Everything Else

Game #80 – Hawks vs. Blues Preview/Racquet Restringing: I Don’t Wanna Be Found At The Sound Of The Bell

By Sam Fels 1740 0

 vs. 

RECORDS: Hawks 32-37-10   Blues 43-30-6

PUCK DROP: 7pm

TV: NBCSN (It’s Rivalry Night, Don’t Ya Know?)

THE COLD AND DESPERATE: St. Louis Gametime

This is what it’s come to. This “small club” mentality. We used to mock those (i.e. the Blues) whose goals and aims, for fans and players alike, was merely dragging a superior rival down. We laughed that they had nothing else to hang on to. Remember April ’11, when the Blues were determined to knock the Hawks out of the playoffs? Sharp rushed back on one knee and Toews was able to take advantage of Ty Conklin having the angle awareness of a drunken sloth to win it in overtime. That wasn’t the last time that’s happened between these teams of course, the Blues claiming minor/moral victories here and there while the Hawks collected the real baubles. Pictures in a box at home…yellowing and green with mold…

And now this is where we are. The only hope to have a smile about this season is two games with the wholly desperate Blues, who sit one point outside the playoffs but with a game in hand on the Avalanche, who hold the last spot. Those two play on the last night of the season, so even if the Hawks were to somehow get around having unemployed rodeo clowns in net and take both of these next two in regulation, the Blues could still pull themselves out of the muck by beating the Avs in Denver (assuming the Avs don’t beat the Sharks tomorrow night). Further complicating matters is the two teams are tied on ROW at the moment at 40. So it’s going to be white knuckle time for everyone.

And it hurts to admit it would bring a smile to my face if the Hawks cost the Blues a playoff spot. We’re supposed to be bigger than this. The season is lost and our eyes are always supposed to be pointed higher. But I’m a small and petty man, and dragging someone into the muck with you, especially if it’s these cretins… if that’s the only catharsis we’re going to get then let’s have it. Just to let them know they’ll never be free. Plus there’s the added bonus that missing the playoffs will send that organization into an existential crises that can’t help but have hilarious results.

Then again, all the Hawks might have to do is just remain upright and let the Blues do what they do best…Blues all over themselves. They had a home date with the nothing-to-play-for Caps on Monday and promptly blew a lead to lose 4-2. They gave up a touchdown to the Coyotes on Saturday night. They lost to the Knights before that. Only the Avs hiccup in California so far has even allowed the Blues to have a shred of hope. It would suck for the Hawks to be their lifeline, you have to admit.

It’s not like the problems have changed much since we last saw the Blues a couple weeks ago. Jake Allen can’t put it together, and yet they’re determined to shove the job right down his throat. Carter Hutton, who kept the team afloat in January, but admittedly fell apart in February, has played twice since March 1. He got lit up by both Dallas and Arizona. So they’re going to almost certainly let Allen take all three of the remaining games, and he’s barely been ok of late. He had a .916 in March, which is all right, but all right might not save a team that currently has Kyle Fucking Brodziak at a #2 center. That’s what happens when your GM goes into sell-mode but only like halfway and the rest of the NHL can’t bury your half-in, half-out team.

That’s another problem for the Blues. They don’t score a ton, even though they carry the play and chances in most games. They have one genuine, class finisher in Tarasenko, which you knew. But most everyone else who did at least a passable impression of one has gone cold. Schenn has one goal in eight. Schwartz has two in 11, and both of those came in the same game. Alex Steen was dropped into a vat of DIP. The only forward other than Tank who’s on anything resembling a hot streak is Patrik “Yes Somehow He’s Still Here” Berglund, with four in his last six. And he has a such a sterling rep for showing up when it counts. If Tarasenko doesn’t fire them into the playoffs, ain’t no one else gonna. Thankfully for them they get a face-full of JF Berube or Jeff Glass or whatever other form Quenneville and Bowman can dig out of their ear to play goal the next two games.

As for the Hawks… oh christ who gives a flying fuck? You know the drill here. Some dope in net, and basically the same lineup you’ve seen. Maybe Q will break up the “Kids” line of Top Cat, EggShell, and Sikura because they got worked in Colorado and there’s no sheltering them on the road. Maybe he’ll continue to see what they can do in the deep end. Blay Killman will probably exit stage right after getting a run-out in front of his college and drinking buddies in Denver. That should see Jan Rutta return. And more of Gustafsson-Murphy, which might be the only pairing you see again next year given how things have gone for them. These are the lights were trying to find our way with.

Three more to go, people.

 

Game #80 Preview

Preview

Spotlight

Q&A

Douchebag Du Jour

I Make A Lot Of Graphs

Lineups & How Teams Were Built

Everything Else

Let’s Discuss All Things McD

By Sam Fels 2382 0

Well, not all things. But there are a couple things out in the bloodstream I’d like to talk about. The first was this from last week’s 31 Thoughts by Elliote Friedman. Before we get to the actual merits of the idea McDonough suggested at the GM meetings, I can’t help but smirk at the, “But we’re still paying them, right?,” line. Really lets you know where things are in the minds of really all presidents and owners. Yes John, you’re still paying them. Just like NFL players that don’t dress on Sundays (there are seven of the 53 who don’t), or the guys in suits at the end of an NBA bench. What McDonough is really asking here is probably more to the point of if they can find a way to not pay them then to sub them in.

But it’s his idea of having the option of subbing in players mid-game that gets the press here, and I have to say it’s at least worth thinking about. Much like a sub in soccer, it would bring one player out for the rest of the game while keeping the subbed in one involved the rest of the way. Injuries wouldn’t be as serious to a team in a game if after the period or even immediately you could dress one of your scratches.

The strategy of it would be the real watch. As this season has gone along I’ve been more and more leaning toward seeing teams dress seven d-men and have 11 forwards, and having your three or four best forwards get the extra shifts. Just here in town, what would be more preferable: getting Andreas Martinesen 12 minutes or seeing Kane, Saad, DeBrincat getting an extra two or three minutes? Think of it like batting your best hitter in the #2 spot. It’s become the new thing to do, because over a season you wring an extra 50 or more ABs. Well, two-three minutes a game over a full season probably nets you more goals, and these days things are settled on a handful of goals for or against.

