Everything Else

Well Pilgrim, Not Until You Eat The Peanuts Outta My… -FFUD’s Player Reviews: Gustav Forsling and Carl Dahlstrom, the red-headed step children

By Adam Hess 2023 0

Our next stop on the hindsight circuit brings us to Chicago’s two young Swedish defensemen, Gustav Forsling and Carl Dahlstrom. Let’s do these bad boys one at a time.

Gustav Forsling

41 Games, 3 Goals, 10 Assists, 13 Points, -2, 8 PIM

48.9 CF%, -6.8 CF% rel, 44.54 xGF%, -8.9 xGF% rel, 51.67 Zone Start Ratio

With what appeared to be a mostly patchwork blue line group heading into the 2017-18 Blackhawks season, it seemed to make sense that Gustav Forsling would get a really fair shake at proving his worth in the NHL. Some might make the case that he did get that shake, but those some would be wrong. Yes, Forsling spent a good amount of time at the NHL level last year – playing in half the games definitely strikes one as a fair shake. But the big number that sticks out there is the 51.67 Zone Start Ratio. For a player of Forsling’s skillset, that is entirely too low, even as a defenseman. Barely having more than half of his shifts start in the offensive zone screams misuse.

Add in the fact that he was saddled for much of the season with Jan Rutta, which we covered yesterday, and you have another example of the miscasting. The root of that misuse is that Joel Quenneville seems unable to see Forsling as anything other than what he isn’t, which is to say that Q sees his lack of pure defensive d-zone instincts, physicality, and overall boring defensive play and has thus far tried to coax him into developing that side of his game rather than really accentuating what he does well. Which is really strange, because it seems to me that what Forsling does well is almost exactly what the Hawks blue line really needs.

Forsling has the most beautiful skating stride on the team, sees the ice with enviable vision and anticipation, can drop a puck on his teammates tape nearly as good as anyone else on the team, and he can combine all of that moving full speed up the ice with the puck on his tape. We’ve been clamoring for Keith to have a mobile partner who might be able to cover up for his freewheeling and loss of mobility, and it seems like Forsling might be the right fit. Even if his defensive instincts are not exactly high level, he can get himself back in coverage well enough to break up or delay any rush enough to let the other four guys get back. No, it’s not the ideal scenario because it’s not Erik Karlsson or Oliver Ekman-Larsson, but he’s got the shell basics outline of the game those two play with still plenty of potential to be tapped into.

In a perfect world, Joel Quenneville realizes that he already has defensemen with skill sets more geared toward what he’s tried to get Forsling to do these past two years, and finally starts letting my special boy (yes, I am still giving him that title) off the leash a bit to play a style that fits him best. That might be with Keith, maybe with Murphy, it could even be with Seabrook if the Hawks and Seabs can get on the same page with a role like Sam outlined the other day. That’s the best and maybe only way you’re really gonna see what you have in the Fors.

But this isn’t a perfect world, so Quenneville will do the same shit for the third year and hope it works this time – something something definition of insanity – before Forsling gets sent back to A in January again. Hooray.

Carl Dahlstrom

11 Games, 0 goals, 3 assists, 3 points, -2, 0 PIM

52.29 CF%, -5.29 CF% rel, 46.7 xGF%, -6.55 xGF% rel, 46 Zone Start Ratio

There isn’t too much you can glean from just 11 NHL games for a young defenseman, especially one who was in just his second year in North America. Dahlstrom has his good and bad moments, which is really shitty analysis, but again, it was just eleven games. What more do you want from me?

Digging into the pairings a bit, Dahlstrom spent more time with our ginger darling Connor Murphy than other blue-liner while he was in Chicago, with those two racking up 50:31 of ice time together at 5v5, or about three-to-five games worth of being a pairing. Dahlstrom only played about 120 5v5 minutes total away from Murphy. They posted a 52.53 CF% together, which was better than either of their marks away from each other, though Murphy had significantly more time without Dahlstrom than vice versa, and I don’t read anything into it for #5. But what it does show for Dahlstrom is that he has the goods to play at an acceptable level in the NHL if paired with a good partner.

Overall, I don’t really know what kind of future Dahlstrom has in Chicago. You have the obvious three of Keith, Nacho, and Murphy that will be hear for the long run, plus Rutta and Oesterle who if here will probably get minutes from this coach. Then you have Forsling, Jokiharju, and Ian Mitchell that the organization appear to be very high on. On top of all that, consider that you’re probably adding at least one or two high-level guys – one NHL d-man via trade or free agency, and ideally a top d-man prospect with the lottery pick – and you have a whole hell of a lot of guys in front of Dahlstrom. But besides that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?

In all seriousness, the bottom pairing and depth d-man spots should be wide open for competition in camp next year, and Dahlstrom will likely be given the same shot as anyone to earn one of those spots. It’ll be up to him to do so.

Everything Else

Well Pilgrim, Not Until You Eat The Peanuts Outta My… -FFUD’s Player Reviews: Jan Rutta, better known as Who?

By Adam Hess 1557 0

Mats Halin has now been the Blackhawks’ director of European scouting for five years, and in that time he has been able to pull a few decent players out of that continent and into the Hawks system. Identifying Artemi Panarin and surely playing a role in getting him to sign here was no doubt his shining moment definitely bought him a lot of leeway. Jan Rutta’s first NHL season should have eaten up a bit of a that leeway. Rutta wasn’t outright terrible, but he was bad, and deserved more ire for just how bad he was. Lets dig in a bit.

