GDT: Hawks vs Devils: 6PM CT on NBCSNCH--Battle of the Former 1sts

[Panzerspitze]

Schmaltz and Debrincat are good together.

Kane and Debincat are good together.

Kane and Schmaltz are good together.





....am I missing something, or is this really as ****ing simple as it appears?

Who's the NHL center of those three? Not Schmaltz currently, 33.3% FO last night reinterates so.

 

[JaegerDice]

Who's the NHL center of those three? Not Schmaltz currently, 33.3% FO last night reinterates so.

Your obsession with faceoffs is funny.

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

Your obsession with faceoffs is funny.

It matters a lot because if those 3 are together and they cant win a draw your going to find yourself trapped in own end often

 

[Panzerspitze]

Your obsession with faceoffs is funny.

But I thought you are the one obsessed with stats.

 

[BK]

It matters a lot because if those 3 are together and they cant win a draw your going to find yourself trapped in own end often

Before we all get into this, how many shifts per game typically start with a face-off?

 

[ChiHawks10]

That is a hell of a leap from what i said saying that i dont know what the next step should be while praising toews kane and debrincat. So you may have not read my post. Panik Harman Anisimov Murphy and Forsling are nothing special this year. You can win with them on ur team but not playing the important situations and time they are playing now. Thats two of our top 4 d men and 2 or 3 of our top 6 forwards. Thats not good enough to win a cup with how they have played for a long period of time now. If you want to give oesterle a shot go ahead. I have seen him play before this year and seen him play his 4 games. Hes another guy.

It wasn't specifically directed at you. Just the frustration with the general ridiculousness going on around here lately talking about how basically the entire team is trash and should be torn down. It was suggested by a few people the other day to trade Kane and/or Toews and start a full blown tank/rebuild.

People are spewing stupidity because the team is playing bad, in general, as a team.

Panik has always been a bit up and down. But he has still played well, overall.

Hartman has made some stupid mistakes, and played bad. I'll give you that one. Sophomore slump?

Anisimov was still playing hurt, obviously, and has looked light years better the past 4 or 5 games.

Murphy is new to the team, new to the system, and is now being played on his off-hand side. Of course he's not going to look like an all star.

Forsling has been fine. He's a rookie. Mistakes will be made. He'll grow as a player. With that said, he has been the best D on this team the past couple of games, and continues to show a ton of progress.

This entire season was going to be a progress only type of year. The most important thing I wanted to see was development from the young guys. And for the most part, I'm seeing that. They lack a ton of consistency, right now, but that will come as they get more experience.

 

[JaegerDice]

But I thought you are the one obsessed with stats.

I am. Stats that matter and actually impact winning.

Care to guess how many of the top 10 faceoff teams in the league are currently playoff teams? 4

Care to guess how many of the bottom 10 faceoff teams in the league are currently playoff teams? 7

Small sample sizes, obviously. Winning faceoffs obviously isn't actively detrimental to winning. By the end of the season, the best faceoff teams will be scattered throughout the standings as they typically are, a by product of them having basically zero correlation with wins over a full season.



If you're desperate to give that line a faceoff man so that they can start with the puck, put Debrincat and Kane with Toews.

Put Saad and Panik with Schmaltz, let them handle puck retrieval.

It's pretty clear Schmaltz and Cat have insane chemistry though. And the only way you get better at faceoffs is to take them.

 

[hawksfan50]

Well...there are plenty of issues...But usually as it bis mist games goaltending is tge 1st difference-maker. ..CC had a bad game ..this makes what the Hawks did well look not as significant as what they did poorly and who played poorly ..
Hawks did get 5 goals..ordinarily if CC played well we woukd expect a win with 5 goals scored. SO an aberration in net ...his worst Gameboy the season. ..is the main reason we list this game though there were plenty of stinky issues elsewhere too ..
The good...Hawks had over 60%shot advantage ..Hawks scored 2 pp goals which matched NJ..but Hawks lost in evens 5-3....so apart from bad goaltending what else was the cause of this ?