This would only extend that. Down in a game you could bring in your cowboy d-man whom you’re afraid to play over a game or your shutdown guy who can’t really be trusted either. Or an extra forward if you want, It probably can’t sway too many games because if a certain player was that good he wouldn’t be scratched anyway. But still, it provides intrigue.

There’s only one downside that I can see: This would give coaches an easier outlet to have a goon/thug on the roster and only play him for a period. You can easily see a team getting whomped one night and a coach reaching for perhaps the most childish and dumbest hockey tradition of “message sending.” So out for the third comes whatever barely developed beast the team has out of the cage where he was tossed raw meat and fish heads to “stir shit up” and really cause a scene. You know this would happen. And we’d all be dumber for it.

There are obviously questions. How do you keep these players warm for a period or two? Simply riding the bike isn’t going to be enough. Can they get a five-minute skate at intermissions before the zambonis come out? Maybe, maybe not, and with the intermission mishegas it’s even less likely. But there’s probably a way.

It’s worth thinking about. The NHL shouldn’t outright dismiss any new ideas right now, and this doesn’t significantly warp the game while giving coaches more options and keeping players more involved. Maybe teams are more tempted to give their stars nights and periods off if they can, and keep them fresh for when it really matters, which really should be a bigger concern in the league. It’s worth talking about.

-As for McDonough’s day job, I see more people yelling at Lazerus and the other beat writers about who will GM the Hawks next year. I think a history lesson is important.

You may not have been around then, but when McD and Rocky first took over they knew enough to know they didn’t know jack or shit about hockey. So they brought in Scotty Bowman as their de facto president of hockey operations. It was Scotty who told them they’ll never figure out what they have on the roster if they don’t get a real coach in there, and only waited four games to whack Denis Savard thanks to Quenneville’s DUI the previous summer. (and it was also Scotty who probably told them to find a way to torpedo Tallon to hire his son, but considering how the 08-09 season went, that was put on hold for a year). Scotty advised them on pretty much every hockey decision.

So for those who want Stan fired, keep in mind that Scotty is unlikely to help find a replacement for his son, and he’s also 135 years old now. That would leave McD and Rocky to their own devices, and quite frankly I can’t help but think it might result in something looking like the Bears “search firm” adventures of the past, or seeing which way Ernie Accorsi’s wig is pointing that day.

Perhaps in ten years McDonough has taken time out from telling everyone what a great job he’s done or slathering himself in his own praise while presiding over one of the more born-on-third organizations in sports to get some connections and plug himself in a bit more to actual hockey goings-on. But I wouldn’t be so sure. Remember his presidency of the Cubs wasn’t even two years and all he did there was open the checkbook for Jim Hendry and his barrel to prepare for the sale of the team. This isn’t a man with a “grand plan.”

There will come a time that Stan has to be fired or let go or he’ll walk and McD will have to find his replacement on his own. I’m just not sure you want that ASAP.

Everything Else

How Not To Write About The Hawks Elimination

By Sam Fels 2381 0

So originally I planned to do some wistful, eulogy-type thing about the Hawks being officially eliminated from the playoffs. And I may yet still tomorrow or Friday. But then I saw this, and I feel like it’s at the root of so much horseshit Hawks thinking right now that I thought it best to dissect it until it’s dust.

Though at the top, I should mention that Steve Rosenbloom has been a big supporter of ours and a genuine fan, so I don’t take pleasure in it (well, not THAT much pleasure). And Rosey is always up for a good argument, so I don’t think he’ll mind too much. With that, let’s go through what Rosenbloom had to say today.

Just like that, on consecutive nights, the United Center was eliminated from the playoffs.

On Monday night, the Bulls lost to the Knicks. Bang, officially out. First goal officially met

On Tuesday night, the Blackhawks lost to the Avalanche. Bang, officially out. Firing speculation season officially opens.

Ok… not sure what the Bulls have to do with anything but I’ll allow it. Though the Hawks and Bulls are certainly in different spots in their arc but let’s save our breath for when we need it.

Since winning the Stanley Cup in 2015, their third in six years, the Hawks haven’t won a playoff series. Geez, last year they didn’t even win one playoff game, a pantsing that came one postseason after losing a seven-game series to the evil, dreaded Blues.

Yeah, the thing is they didn’t win a playoff series for two years after the first one, so this isn’t that abnormal? I mean we’ve gone through this before. And when you say seven-game series, you’re basically saying the Hawks lost a coin flip. Which it was. But hey, if you want the Blues recent history instead of the Hawks, that’s your toasted ravioli/mucus to choke on.

Getting swept in a playoff series was deemed unacceptable last year. People lost jobs. Big verbal fingers were wagged. So, what does missing the playoffs altogether for the first time in 10 years bring?

The firing of GM Stan Bowman?

The end of Joel Quenneville as coach?

Both?

The argument for firing Bowman starts with Brent Seabrook’s inexplicable contract that still has six years and more than $41 million remaining with a no-movement clause that makes it less a playing contract than a prison sentence.

Look, I will certainly listen to arguments for firing one of or both of Stan and Q. It certainly should be brought up. But…but… I’m no insider, but even I know that Bryan Bickell’s contract and Seabrook’s weren’t all Stan’s idea. That doesn’t mean Stan was willing to see either of them walk, but as we’ve seen with Antti Niemi, Brandon Saad, and a couple others, he will pull the trigger on some parts when he feels they get too expensive.

Second, Seabrook’s extension was signed three months after that third Cup. Yes, it was too long and yes it was for too much money, but what kind of rocks would it have taken to just let him walk? Or trade him? After he had just skated like 30 minutes a game for two straight months? It appears that’s an organizational policy to not do that, and I don’t think that’s Stan’s policy. Also, name me another GM who just let a top pairing or top line player simply walk out the door? You could argue Marc-Andre Fleury, but the Penguins had Matt Murray already taking over. Again, this Seabrook contract is bad, but the alternatives, especially at the time, weren’t nearly as clear as everyone wants to believe they are now.

