JC's Change Tracker

Status
Not open for further replies.

AmericanDream

Thank you Elon!
Oct 24, 2005
36,959
26,271
Chicago Manitoba
“(Rutta rotating in w/ Jokiharju)”
no other place really for Rutta to slot in at - Seabs and Manning seem the pair JC wants, and he obviously likes the balance that a Gus/Murph pair can do - I like it as well...Gus will have someone to help cover for his type of play..Rutta and Joker swapping doesn't mean to me that Joker is in danger of scratching but more along the lines of wanting to get Rutta into the practice and not disturbing the other two pairs JC likely wants to keep...

if there is any chance that Joker gets scratched for Rutta you will have my 100% apology and a pitchfork will be headed for JC lol...and as you said no harm in sending a message to Joker that if he wants to stay on the top pair he has to play like it - the past week hasn't been the best for Joker despite JC moving him around...not happy with JC on his defense pairs but Joker can and will play better.
 

CanadianHawks

Registered User
Feb 23, 2018
1,430
1,200
Why in the hell is he intent on keeping Manning with Seabrook? Is he a dumb***, tanking or really thinking that playing with Seabrook will increase Mannings value
 

Blackhawks

Registered User
Jul 25, 2007
5,678
1,134
3-10-2

This kid should be sent back to the AHL so he can progress correctly, he was called up way too fast, he needs a lot more minutes in the A.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: joshprost99

idontusethisanymore

This is joshprost99
Apr 6, 2016
1,169
923
3-10-2

This kid should be sent back to the AHL so he can progress correctly, he was called up way too fast, he needs a lot more minutes in the A.

Yeah I've been thinking the same way. Hockey in North America is different than Hockey in Sweden, and even the NHL and AHL are different. Plus he's way younger than any other coach in the league, so he obviously has the least experience out of all of them. Unless Bowman thought that he was the guy after just one season, he should've stayed as the coach of Rockford.
 

helicon1

Registered User
Jan 4, 2010
544
29
Since Q and JC have coached about the same number of games I've been looking at some underlying numbers for each stint. Although it's way too early for any kind of evaluation, everything seems to suggest Q and JC should have had around the same record. Basically, the main differences were luck, goaltending, and Q getting to play the Blues two extra games.

At 5on5, expected goal percentage was 44.76% for Q, and 45.77% for JC. Both of these are terrible, and reflective of the talent level, but things may actually be improving process wise under JC. If you just look at his last 7 or 8 games, the numbers look even better. Although still well below 50%. The luck factor is also kind of reflected in the goal differential during each stint. Q was expected to be at about -6 5on5, but was only -3. JC also had an expected differential of -6, but they were -11 during his stretch.

Part of the reason for the difference in expected goals seems to be JC doing a slightly better job at both generating high danger chances for, and limiting chances against. Not to any great amount but it basically comes out to half a chance more per game, half a chance less against a game. The hdcf% went from 43.64 to 46.33. Again still terrible, but an improvement.

Pace of play may be the biggest difference between the two. Q has been more run and gun the past two seasons. This year they were near the top of the league in attempts, but at the bottom in the amount they gave up. Under JC, they've been middle of the pack in both. Q had a slightly better shot attempt share at just over 51%. Under JC it`s just over 50.

Goaltending issues have been more about the types of goals given up lately, but the save % was higher under Q - 91.41 to 90.76 (just 5on5). There was a bigger difference on the pk, with Q getting 86.75 and JC 82.09 (near the bottom of the league). Shooting % has been low for both teams - 7.24 (Q) and 7.36 (JC). Both teams took about the same number of penalties but the JC team is much better at drawing them for some reason. JC is +2 penalties drew versus taken, to Q's -12.

Looked at special teams too, but it seems way to small a sample size. PP hasn't changed too much, although there has been a pretty big increase in shot attempts under JC. A lot of it I think is coming from the point. Q actually had a slightly higher expected goals per 60, but it`s not much of a difference. There was a bigger difference on the pk. Basically we should be giving up one more power play goal against every 15 game or so under JC. Weirdly, we're also expected to score about 1 and a half more short handed goals over that same 15 game stretch under JC. They have seemed a little more aggressive in terms of forcing turnovers and and taking chances at times, but I didn't expect that much of a difference.
 