TOEWS -2 SAAD -2 KANE -2 ...when your 3 highest paid star forwards are a combined -6 and Toews and Saad have zero points and Kane only 1 pp goal and a secondary assist
.welklwhen your best are not your best
..not starry ..your should lose !!!!

Saad was toed with Seabrook for the worst Corso relative at -12 ..

Toews put in offensive effort..6 shots but Failed to score on them and that in my viewing was a Fail on 4 glorious grade A scoring chances tge other 3 shots being more routine. .BUT you cannot expect to win when finishing is a huge problem for any player with 4 glorious scoring chance shot opportunities ...NOT starring g..Not doing the job. .Not earning the $120. 5..

My lesson Woods earns a Hatty and 1a ...4 point night.Our other $10.5 manages 1pp goal and 1 secondary asdists and also the -2 ..Not as bad as Toews but still hardly starry for what he is paid

whike we can look at CC having a poir game ...unable to bail out the team when they made gaffes or had coverage breakdowns, the fact is that several NJ scoring chances that resulted in goals could have been prevented had our forwards supported our D in checking better and covering better in our D zone ..The are big 3,Toews Kane and Saad, are as guilty of poor d-zone support as any in this criticism ..if not more so ..
At least 3 NJ goals might not have ever developed into scoring plays had each of these 3 done a better job checking earlier in the play sequence ..So there is a responsibility issuecamong the 3 highest paid forward 'stars" amd leadership group .
Now Seabrook..We have talked lots on his inability to defend properly and movement issues. .Somehow he managed to finish even in the +/- ladt night..but still had problems giving NJ some scoring chances of high danger ..this time those did not get finished ..So he got lucky ..Now,on another board there was speculation he bus nit what he once was becausebifvtheyvrealky a back issue suffered 2 years ago in playoffs and still affecting his movement ability..IF so..Hawks are negligent in playing him this way ...he should either be recovering on LTIR or perhaps having a surgery to fix this ...IF indeed it is the real cause of his decline..But since you woukd expect the Hawks not to be so stupid to play a phaser UNABLE to perform due to a physical issue ...I am disinclined to not believe this speculation. .

If it turns out I am wrong and his back is an issue...then the Hawks should be ashamed of playing him when he cannot operate properly ..
Until the speculation is denied by the Hawks, I will not be making any excuse for Seabrook..He cannot play tge D position properly ...pnly inept ly now..So either bench hom or maybe use him at forward ...and if he also proves inept there then bench him again .At forward he only has to go North -South ..you remove his turning problem..his backwards skating problem,his reads problem (his mind has slowed xast-offfs much as his sjating/agikuty) . you woukd simplify things for him ..And you coukd cover for him when caught up ice and not having speed to get back if you had the bother forward play back up high when Seabrook took the puck down low..but you do get benefit of another down low big body presence ..Anyway I woukd try tgat move to forward..just to see. .if it cannot work then he mist be stapledvtonthe the bench ..cause hevusvuselessvon D.

KEITH had a poir game..now getting beat on rushes past him ..weaker stick checking..losing me battles ..useless offense ..fumbling more..slower in supoirt to help his D-partner .. On the Hall goal where Rutta got beat 1 on from the side boards due to a crazy bounce of the boards right to Hall who had Rutta slightly outbox piston and turned wrongly when he collected the bounced puck,to ne Keith should have been able to see tge pkay happening and hustle over to cut off Halls play to the net ..He hardly moved ..perhaps thinking Hall would pass to the slot instead ..th e proper pkay should've average been Keith baikungnoutvRutta by hustling to cut off Hall's path ...Maybe a younger Keith would have done that ..bit not old Keith..Had he donenit it could have forced Halk to pass into the slot where our C shoukd be coming back low to help cover the spot.