The argument also extends to the no-movement clauses given to former heroes such as Jonathan Toews and Duncan Keith. Toews isn’t the No. 1 center on a Cup winner anymore the way Keith isn’t a No. 1 defenseman on a future champion.

I know this is convenient and all, but Toews is closing in on a 60-point season which isn’t what you might remember him doing but he’s hardly a bum. And he’s been seriously unlucky to be at that total. Trading Toews to leave the Hawks with Nick Schmaltz and a handful of themselves at center is in a word, “lunacy.”

Keith is Thirty-Fucking-Four. You got a two-time Norris winner for barely $5 million a year. He’s been one of the biggest bargains in the league for a decade. Suddenly he’s just ballast? Yeah ok maybe he’s not top pairing anymore, but you’d still be moving him for 70 cents on the dollar at best. He can probably still take second-pairing minutes. And also we have no idea if that NMC is that big of a hinderance because the Hawks haven’t been motivated to ask because… well Duncan Keith wasn’t bad until this season, and “bad” is kind of strong.

And then there are such things as curiously big contracts for defensemen Jan Rutta and Erik Gustafsson while remaining a franchise strapped by the salary cap.

Except they’re not really strapped by the cap anymore, especially with it going up. Yeah these deals are high, but only by 500k or so and as we’ve previously discussed, the Hawks might have $12 million or more to play with. And no one needing an extension just yet, after the trading of Ryan Hartman. Which Rosenbloom strangely doesn’t mention.

The argument for firing Quenneville starts with that awful team defense and the painfully regular inability to protect a lead. Some of that blame is mitigated by the loss of star goalie Corey Crawford, but defensive responsibility team-wide has been hard to find.

Ok, before I get to the half-dismissal of Crow being hurt as the biggest reason the Hawks blow chunks, you just said four of the Hawks d-men suck deep pond scum (and you’ll allude to a fifth later), and now you’re blaming the coach that they can’t play defense?

Ok, to Crow. Since he got hurt, the Hawks SV% at ES is .910, second-worst in the league. Crow’s was .935. Yeah, ok, maybe unsustainable, but with that SV% the Hawks would have given up 23 goals less just at even-strength. I don’t know how many points that results in, but it’s more than a little. Even a .920 at evens would have seen the Hawks give up 11 less goals, and I’d be willing to be Crow would have eclipsed that because he’s been over .930 for five of the past six seasons . And we’re not even getting to the PK which has suck into the dirt to the points of being past the Earth’s core. “Some” of the blame?!

The Hawks have allowed 228 goals, fourth-worst in the Western Conference. Blame Bowman for not having a backup goalie who can win. Blame Quenneville for not devising a system that protects clearly inferior goalies. And blame the players for not executing and for not scoring the way the Hawks must.

In goals for per 60 minutes, according to NaturalStatTrick.com, the Hawks rank 18th. They used to be the scariest team in the league. Now they’re in the lottery.

Yeah I don’t know what system protects goalies that aren’t even cracking .905. Jacques Fucking Lemaire would have a hard time with this lot. We’ve already been over the blue line. So your point about Bowman is correct, except he’s also the guy who found Niemi, Emery, Raanta, and Darling as backups, so he’s allowed a fuck-up here and there? You just said they were cap strapped so they needed a backup on the cheap.

Ok, the Hawks don’t score a lot. They also have the sixth-worst shooting percentage. They also create the most scoring chances per 60 minutes. Know where I got that? NaturalStatTrick.com. Finish is a skill, yes, but it’s impossible to ignore luck here.

If you’re ranking causes of death this season, Crawford’s injury is No. 1. Then comes the loss of Marian Hossa to a skin affliction. No. 3 is trading defenseman Niklas Hjalmarsson. Then the loss of Brandon Saad – or at least the loss of his ability to play hockey, which came at the cost of Artemi Panarin, with whom Patrick Kane won a scoring title.

Crow’s injury is numbers 1-10, but I won’t push it. Fair enough on Hossa. But Hammer? Really? Weren’t you just bitching three paragraphs ago that the Hawks didn’t move along a slowing, aging, stay-at-home d-man who sucks now and now you’re bitching they did move along a slowing, aging, stay-at-home d-man who sucks now for a younger, faster, cheaper model? I don’t think both of these things can be true.

Ok, Panarin’s gone. But Debrincat has 25 goals and he didn’t get any of the PP looks that Panarin did. Essentially, Panarin’s goals have been replaced. So your problem there is with Q, no? For making him a third liner for a good portion of the season and having a power play that is causing tooth decay throughout the land?

Crawford’s injury is not on Quenneville or Bowman. Ditto, Hossa. Hjalmarsson is Bowman’s fault, same as the Saad trade, although Saad gets a ton of blame, too, as do the core players with no-movement clauses.

Is this where I have to point out that Saad is basically the same player he’s been in terms of possession, attempts, and chances, and just none of them or going in? Or do I do that later? Or are you blaming him for not being a 35-goal guy which he has yet to be in the NHL? Tell me where that goes, I’m not sure.

You can blame Quenneville for the lousy power play, but look at the talent out there. I’d blame the big names, too.

Where’s the line for “You made Jordan Oesterle a PP QB or a quarter of the season?”

One knock on Quenneville is that he hates young players, something that goes back to Nick Leddy. But if he hated kids, how has Gustafsson gotten another chance after making the awful, series-deciding mistake in Game 7 against the Blues in 2016?

And look at Alex DeBrincat and Nick Schmaltz, youngsters showing they could play in the top six for years. Heck, DeBrincat looks like he’s threatening to become Kane 2.0.

Top Cat has spent most of the season being a third line RW when he’s a top six LW, so his scoring has been somewhat miraculous. It took 30 games to get Schmaltz into the middle over Artem “I Skate Like Something Died In My Pants” Anisimov. So while Q isn’t the dungeon master of young talent he’s portrayed by some, he’s also not the child-whisperer either. And Q didn’t want DeBrincat on the roster at all to start the year, by the by.

And Bowman gets credit for the drafting and development of that talent. This is how the game works. It’s tangled, the blame and the credit. And then there’s this question:

Who’s available and who’s better?