Jan Rutta

57 Games, 6 goals, 14 assists, 20 points, -1, 24 PIM

50.08 CF%, -2.4 CF% rel, 47.92 xGF%, -2.24 xGF% rel, 51.1 Zone Start Ratio

On the face of it, those numbers are not awful, but on the worst Hawks team of the last decade, Rutta stuck out to me as the worst defenseman that saw regular minutes on this squad. He had the second-worst CF% among the team’s blue liners, with the only one behind him being Gustav Forsling – and we aren’t gonna get started on that yet, but it’s coming tomorrow. He was third-worst in xGF%, just above Keith and Forsling. The points look okay, but aren’t overly impressive, and the underlying stats are obviously bad enough to show that this is a player who is arguably not even good enough to crack the NHL roster.

Looking at his pairings, he spent more time with the aforementioned Forsling than anyone, and the two of them were pretty much abysmal together, with a 48.22 CF%. The blame for that probably lies more on the coach who saddled them together consistently than either of the players, because their individual play styles are not compatible. Rutta is not mobile, not a good puck mover, and isn’t a great reader of the play on either side of the ice, while Forsling is nearly the opposite though only reads the play well on offense. Rutta isn’t awful in his own zone, but he is not nearly good enough to make up for Forslings shortcomings in that area. He also is not fast enough to clean up the messes that might’ve been left when Forsling started to freewheel on offense, and that became evident quickly. This was a hair-brained pairing from the start, but that still doesn’t completely absolve Rutta from being terrible.

He also spent a decent amount of time (120+ minutes total) with Jordan Oesterle, and oh look they were terrible together too. That was mostly because both of them are terrible individually, and putting two terrible defensemen together to form a terrible pairing results in a 42.03 CF%. I’d like to never think about them together.

Now, to his credit, Rutta did at times prove to be a decent partner for Duncan Keith, with those two providing a fine-but-not-spectacular 52 CF% in 140+ minutes together. Sam and others here have talked plenty about Keith needing to recalibrate his play style and approach to the game, and there is a case to be made that Rutta’s style of play makes him a match for Keith because his lack of mobility results in some quasi-stability. However, Duncan Keith is still good enough to man a top pairing, and Rutta is the last defenseman you want to play on a top pairing. Also, that stability from Rutta might help a little bit, but as Sam said the other day, you prefer a mobile partner for Keith at this point to cover for him. So while the results weren’t awful, this isn’t an idea even worthy of pinning to the board in case you need to return to it. Toss in the trash, Joel.

Outlook: Overall, Rutta’s season was not good, and he is arguably not worthy of any NHL minutes next year. Luckily, he probably lines up as the odd man out when you consider you’re ideally gonna have Keith, Seabrook, Forsling, Gustafsson, Oesterle, someone who isn’t here now, and maybe even Jokiharju lined up as defensemen who are better than him and will be competing for minutes. There is the major red flag though, that being the contract extension he was handed near the end of the season, that might earn him some undue preferential treatment. That was an extremely confusing move from StanBo, and the cap hit is particularly worrisome. But, it’s not an albatross, and might even be a toss-in contract for when Stan dials up John Chayka and brings OEL to Chicago. Thanks.

Everything Else

Well Pilgrim, Not Until You Eat The Peanuts Outta My…-FFUD’s Player Reviews: Brent Seabrook or Maybe He’s Not Earthquake?

By Sam Fels 1621 0

It’s been a while now that Brent Seabrook has been our main punching bag. He actually started this slide years ago, in the lockout season if you’ll recall. He redeemed himself with THAT goal, and then THAT OTHER goal, and was mostly fine in the playoffs, but he did not have a good season. We blamed it on the nature of the campaign and not playing during the lockout. He wasn’t really any better the following year, and the Kings tore him apart in the conference final, scoring roughly 64 rebound goals while Seabrook watched alongside the rest of us. He rebounded in the last championship campaign, and was pretty much a monster alongside Duncan Keith’s Conn Smythe journey.

And that’s basically where it peaked. Seabrook isn’t the first to lose their battle with Time, and he obviously won’t be the last. It was particularly ugly at times this year, and we and others certainly didn’t hesitate to call it out.

The thing was, it might not have been that bad?

Brent Seabrook

81 games, 7 goals, 19 assists, 26 points, -3, 38 PIM

51.4 CF%, -1.36 CF% rel, 49.0 xGF%, -0.65 xGF% rel, 55.8 Zone Start Ratio

The problems for Seabrook were myriad, but the main one seemed to be that the Hawks didn’t know where to slot him. His pairing with Duncan Keith, the foundation on which this whole thing was built for only about eight years, just didn’t work. Keith doesn’t have the quickness to cover for Seabrook’s mobility that disappeared somewhere in 2016. Seabrook couldn’t cover for a recalibrating Keith. Mostly, it was just ugly, and it’s why of the d-men Seabrook played with his pairing with Keith had the worst metrics (48.5 CF%).

But on the flip side, for the entire middle portion of the season his pairing with Connor Murphy did work. Murphy wasn’t nearly as adventurous as Keith, so he was in better position to cover. Murphy allowed Seabrook to still do some of his cowboy act, which has always been part of his game. Together, they pushed the play the right way (53.0 CF%, 56.5 SCF%).

The numbers with Erik Gustafsson aren’t as good overall as they were with Murphy, but they’re still on the plus-side of the ledger and we all saw how it ended the season. Now, at the end of a season when all is lost probably isn’t the best time to judge things, but Gustafsson’s “Three Musketeers In One” act kept Seabrook in a strictly support role, which is probably what he should be doing. Seabs can’t go cruising up the ice where he’ll never get back if Gustafsson is leading rushes himself. And we know Gustafsson isn’t getting back. It’s hard to say if this is a a solution in the future or just something a flawed team came up with in the death throes of a season everyone wanted over.

The problems are obvious. Seabrook can’t move, and even his passing–still top level–is nullified when he can’t even give himself the time and space to execute it. He still wants to be as aggressive as he was, but he simply can’t. The times when he realized that and played a more reserved game, it was actually ok. It just didn’t happen enough.