Bottom.line Keith made a lot of gaffes last night..some of his own lije getting beat on rushes and in 1vi stance quitting and not completing his recover y check ..and a goal resulted ..And I the Halk goal case..failing to get over to cut off Hall or at least force a more hurried shot by Hall ...CC needed to make that save..so blame him too ..but tge biggest error was Keith not baling out Rutta by getting over to cut off Hale's path to the net..So we see Keith's reads of developing plays ot being as quick and decisive as he was able to process what was going to happen as hecwas able to do so well in past years when younger.

So we must admit that both 7 and 2 are Not able to do what they did welk in the glory years. AGE catching up to them ..abilities waning. THIS is an ongoing issue and we cannot expect much reversion back to form of their glory days. In fact ..it probably gets worse as their contracts go on.

So we have the huge problem of stars not starring and not caring to defend well either . And we have tge 7 and 2 problem of aging star d-men who no longer bring tge capability they had in their younger glory years..

Goaltending was probably a 1 off bad night..But the other issues of the 3 top forwards not bring consistent production and 2 way excellence
And the declining play of 2 hard and 7 are hard to dismiss as huge concerns.

 

[Backyard Hockey]

Your obsession with faceoffs is funny.

you're kidding right?

you don't understand why it's a bad thing (especially for a 'puck possession' team) to lose faceoffs at that level?

PPs = lose face-off, lose possession, puck cleared, lose 25 secs plus of the 2 min pp

PKs = lose face-off, lose ability to clear and face pressure/shots/goals

D Zone = lose face-off, hemmed in - especially on a line with Kane and his D zone laziness. Not to mention a wasted shift when you want that line on the breakout and attacking, not spending their 40 seconds hemmed in and 'defending'.

O Zone = lose face-off, lose possession, transition from O to D and no pressure/attack.

I get the overemphasis on +/-, but you really are minimizing the value of winning face offs and more importantly, can't see the problem with an NHL center that loses 65% of his face offs on a line with Patrick Kane?

 

[ChiHawks10]

I am. Stats that matter and actually impact winning.

Care to guess how many of the top 10 faceoff teams in the league are currently playoff teams? 4

Care to guess how many of the bottom 10 faceoff teams in the league are currently playoff teams? 7

Small sample sizes, obviously. Winning faceoffs obviously isn't actively detrimental to winning. By the end of the season, the best faceoff teams will be scattered throughout the standings as they typically are, a by product of them having basically zero correlation with wins over a full season.



If you're desperate to give that line a faceoff man so that they can start with the puck, put Debrincat and Kane with Toews.

Put Saad and Panik with Schmaltz, let them handle puck retrieval.

It's pretty clear Schmaltz and Cat have insane chemistry though. And the only way you get better at faceoffs is to take them.

I've been lobbying for Cat, Schmaltz, Kane since the preseason... I still don't know why Q's dumbass is so reluctant to go to it.

Like I've said. It's time for Q to go. Can his ass. "Promote" him. Just get him out from behind the damn bench.

 

[Backyard Hockey]

I am. Stats that matter and actually impact winning.

Care to guess how many of the top 10 faceoff teams in the league are currently playoff teams? 4

Care to guess how many of the bottom 10 faceoff teams in the league are currently playoff teams? 7

Small sample sizes, obviously. Winning faceoffs obviously isn't actively detrimental to winning. By the end of the season, the best faceoff teams will be scattered throughout the standings as they typically are, a by product of them having basically zero correlation with wins over a full season.



If you're desperate to give that line a faceoff man so that they can start with the puck, put Debrincat and Kane with Toews.

Put Saad and Panik with Schmaltz, let them handle puck retrieval.

It's pretty clear Schmaltz and Cat have insane chemistry though. And the only way you get better at faceoffs is to take them.

So that Kane or Debrincat can take the face-off when Toews gets booted his 15x per game?

But face-offs don't have a correlation with wins?

2015 Playoffs Antoine Vermette says hi!

 

[JaegerDice]

you're kidding right?

you don't understand why it's a bad thing (especially for a 'puck possession' team) to lose faceoffs at that level?