Tyler Dellow.

Quenneville trails only Scotty Bowman in all-time regular-season wins. Since the start of the 1997 playoffs, Quenneville is tied with Bowman with three Cups. Nobody has won more.

This always annoys me. With the shootout and overtime rules coaching wins are horribly inflated. Q would still be top ten but like, c’mon. What if Al Arbour never had ties?

Quenneville won those Cups with Stan Bowman, although both received help from Dale Tallon.

Who received help from Mike Smith, believe it or not.

So, you can fire Bowman or Quenneville, or both, and you could convince yourself you have legitimate reasons.

Seems like you just did for yourself.

But I wouldn’t. I wouldn’t fire either of them. Their resumes earn one more chance to return to Cup contention. I think the case to fire Bowman is stronger, but I’d give both a do-over.

Weren’t you just complaining that Seabrook and Keith and Toews got extensions because of resumes and not for what they would do in the future? On the nights the Hawks clearly don’t give a shit, I’m not sure they’re all that concerned with Q’s resume. Also, you just said Stan owes a portion of his resume to Tallon, and then torched the part that doesn’t for nearly 700 words.

Because here’s the hard truth: If Crawford doesn’t come back as Crawford next season, then this team is going nowhere and John McDonough might as well serve as President/GM/coach to save the organ-I-zation some cash.

Don’t think he won’t try.

 

 

 

 

 

Everything Else

Let’s Find Some Hope: Let’s Buy John Tavares

By Sam Fels 4902 0

Ride the snake.

Ok, so you’re Stan Bowman. Yes, you’re quite bald. It’s ok. The world doesn’t end if everyone can see the top of your head. Trust me. Anyway, though you may have gone to the higher-ups last summer and told them you have a plan to rebuild the roster on-the-fly, and even if they totally believed you, you’re under serious pressure. No matter what you laid out to Rocky and McDonough, probably using very small hockey words, this is not what you told them would happen. Sure, you can claim Corey Crawford getting hurt is the same as Aaron Rodgers or Tom Brady or Drew Brees getting hurt, such was his importance to his team. And that’s not even wrong. And hell, they may even go with you on that. But a year missing the playoffs this badly after two first-round exits still has them more in a “glower” position than “hopeful.” You need results and you need them next year.

And sure, if you do actually get analytical instead of just telling us you do because that’s what you think everyone wants you to say, you could play it safe with a move here or there, knowing that there’s every chance Crow stays healthy next year, Toews’s and Saad’s SH% pop back up simply because HOCKEY!, Top Cat and Schmaltz continue to grow, Sikura is just as good as you think he is, and Vinnie Hinostroza has a breakout year that his metrics suggest he very well could. Hell, maybe even Duncan Keith can play the hits for just one more season. Hell, that’s a playoff team there. You make one move at the deadline, and maybe it’s even more.

Still, the higher-ups want more. If all those things don’t happen, you’re out on your ass. Yes, with your resume and last name and this being HOCKEY! you probably won’t be out of a job long. But is that how you’re goin’ out? Like some punk “with a plan?” Or you firing all the guns at once, knowing if it doesn’t work it’s going to be someone else’s problem anyway? You only have max one or two seasons to do anything with this group anyway. Clock’s ticking. You say, “Fuck it. you only live once and dyin’ would be a stone groove.”

You sign John Tavares. $11 million a year. $12 million a year, who fucking cares? This is your blaze of glory. Win next year and ain’t no one gonna give a shit about a fuck.

“But Sam,” you’re saying out there, “there’s no way the Hawks could do that!” Well, actually there is.

Right now, the Hawks will have about $12 million in cap space if the cap goes up to $80 million as has been rumored. And that’s if they don’t find a way to shuffle off Hossa’s hit to some hinterland hockey landfill. Or they could do what they didn’t do last summer and just use it in the summer and white-knuckle it through the season. Again, if you’re Stan Bowman, you need results next season or you’re toast. It’s time for risk. So either moving Hossa’s contract or just using his LTIR gives the Hawks damn near $18 million to play with. Fuck and yes. It could be more if you can flog Artem Anisimov to some destination without taking too much money back.

You basically have no one to re-sign. You can punt Patrick Sharp to the bunny farm upstate where he’s longed to be for two seasons. Anthony Duclair won’t have warranted more than the 10% raise he’s due as an RFA, which is $1.5 million or so. We love Vinnie Smalls, but he’s not getting any more than $1 or $1.2 million. So you’re still just south of $16 mildo to play with. That’s plenty for the $11-12M you’d have to throw at Tavares.

“But Sam,” you’re saying, “Tavares is a pretty low-key guy. He’s not going to want to come here!” Shut up, moron. Let me disabuse you of that notion.

One, this is not a testing hockey market. You’ve seen that. It’s the NHL’s fourth biggest market, yes. But no one cares when the Hawks are bad. Look at it now. These guys facing really hard questions every practice? There’s like three full-time beat reporters for fuck’s sake. No one’s talking about them on the radio or TV. You don’t have a roundtable of concussed ex players/drunk writers with an hour to tell you why you suck. They’re talking about Kris Bryant here. There’s no Steve Simmons to get up your ass, and I’ll be bored and old next year. I ain’t gonna bother ya. You can fly under the radar here easy.

Second, even if there is “furor,” that’s Toews’s job. Or Kane’s, I suppose. Seabrook’s. You’re not first in the firing line. Tavares could play his hockey and go home. But it’s just big enough to keep him in the endorsements/advertisements world if he so desires.

So that makes it a more desirable destination for him than say, Montreal or Toronto or even Vancouver. We’ll circle back to this.

Your top six, if Stan goes Wild West:

Saad-Tavares-Hinostroza/Duclair

Top Cat-Toews-Kane

Sure, you could arrange this several ways. But Tavares has gotten Anders Lee a 35+ goal season and there’s nothing Anders Lee can do that Brandon Saad can’t. This team scores, especially with Schmaltz as a #3 center simply clocking whatever bums he finds across from him with Sikura and whichever of Hinostroza or Duclair is not on the top six. It scores a lot.

