Players will give more rope/leeway to a guy who has that type of resume to prove if they can coach/lead. If things go bad/sideways...they can lean on their playing experiences to relate at times with the players - and the players have a little extra trust in that
- PatShart

Agreed. As evidenced last night with King. He read the team’s problems as being more between the ears and not as much of an Xs and Os issue. He stated his basic message to the team was to go out and play - play on your hockey instincts. And most of us saw a team last night that played better then they had in a while.

None at the NHL level

Which is why he is what they call "interim" head coach until they conduct a search and interview a permanent one.

Those who can't or fail to associate why line matchups, player slots/roles...putting players in positions to succeed- are all proponents of a "System" - as well ad the most important input a coach has...I can't help you

King played and coached all his hockey in NA. He has a reputation when he walks in a room when the guys as "who is that?". Its a respect factor he earned. Now, if he is going to make it as a coach in the NHL, he'll need to prove his worth to the players.

JC walks in from Euro with no credibility and the players- who were the same age and more successful - were told to follow this guy's "leadership". And his results speak for themselves

If he was good ad his job - he would have earned the players respect
- PatShart

Maybe it's simply semantics. I view the "system" as the X's and O's of what the players responsibilities are regardless of who is on the ice. If the LD leaves the front of the net to cover an attacking wing, the center covers the slot (or whatever, I actually have no idea how all that poop works). The implementation of that system, line matching, lines/pairings, etc, is the coaching decisions that I am referring to.

So you can have a solid system, but implement it poorly with bad line combos, and putting a "green" 4th line out against an opponent's first. Or being so literal with adhering to the rules set that you don't allow for situational improv. Obviously there is more to it, but I'm just trying to make the distinction here.

Ben Pope
@BenPopeCST
One commonality in Colliton practices that seemed inefficient was drills that only 3-8 guys participated in at a time, while everyone else stood around and waited.

That's not the case today. Hawks are running 3 side-by-side iterations of a passing drill to involve everyone.
9:45 AM · Nov 8, 2021·TweetDeck
8
Retweets
2
Quote Tweets
53
Likes


John Dietz
@johndietzdh
#Blackhawks opening practice with a simple passing drill, going zone to zone. This is something I thought they should have worked on a long time ago.

Simple stuff but better passing = better scoring opportunities.
9:37 AM · Nov 8, 2021·Twitter Web App

Maybe it's simply semantics. I view the "system" as the X's and O's of what the players responsibilities are regardless of who is on the ice. If the LD leaves the front of the net to cover an attacking wing, the center covers the slot (or whatever, I actually have no idea how all that poop works). The implementation of that system, line matching, lines/pairings, etc, is the coaching decisions that I am referring to.

So you can have a solid system, but implement it poorly with bad line combos, and putting a "green" 4th line out against an opponent's first. Or being so literal with adhering to the rules set that you don't allow for situational improv. Obviously there is more to it, but I'm just trying to make the distinction here.
- Chunk

There is no 1 set 100% "system". Its much more about responsibilities and depending on how that specific game is being played - a teams "system" will change - but a players responsibilities shouldn't

So in order for a coach to implement what everyone calls a "system" - he needs every player to execute the roles/responsibilities he sets forth.

THEN the coach after getting that message thru to each individual player, he needs to put them on the ice in the best position to succeed for both themselves individually and then as a team

Was Colliton doing that? And/or did players have confidence in what he was teaching?

All we have is the eye tests...then some comments early on from players (who were immediately labeled as bad players/jerks). But players know smoke when they see it.

Well if you bring up Nylander you probably have to keep him up the whole year, unless you think he can pass through waivers again. I would leave Reichel in the minors the whole year.
- LAHawk

That’s a great point, forgot about him needing to clear waivers to get back down. Yeah it’s likely best to leave them down.
Really hoping Kalynuk can provide a spark, he can skate so well.

That’s a great point, forgot about him needing to clear waivers to get back down. Yeah it’s likely best to leave them down.
Really hoping Kalynuk can provide a spark, he can skate so well.
- ObeseOprah

Meh, if the German kid is better than everyone else by a margin and better than players on the Hawks line up then he should be on the pro team.

Don't need to see Nylander again but if he is consistently scoring and not sand bagging it - then may as well see if maybe he figured it out - at least there are two spots not occupied by 6 of the 4th liners they've been playing.

There is no 1 set 100% "system". Its much more about responsibilities and depending on how that specific game is being played - a teams "system" will change - but a players responsibilities shouldn't

So in order for a coach to implement what everyone calls a "system" - he needs every player to execute the roles/responsibilities he sets forth.

THEN the coach after getting that message thru to each individual player, he needs to put them on the ice in the best position to succeed for both themselves individually and then as a team

Was Colliton doing that? And/or did players have confidence in what he was teaching?

All we have is the eye tests...then some comments early on from players (who were immediately labeled as bad players/jerks). But players know smoke when they see it.
- PatShart

Not that I'm saying you are wrong (because again, I'm not familiar with actual hockey coaching), but this makes no sense to me at all. What is the system if not those explicit roles and responsibilities regardless of who is on the ice?

Meh, if the German kid is better than everyone else by a margin and better than players on the Hawks line up then he should be on the pro team.

Don't need to see Nylander again but if he is consistently scoring and not sand bagging it - then may as well see if maybe he figured it out - at least there are two spots not occupied by 6 of the 4th liners they've been playing.
- fattybeef

Capenter is a UFA next year, gotta figure Davidson recoups something at the TDL (a 4th or 5th), as he would be a good depth guy for a Contender.

Capenter is a UFA next year, gotta figure Davidson recoups something at the TDL (a 4th or 5th), as he would be a good depth guy for a Contender.
- LAHawk

Carpenter gets nothing but completely poop on here, but he would be a good depth guy on a contender.