PPs = lose face-off, lose possession, puck cleared, lose 25 secs plus of the 2 min pp

PKs = lose face-off, lose ability to clear and face pressure/shots/goals

D Zone = lose face-off, hemmed in - especially on a line with Kane and his D zone laziness. Not to mention a wasted shift when you want that line on the breakout and attacking, not spending their 40 seconds hemmed in and 'defending'.

O Zone = lose face-off, lose possession, transition from O to D and no pressure/attack.

I get the overemphasis on +/-, but you really are minimizing the value of winning face offs and more importantly, can't see the problem with an NHL center that loses 65% of his face offs on a line with Patrick Kane?

Some worthwhile reading for you.

Searching for a link between winning faceoffs and NHL games

Read the whole thing, but take note of the linked article to a hockey-prospectus article that looked at the impact on goals scored immediately following a face-off win in the Ozone (hint: there was no significant impact).

Look, I get we have sat through years Pat Foley trying to link every goddamn goal the Blackhawks ever score to the last faceoff won beforehand, and maybe that rubs off via osmosis, but it's simply not the major factor people like to make it out to be.

And if you want Schmaltz to win more faceoffs, make him take more faceoffs. He's not going to get better by never doing it.

So that Kane or Debrincat can take the face-off when Toews gets booted his 15x per game?

But face-offs don't have a correlation with wins?

2015 Playoffs Antoine Vermette says hi!

Ok?

Did you know that the 2013 Chicago Blackhawks only won 46.8% of their faceoffs in the playoffs? 3rd worst team in the playoffs at it, behind only Vancouver and Toronto.

I think they did ok.

We can trade small samples all day if you like.

 

[BK]

Here is another interesting piece on face-offs.

I value them more than JD but less than BH.

JD is right that the only way for him to get better is for him to take more draws and work with Yannik. The hand-eye is there.

 

[HawksBeerFan]

This looks to be a minority opinion but I thought last night's loss was on Crawford, he did not look good all night. Gave up some real soft goals. Yea the defense wasn't great but Crawford needs to be better.

I also came away really impressed with Rutta

 

[piteus]

Fiddy - cut up your posts a bit. You might have some good nuggets in it (along with some gibberish ) ... but it's daunting to read when it's so long. Perhaps 2 or 3 thoughts per post should be the limit for you. It will help get your point across.

 

[LDF]

Management could call up Hino and tell Q to play him or he is fired, that might work. Unfortunately I would expect they are all scared of Q and remember this is the same management that gave Seabrook one of the worst contracts in NHL history and had a Q mustache night. So it just sits and carries on as is, which is basically the Titanic after hitting the iceberg.

i could also expect to see Q play hino 1 shift per period. so by this, he did play hino. remember this is Q who walked away from an important day in a season. the draft.

 

[BK]

This looks to be a minority opinion but I thought last night's loss was on Crawford, he did not look good all night. Gave up some real soft goals. Yea the defense wasn't great but Crawford needs to be better.

I also came away really impressed with Rutta

I don't think anyone here would disagree with you that this loss is on Crow (or at least a large percentage of it).

 

[LDF]

And that is probably part of Bowman’s thought process. I think he’s just gonna let Q do the best he can this year and unless a miracle occurs, launch him after the season. In the meantime, be careful not to let him ruin any of the young players he likes by letting them get led into the doghouse. It works well on both ends. Bowman can say “you wanted Bouma and Wingels” and at the same time preserve the better players in Hinostroza and Dauphin. I really believe Q is a lame duck at this point. The effort level from the vets says it all. Q still has some utility in teaching the young players the fundamentals of NHL hockey. And also, if the vets aren’t producing, he’ll look to lean on the young guys more and more as the season moves along. He’ll have no choice but to do so to potentially, in his mind, save his job. The vets are just going to have to suck it up this year. I don’t want to placate them and bring in a new coach in the middle of the season. Another thing too, we should give Colliton his best chance to show what he can do and that means giving him a strong roster. See if he can make a good enough run with the Hogs to justify giving him the top spot next year.

i totally agree with the Q launching him later rather sooner.

