[A] The Hot Seat: Joel Quenneville

[Ton]

The Blackhawks have dropped six games straight, only gaining a single point during the their worst stretch of the season. The last four games have been spent on the road with no success; outscored by the opposition 17-to-9 so far.



Heck, the six game skid has only highlighted the Blackhawks problems, but in reality they have only won 8 games in their last 21 games.



Pushing all the wrong buttons lately, Quenneville has certainly been a hot candidate in taking the fall for the Blackhawks woes. The question is, will he?



It's quite clear that the lack of an aggressive system has played a role in the Blackhawks slide down the standings, more specifically their lax style of defense, showing no aggression or desperation to win the puck. Rather than being aggressive, Quenneville has opted for his crew to cover lanes, block shots, and remain passive.



The result: the Blackhawks almost standing still at moments, waiting for turnovers, and allowing the opposing defenseman enough space to get involved in the play. In fact, defenseman have had so much space they've scored 5 goals and assisted on 12 during the six game slide. For a better perspective, in the last six games the Blackhawks have scored 14 goals while the opposing defense has combined for 17 points, 15 of them involved on different goals.



That is an embarrassing amount of space allowed for them to out-score the entire Hawks team in the same time span.



Do the Blackhawks need to simplify? Perhaps, but it seems as if they have mistaken simplification with passiveness. Simplifying the system to the point that the forwards are afraid to make a play in the defensive zone is a big mistake that has cost them six games in a row. The players refuse to admit that they have lost faith in Quenneville (what player would admit that anyway?) despite being ineffective in getting the most out of some of his players. His defensive system has lacked the puck pursuit and desperation that made the Blackhawks successful in the past, coupled with his frustrating use of line combinations, the pot seems to be boiling over.



What happened to the coach that would send a message to his players by benching them ala Kane and Sharp years ago? Just more evidence that his methods have become somewhat soft. While the players may respect him, they certainly are not producing results. Years ago, some of these same players had the same respect for Denis Savard before watching their mentor fired in place of a coach that placed more responsibility on the players to be effective. That coach was Joel Quenneville--now on the verge of finding himself in Savard's shoes, full circle.



They need to keep things simple in a different sense. They need to forget the past--the best memory they can have is no memory at all. Be hungry, pursue the puck, work hard, and take each shift one at a time. This is the identity Joel Quenneville has seemingly lost over the course of his tenure behind the Blackhawks bench. I don't think it's time for him to see his way out of the door just yet, but it is clear that he has had an issue which is no longer a bump in the road, but a mountain he must overcome. The rest of the season will certainly determine the outcome of Quenneville's Blackhawks career.



On the other side of the coin, Joel has admitted that the power-play has been so bad, they've actually been losing momentum as a result of the man advantage. Today, Quenneville put a lot of emphasize on improving the power-play despite the defensive struggles. Although both areas need improvement, he may seem to think that the Blackhawks are in a situation where fixing the momentum issues may have a trickle down effect.



At this point I think it's safe to say his days are numbered if this continues, but no doubt if he can turn things around he will extend his stay in Chicago. People quickly forget that Joel currently remains as one of the best coaches in Blackhawks history, topping the list for winning percentage, surpassing Rudy Pilous as the 2nd coach in all-time games won, and capping off his career with a Cup ring. The Blackhawks brass will certainly give him leeway due to his prior success, and something that they may ride out for the rest of the season and evaluate during the summer mostly due to the fact that it may be too late to make such a change this late in the season. Unless the Blackhawks turmoil continues to spiral at an alarming rate, Quenneville will be safe until the off-season.



Click here to view the article

 

[supraman]

Yeah but only 1 cup. That tells you something.



I get it, he's a great coach and all that but I want him out of Chicago. This team doesn't have a lack of talent problem. It has to be a coaching issue.

 

[the canadian dream]

Great stuff Ton. Really really good stuff.



I think you broke down the defensive woas perfectly and what is the problem with the defensive system. I still think goalie issues this season hasnt helped the overall defensive system and the goals against but still agree with you 100%.