Outlook: Both Seabrook and the Hawks have to accept what he isn’t anymore and figure out what he should be. Seabrook hasn’t quite adjusted his game the way Keith was at least trying to at times, and he’s going to have to. Ideally, on a team that has any hope of doing anything, he’s your third-pairing rock. He can still be your triggerman on the second power play unit, assuming you have two real-ass QBs for each (the Hawks don’t have one at the moment). If you absolutely have to you can probably get away with Seabrook taking #4 minutes, but your first three had better be something special. That doesn’t look like happening. Seabrook is cut out for the glorified Sopel/Rozsival role of years past. It’s up to the Hawks to find enough to get him there, and it’s up to Seabrook to accept that.

Everything Else

Well Pilgrim, Not Until You Eat The Peanuts Outta My… – FFUD’s ’17-’18 Player Reviews – Connor Murphy Or: How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love Our Large Irish Son

By John Pullega 1932 0

When the Hawks brought Connor Murphy in, he was the presumptive favorite to replace the puck-pocked husk of what was once Niklas Hjalmarsson. And as the season went on, and the Hawks found their heads deeper and deeper in the toilet, the narrative began to range from “the Hawks will need a Top 4 defenseman next year” (true) to “the Hawks really miss Hjalmarsson this year” (categorically false in terms of on-ice performance).

After some early season struggles, a few confounding healthy scratches, and a mostly successful experiment on his off side, Murphy settled in to produce a couple of interesting career highs and team rankings. Let’s kick it.

Connor Murphy

76 GP, 2 Goals, 12 Assists, 14 Points, -3, 34 PIM

53.44 CF% (Evens), 1.2 CF% Rel (Evens), 53.47 SCF% (5v5), 51.57 xGF% (5v5), 2.99 xGF% Rel (5v5)

 50% oZ Start (Evens)

What We Said: Behind Keith and—if you look at him with enough glare from the sun—Seabrook, Murphy is probably the Hawks’s third best D-man. He’s fine if not underwhelming for the price ($3.85 million cap hit), but on the edge of 24, he will need to prove that his numbers really are the result of playing in America’s chafe rather than wasted potential. Given that the Hawks have won three Cups on the backs of their defensemen . . . Murphy will need to develop into a shutdown D-man fast.

What We Got: We’ll start with some numbers (feel free to skip the bullets if all you want is the explanation).

– Murphy posted an even-strength CF% of 53.44, finishing above water for the first time since his rookie year. Of Hawks D-men who played at least 20 games, he finished fourth, behind Franson (59.91), Gustafsson (55.39), and Kempný (53.95). If you bump the minimum threshold up to 40 games, Murphy is your leader in CF% for Hawks D-men.

– His 1.2 CF% Rel was only the second time he’s been in the positives on that ledger (1.0 last year). Of all Hawks defensemen who played at least 20 games, only Franson (9.2), Gustafsson (6.6), and Kempný (1.4) had higher CF% Rels. Again, bumping the threshold up to 40 games, Murphy’s your D-man leader for the Hawks.

– The caveat there is that Franson, Gustafsson, and Kempný started in the offensive zone at respective rates of 65.8%, 57.4%, and 55.4% to Murphy’s 50%.

– Murphy also finished with a High Danger Chances For Percentage (HDCF%) of 48.56. That’s fourth among Hawks D-men with at least 20 games—behind Kempný (52.86), Franson (52.34), and Gustafsson (50.59)—and above the team rate of 47.11. Once again, bumping the threshold to 40 games, Murphy leads all Hawks D-men.

– Murphy finished fourth in Expected Goals For Percentage (xGF%; 51.57) among Hawks D-men who played at least 20 games (behind Franson, Kempný, and Gustafsson). When bumped up to 40 games, Murphy was the leader.

– Finally, Murphy finished third in Expected Goals For Percentage Relative (xGF% Rel; 2.99) among Hawks D-men who played at least 20 games (behind Gustafsson and Franson). When bumped to 40 games, he’s the leader again.

All of this is to say that in terms of possession, Murphy was good if not great overall. He was better than the Hawks’s average in terms of giving up high-danger chances, but not great in a vacuum. And when he was on the ice, the Hawks could have expected more goals for than against.

That said, one of Murphy’s glaring weaknesses, especially at the beginning and end of the year, was his struggle to clear the puck in his own zone under pressure.

The above graph, which was tracked by Corey Sznajder, tells us that of these nine Blackhawks, only Brent Seabrook had more failed zone exits per 60 minutes of play. This means that the opposition was more likely to sustain pressure when Murphy had the puck in his own zone, which, of course, tends to lead to more opportunities to score goals. And while these data aren’t comprehensive (only tracked through 38 games), it does give us a good sample size for what’s pretty obvious through the eye test: When Murphy was pressured in his own zone, he sometimes panicked.

While Murphy absolutely must keep his spurs from jingling and jangling in his own zone if he’s going to develop into a true Top 4 shutdown D-man, it’s hard to ignore the carousel of D-men he was jerked around with this year and wonder whether that affected his play.

Murphy played primary time with five different defensemen this year.

All stats 5v5

Given how often he got jerked around, including playing his off side in his 25 games with Seabrook, one thing that stands out is the relative consistency in his possession numbers, aside from Keith. And despite the fact that the Hawks were the seventh worst team in giving up High Danger Chances, Murphy still managed well when away from Oesterle and Keith.

But therein lies the problem: Since the assumption is that Keith takes on the toughest competition (and he usually does), Murphy’s piss-poor numbers with him might suggest that he isn’t a Top 4 guy like Hjalmarsson was.

But this dovetails nicely with the overall point I want to make: The Murphy-for-Hjalmarsson trade wasn’t the loss for the Hawks some people want to say it is, and having Hjalmarsson over Murphy would have made things worse, not better.