RememberTheRoar

“I’m not as worried about the 5-on-5 scoring.”
Oct 21, 2015
23,119
21,154
That's me in the corner
Can someone explain to me why Toews and Kane no longer work together?

You look at Calgary and see that Monahan and Gaudreau have basically been tied at the hip for years, and this year they’re the engine behind one of the best teams in hockey.

Obviously it helps they’re getting more than a PPG from Tkachuk on the second line, and offensive from the blue line in Giordano, but it’s not like they’re getting insane depth scoring.

But looking how that roster is built, everything still starts with Monahan-Gaudreau and it’s working. Why can’t Toews-Kane together dominate the same why those two do?
 

ClydeLee

Registered User
Mar 23, 2012
11,713
5,263
Can someone explain to me why Toews and Kane no longer work together?

You look at Calgary and see that Monahan and Gaudreau have basically been tied at the hip for years, and this year they’re the engine behind one of the best teams in hockey.

Obviously it helps they’re getting more than a PPG from Tkachuk on the second line, and offensive from the blue line in Giordano, but it’s not like they’re getting insane depth scoring.

But looking how that roster is built, everything still starts with Monahan-Gaudreau and it’s working. Why can’t Toews-Kane together dominate the same why those two do?
They put up good numbers this year together and did in March last year. This notion is not valid.

But the team is horrendously depthless when together
 

swerdnase

Registered User
Jan 27, 2013
727
767
I haven't looked at the actual stats but I think the answer is probably goal differential. T and K on the same line don't outscore the opponents as much as T and K on separate lines.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LDF

deytookerjaabs

Johnny Paycheck's Tank Advisor
Sep 26, 2010
13,294
5,260
Eastern Shore
I gotta bump this.

Given the Power Play AND Penalty Kill since JC came in, the lack of effort by players who certainly could be doing better by now, his only saving grace so far is the couple guys who seem to be working harder under him versus Q. I know there's many roster issues, but I'm talking about individuals who you absolutely know have been better in the very recent past are still going through the motions as much with JC as they did with Q....if not worse?


At the least, what I'm saying is a fire under most fellas' ***ses has yet to be lit and taking that into consideration what's the probability the same guy will be able to do that next year?
 

Hattrick Kane

Registered User
Oct 8, 2018
8,736
12,616
Seabrook needs to be permanently off the powerplay. The powerplay in general needs to be built around someone other than Kane. Him being the QB clearly isn’t working.

I like his defensive pairings though. And keep Strome and Cat glued together, they work too.

It’s gonna be a long season without Crow, so hopefully we see some improvement in the special teams. That’s as much as I’ll ask for right now.
 

RememberTheRoar

“I’m not as worried about the 5-on-5 scoring.”
Oct 21, 2015
23,119
21,154
That's me in the corner
One of the biggest challenges facing JC and the Blackhawks is how to handle Patrick Kane. His Alex Kovalev imitation is as bad as it has ever been.

Don’t you think it starts with cutting his minutes back and only using him in the offensive zone?

He had 18 minutes of even strength time tonight. Toews had 11:34.

I get that they were playing catch up, but for the season he’s averaging 3 more minutes at even strength than Toews. There has to be a point of diminishing returns with Kane’s ice time when he’s refusing to put in effort on defense.

If this is the Kane we’re going to see for the rest of his contract, I think you go out and sign a stud winger for Toews, not for Kane, so you can once again use that Toews line to dominate games. Even if you get Panarin, I’d rather see Panarin go play with Toews and Saad than loaf around with Kane.
 

Kaners Bald Spot

Registered User
Dec 6, 2011
22,704
10,812
Kane County, IL
Kaner =honey badger.
Kaner don't care. Kaner don't give a shit.
I'd imagine he's going to request to be traded shortly, and honestly, I don't think that is a bad thing for the Hawks.
 