Still in the top 5 in the league for goals for. So despite the defensive system sucking eggs there is still production in other areas on the ice. Things that can certainly be built on. If Q had indeed lost his players I would think that team offensive production would be down as would core players numbers (Toews still could get career numbers). Other than Kane the core is averaging core numbers. Maybe Q has lost Kane. Who knows but the rest of the core dont appear to be suffering too badly as far as offensive output goes..defensively...its strange if you want to go stats. The core forward players + - numbers are pretty much on average. Keiths + - is way off of his average but his offensive numbers are on average with his career numbers (not close to his Norris year though...shocked..not me). Seabs + - are on average but his offensive numbers are down. So strange.



I dont think Q is losing his team. I think he on pace to be losing certain players though. Kane as far as core guys go up front. And maybe Seabs a bit on defense (Keith I think is a victom of too many minutes played and since Campbells departure its even more evident).



I do think the defensive system does stink to high heaven and goalkeeping hasnt helped.



I dont think the depth guys are overly talented to be honest and are not great additions to Qs coaching system anyways. But as you have said before Ton its a half rebuild so its expected.



Bolland is also one of the most interesting cases on this team and how he is being used (he isnt core but he is our best forward depth outside the core). He is on pace for career goals this year already has career pp numbers and sh numbers yet his + - is way off his average. Is that system or is that a shitty 3rd line responsible for the + -. When Bolland is used with real wingers he is highly productive when buried around garbage wingers his game gets brought down to their level. To me that is both a coaching and GM problem. Coaching should be playing him 2nd line and if thats not happening then the GM needs to put better skill around him on that 3rd line. Theres something fishy going on with how both Q and Bowman are approaching the 3rd line and Bolland..I dont like it. Bolland should have been playing constant 2nd line minutes long long long ago into this season.



Blueline....I have no idea whats wrong with it other than what you mentioned Ton. Defenisve system is def broken. Its also not a very well structured blueline anyways. Q has looked to lost his ability to coach defense i will agree 100% on that. What he has had to work with on the blueline and team defense he hasnt done a good job with. Not the best blueline on paper anymore but its still good enough to be getting better production. Again the goalkeeping has not helped but that is a little chicken and egg stuff also on most nights.



I wrote a lot of tripe here I know.

 

[Ton]

I don't think the team has any issues offensively because they are good when they have the puck. They are a fine puck possession team, the problem is actually getting the puck. Of course our core will have high point totals with the talent loaded on the top 2 lines also combined with Q's preaching of puck possession and patience, I think it will continue to work as long as they have the puck.



The Cup winning team wasn't *just* a puck possession team. They were hungry, they pursued the puck, and they fought for every inch of space--It was "high-tempo" 2 years ago. Outside of a few older players, I believe we can still play a high-tempo game without killing ourselves defensively, but we have to strike quick and burn teams in transition. The faster we get the puck, the faster we can play our puck possession game. But since then, Q has seemed to take a more passive approach in trying to rely on positioning and covering lanes. Why? Are we really that slow? Where is the pressure?



If that's the case, then perhaps he needs to have different expectations for each line, because this passive approach isn't working for all of them.



Also, I don't think it's the blueline that is the issue, it's the entire team defense. Sure, we can use a top 4 defenseman but it won't mean squat if our forwards can't provide enough pressure to help them out. Its the forwards leaving the opposing defenseman open to make plays, not our D. Also, don't get me wrong, it's not like this is the only problem the Hawks have defensively, it's just the most prominent one that could be fixed and needs to be fixed IMO.

 

[dlrob315]

Number 2 team in the league in take aways and number 6 team in face offs, the Hawks do not have a problem of actually getting the puck. The Hawks have a problem of giving up too many soft goals and too many defensive break downs which leads to pucks in the net which results in them yielding one of the worse save% in the league and to compound things, they are one of the worse PK's in the league but getting the puck is not their problem.

 

[Ton]

That may be true for the majority of the season (when they were #1 in the league), but certainly not the past 6 games. They have not put enough pressure defensively to create the same amount of turnovers that they did earlier in the year (preferably compared to 2 years ago), and their faceoff numbers are bad. Also, the takeaway stat isn't an accurate indication of creating a turnover/placing pressure to gain possession. In other words, every time the puck is turned over, it is not recorded as a takeaway. An example would be Player A placing pressure on Player B (stick on stick, hitting him, tying him up etc) and forcing a bad pass or forcing the puck loose for someone else to pick up--most statisticians would not consider this a direct takeaway while others will, it's too inconsistent to use accurately. More pressure = more mistakes by the other team and less opportunities for them to "breakdown" our defense, there is no stat for this. Perhaps showing the opposing defense and their production the last few games is a perfect example of placing no pressure to gain possession as they have had enough time to produce as much as our top lines--but still, I don't think any stat can really show it accurately.