Check out some of Hjalmarsson’s numbers when he played with Keith over his Hawks career:

All Stats 5v5

Like Murphy, Hjalmarsson had a rough go of it in the first 100 or so minutes with Keith, and that was when Keith was starting to go full Oppenheimer on the league. Coincidentally, it wasn’t until Hjalmarsson turned 25 that things really started to click any time he played with Keith, and next year Murphy will be 25.

Clearly, this is simply a coincidence, as raw age will have no effect on how (or whether) Murphy plays with Keith going forward. But this idea that Murphy doesn’t have Top 4 potential because he didn’t play well with a declining Keith over seven games this year is one of the more confusing implications I’ve heard this year.

The last point I’ll make regarding the implication that the Murphy-for-Hjalmarsson trade was a loss for the Hawks and that the Hawks miss Hjalmarsson is this:

Using more of Sznajder’s tracking data, it’s obvious that Murphy brought more to the table for the Hawks than Hjalmarsson did for the Coyotes this year. One of the two things that Hjalmarsson did that was marginally better was in terms of the breakups he caused at the blue line, preventing opponents from entering the zone with possession. (Note: They only tracked Hjalmarsson for 10 games this year against Murphy’s 38, so consider the sample size.)

Going even farther—because I have no sense of moderation whatsoever—even when comparing this year’s Murphy to last year’s Hjalmarsson, the differences aren’t as big as you’d think, mostly:

So even when we recognize and admit that Murphy had trouble with his exits from his own zone, the revisionist history that Hjalmarsson was an indispensable cog whose absence contributed to this year’s downfall doesn’t really hold water. Last year’s Hjalmarsson certainly had a better performance in terms of breakups and the percentage of entries he allowed, but he did it primarily with a not-yet-in-full-decline Duncan Keith covering him (or vice versa). Murphy spent most of his time with the glob of ambergris that is Brent Seabrook.

In short, Murphy had a good year with the Hawks despite his coach’s best efforts to jerk him around, was better than Hjalmarsson would have been, and stayed generally consistent despite spending almost a third of his year on his off side babysitting Seabrook. He’ll never be a game breaker, but he doesn’t have to be.

Where We Go From Here: Connor Murphy ought to open next year next to either Keith or Erik Gustafsson. If the Hawks are going to look at Keith as a Top Pairing Guy next year (they probably shouldn’t), they have to give him someone to cover his ass when his brain says he can make a play but his feet disagree, as we saw more often this year. I’d argue that Murphy, more than Oesterle, is that guy, despite how poorly they played together last year.

Whether you think Gustafsson is a second pairing guy is a conversation for another day (for the record, I can see it if I squint, and I’m willing to try it). But what’s undeniable is that in 135 minutes together at 5v5, Murphy and Gustafsson had a 57+ CF% while starting in the offensive zone at a 49.45% rate. With Murphy and Gustafsson entering their primes at 25 and 26, and each having paper that runs at least through 2020, pairing them might be worth an extended look, but it probably requires outside help to pair with Keith.

If the Hawks manage to sign a guy like John Carlson, or swing a trade for an OEL, Darnell Nurse, Justin Faulk, or maybe Oscar Klefbom, you’ll feel more comfortable about having the new guy and Keith as the top pairing, with Murphy covering Gustafsson. Or, you can pair the new guy with Murphy on the top pairing. This would let Keith slot in the second pairing with some iteration of Gustafsson on his off side, Forsling on his off side, Jokiharju (which is probably too much to ask), or Oesterle, because you know that’s going to happen again, despite our wailing.

Regardless, the Hawks have to saddle Murphy with more responsibility next year, whether they like it or not. The Hawks have a Top-4-potential guy in Murphy, and when he wasn’t getting the runaround, he showed flashes of it last year. Whether they use him that way is anyone’s guess.

All stats from hockey-reference.com, NaturalStatTrick.com, or corsica.hockey, unless otherwise noted.

Everything Else

Well Pilgrim, Not Until You Eat The Peanuts Outta My… -FFUD’s Player Reviews: Duncan Keith or Diminishing Flash

By Sam Fels 1737 0

Duncan Keith had a couple things going for him this year, in terms of not being the subject of the hairdryer treatment from fans and media alike that Seabrook, Saad, and Toews got. One, Seabrook soaked up most of it amongst the d-men, mostly because Seabrook’s contract was never a bargain which Keith’s has been for a decade now. Or was. Second, Keith has never been put center of the Hawks marketing blitz like Toews has, nor has he show much motivation to be so. While he was the most important skater for the Hawks for said decade, and he was, he’s never been covered or treated that way, even though his silverware cabinet eclipses that of any of his teammates and most players in the NHL (to review: three rings, two Norris Trophies, two gold medals, and a Conn Smythe, the only Hawk who actually got the Conn Smythe he deserved).

So even though Keith has clearly hit the back nine on his career, the knives for him aren’t nearly as sharp. And they probably shouldn’t be. Let’s dive in, folks:

Duncan Keith

82 games (first time he’s done that since 2011), 2 goals, 30 assists, 32 points, -29, 28 PIM

51.8 CF%, 0.73 CF% rel, 51.3 SCF%, 47.1 xGF%, -3.57 xGF% rel

So if I were to map out the numbers over the previous five years, you would see that yes, these are lower than what Keith used to do, but they’re not really that far off what he was doing in 2016-2017. That’s when he was mostly paired with Hjalmarsson, they were taking the hardest shifts in terms of opponents and zone starts, and both of them were starting to creak rather loudly.

Here’s the scary part of Keith’s numbers this year, though. It’s with a huge uptick in offensive zone starts. This year Keith’s Zone Start Rating–the measure offensive zone starts against total starts–was 59.2. Last year it was 52.3. So even with start many more shifts in the offensive zone, Keith wasn’t really pushing the play at all. That’s a problem.

