell him to shoot more. Then again you cant shoot the puck when the other team always has it.

Yeah, almost sounds coordinated.......

I think they should can JC and name either Toews or Keith player/coach. They're running the show anyway.
- mohel

That sure appears to be true. If there is a way out of the chaos, using more young players and sending a message to certain players like Toews will work if the coach stands firm. The players such as Toews want to play not sit. The GM needs to privately let whomever sits, you are not being traded. Pout by playing like crap and you will sit often if it is the coach perogative. If you think Colliton would loose the room, go ahead and challenge. I hate players crappy attitude. Look the system might not be right for you but too bad. Stan can threaten to loan a player to a Chinese or KHL team, right. Final analysis doesn't matter who you are .....it is all about what have you done for me lately.

I was just wondering, if we were playing man to man defense wouldn't each player be on the hip pocket of the opponent? Dmen along the blue line are always open? Theoretically i envision man to man to mean you are not covering an area you are shadowing an opponent and i just don't see this.
-BetweenTheDots

Not sure if someone answered this already in the 33 pages of comments, but...

The Hawks play a hybrid system--not all 5 guys are in M2M. The wingers cover man-on-man when the puck carrier is high in the dzone, but not when it's low. When it's low in the dzone (for example, the opponent has the puck in the corner), the Hawks' default look has both dmen and the center in man-to-man coverage. The puck-side winger will be up high on the boards in front of his pointman, and the away-side winger will actually be down in the middle of the slot to prevent cross-ice passes/high danger chances. So, from a spectator's perspective, if the opposing puck carrier is in our corner, it would look like our away-side winger is sitting out of position in the exact middle of the defensive zone (i.e., the mid-slot)--but he's not out of position; this is where he belongs in the system.

Now, the away-side winger's pointman is left with a lot of free space, but the general idea is the away-side winger can still prevent pucks from reaching his pointman by preventing the cross-ice pass and being able to sprint to the boards (like a goaltender on a dump) if the puck carrier sends the puck around the boards behind the net toward that point. As we've seen, the theory of this and the practice of this are two different things.

At the NHL level, the speed and passing precision tends to exploit the away-side winger's loose coverage as well as exploit when the wingers need to transition between assignments (for example, if the puck goes quickly from one corner, behind the goal line, then to the opposite corner, forcing the wingers to change assignments just as quickly as the puck is moving around behind the goal line). It also exploits the dmen when they need to hand off their men and transition to netfront when the puck gets carried high. Whenever the opponent carries a puck low to high or high to low around the perimeter, the Hawks change assignments and scramble, and it looks... ugly.

This system is intended (at lower levels of hockey) to get the puck back quickly through high M2M pressure and not conceding the perimeter. If you don't get the puck back quickly, however, you'll tire out and fail to do anything offensively. When the Hawks get pinned and tired, they do drop into a wide zone look with 3 stationary men across, conceding the point area and hoping for a long shot from the point (and a frozen puck).

That sure appears to be true. If there is a way out of the chaos, using more young players and sending a message to certain players like Toews will work if the coach stands firm. The players such as Toews want to play not sit. The GM needs to privately let whomever sits, you are not being traded. Pout by playing like crap and you will sit often if it is the coach perogative. If you think Colliton would loose the room, go ahead and challenge. I hate players crappy attitude. Look the system might not be right for you but too bad. Stan can threaten to loan a player to a Chinese or KHL team, right. Final analysis doesn't matter who you are .....it is all about what have you done for me lately.
- jhawk59

This!

Not pretending to be Shaw, but Q was known for adjusting in game based on what opponent was doing in game, wasn't he?

These line changes haven't appeared to be anything other than shuffling chairs, even chairs that were working well together. ETA: or rewarding players for effort, rather than production.

I'm guessing the guys see that.
- pdx2ord

As I recall, Q made changes in game and between games that positioned his players to have more success against their opponents. Remember their record in playoff series always got better in games 4-7?

JC is making random guesses, often making things worse.

#CollitonSucks

Wasn't it a theme here that teams found it easy to stop the Hawks - just put a few guys at the blue line because everyone knew they were just gonna carry it in? Some posters were begging them to dump and chase to offset this. Could be that my memory is faulty from the brown liquor.
- mohel

Yes, though it has nothing to do with the dump and chase...though on second thought.