Not necessarily directed at you LA (if you've not made disparaging remarks about Carp in the past), I just think it's funny.

Not that I'm saying you are wrong (because again, I'm not familiar with actual hockey coaching), but this makes no sense to me at all. What is the system if not those explicit roles and responsibilities regardless of who is on the ice?
- Chunk

They are hand in hand

Which is why who the coach then puts on the ice in specific roles- is an important part to a "system"

But your "system" - isnt one set way (as in a 1-2-2 ...or 2-1-2)

You will essentially play all/both they styles/systems, etc - based on how a game is being played. Scores, opponents can dictate that.

You will have a "base" system of what you play but no one set one. So you implement your responsibilities to each players role...that will "fit" that base

It's such a hard explanation over this and I've done it in courses. I've still got my playbooks from my coaching days and back when it was pretty basic - I has 2-3 "systems" my teams would play.

PROs actually, are a lot sloppier than college and/or Jrs when it comes to "systems" because of talent. One of the biggest adjustments is a player needs to be able to read/react too fast in the PROs so instincts matter more than "positions".

Q had things he liked his teams doing

Their backchck was relentless

Ever notice with his (cup) teams - whenever that puck got within 2 feet of their own blueline, it always got out. Small play, but forced the other team to regroup. Always won that battle. Guarantee it was an emphasis.

Possessing the puck. A trademark for them would be to hold it D to D to make passes for regroups and line changes. How many Keith to Seabrook regroups you remember? You may think they didn't mean much...but it was a discipline to it.

Or guys like Shaw, Kruger would eat pucks in the O zone along the boards? Why? Just because? Or because it was a possession game he wanted.

Its coaching that implements those small practices and drills them to his players. The singular 'system's you play will change as a game/season dictates

But a coach implements those things) holds his players accountable - and puts them in the best position to succeed

Scott Powers
@ByScottPowers
·
4m
Blackhawks announce Brandon Hagel (left shoulder), MacKenzie Entwistle (left ankle) and Calvin de Haan (maintenance) will not practice today.
- TheTrob

Not good, Strome's ankle has been bothering him for three seasons.

They are hand in hand

Which is why who the coach then puts on the ice in specific roles- is an important part to a "system"

But your "system" - isnt one set way (as in a 1-2-2 ...or 2-1-2)

You will essentially play all/both they styles/systems, etc - based on how a game is being played. Scores, opponents can dictate that.

You will have a "base" system of what you play but no one set one. So you implement your responsibilities to each players role...that will "fit" that base

It's such a hard explanation over this and I've done it in courses. I've still got my playbooks from my coaching days and back when it was pretty basic - I has 2-3 "systems" my teams would play.

PROs actually, are a lot sloppier than college and/or Jrs when it comes to "systems" because of talent. One of the biggest adjustments is a player needs to be able to read/react too fast in the PROs so instincts matter more than "positions".
- PatShart

A lot of the Hawks issues was because they were no longer just reacting, they were thinking first. That's one of the reasons why you take someone like McCabe who was a decent defender, and now, instead of reacting, he was overthinking and making lots of mistakes. You think it is a coincidence that last night may have been his best game this year. Also, go back and look at previous games when there was a puck between two Hawks, both were hesitating, wondering who was the "right" person to play it, and causing lost pucks/battles or opportunities to the opponent. Still a few of those last night, but not as many.

Capenter is a UFA next year, gotta figure Davidson recoups something at the TDL (a 4th or 5th), as he would be a good depth guy for a Contender.
- LAHawk

I guess something is better than nothing - but I think they have a surplus of fourth round and later picks already in the system.

I guess something is better than nothing - but I think they have a surplus of fourth round and later picks already in the system.
- StLBravesFan

Better than losing him for nothing. you think he will bring back more?

I guess something is better than nothing - but I think they have a surplus of fourth round and later picks already in the system.
- StLBravesFan

Can never have too many prospects. Can always hope for a Shaw, Hjalmarsson, Kurashev, etc. in the 4th or later round.

Can never have too many prospects. Can always hope for a Shaw, Hjalmarsson, Kurashev, etc. in the 4th or later round.
- TheTrob

Phillips! The next great hope!

Better than losing him for nothing. you think he will bring back more?
- LAHawk

We signed the guy for $1M anything he brings is a plus!

Can never have too many prospects. Can always hope for a Shaw, Hjalmarsson, Kurashev, etc. in the 4th or later round.
- TheTrob

Was with the big team at 20 years old I believe?

Capenter is a UFA next year, gotta figure Davidson recoups something at the TDL (a 4th or 5th), as he would be a good depth guy for a Contender.
- LAHawk

He would?

King may have not changed the "system" but he definitely made a couple of tweaks.



Is he the coach going forward? Who knows but after listening to the guy, it sure not hard to root for him.

He would?
- Elbows15

Toronto traded for Riley Nash while he was out long term with a broken leg, yes he would.

I guess I am not talking about these "so called reporters". I am talking about real news people that want to report the truth. Are there any here in Chicago, or the US for that matter?
- powerenforcer

Absolutely not, the “Big 5 Control the media”. Reporting the true news is not on their agenda!

The biggest culprit in the “Beach case” is McD and he is nowhere to be seen on TV. How ironic! Does anybody know why the Blackhawks have canceled Hossa’s appreciation night?

Better than losing him for nothing. you think he will bring back more?
- LAHawk

No - sounds about right. Let’s see what Davidson can do with this kind of player movement before tackling something big.

Toronto traded for Riley Nash while he was out long term with a broken leg, yes he would.
- LAHawk

Hopefully KD moves him now and avoids the TDL rush.