Another problem was finding someone to play with Keith. At this point in his career, Keith needs someone to do some of the work for him. He can’t be the ultimate defensive guy and squeeze the play up the ice as he had done in the past, with either Seabrook or Hjalmarsson basically being the “Break Glass In Case Of…” guy behind him. Most of his time was spent with Jordan Oesterle, who we know is basically a faint suggestion of anything. Oesterle is basically the blank slate you get when you Create-a-Player, before you earn any points to improve him. Even though they went back to it at the end of the season. Brent Seabrook simply isn’t up to it anymore. The pairing with Connor Murphy just didn’t quite work, which had to have been the blueprint before the season started. Then again, they only got about 10 games together, so it’s probably worth trying again next year.

A lot was made of Keith’s lonely two goals (one of which kept the Blues out of the playoffs so that should count for like 10, if not 100). What’s kind of funny is that Keith got more attempts per game, more shots on goal per game, and more xG per game than in his previous seasons. He just shot an utterly unfathomable and really quite comedic 1% overall. Even for a d-man that’s…I mean I think the adjectives are beyond me. Farcical would be a good place to start. Seuessian might be another. Some of that has to be a result of starting in the offensive zone more than ever before.

The thing is Keith has never been a great offensive d-man. And that sounds strange for a two-time Norris winner and has a few 50+ point seasons to his name. But Keith’s offense, as we’ve said repeatedly, springs from his defense. He’s not Karlsson. He’s not Subban. He’s not Hedman. He would stop rushes against at his own blue line or before, get the puck up to the forwards ASAP and then join the rush. He would be the late-man or rack up secondary assists. He’s not really, nor has never been, a playmaker.

So next year you can look for his point totals to go up simply because HOCKEY. But that doesn’t mean the Hawks can count on him to be a top-pairing puck-mover ever again. He’s not going to be. To go with the numbers, you could see that the plays Keith used to make, and the ones you wouldn’t necessarily teach, he couldn’t quite get to anymore. He couldn’t step up outside his blue line as consistently anymore because he could get beat to the outside. He couldn’t chase outside the circles in his own zone because more and more forwards could get around him. He couldn’t fly out to the corners in the same way because he wouldn’t get there in time or he’d get beat back to the net.

That’s not to write off Keith at all. His instincts are still upper echelon. What he needs is to find a way to shrink his game, and to do that the Hawks are going to have to find him a partner who allows him to. It has to be someone mobile, because you want someone who can cover for Keith and not the other way around. It has to be someone who can get up the ice the way Keith used to, and it has to be stressed to Duncs that he’s just not that guy anymore. Murphy in theory can do the first part but not really the second. Gustafsson is too wonky in his own end to do the first part. If Jokiharju were two years older, he has the skillset to be that guy. But he’s not going to be ready for that. Forsling has the Gustafsson problem. The answer is going to have to come from outside the organization. I just don’t know what that answer is, and know it most likely will be very expensive in terms of either money, chips in a trade, or both.

But then…all of Karlsson, OEL, and Faulk are probably going to be out there in the trade market…I’m not sayin’, I’m just sayin’.

Everything Else

Why’d They Hang Them So High? Perhaps In The Hopes It Would Make Them More Dead

By Sam Fels 2274 0

As Hess put it, our nightmare is over. The Hawks season has come to an end, and now they get the maximum amount of time to pick up the pieces, dust for prints, perform the tests, and try and diagnose and then prescribe. They certainly can’t complain the schedule will be too crunched to figure out what “The Plan” (it keeps coming up again) is going to be.

What will they find?

-As everyone has said though are hesitant to pin everything on, Corey Crawford going out was reasons 1-6 that this team did a face plant in front of everyone at the party including the girl they liked (this is no way ever happened to me in high school I assure you. Nope. Never).

We’ve said it a few times and it’s worth repeating. Since Crow went down the Hawks have the third-worst even-strength save-percentage, at .910. Crow’s was .935 before he got hurt, Last year it was .930, and he’s averaged .932 at evens the past four seasons. The Hawks gave up 112 goals in that time, and with Crow’s SV% that number would have been 81. Now, clearly it doesn’t work like that because Crow wouldn’t have started every game, but you see the problem.  Let’s throw in the penalty kill problems, where the Hawks had a .857 SV% after Crow got hurt, and when he did he was stopping shots at a .902 rate. Now, that number is astronomically higher than his career mark of .868, but again, it’s clear. Crow was worth anywhere from 10-15 goals, probably more. Or 8-10 points, maybe more.

Now you might say that’s still not enough to get the Hawks near the playoffs, but what we can’t calculate is how many goals for, and games overall, Crow might have changed. Goals change games. If Crow wasn’t letting in the terrible goals that the cavalcade of nincompoops and halfwits the Hawks rolled out there did, opponents couldn’t sit back as often and early as they did this season. Things may have been more open. The Hawks wouldn’t have looked so beaten, so early, so many times with Crow behind them, giving them the confidence he could hold the other team still at least. He gives them a platform to get ahead in games more often, and the assuredness they could stay there. One-goal deficits instead of two. Those things make huge differences in an NHL where basically every team is the same save a few degrees. I think that’s good for a few more points.

While the Hawks and/or their press say there’s no reason to think that Crawford won’t be ready in September, quite frankly I need a reason to think that he will. He’s still been nowhere near the ice lately, and the Hawks never used the words, “shut down.” He just didn’t make the bell. Maybe you’ll get pics of summer workouts. Then again, maybe you won’t. Then what? Me, I’d let him try and give the World Championships a whirl if he’s able and willing, just so he and the team can find out if he can play a stretch of games at all without being sidelined by a passing breeze or aggressive fart.