“Sam!” you’ll exclaim, “how are the Hawks going to afford all of Kane, Toews, Tavares, Seabrook, Keith, Saad, and then raises for Schmaltz or DeBrincat or more?” There’s going to be another lockout, you ninny. They can hit the reset button on one or two of these deals under a new system. And you’re probably fucked by that point anyway.

“But Sam,” you’ll interject, “this does nothing to solve an already porous blue line!” Fuck you! I can’t do everything here!

Ok yeah, your blue line would still suck and you can’t get out of the Central or West without one. The free agent class of d-men makes you vomit all the colors of the rainbow. You don’t have the pieces to acquire Erik Karlsson, unless you’re comfortable moving Schmaltz for him. Which you might be after signing Tavares, I don’t know. Maybe you find a way to pry OEL loose at the deadline. Maybe when Vegas reverts back to being an expansion team next year they loose Nate Schmidt before he’s a free agent. There are solutions to every problem.

“But Sam,” you say as I get more annoyed with your pragmatism, “everyone’s going to want Tavares and the Hawks haven’t won a bidding war since Hossa!”

Yeah ok, fine. They haven’t even really tried either. They wanted us to believe they were in on Zach Parise in ’12, though I have my doubts. But the Hawks name and market is still an awfully big draw, especially when you consider Tavares has already been on a Team Canada with Toews and Keith.

He’s not going to Montreal. Who wants to deal with that shit? Toronto doesn’t need nor can afford him. Vancouver is clueless and stupid. Tampa… ok, well that could be a problem if they can lose Callahan’s bloated checks for looking angry. But maybe they want to keep their powder dry for the entire bank chain they’re going to have to hand to Kucherov. Or maybe they’re still after Karlsson. Is Florida going to make a splash? Weather and state income tax aversion are nice, but that team isn’t that much more attractive than the Hawks in the near-term? Detroit might be more clueless and stupid than Vancouver. The Rangers are rebuilding. The Islanders won’t have a home for two or three years. The only language really here is green. Tell me you’re not starting to see it. Tell me a grin isn’t slowly spreading across your face.

C’mon Stan, let’s get nuts. You really don’t have anything to lose.

Everything Else

What Do You Do With Duncan Keith So Early In The Morning?

By Sam Fels 2401 0

A couple weeks ago, our colleague and probably the most flowing lochs in the Hawks blogosphere Chris Block gave his state of the Hawks post. There’s a lot in there, some of which you might not have known, but there’s one part of it I’ve been meaning to dive deeper into. I do encourage you to read the whole thing though, and then give Chris a hard time for bailing out of doing Wrestlemania with me even though it was his idea.

At the end of this, Block ruminates on whether or not the Hawks should at least kick the tires on moving Duncan Keith this summer. The reasons are pretty clear. The Hawks have to get out from under some of their ridiculous contracts (although Keith has been worth every penny, any contract that runs 13 years has to be considered ridiculous). Keith is getting older. While the hit remains the same the actual salary starts diving next year making him even more affordable than he already was. And Keith is aging, and not all that gracefully at that.

We’ve talked about it a few times over the years, but looking for Keith precedents in previous players is a hard thing to do. Few d-men have dominated games and seasons simply on quickness and instincts, as Keith did for far longer than he had any right to. One name we have used is Scott Niedermayer. He retired after his age-36 season (Keith will be entering his age-35 season next year). And Niedermayer was more offensively gifted than Keith and by some distance. The hands don’t go away even if the feet do. Keith has no such attributes to fall back on.

Yes, Nick Lidstrom played until he was 41, and comedically won a Norris at 40 simply because voters didn’t know they could vote for anyone else. But Lidstrom’s game was much more calm than Keith’s, sort of letting things come to him and simply being ahead of everything in his mind. There was no high-wire with Lidstrom. Keith’s game has been all high-wire since the moment he arrived and looked like a kindergartner who got hold of Jolt Cola (dated reference alert).

Watching Keith this year has been mostly an uncomfortable experience. You can see his computer trying to recalibrate with how to play knowing he can’t take all the risks and be as aggressive as he used to be. Keith could actually do a lot of things wrong in the past and his quickness would allow recovery to see him get away with it. He could venture outside the circles in his own zone, he could chase more in to the corners or behind the net, he could skate into more traffic with the puck and squirt out. He can’t really do all of those things anymore, but the internal mechanism is still saying he can too often. His instincts and brain constantly seem to be at odds.

That doesn’t mean Keith is useless or a complete anchor, as say Seabrook has been at times this season. He hasn’t been anything like a ghost like Sharp has been on most nights, to use two his contemporaries. To me, the worst case scenario with Keith is that he can be an effective second-pairing d-man, and probably can for a couple more seasons. And I think he could do that in a couple of ways. Against easier competition he could still push the play up the ice as he used to. Or you could just use him as a human shield as Oduya was used here, or Dan Hamhuis is used in Dallas right now, or Pesce and Slavin are used in Carolina, or a few other examples. You’d ask no offensive or puck-moving responsibility of him, and just have him basically keep the puck out of his net against top lines while whoever is designated for the top pairing role can simply run over what they see.

But therein lies the problem. Whichever you choose to do with Keith, you then have to solve your top pairing problem. I’m one of the few who is comfortable with Connor Murphy as one half of that, but you need the other half and that’s the half that has to be the possession monster. That’s the half that has to get up and push the play, join the offense, and score. And right now, that’s nowhere near in the Hawks system. Unless by some miracle they think Henri Jokiharju can do that next season. I suppose Ivan Provorov went straight from the WHL to the Flyers, so it can happen. But he wasn’t asked to play on the top pairing either. We know it ain’t gonna be Gustav Forsling either.

Keith would still have value to other teams, if he were to waive his NMC. Off the top of my head, the Islanders, Leafs, Flames, Oilers, Canadiens are all teams that have defensive depth issues that want to win sharpish. We could probably figure out a couple other teams that would at least make a call, even with Keith’s age and expense.