Imo everyone is to blame for this debacle. Rocky mcego and bowman all signed off on the Seabrook contract when he shoulda been traded right after the last cup win. Firing q in season instead of in the offseason and bowman hiring a coach who clearly is not ready to coach in the nhl. Bowman trading AA for smith which made no sense. If jc system is man to ma defense and dump and chase offense the bowman shoulda acquire those type of players. Players underperforming and whining and pouting like little kids who are not getting their way. List goes on, so who should let go first bowman or jc? Imo bowman should go first the last 4 years have been horrible now he has done some good things but the bad has out weigh the good similar to pace of the bears. Thoughts opinions are welcomed.
- Scott1977

First of all, it's not similar to Pace at all. The Bears haven't won anything for 34 years and counting.

If Bowman ends up going at the end of the year or somewhere before, fine, but the mischaracterizations and reasoning is comical. The trades other than Smith this season were largely accepted as decent to good. I liked AA but if you think that's the difference between winning and losing, I've got some swampland to sell ya. Lots of it.

Also, Seabrook was playing well and a large contributor during the last Cup win. Anyone who says he should have been traded right afterwards is using their hindsight goggles and not being close to honest. Yes, the contract sucks, but if you knew his play would fall off a cliff that much and that quickly, then you need to start playing your Powerball numbers regularly...oh, and give me a cut for the tip.

Last year the D was prolific at scoring and giving the O
a short field upon which to score, this year that aint
happening.
- gazza53

So you're talking about Gus, right?

Have a friend that wants a Doug Mohns Jersey, where’s the best place to get custom made jerseys?
- walleyeb1

A Blackhawks or Bruins jersey?

Not sure if someone answered this already in the 33 pages of comments, but...

The Hawks play a hybrid system--not all 5 guys are in M2M. The wingers cover man-on-man when the puck carrier is high in the dzone, but not when it's low. When it's low in the dzone (for example, the opponent has the puck in the corner), the Hawks' default look has both dmen and the center in man-to-man coverage. The puck-side winger will be up high on the boards in front of his pointman, and the away-side winger will actually be down in the middle of the slot to prevent cross-ice passes/high danger chances. So, from a spectator's perspective, if the opposing puck carrier is in our corner, it would look like our away-side winger is sitting out of position in the exact middle of the defensive zone (i.e., the mid-slot)--but he's not out of position; this is where he belongs in the system.

Now, the away-side winger's pointman is left with a lot of free space, but the general idea is the away-side winger can still prevent pucks from reaching his pointman by preventing the cross-ice pass and being able to sprint to the boards (like a goaltender on a dump) if the puck carrier sends the puck around the boards behind the net toward that point. As we've seen, the theory of this and the practice of this are two different things.

At the NHL level, the speed and passing precision tends to exploit the away-side winger's loose coverage as well as exploit when the wingers need to transition between assignments (for example, if the puck goes quickly from one corner, behind the goal line, then to the opposite corner, forcing the wingers to change assignments just as quickly as the puck is moving around behind the goal line). It also exploits the dmen when they need to hand off their men and transition to netfront when the puck gets carried high. Whenever the opponent carries a puck low to high or high to low around the perimeter, the Hawks change assignments and scramble, and it looks... ugly.

This system is intended (at lower levels of hockey) to get the puck back quickly through high M2M pressure and not conceding the perimeter. If you don't get the puck back quickly, however, you'll tire out and fail to do anything offensively. When the Hawks get pinned and tired, they do drop into a wide zone look with 3 stationary men across, conceding the point area and hoping for a long shot from the point (and a frozen puck).
- Instamatic

THANK YOU!!! for taking the time to explain this, and for helping with understanding on why it is not working for this team.

So you're talking about Gus, right?
- BMWChiFan

A Blackhawks or Bruins jersey?
- BMWChiFan

#2 or #11?

Not sure if someone answered this already in the 33 pages of comments, but...

The Hawks play a hybrid system--not all 5 guys are in M2M. The wingers cover man-on-man when the puck carrier is high in the dzone, but not when it's low. When it's low in the dzone (for example, the opponent has the puck in the corner), the Hawks' default look has both dmen and the center in man-to-man coverage. The puck-side winger will be up high on the boards in front of his pointman, and the away-side winger will actually be down in the middle of the slot to prevent cross-ice passes/high danger chances. So, from a spectator's perspective, if the opposing puck carrier is in our corner, it would look like our away-side winger is sitting out of position in the exact middle of the defensive zone (i.e., the mid-slot)--but he's not out of position; this is where he belongs in the system.