-But that’s not all. Joining the Hawks in the bottom-10 of SV% at even since Crow went to the land of wind and ghosts are San Jose, New Jersey, Pittsburgh, and Philly, all playoff teams. Only the Devils matched that with a bottom-10 shooting percentage as well (so what the hell are the Devils doing in the playoffs anyway?) So clearly, the Hawks didn’t score enough.

And their chance-creation wasn’t terrible. They were second in attempts per game, first in scoring chances. But middle of the pack in high-danger changes for per game. Some, and I’m terrified this will the front office who do, will conclude the Hawks didn’t create enough high-danger chances because they lack some drooling monolith in front. I remain unconvinced of that. The culprit to me is that the forwards had to do all the creating and converting, because this team got nothing from its defense.

33 goals, 115 points from the Hawks d-men. And that’s all 11 that played. Compare that to the 56 goals and 197 points the Predators got from their eight d-men who played significant time. In practice, the Hawks forwards had to get the puck from their zone to the attacking one, recover it, create all the chances while getting to the net, and finish them. Clearly it proved too much of a task.

This is the biggest thing the Hawks have to solve. They need to find at least one puck-mover, and they probably have to stop considering Duncan Keith one. Gustafsson has done enough to earn another look next year as a bottom-four puck-mover. But they need one more, and I don’t know where that one is. Jokiharju is going to need seasoning. Forsling will have to make quite the leap. They’re ain’t shit on shit in the free agent market. They’ll have to get creative here.

-Because with a mobile and at least threatening blue line, this forward corps has a lot of hope. If Dylan Sikura is all they think he is and Vinnie Hinostroza is what the numbers say he is and EggShell can actually play, there’s a top nine here a lot of teams would envy. Yeah I know. “THEY’RE TOO SMALL AND DEY DON’T HIT AND DEYRE NOT CHICAGO TOUGH.” Bite me. Give me all the speed and skill you can shove into a needle and inject. Play faster. Blitz teams like the Hawks were at times.

A lot of work to be done, but not as much as some might think.

Everything Else

Game #82 – Jets vs. Hawks Preview/Mohair Suit Fitting

By Sam Fels 2163 0

vs.

RECORDS: Jets 51-20-10   Hawks 33-38-10

PUCK DROP: 6:00 p.m.

TV: NBCSCH

SOLID WALLS OF SOUND: JetsNation.ca

We’ve reached the end of the line. Tonight’s matchup between the second-seed Jets and the Chicago Post-Acid Emil Antonowskys will have all the vim and vigor of a midsummer Pony league game between two teams whose best players all went on a family vacation without telling the rest of the parents. There’s hardly been a game more useless than this, but she’s there, you’re there, and everybody’s there, and we’re in turmoil, as puzzled as can be. So let’s cut this vestigial tail one last time before the Hawks gather their clubs.

The Jets have won 10 of their last 11 (that’s allowed??) and are on a four-game winning streak. Their one loss in that time came via the 6-2 drubbing the Hawks doled out just one week ago. You might remember that as the Scott Foster game, one of the last beacons of fun we’ve had this year. With absolutely nothing to play for, being entrenched in the #2 spot and drawing the Wild in the playoffs, it’ll be a small miracle if we see anything resembling the A-team for the Jets. We’ll probably end up seeing Steve Mason—who last posted a 36-save, 90 SV% win over Montreal—or worse, because again, this game is absolutely meaningless to the Jets. The only thing they might do of note is continue giving Trouba his shifts as he shakes the rust off of his brown brain. Then again, this could be a nice little tune-up game for Hellebuyck, so who knows?

As for your Men of Four Feathers, the big story is that this may be will be Patrick Sharp’s final game as a Blackhawk, and perhaps final game full stop. There wasn’t much to expect out of him this year, but we’d all be remiss to forget the contributions he made to this team throughout his career. It won’t be a shock to see him play extra minutes tonight as one last sayonara, similar to last night. Given what an important cog he’s been in his Hawks career, I certainly wouldn’t begrudge the decision, especially since the only guys who came to play yesterday were Sikura and DeBrincat, anyway.

Tonight will also give Alex DeBrincat another chance to tighten his grip on his team lead in goals, which is about all there is to play for at this point. He’s been one consistent bright spot on this blighted potato of a team this year, and if I had my druthers, I’d want to see him, Eggshell, and Sikura as the top line, just for fun. But again, it hardly matters with a game as meaningless as this. After J-F Berube had another J-F Berube game, it’s likely we’ll see Jeff GL Ass out there once more to bolster his Masterton chase, which should be hilarious and fitting given that Keith has decided that he’s done playing for the year and Connor Murphy has been trying his hardest to make us look like big(ger), stupid(er) assholes for believing in him over the last two games.

The nightmare officially ends tonight, and no one will judge you for consciously missing this one. For the first time in, well, ever, we at FFUD leave you with our final Hawks preview during the regular season. It’s a strange feeling I don’t want to feel again next year, so savor the strangeness of it.

Thanks for reading this year, and stay tuned for the playoff coverage we’ll have and the postmortems we’ll do. I’ll never be able to bring myself to jump on the tank wagon, so one last time for the year:

Let’s go Hawks.

Game #82 Preview

Preview

Spotlight

Q&A

Douchebag Du Jour

I Make A Lot Of Graphs

Lineups & How Teams Were Built

Everything Else

Game #81 – Honey Don’t Stop Tryin’ and You’ll Get What You Deserve – Hawks 1, Blues 4

By John Pullega 2018 0

Box Score

Hockey Stats

Natural Stat Trick

Like a day at the Robert Crown Center, this game leaves us cold, bored, and completely disenfranchised about things that are supposed to be fun. The good news is that none of it mattered, and it’s now almost over. To the bullets.