RememberTheRoar

“I’m not as worried about the 5-on-5 scoring.”
Oct 21, 2015
23,119
21,154
That's me in the corner
Trade him for Ryan Miller

No, he has a point about Kane being a liability. Yes, Kane is a point per game player but you need to use him smartly.

He’s such a liability defensively (by choice, he has the skill to responsible) that he will basically give his scoring right back if he’s overused.

My theory is Colliton is overusing Kane because of his offensive flash and Colliton is not relying heavily enough on Toews to dictate the game through his responsible play.

I think that Toews line is missing an elite wing so that’s why Colliton is essentially giving it second line time at even strength. A new elite wing can be added this offseason in the draft or free agency, I think that’s a priority.
 

ClydeLee

Registered User
Mar 23, 2012
11,713
5,263
I've seen some people complain about things, that as stated by JC or the interview with Shuan King after JCs hire, that are more intune to what JCs system wants differently.

Things like some guys like Kane or others not going hard or lower in the dzone and moving out quick is what they said they wanted. There was that play Dahlbeck was battling vs 3 guys, and after a short hiccup & second attempt he got the puck out. But people were like why is no one helping him, because yeah you think to match bodies down low. But King and JC at least in Rockford and presumably now here push to want to try less bodies down low but push for that aggressive transition and have the D push the puck out to try to get better rushes.
 

BobbyJet

I am Canadian
Oct 27, 2010
29,736
9,838
Dundas, Ontario. Can
Kane plays the most of any forward and is -8.

He could probably be traded for two young top-6 players and a high draft pick.

And please don't tell me the -8 stat means nothing or that Kane is a Blackhawk for life. Any player can be traded but will it happen? Not a chance. The priority is very clear in Chicago. Winning is a distant second to strong ticket sales.
 
Last edited:

RememberTheRoar

“I’m not as worried about the 5-on-5 scoring.”
Oct 21, 2015
23,119
21,154
That's me in the corner
Kane plays the most of any forward and is -8.

He could probably be traded for two top-6 players and a high draft pick.

And please don't tell me the -8 stat means nothing or that Kane is a Blackhawk for life. Any player can be traded but will it happen? Not a chance. The priority is very clear in Chicago. Winning is a distant second to strong ticket sales.

I don’t know if you need to trade him, but I think Colliton has him on the ice too much, and has Toews on the ice not enough.
 

ChiHawks10

Registered User
Jul 7, 2009
27,917
21,139
Chicago 'Burbs
Highly doubt Kane is traded, let alone asks for a trade.

And love the complaints about his D. His D has always been an issue. It's just something to complain about now since the Hawks are bad, and losing a lot.
 

ChiHawk21

Registered User
Jan 15, 2011
7,310
1,552
Kane plays the most of any forward and is -8.

He could probably be traded for two young top-6 players and a high draft pick.

And please don't tell me the -8 stat means nothing or that Kane is a Blackhawk for life. Any player can be traded but will it happen? Not a chance. The priority is very clear in Chicago. Winning is a distant second to strong ticket sales.
kane is a player thats necessary in helping a team in the future win tho. someone has to collect points and do it regularly. Nobody else on this team can do that. hes going to be able to do that for another maybe 6-8 years. i dont like the idea of trading him.
 

BobbyJet

I am Canadian
Oct 27, 2010
29,736
9,838
Dundas, Ontario. Can
Highly doubt Kane is traded, let alone asks for a trade.

And love the complaints about his D. His D has always been an issue. It's just something to complain about now since the Hawks are bad, and losing a lot.

Actually, the consideration to shop Kane (and Keith) is all about the big picture and what this line-up will look like in 2021 and beyond. It's not about optics.
 

BK

"Goalie Apologist"
Feb 8, 2011
33,636
16,483
Minneapolis, MN
Actually, the consideration to shop Kane (and Keith) is all about the big picture and what this line-up will look like in 2021 and beyond. It's not about optics.

The question is though, will Kane's return replace his production over the remainder of his contract? I have my doubts.

I keep Kane, Toews, Saad, and Keith and try to more the rest.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->