Playoff Push Thread

[Cowch]

Avs losing today makes it look more and more like Hawks can dictate their own destiny. Do they have the character to pull it off? Are they hungry enough? I know Toews is.

I'm trying to think if there's anyone else, but Toews, Koekkoek, Murphy, Saad, and sometimes Keith all look pissed off out there. I want more of that.

 

[DontToewzMeBro]

Not giving up yet.

St. Louis was dead as can be 15 games back. We (mostly) thought they were done, now the hottest team in the NHL from BINNINGTON. Who would have thought?

Hawks need to beat less talented teams. And yes play more physical.

 

[JaegerDice]

Not giving up yet.

St. Louis was dead as can be 15 games back. We (mostly) thought they were done, now the hottest team in the NHL from BINNINGTON. Who would have thought?

Hawks need to beat less talented teams. And yes play more physical.

Yeah, but most people expected St Louis to be pretty good this season based on the talent on their roster.

They went into a spiral and have corrected. Which isn't to say they're world beaters, but a solid playoff team was kinda what most people had pictured for that lineup before they went off the rails. They're only now putting things together and reaching that potential or expectation

Nobody felt the Blackhawks had a sniff of the playoffs, and if not for half of the Western Conference imploding, they still wouldn't. It seems a larger stretch that a bad team would figure things out, than a pretty good team that had a bad run would figure things out.

 

[jls24]

The Blues are playing much better but they are getting unrealistic goaltending right now.

It will be telling how well they play when the goaltending cools off to normal levels. They should still be fine bc they are playing so much better in general, unless they're goaltending cools off to below avg.

 

[DontToewzMeBro]

Yeah, but most people expected St Louis to be pretty good this season based on the talent on their roster.

They went into a spiral and have corrected. Which isn't to say they're world beaters, but a solid playoff team was kinda what most people had pictured for that lineup before they went off the rails. They're only now putting things together and reaching that potential or expectation

Nobody felt the Blackhawks had a sniff of the playoffs, and if not for half of the Western Conference imploding, they still wouldn't. It seems a larger stretch that a bad team would figure things out, than a pretty good team that had a bad run would figure things out.

Ah, hindsight though. That spiral was bad. This goalie and defencd has given them life.When you compare the two teams, I don’t feel St.Louis is better. They are definitely more physical, but minus Ken Dryden Binnington in net, I feel like the hawks could put up a fight or win a series between them.

 

[JaegerDice]

Ah, hindsight though. That spiral was bad. This goalie and defencd has given them life.When you compare the two teams, I don’t feel St.Louis is better. They are definitely more physical, but minus Ken Dryden Binnington in net, I feel like the hawks could put up a fight or win a series between them.

I mean, in a weird way it's both hindsight and foresight, since many people had them pegged to be good, but then gave up on them when they were spiraling the drain.

I don't think the Blackhawks lineup is as good. I don't think the defense is anywhere near as good, and I think while the Blackhawks have better top-end talent, the Blues have more depth across 4 lines.

Do I think they'd get swept by the Blues in the same way I think they would by a Nashville or San Jose? No. But I don't think they win that series either.

 

[SnakePlissken]

I mean, in a weird way it's both hindsight and foresight, since many people had them pegged to be good, but then gave up on them when they were spiraling the drain.

I don't think the Blackhawks lineup is as good. I don't think the defense is anywhere near as good, and I think while the Blackhawks have better top-end talent, the Blues have more depth across 4 lines.

Do I think they'd get swept by the Blues in the same way I think they would by a Nashville or San Jose? No. But I don't think they win that series either.

Agreed.

I think preseason expectations should be factored into the "anything can happen if you just make the playoffs" debate. There's a big difference between a team that squeaks in with a high PDO or otherwise appears to be overachieving vs. a team that was expected to be good and had a bad stretch early in the season for whatever reason.

2017 is a perfect example, where Nashville was one of the preseason favorites to win the Central, along with the Hawks and Dallas. They started really slowly but got things back on track and were a legit threat as the WC2. Of course, Dallas is an example where the writers totally misevaluated in their predictions, but I think the point is valid regardless of the misses.

 

[ColdSteel2]

Berube deserves a lot of credit for the turnaround in St. Louis too. Binnington is playing well, but he’s not facing much quantity or quality of shots. And that chip pass into the neutral zone he has them doing to create breakaways and odd man rushes is working really well.

 

[BobbyJet]

I mean, in a weird way it's both hindsight and foresight, since many people had them pegged to be good, but then gave up on them when they were spiraling the drain.

I don't think the Blackhawks lineup is as good. I don't think the defense is anywhere near as good, and I think while the Blackhawks have better top-end talent, the Blues have more depth across 4 lines.