– This was less a hockey game and more a farewell to one of the most important Blackhawks of this era, Patrick Sharp. He got a nice video montage both before the game and in the third, and was slotted on the top line next to Kane, in hopes that he’d be able to recreate some of the magic of his younger years. While it’s no surprise that nothing really happened, it was a nice gesture from the organization. It hardly matters that Sharp was the worst possession player for the Hawks by far. Given that Colorado lost last night, the outcome of this game was window dressing, so giving Sharp a good sendoff was about as good as it was going to get.

It might be easy to forget just how good Sharp was for the Hawks in his prime, but I’m not going to take that away from whoever does his year-end wrap. All I’ll say is I’ll miss what Sharp once was and am glad to see him retire as a Hawk, which I assume is what he’ll do following tomorrow’s game.

– J-F Berube looked good until he didn’t, which is about par for the course. Crawford can’t come back quickly enough.

– One positive from this game was the chemistry between DeBrincat and Sikura. Sikura fed DeBrincat a few nice opportunities tonight, the best of which coming in the first period. Sikura took advantage of a Carter Hutton turnover behind the net and fed DeBrincat for a high-danger zone shot that Hutton managed to stuff. Then, in the second, DeBrincat returned the favor with a crisp pass through the Royal Road to Sikura, who also got stuffed by Hutton. The only real question is who’s going to center these two, because Ejdsell looks like a sore thumb out there with them. He’s going to need to progress by leaps and bounds if he wants to be the guy for these two.

– Duncan Keith had one of his worst games in recent memory tonight. He had three turnovers by the second period, and never looked comfortable on the ice. Again, this was a meaningless game, but watching Keith struggle as badly as he did is never fun. Like most of us, he’s obviously ready for this year to end.

– Connor Murphy also had a bad game, which makes two stinkers in a row for him. Only Duncan Keith had a worse possession night for Hawks defenseman, and what was worst about Murphy’s night was his regression into balloon hands in his own zone. He’s got a lot of potential as a defensive defenseman I think, but his struggles to exit his own zone are going to need to improve if he wants to stake his claim as the Top 4 guy we all think he can be.

– Outside of the Sharp farewell tour, this game was drudgery. The Hawks had 13 shots about midway through the third, and never looked alive at all out there. They finished with 20 shots, but I’d be hard pressed to describe any more than two. The highlight of the game was the two free chalupas and one cheesy gordita crunch I got in my Taco Bell order, which are currently calling my name from the microwave, the disgusting animal I am.

That’s it for the home games this year. In a game against a desperate rival, the Hawks rolled over, which doesn’t really deserve anything more than a shoulder shrug at this point. The last one’s tomorrow, and you should join Adam Hess for that one.

It’s been a pleasure writing for you all about this Hawks this year, despite the performances on the ice. We’ll be back at it for the playoffs and postmortems soon enough.

Beer du Jour: Dogfish Head Oak-Aged Siracua Nera.

Line of the Night: I didn’t catch the actual quote, but Brian Campbell suggested that the Hawks need a “character guy” like Andrew Shaw or Danny Carcillo during one of the intermissions. The perfect summary of this brat-fart season.

Everything Else

Game #80 Look at All the Loonys and the Sad-Eyed Failures – Hawks 4, Blues 3

By Rose Rankin 2137 0

Box Score

Natural Stat Trick

Corsica

By every measure, the Hawks got their asses kicked in this game—shots, possession (in the first and second), faceoffs, you name it. And yet, they capitalized on the Blues going full-on Blue-ing themselves, and the Hawks are halfway towards fucking them over completely and keeping them out of the playoffs. To the bullets:

–It was a big night for Hawks’ nobodies. Both Andreas Martinsen and Blay Killman took their first steps toward what is assuredly legendary status with the Blackhawks with their first-ever NHL goals. And Killman’s was short-handed! (That’s his name, isn’t it? Ah, who gives a shit.) Everyone gets their 15 minutes, right?

–It was a bigger night for Alex DeBrincat, who now leads the Hawks with 28 goals. He just undressed Edmundson midway through the third to tie the game at 3. We’ve said it before and it’s no surprise at this point, but this guy gives me hope for the future, which is about all we’ve got. Well, that and schadenfreude.

–And it was an even bigger night for Duncan Keith, who scored is second—count it second—goal of the year, and the timing couldn’t have been better. Patrick Sharp drew a penalty late in the third and Keith was able to miraculously avoid all shinpads in the area and get the winner. Dreams do come true!

–All that’s great and not to be Debbie Downer here, but Connor Murphy had a rough one. I’m particularly bummed to see it come near the end of the season when he really needs to finish strong, both for his own confidence and as a fuck-you to Quenneville. But no, his turnover in the defensive zone led to Bortuzzo’s goal in the first, and his high-sticking penalty later that period resulted in the power play to start the second that set up Schenn’s goal (time on the pp had just expired so it wasn’t a pp goal but it was one of those situations where they were cycling and still riding out the man advantage). Murphy recovered his composure by the end of the second but finished with a 42 CF% for the night. Overall, not one for the highlight reel.

–In other tales of questionable defense, Tarasenko scored in the second period after Jan Rutta turned over the puck at the offensive blue line, but honestly, as he reached the zone, Rutta was alone with three Blues closing in around him, and c’mon, it’s Jan fucking Rutta, what did you think was going to happen? Pierre and the rest of the broadcast team lost their shit over him giving the puck away, but again, it was Rutta for god’s sake. It just felt like a matter of time before Tarasenko capitalized on an opportunity; Rutta has had way worse offenses this season than this one.

–All that aside, we fucking beat the Blues and severely damaged their playoff chances. Sikura had some flashes, Jurco had a strong game and led the team in possession, and Berube was just good enough…better than Jay Gallon which may not be saying much but so fucking what?

This is my last Hawks wrap of the season, people! Pullega and Hess are going to bring it home for you for the last two games. It’s been absurd amounts of fun, and I want to thank all of you for reading even if we don’t love the way the season worked out. Onward and upward!