But still, does Keith get you back a young, top-pairing potential d-man? Skeptical of that. If you’re just swapping him out for more mid-pairing or bottom-pairing flotsam, I don’t know that moves you forward. Yeah, if you can get the Oilers to give up on Nurse, go right ahead. And I guess they’re capable of any kind of stupidity.

For the Hawks, Keith is almost certainly the most movable of “the core.” They wouldn’t ever dare move Toews or Kane, given how their entire marketing strategy has been built on them, problematically at times, for going on 11 years now. Seabrook’s play has made his deal immovable. Keith has never had the connection with the Hawks that the two forwards do. You don’t see him on the Chevy ads or the posters, and that’s mostly because he doesn’t have much interest. Keith is also the only one you see openly flouting McD’s rules about how to be presented during interviews and such. He clearly just does not give a fuck about that aspect of being a pro hockey player, and honestly more power to him. While on the ice Keith has been the most important cog to the Hawks success (and he has, don’t even play), he hasn’t been nearly as important to the Hawks off it. And don’t think that wouldn’t play a role.

Still, I doubt the Hawks and Stan Bowman would do this unless they got some offer they couldn’t refuse. But it seems more plausible than it did even just a month or two ago.

Everything Else

Friday Thoughts: Gustafsson, Rutta, And Last Night’s Pummeling

By Sam Fels 2199 0

It’s been a couple days so we should get to it. Whatever your list is of grievances that you’d like to air by firing Stan Bowman, if you have one, you can add two more.

I’m sure the Hawks thought it would slip under the radar, and it kind of did because everything they do these days slips under the radar because almost all of the city doesn’t give a flying fuck about them anymore. Either way, the Hawks re-signed both Eric Gustafsson and Jan Rutta to extensions, and combined they will cost $3.5 million combined next year.

I’m going to try and be reasonable about this….

WHAT IN THE HOLY FUCK IS THIS???!!!!

Now that that’s out, let’s get to it. There’s really no other way to dress this. Both Eric Gustafsson and Jan Rutta suck. They might not be the suckiest bunch of sucks who ever sucked, but they’re not far from the team photo. Neither one of these guys will ever rise to the level of anything more than a third-pairing d-man.

For literally no reason, Stan Bowman doubled Gustafsson’s salary. All he had to offer him was about 700K. Now, you might think the difference of about $500K really isn’t worth worrying about, but as we’ve seen, every dollar counts in a cap era, even if the cap goes up. And Gustafsson has shown nothing to warrant being offered much more than a pointed finger to the door. If he were going to provide offensive spark, we would have seen it by now. He’s 25 and basically never really flashed in the NHL. How much longer are you going to wait? And who was Stan bidding against? Who was coming to save Gustafsson from Chicago?

The Rutta one is even more baffling. He can’t regularly crack the lineup even after the trade of Michal Kempny, and yet you just hand him $2.3 million? What is it he does? Is Stan so fixated by the fact he’s been able to spasm six goals into the net and no one else on the blue line can find the right zip code with their shots? Again, what was Rutta going to get on the open market?

Here’s a list of UFA d-men you could probably get for $2.3 million this summer: Calvin de Haan, Cody Ceci, Luca Sbisa, John Moore, maybe Thomas Hickey, Dalton Prout, the aforementioned Kempny. Most of these guys suck, and yet all of them are better than Rutta.

It’s not like Stan hasn’t been able to admit a mistake. Fuck, he just traded Ryan Hartman and he wasn’t a mistake (and I’m fairly sure that trade is going to work out as having “sucked”). I have no idea why he’s doubling down on these two, but if it costs the Hawks a higher quality free agent this summer or a trade, it honestly probably should be the final nail in his coffin.

-I don’t think we can state long enough and hard enough just how pathetic the Hawks top players were last night. And you can toss out all the caveats you want–Canes are more desperate, they’ve always been a good possession team, blah blah blah–to have Corsi marks under 20% you actually have to try to do so.

I try and reserve myself about games where the Hawks haven’t looked like they care. Losing teams always look “flat,” or at least do most of the time. But the Hawks are a good possession team, or at least they have been. And for their top line and top pairing to simply get skulled by a team that doesn’t actually have a top line is simply unacceptable. You can’t say they were all there, or fully focused, to be that bad.

I can’t ask this team much more than to actually just show up and finish out the season professionally. Last night was anything but. That falls squarely on the leadership. They’re not going to fire Toews and Keith and Seabrook as captains, at least I doubt it. So you know where that goes. But I’m guessing Rocky and McD are too chickenshit to let that happen, nor do they have the scruples to replace Stan competently (which would involve probably firing Q anyway). So if the Hawks don’t care now, why am I going to assume they will next year at this time after another seven months of listening to a coach’s voice it’s becoming more and more apparent they’ve tired of?

Everything Else

You There With The Flamethrower. Let’s Talk For A Minute

By Sam Fels 2788 0

It would be folly to try and talk everyone off the ledge after last night. When you get pumped by the NHL’s worst team, there’s nowhere to hide. You’re pissed off. You should be. No matter the holes in the lineup, and even without Crawford, it shouldn’t look like this. There’s no excuse for this. There seems to be little excuse for 25 goals in 13 games. There’s simply no excuse for just how listless they’ve looked of late. For a team that prided itself on never panicking and never being beaten, they sure look like they accepted their fate (COOAAACHHHHH!) long ago. That was a team last night that didn’t look like it cared much.

So you want everyone fired. Understandable. You’re in a rage. Yeah, fair. It wasn’t that long ago that we saw stuff like this every year, but you’re accustomed to different. They’ve told you to be accustomed to different. This isn’t that. You want changes. You very well may get them.

But before we take a torch to it all, let’s breathe. Last night was an example of where we’ve been since Crawford got hurt. The 1st period was bad, and I can’t explain that away. But in the second, they showed some spice. They got a goal, had the momentum, and you really would have bet on them finding an equalizer.

But just like happened in Vancouver, and a few other times, whether it was a defensive mistake or goalie one, the Hawks let in a bad goal. And you can just see the life go out of them. There’s a real, “Why even bother?” air about them when stuff like this has happened. The fight goes out. And when you feel like your efforts are always going to be undone by something in your own end due to your own incompetence, it’s probably hard to muster up a ton of get-up-and-go.

