Hawks Defense-2012-2013 v. 2013-2014

[Say Hey Kid]

Crawford wasn't as good as the team made him look last year. But probably isn't a bad as they've made him look both this season and 2 seasons ago. ...

Agreed. 2.55 and .905% are fine.

 

[Kurtosis]

Hopefully someone bumps this thread next June after a repeat and everyone says "I told you so."

I'm not asking the team to play "99 mph" nor am I not cognizant of the fact that it is indeed November. I find it hard to brush aside what I see as bad habits forming. If they are fatigued that is fine, but things aren't going to get any easier.

I do have confidence that they will turn it around because if they don't and are playing this loose come May they will have difficulty advancing. Full stop.

 

[ChiTownCode]

Last season obviously spoiled the hell out of us... Some legit concerns and some overreactions but at the end of the day I'm sure there are a few other clubs around the league that would like to have our problems- We're playing for a repeat and most others are playing for a playoff spot.

It'll get fixed and if it doesn't 3 in 6 wouldn't be too bad.

 

[SLarmer28*]

2013-14 Chicago Blackhawks

Shot allowed per game: 27.1

http://www.nhl.com/ice/teamstats.ht...&sort=avgShotsAgainstPerGame&viewName=summary

2009-10 Chicago Blackhawks

Shots allowed per game: 25.1

http://www.nhl.com/ice/teamstats.ht...&sort=avgShotsAgainstPerGame&viewName=summary

 

[SLarmer28*]

2013-14 Chicago Blackhawks

Goals allowed per game: 2.91

http://www.nhl.com/ice/teamstats.htm?season=20132014&gameType=2&viewName=goalsAgainst

2009-10 Chicago Blackhawks

Goals allowed per game: 2.48

http://www.nhl.com/ice/teamstats.ht...=avgGoalsAgainstPerGame&viewName=goalsAgainst

 

[SLarmer28*]

2013-14 Chicago Blackhawks

Penalty Kill Percentage: 74.2

http://www.nhl.com/ice/teamstats.ht...rt=penaltyKillPercentage&viewName=penaltyKill

2009-10 Chicago Blackhawks

Penalty Kill Percentage: 85.3

http://www.nhl.com/ice/teamstats.htm?season=20092010&gameType=2&viewName=penaltyKill

 

[LandofLincoln*]

They should probably trade Keith. He's a bum

that would be selling low

 

[Oh_so_saad]

Fire q

 

[Kurtosis]

Fire q

0/10 for originality.

 

[SLarmer28*]

Fire q

Somewhere ...... ColdSteelOnIce is smiling.

 

[SLarmer28*]

Agreed. 2.55 and .905% are fine.

Disagree. Both numbers are worse than his rookie season.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/c/crawfco01.html

 

[here come the]

Agreed. 2.55 and .905% are fine.

In what world is .905 good?

 

[zac]

Figured I would address the elephant in the room at this juncture in the season that is the Hawks' terrible defense up to this point.

With much of the same personnel from last season's top 3 defense it is mystifying why this team cannot keep the puck out of its own net. I think the easy scapegoat could be Crawford, but the majority of the goals being let in can be placed directly at the feet (or skates if you will) of the defense.

I am not really sure what the solution is at this point, but coupled with the woes of the PK, this team will not advance in the playoffs if the problem is not addressed (and addressed in an effective manner).

Our defensemen are playing much better than they were last year on the overall. Seabs is better. Keith is playing at or maybe slightly below his play last year. Hammer and Oduya have been fine, Leddy has been great while Roszy (better of late) is a little under last year's play.

Our problems lie with turnovers and the forward position. Defensively our forwards have been trash once the puck is established in the zone. Point men and peripheral players are yielded WAY too much space; this leads to ample passing lanes and space to walk up and blast 15 footers on our goalie. We have been and will likely never be a really strong team around the net on either side. We lack the physical bangers, and several of our players: Keith, Seabrook, Kruger, etc. are absolutely putrid at clearing pucks out in front of the net (whiff clears, poor puck location, etc.).

Another problem, especially on the PP, is that we suck at clearing pucks in general. Too often we skate at the puck softly and simply look to chip it out of the zone. If no one's around you and it's been a short possession I'm fine with that, but JFC if the puck has been in your zone for a long time AND you have pressure, crank it out of there. We've given up WAAAYYY too many extended possessions with ******** half-hearted clears that turn into turnovers.

Simply put we need to clear up the mistakes, emphasize more aggressive perimeter defensive play from our forwards (this includes the 8x8 clown box we use on the PK), and start getting pucks out of the zone with authority. Icing the isn't ideal, but the opposition can't score if the puck isn't in the zone. Nashville selectively used this approach against us when we had long possession. If the "safe clear" wasn't there, they blasted that thing out and lived to fight another day. It's better to ice the puck and get a little bit of a break, than to turn it over and make an already long possession even longer. We do that stuff way too often.

Q's not much of a problem solver so the odds of this stuff getting fixed is just about zero.

 

[zac]

Agreed. 2.55 and .905% are fine.

Crawford's most consistent problem had been playing the puck around the net. He's made some brutal decisions that have resulted directly to goals, or turnover that led to goals.

His in goal play though? It hasn't been that bad, likely on par with last year. The difference is we've been sloppier (leading to better scoring possessions) and that our forwards are making it VERY EASY for the opposition to get great shots. The are gravitated too close to the net, yielding too much room, and often times screening our goalie. WTF do you expect Crawford to do, pull miracles out of his ass?

Last night he gave up a goal on a point blank shot ripped off the post from 10 feet, a redirected shot, and a bang bang pass/shot from 3 feet out. Now tell me what goalie in the NHL would stop those shots? I'll answer it for you, NO ONE. If you want to say the first one's his fault because of a poor puck play I'll give you that, but from a save perspective he had no chance.

 

[CPHawksFan]

So this is the Stanley Cup hangover...I'll take it

 

[Bubba88]

this time its a 82 game schedule and nobody really cares if you lose a game in november... have plenty of time to make up for that loss and when you are as good as our team is, you don't give 100% effort every game.
Inconsistent goaltending is part too, but Craw has been fine for most of the time other than a few games

 

[Sevanston]

Crawford's looked like a standard workhorse #1 goalie this year, just like last year. Comes up with the occasional big game, but mostly just gives the team a chance to win. The difference is last year our defense could make a workhorse goalie look fantastic, and this year they aren't.

I do agree that this team isn't going very far in the playoffs if they keep playing such sloppy defense. At this point it's starting to look less like rust and more like laziness or coaching errors, but it's something that should certainly be fixable within the season.

 

[Bubba88]

Raanta will take some games away from CC. At least more than Khabby would

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Goalie #'s are crap to begin with. It's definitely the one position in hockey that the eye test is way more important than the stats. Is Ray Emery a .922 goalie?

 

[Bubba88]

no he isn't, but he is way better than Khabby was so far... numbers still tell the same as the eye test does.