Beer du jour: Fist City by Revolution

Line of the Night: “Play like Scott Foster is in the net!” –Adam Burish, giving his best advice of the season.

 

Everything Else

Game #77 – We’re Pretty and Sick, We’re Young and We’re Bored– Hawks 3, Sharks 3 (Sharks Win Longest Toenail Clipping Launch)

By John Pullega 1955 0

Box Score

Hockey Stats

Natural Stat Trick

The outcome may not have gone the Hawks’s way, but that was the most exciting game I’ve watched since the first two. There’s more than enough to take away from this one, so let’s get to it.

– We’ll start with Victor Ejdsell. For a guy whose first game saw him on the top line between Saad and Kane against a team still fighting for home ice advantage, he looked utterly pristine. We were worried about his skating, but Ejdsell assuaged our fears with a long albeit syrupy stride. He had a quick one-on-one with Jones early in the first that he got nervous on, forgoing a wrister to try to get closer and finish with a weak backhand. But outside of that hiccup, his first period was close to flawless.

He finished the first with a stunning 61+ CF% (26.05 CF% Rel) and a couple of good passes and set ups. He ended the game with a strong 51+ CF (12.59 CF% Rel) and didn’t have any huge diaper shittings. It’s only one game, but Ejdsell impressed me, especially with his passing. The only time I saw him plop in front of the net was during the first period PP, but otherwise, he maneuvered around in the high slot most of the time, looking to make plays. He’s someone to watch over the next five games, as he has the look of something useful.

– Speaking of useful, wouldn’t it be useful if fourth liner Alex DeBrincat would forgo his gritty bodychecking ways and just commit to scoring? The fact that he’s on the fourth line is a continuous personal affront, but hey, he set up the game tying goal there. I sometimes worry that Q putting him on the third and fourth lines will sour DeBrincat down the line, but I’m probably just projecting. Top Cat was outstanding with his passing and positioning as usual, but perhaps most impressive was a sequence late in the third.

After losing his stick, DeBrincat was bothersome until he read the puck as just unplayable enough in his own zone. He streaked to the bench, got a new stick, started a rush up the ice, and nearly scored on the play. And he’s only 20. Once he eats a few more sandwiches with Dylan Sikura, he’s going to be a force.

– I’m always going to be a curmudgeon about people who say that the Hawks miss Hjalmarsson and that Connor Murphy just isn’t up to snuff. Tonight was strictly a peep show for me, as Murphy was outright ruthless in all aspects of play. His CF% was a robust 52+ (15.12 CF% Rel), he scored a goal with a UNITY slapper, and he was far and away the most positively noticeable Hawks D-man on the ice. Don’t let Pat “Let Me Sound Out My O-Face Over Hits Unless Connor Murphy Does It” Foley fool you: Hertl’s goal ought to be laid at the feet of Gustafsson—who both misread the pass out of his oZ then couldn’t read Murphy covering for him—and Forsberg, who was wedgied by Hertl all alone.

And Murphy found himself playing with Gustafsson most of the game, which makes sense to me. Gustafsson—despite all the shit we give him—DOES have offensive instincts, and with Murphy’s burgeoning confidence, I can see this pairing working in the long term, provided Gustafsson makes at least some effort at defensive responsibility. It’s not perfect, but it makes sense on paper. And hey, Gustafsson led the team with a 57+ CF% tonight against a team rate of 43+, so you’ll take it.

– Aside from the Hertl goal, Forsberg looked decent. As always, he looked behind himself more often than a professional goalie should, but I’m always going to have a hard time being mad at him. The first goal was the result of Rutta playing “don’t touch the lava” in the blue paint, trying to cheat toward the far side of the net to cut off Hansen, who was covered pretty well by Oesterle, leaving Sorensen a gaping goal mouth on the near side. The second was off a faceoff win by the Hawks in the oZ, which then saw Seabrook turn the win over to Boedker, who passed to Shitty Kane #2, who then made Seabrook look like John Daly stumbling down a bunker to look for either his ball or a cigarette butt with a pull left on it, whichever requires less effort.

– Ragging on Seabrook these days is like shouting at the wind, but holy shit did he look like a bag of chewed cuticles tonight. He finished with a 28+ CF% at 5v5, and that’s WITH Keith. Keith himself had a 27+ CF%. I get the temptation to put the band back together, but Seabrook sucks and Keith isn’t the “America Runs on Duncan” Keith that’s a surefire first-ballot Hall of Famer anymore. If you’ve ever lamented the fact that you’ll be long dead before the sun burns out, just watch these two play together. It’s the same fucking thing. These two simply cannot play together next year if the Hawks want anything to do with a playoff run.

– Brandon Saad seems to be in the throes of a relative Renaissance. Paired with Ejdsell and Kane, he was aggressive and his passing was crisp. He fed Ejdsell a couple of prime chances, and finished with a Hawks-forward-leading 55+ CF%.

– Vinnie’s confidence continues to grow as well. He finished with a 53+ CF% and put on a one-man show in the third period, juking and jiving through defenders for a clean shot that Jones managed to stop. Fels said it earlier this month: We might have a Top 6 forward on our hands here.

Yes, the Hawks lost, but the younger guys looked good doing it. If Ejdsell can keep up what he did tonight, I would love to see him anchoring the third or fourth line next year, depending on what Kampf and/or Sikura end up being. Call me romantic, but I think there’s hope yet for this team.

Beer du Jour: Boulder Beer – Shake Chocolate Porter.  One of the best porters I’ve had in a while.

Line of the Night: “The Blackhawks won the first period, no question. That should have been a 3, 4–1 period for the Blackhawks.” –Burish during the second intermission, despite the Hawks posting a 43+ CF% and a 2/7 high-danger Corsi For percentage (i.e., the Hawks had two high-danger shots to the Sharks’s five)