 

[JaegerDice]

This looks to be a minority opinion but I thought last night's loss was on Crawford, he did not look good all night. Gave up some real soft goals. Yea the defense wasn't great but Crawford needs to be better.

I also came away really impressed with Rutta

Crawford had a bad game.

Honestly they probably win it if he even gives them a league average night.

But the Blackhawks can't count on Crow to be superman as often as they have either. Goalies have rough nights sometimes.

It's a bit of bad luck that a night they played well for the most part, was the first night this season that Crow really struggled. It would have been nice to see they carry Crow for a night, instead of the vice versa we've seen way too many times already this season. But they couldn't lock it down.

Crow needs to rebound (which I think he will), and the team needs to keep building on the things they're doing right and fix the shit they keep doing wrong (including the coach).

 

[JaegerDice]

Here is another interesting piece on face-offs.

I value them more than JD but less than BH.

JD is right that the only way for him to get better is for him to take more draws and work with Yannik. The hand-eye is there.

That is an interesting link, thanks for sharing it.

 

[Salvaged Ship]

Crawford had a bad game.

Honestly they probably win it if he even gives them a league average night.

But the Blackhawks can't count on Crow to be superman as often as they have either. Goalies have rough nights sometimes.

It's a bit of bad luck that a night they played well for the most part, was the first night this season that Crow really struggled. It would have been nice to see they carry Crow for a night, instead of the vice versa we've seen way too many times already this season. But they couldn't lock it down.

Crow needs to rebound (which I think he will), and the team needs to keep building on the things they're doing right and fix the **** they keep doing wrong (including the coach).

I thought a big telling point in the game ended up being the start of the third. Kane had the late goal, Crow was struggling and got pulled (maybe too late) and then that first shift and first 2 1/2 minutes of the third. That might be the worst 2 1/2 minute stretch the Hawks have played in 10 years. Outshot 8-0, pinned in the entire time. Poor Forsburg was left out to dry and the only explanation for that kind of domination for that long a period is lack of effort. They gave up the lead and felt sorry for themselves while the Devils came out fired up. I have not blamed much of the Hawks demise on effort like some but that stretch was flat out lack of effort.

 

[BK]

People keep bringing up Hjalmarsson, when in reality he has been even worse this year than the last 3rd of last season. Hammer is not fixing this team or even helping.

 

[LDF]

This looks to be a minority opinion but I thought last night's loss was on Crawford, he did not look good all night. Gave up some real soft goals. Yea the defense wasn't great but Crawford needs to be better.

I also came away really impressed with Rutta

re Rutta offensive numbers is and i will agree impressive. but i want to keep a keener eye on his defensive side of his game. i am not that sure of that side is as good as the offense.

 

[SAADfather]

So that Kane or Debrincat can take the face-off when Toews gets booted his 15x per game?

But face-offs don't have a correlation with wins?

2015 Playoffs Antoine Vermette says hi!

Are you saying his face offs were his biggest asset helping that team win? Strange position if so considering he was tied for the team lead in GWGs...

 

[Bubba88]

I agree the loss of Hjalmarsson is a big deal. Notice the Hawks giving up tons of shots each game - while Hammer did start to decline, people are forgetting that he always led the NHL in blocked shots. Hawks could use a few of those now.

Kruger's loss is negligible at best - although he was one of the better penalty killers (but ironically enough, the PK has been light years better this season).

We don't know which Hossa we would have seen - would it have been 2016 Hoss or 2015? I think the lack of his two way game is a bigger deal. I think the Hawks were hoping Sharp could have filled that role to provide some veteran leadership and scoring depth - boy were they mistaken.

Krüger was proven and much better than Kero or Wingles. I'd much rather have him right now.
Hossa is missed for sure. If it's the rookie Version, the prime Version or the 15/16/17 Version. We'd Need him.
Stupid HF Fans, Cap Circumvention my ass. Rather have the Player.