Still, you want coach and GM fired. Ok, let’s go through that. I’m not sure Q can do any more with this roster than he has, whatever our complaints are, but it sure does feel like we’re at a point where firing Q doesn’t even have that much to do with him. Just a new voice and some new ideas might be welcome simply because they’re new. I don’t know who that would be–Brad Lauer as an assistant to Jon Cooper seems like a good start but it could be anyone–but it appears that Q doesn’t get the same response he did and he’s out of cards to play.

Here’s the other thing. It might be that the players would respond to some new assistants. We know Q’s choices for assistants haven’t exactly been glittering. Mike Kitchen – moron. They had to fire him for Q because the players despised him for so long. Jamie Kompon – moron.  Kevin Dineen – we thought he wasn’t a moron, but then you look at this power play and you wonder. Ulf Samuelsson – judging by how the defense is playing, you’d have to guess he’s a moron. Maybe the players have seen through this.

You want Stan gone, too. Fair, I see why. It feels like he built a creaky roster wholly dependent on his goalie and the one thing that couldn’t happen happened. I would counter that many teams are in this position, and have before, but you’re not used to it. Fine.

This is where the Hawks lack of transparency hurts. Again, if Stan had come out at training camp and told everyone that this season, while they want to be competitive and be in the playoffs, what the main goal is is turning over the roster beneath the veterans. They have to blood in Top Cat and Schmaltz and Duclair and Forsling and Dahlstrom and Gustafsson and find out what they have. Then you wouldn’t much argue with what’s gone on here.

Ok, the Saad trade hasn’t worked out the way we thought. I also wouldn’t judge it on one year. Maybe this is what Saad is, but at 24 I don’t want to conclude that. If Panarin were still here, I doubt the Hawks are more than one or two points better. You still wouldn’t really have a bottom six. The defense would still be a mess.

Don’t even start with me about Hjalmarsson and Murphy. Murphy at worst has given the Hawks everything Hammer would have, and likely more. He’s just been the victim of his coach acting like a child. That’s not why this team kinda sucks. If not fully sucks.

So to me, firing Stan in the middle of a rebuild-on-the-fly to try and squeeze one more run out of this window isn’t sensical. If you want to fire him for previous mistakes–Johns, Teuvo, Danault–it seems like odd timing. And some of those, or all of them were parts of trades to either go for it, placate his coach, deal with contracts that he might not have had a full say over, or all of the above. Again, some of this is self-inflicted.

There’s the inability to develop a d-man. Well, there’s Johns but that’s about it. Forsling shouldn’t be given up on. We should see what Dahlstrom has. Neither look to be top pairing material, and the Hawks are going to have to find their own Charlie McAvoy or Mikail Sergachev or the like to take the heat off Keith. They haven’t proven they can find that.

You wanted a more active summer. Ok, but the problem was, as previously discussed, that with Hossa having to be LTIR’d you couldn’t really use his money. They could have used that space in the summer, and then just had no flexibility during the season. I’m not sure what d-man would have helped.

If indeed this is what this season was, without them stating it, I feel like you need to see it out. I’m not sure when it’s complete. Sikura and Jokharju? Whoever they draft this June is up? I would guess Stan gets a coaching hire and then two seasons to see where they are. Then you can blow it up.

All I ask is that next fall, they tell you exactly what it is they’re trying to do here.

Everything Else

Game #54 – Stars vs. Hawks Spotlight: Our Yearly Stephen Johns Referendum

By Sam Fels 2259 0

This will be the third year we do this. It’s because the trade of Stephen Johns still stings a bit. It’s the trade that the acquisition of Connor Murphy is basically trying to make up for. It’s easy to just say that the punting of Johns simply to get rid of Patrick Sharp’s salary crippled the Hawks blue line to its current state. But is that really true?

Johns has been skating third pairing minutes in Dallas, though he’s flipped at times with Greg Pateryn for second pairing time with Dan Hamhuis. Lately, Ken Hitchcock has found a comfort level with Pateryn and Hamhuis, though he’s not been shy about giving Johns and Honka just about as much time. He’s seeing 13-15 minutes at even-strength per game for the past month.

Metrically, Johns is not having the season he’s had in the past. Of their current regular six, Johns has the worst relative CF% and xGF%. He does start more in his own zone than the top pairing of Klingberg and Lindell, but not as much as Hamhuis and Pateryn which has become something of the shutdown pairing for the Stars.

However, it’s worth taking Johns’s numbers with Julius Honka on their own. Because they’ve taken quite a leap. Honka and Johns together are carrying a 53.4 CF%, and a 52.9 scoring-chance percentage. It’s the best mark he has with any of Dallas’s d-men.

We’re still a long way from learning what Johns is, though getting closer. He’s got 126 games in the NHL, and an additional 100+ in the AHL. So he’s passed that magical 200 professional game mark. What we can say is that he’s best with a puck-mover, where he’s not the one asked to get the puck up the ice solely. Johns’s strengths are in the corners and down low and stepping up at his blue line to squeeze the play. He can do that better behind someone instead of in front of his partner. At least that’s the way it’s worked out so far.

How he would have fit in the Hawks is hard to say, and probably not even worth thinking about. How many times would he have been scratched behind TVR, for instance? While the Hawks might claim different, they were high on him. They tried multiple times to get him out of Notre Dame, and then had to give him special circumstances in Rockford to get him out of South Bend after his junior year. They wanted him in the system badly, and they wanted him in Chicago as well.

It’s just one of those things will never know. If Stan Bowman  gets the sack this summer, or soon, the biggest black mark against him will be that he lost too many NHL-worthy prospects for nothing. Johns had to be the sweetener to get the Stars to take Patrick Sharp. Teuvo had to be that so the Canes would take Bryan Bickell. Phillip Danault was punted in a rental-trade for Tomas Fleischmann and Dale Weise. Those three players are almost certainly the difference between this team being a playoff team right now and where they actually are.

In a salary cap world, your cheap, young talent have to be used or moved along for things you actually use. And you get almost no margin for error. The Hawks are learning that now, and some of that error is Stephen Johns-sized.