Now, the away-side winger's pointman is left with a lot of free space, but the general idea is the away-side winger can still prevent pucks from reaching his pointman by preventing the cross-ice pass and being able to sprint to the boards (like a goaltender on a dump) if the puck carrier sends the puck around the boards behind the net toward that point. As we've seen, the theory of this and the practice of this are two different things.

At the NHL level, the speed and passing precision tends to exploit the away-side winger's loose coverage as well as exploit when the wingers need to transition between assignments (for example, if the puck goes quickly from one corner, behind the goal line, then to the opposite corner, forcing the wingers to change assignments just as quickly as the puck is moving around behind the goal line). It also exploits the dmen when they need to hand off their men and transition to netfront when the puck gets carried high. Whenever the opponent carries a puck low to high or high to low around the perimeter, the Hawks change assignments and scramble, and it looks... ugly.

This system is intended (at lower levels of hockey) to get the puck back quickly through high M2M pressure and not conceding the perimeter. If you don't get the puck back quickly, however, you'll tire out and fail to do anything offensively. When the Hawks get pinned and tired, they do drop into a wide zone look with 3 stationary men across, conceding the point area and hoping for a long shot from the point (and a frozen puck).
- Instamatic

Well that is the most articulate explanation and critique of the current system I have heard. It makes sense why the there always seems to be an open point with no hawks winger in sight. I catch myself thinking oh good the opposing team just dumped it around as a last ditch effort to save possession. Then proceed to watch the puck go all the way around the boards to the other point with no Hawks player insight.

Also explains all the scrambling around I see most of the time.

Darth Kane

I see where you watch a lot of late night west coast and Canadien hcckey games

I am interested in a short (or your choice version) thoughts on:

1) how good is Vancouver? How much has the new players from f/a and Hughes meant? Is Markstom that good to keep Demko in AHL

2). Have you seen B Byram (Avalanche first round 2019) this season -;improved?

3) update for you: C Caufield 8 goals 11 pts in 8 gp including Penn State loss. Barrett vs Caufield ...they represent only two of a boatload of NHL drafts ..
12 alone on Wisconsin Badgers

If it weren’t for Hossa, the Blackhawks May have never won a cup.
- gifman

And if it weren't for the Blackhawk and their core, Hossa may never had won a cup

Not sure if someone answered this already in the 33 pages of comments, but...

The Hawks play a hybrid system--not all 5 guys are in M2M. The wingers cover man-on-man when the puck carrier is high in the dzone, but not when it's low. When it's low in the dzone (for example, the opponent has the puck in the corner), the Hawks' default look has both dmen and the center in man-to-man coverage. The puck-side winger will be up high on the boards in front of his pointman, and the away-side winger will actually be down in the middle of the slot to prevent cross-ice passes/high danger chances. So, from a spectator's perspective, if the opposing puck carrier is in our corner, it would look like our away-side winger is sitting out of position in the exact middle of the defensive zone (i.e., the mid-slot)--but he's not out of position; this is where he belongs in the system.

Now, the away-side winger's pointman is left with a lot of free space, but the general idea is the away-side winger can still prevent pucks from reaching his pointman by preventing the cross-ice pass and being able to sprint to the boards (like a goaltender on a dump) if the puck carrier sends the puck around the boards behind the net toward that point. As we've seen, the theory of this and the practice of this are two different things.

At the NHL level, the speed and passing precision tends to exploit the away-side winger's loose coverage as well as exploit when the wingers need to transition between assignments (for example, if the puck goes quickly from one corner, behind the goal line, then to the opposite corner, forcing the wingers to change assignments just as quickly as the puck is moving around behind the goal line). It also exploits the dmen when they need to hand off their men and transition to netfront when the puck gets carried high. Whenever the opponent carries a puck low to high or high to low around the perimeter, the Hawks change assignments and scramble, and it looks... ugly.

This system is intended (at lower levels of hockey) to get the puck back quickly through high M2M pressure and not conceding the perimeter. If you don't get the puck back quickly, however, you'll tire out and fail to do anything offensively. When the Hawks get pinned and tired, they do drop into a wide zone look with 3 stationary men across, conceding the point area and hoping for a long shot from the point (and a frozen puck).
- Instamatic

You should post more.