Do I think they'd get swept by the Blues in the same way I think they would by a Nashville or San Jose? No. But I don't think they win that series either.

Yeah. Any time I watch or hear about Blues I usually hear how solid their D corps is. They have been underachievers for sure, so no real surprise that they are playing much better and are on a 10-game winning streak (last I looked). The bold above pretty much sums up the difference between St Louis vs Chicago.

 

[ChiHawk21]

its kinda crazy they are on pace for just 3 more points then last year. feels like they have been better up to now.

 

[BK]

What would people's thought be if we passed on Stone and Panarin and instead sign Matt D for a lesser deal. This would give the team 3c high end centers and 3 legit scoring lines. Just another thought.

88-19-91
12-17-24
20-MD-95 (place holder)
EB-64-MH

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

What would people's thought be if we passed on Stone and Panarin and instead sign Matt D for a lesser deal. This would give the team 3c high end centers and 3 legit scoring lines. Just another thought.

88-19-91
12-17-24
20-MD-95 (place holder)
EB-64-MH

It would have to be a whole lot less for me to be interested. I'm very wary of Duechene. Before this year, 4 seasons not hitting 60 pts and now in a contract year with a brutal team he's on pace for 90+ pts. He scares me at the money he's going to likely demand.

 

[ColdSteel2]

No interest at all in Duchene. He seems like someone that would crumble in the playoffs. He should stay in Ottawa, it’s a perfect place for him to succeed.

 

[BK]

No interest at all in Duchene. He seems like someone that would crumble in the playoffs. He should stay in Ottawa, it’s a perfect place for him to succeed.

He has only played 8 playoff games but has 6 points. Not really much of a sample size.

 

[ColdSteel2]

He has only played 8 playoff games but has 6 points. Not really much of a sample size.

The circus around his trade out of Colorado, how the Avs took off after he left and his struggles right after the trade were red flags that he isn’t good in pressure situations.

 

[BK]

The circus around his trade out of Colorado, how the Avs took off after he left and his struggles right after the trade were red flags that he isn’t good in pressure situations.

I mean how much of the circus was on him?

I don't disagree to a point but I think reading pretty deep into the situation imo. Just a difference of view depths.

 

[ColdSteel2]

I mean how much of the circus was on him?

I don't disagree to a point but I think reading pretty deep into the situation imo. Just a difference of view depths.

Hopefully he gets traded to a playoff team and shows otherwise. As it stands, it’s risky.

 

[shidler]

Not giving up yet.

St. Louis was dead as can be 15 games back. We (mostly) thought they were done, now the hottest team in the NHL from BINNINGTON. Who would have thought?

Hawks need to beat less talented teams. And yes play more physical.

The Hawks do not have any physical player other than Cagguila and Hayden maybe.

 

[Enyaw]

Going into tonight's game ....... 2/18/19

Hawks with a 10.3% chance to make playoffs

NHL Playoff Odds -MoneyPuck Analytics Based Playoff & Cup Odds

 

[BobbyJet]

Going into tonight's game ....... 2/18/19

Hawks with a 10.3% chance to make playoffs

NHL Playoff Odds -MoneyPuck Analytics Based Playoff & Cup Odds

That number seems too low, everything considered.

 

[SotasicA]

That number seems too low, everything considered.

Seems about right to me. Hawks need to go on an unlikely run to make it, and hope another bubble team won't match it.

 

[x Tame Impala]

The %chance to make the playoffs seems very arbitrary to me and therefore not very interesting (no offense). It was as low as 1.8% or something like that a month ago and didn’t it get to as high as 17% before the Boston loss?

 

[SotasicA]

The Hawks are a last place team. There's a lot of teams to leap frog. It's not completely in their own hands, barring a miracle run.

 

[ColdSteel2]

The %chance to make the playoffs seems very arbitrary to me and therefore not very interesting (no offense). It was as low as 1.8% or something like that a month ago and didn’t it get to as high as 17% before the Boston loss?

Yeah, they use this stat in baseball a lot. I swear it seems like every year either some team with a single digit chance ends up making it or a team with a 90+% chance to make it misses.

 

[x Tame Impala]

Yeah, they use this stat in baseball a lot. I swear it seems like every year either some team with a single digit chance ends up making it or a team with a 90+% chance to make it misses.

I have a fundamental lack of understanding for statistics so I’m sure it does actually make sense, it just doesn’t click with me in laymen’s terms. It’s like back in the 2015 SCF. Hawks won game 1 and they said “game 1 winner has 76% chance to win it all” then Hawks lost game 2 and they said “game 2 winner has 91% chance to win it all”...it’s so vague and irrelevant IMO