 

Game #54 Preview

Preview

Spotlight

Q&A

Douchebag Du Jour

I Make A Lot Of Graphs

Lineups & How Teams Were Built

Everything Else

Now Here Is Nowhere

By Sam Fels 2697 0

Last night’s frustrating loss whipped up a little more vitriol and angst than previous losses have. Perhaps it was the manner, as the Hawks did play well, couldn’t finish, and were on the donkey end of a couple calls (one not egregious, one that really defies belief). Still, the Hawks only scored one goal that mattered, really none at even-strength, and you’re going to get what you get when you do that. Which is not much and basically a handful of yourself.

And while it hurts to say, given the results everywhere else it’s left the playoff hopes in tatters, and now the Hawks are going to need something bordering on miraculous to even get back into the discussion. Which means the knives are coming out, and that means people want guillotine fodder.

It’s understandable. While I don’t think anyone expected this team to repeat last year’s regular season, this has been a disappointment. The injury to Crawford has been more crucial than anyone wants to admit, because no one wants to admit their team hinges so heavily on a goalie. But the Hawks are hardly alone in this. If Pekka Rinne weren’t having a renaissance season at 35 the Preds would be way off where they are, because they really haven’t been a good defensive team yet this year. The Jets and Hellebuyck. Vegas and their rotating cast of clowns. When the Kings were riding high it was because Quick was throwing a .940 at the league. Even Tampa, the best team in the league, has Vasilevskiy as a Vezina leader. Rask has lifted Boston. This is just how the league works now.

But that’s not enough for a lot, and I don’t know that they’re wrong. People want the house cleaned, and that’s both GM and coach.

Our feelings on the coach are well-known at this point, so let’s save that for a bit later. When it comes to any possible firing of Stan Bowman, one has to ask what the expectations for him and the team really were, not what they said they were, and what mistakes you’re firing him for.

If Stan is truly, and being allowed, to try and engineer a rebuild on the fly and the results this year aren’t quite as important as next season’s or the one after that, you’d have to say his results at worst are just on the positive side. Nick Schmaltz has proven to be a bonafide #2 center in this league. Alex DeBrincat looks to be a future top line sniper, with a dash of vision thrown in. The Connor Murphy trade was a good one, whatever his coach or blinded local media seem to think. Vinnie Hinostroza and David Kampf look like they can be bottom-six contributors on a good team.

Yes, Brandon Saad has disappointed. Maybe that could have been scouted out in Columbus, because he did do this at times there, too. But the thought was that being back in Chicago and on the top line would reinvigorate him. Stan was hardly the only one who thought that. Other than Kane, the other veterans have not performed up to their usual standards. But what was the alternative there? They’re going to be here until they retire.

Ah, this is where the discussion begins. Brent Seabrook’s contract. Ok, let’s have it. Let’s go back in time. Even if I were to grant you that Seabrook’s extension was all Stan’s decision, and I won’t, remember when this contract was signed. Three months after a third parade. It would have taken quite the tires for any GM to let Seabrook go into the last year of his deal, after he was a major, major cog in a third triumph (and you forget how good he was that spring) and then simply let him walk. Or better yet, trade him right after the confetti had fallen to the Soldier Field ground or during the season. I can’t think of a precedent for it. Yes, you might point to the purge after the first Cup, but there was no alternative there. And all of Ladd, Byfuglien, Sopel, Versteeg, even Niemi, were more contributors than cornerstones. Seabrook was a cornerstone. Yes, the Penguins let Trevor Daley walk after two Cups. Trevor Daley also sucks and always has. You’ll notice they probably overpaid for Justin Schultz. They’ve hinted at trading Kris Letang, which would be a comp, except he’s been fragile his whole career and wasn’t even part of last year’s run. Seabrook was neither of those two things at the time.

Yes, perhaps Stan could have played more hardball (again, if this was up to him). Maybe he could have gotten less years on it, but that probably only raises the AAV. And quite simply, hardball negotiations are not something the Hawks do. They’re terrified of it. That’s why they traded Saad the first time instead of waiting him out and imagining an incoming offer sheet that simply was never going to happen. It’s why they’ve twice handed Toews and Kane extensions well before their deals were up that were probably higher than they had to be. It’s why Crow got his deal, though man does that look like a bargain now. They just don’t do it. Their first priority, it seems, is to be seen as THE player-friendly organization.

Stan’s biggest mistakes were losing Teuvo, Johns, and Danault for essentially nothing (though the latter was in a go-for-it trade that simply didn’t work). Even if we accept they had to go, you can’t lose young players like that for nothing in return. And that’s the ground that Stan is trying to make up. I would argue that he had to lose those players to pay other ones to please coach and president, but I won’t be able to prove that until someone writes the tell-all book in about 10 years.

Another thing Stan is working against this campaign is that due to the NHL’s incomprehensibly stupid cap-recapture penalties, he wasn’t really allowed to do anything with Hossa’s money. The Hawks chose not to use the LTIR money in the summer so they could have flexibility during the season, and that’s understandable. What’s not is that they had to make that decision at all. Hossa’s contract was not against the rules when signed, so why should any team be punished for that after the fact? The blame could go to the players’ union as well here, who simply lied down and accepted this ridiculous rule without any fight.

If Hossa could have simply retired and freed up the money, which he should have been able to do, it’s not like the last free agent class was staggering but there were players who could have helped, whatever the aims of this season. Bonino? Shattenkirk (was only going to the Rangers but you get it)? Radulov? Hainsey? Kulikov? Varying degrees here, but clearly some if not all would have helped. The Hawks couldn’t do any of it because of cap-recapture. That seems like a pretty big obstacle.

If you’re firing Stan, it’s for either not starting this rebuild-on-the-fly in the immediate aftermath of a Cup, which seems just about impossible. Or you’re firing him because you don’t like where this is going, and as stated above that’s not correct. Or you’re firing him because players got old.

I’m not saying this roster turnover is going to work next year or the one after, and then it won’t matter anyway, I don’t think. But if indeed that’s what’s going on here, Stan should get to see it to its completion. And if that falls short, then I give you permission to fire him.