 

[the canadian dream]

Can we all agree though that goalkeeping has been a big problem this year and has effected team defense and also goal against stats. It has also cost us more games than goalkeeping has in years (perhaps even more games than Huet cost us).



there are so many issues with team defense right now and poor goalkeeping certainly doesnt lend a hand in the players up front being more confident away from the puck.



I like Crawford..I really do..but talk about a disappointing season thus far. I am meh with Emery and always have been. Both have not won us enough games up to this point and both have cost us more games than any goalkeeper should through a season. Thats a big black mark for me. And I know the argument is always there that poor defense can create poor goalkeeping. It works the other way around also.



Maybe some of the team looking like they are not responding to Q is actaully the team not responding to the goalkeeping.



Just a theory but I bet its part of the current issues. No way goalkeeping gets a pass the last 6 games either as something that has been top notch and something that hasnèt cost us points.



Ton may have a difference in opinion on this being a goalie himself.

 

[Ton]

As far as I can tell, it looks like the goaltenders are instructed to play at the top of their crease (sometimes beyond) and challenge the shot.



It hasn't been good either but I don't think it's a lack of talent. It needs to get better but honestly that's not something Quenneville has much control over--which is why I didn't mention it. All he can do is pick one to start, and either way it's really not much of a difference.

 

[howcho]

For a high scoring team, we sure don't seem to score many goals!



Read important goals, key goals, game tying goals, game winning goals. Maybe a lot of garbage goals?

 

[dlrob315]

That may be true for the majority of the season (when they were #1 in the league), but certainly not the past 6 games. They have not put enough pressure defensively to create the same amount of turnovers that they did earlier in the year (preferably compared to 2 years ago), and their faceoff numbers are bad. Also, the takeaway stat isn't an accurate indication of creating a turnover/placing pressure to gain possession. In other words, every time the puck is turned over, it is not recorded as a takeaway. An example would be Player A placing pressure on Player B (stick on stick, hitting him, tying him up etc) and forcing a bad pass or forcing the puck loose for someone else to pick up--most statisticians would not consider this a direct takeaway while others will, it's too inconsistent to use accurately. More pressure = more mistakes by the other team and less opportunities for them to "breakdown" our defense, there is no stat for this. Perhaps showing the opposing defense and their production the last few games is a perfect example of placing no pressure to gain possession as they have had enough time to produce as much as our top lines--but still, I don't think any stat can really show it accurately.

True assessment, and when the team has trouble getting the puck in the defensive zone it is because the players have in their head they must be in their zone coverage and this is why you see a lack of guys finishing body checks and resort to stick checking so they can maintain their zone coverage. The scheme has this group so confused, they don't know if they should committ or stay in the zone...way too much thinking.



This is why it does not matter who the Hawks bring in at the TDL, once that player is instructed to stick check so he is always in postition to receive a potential pass, the new player will succumb to the scheme. Montador & Brunette did not just automatically become less gritty, what is the common denominator...the Blackhawks scheme. Mayer has been good but he is not as rough and tough like he used to be and has nothing to do with his age, remember Carcillo became a play maker back in November and was less effective...it is the scheme and a new culture and new scheme is needed.



The coaching is in these boys head....big time. I really believe these guys want to go out and hit but the coaching has them confused.

 

[Ton]

True assessment, and when the team has trouble getting the puck in the defensive zone it is because the players have in their head they must be in their zone coverage and this is why you see a lack of guys finishing body checks and resort to stick checking so they can maintain their zone coverage. The scheme has this group so confused, they don't know if they should committ or stay in the zone...way too much thinking.



This is why it does not matter who the Hawks bring in at the TDL, once that player is instructed to stick check so hw is always in postition to receive a potential pass, the new player will succumb to the scheme. Montador & Brunette did not just automatically become less gritty, what is the common denominator...the Blackhawks scheme. Mayer has been good but he is not as rough and tough like he used to be and has nothing to do with his age, remember Carcillo became a play maker back in November and was less effective...it is the scheme and new culture that needs to be broke.



The coaching is in these boys head....big time. I really believe these guys want to go out and hit but the coaching has them confused.

Funny because the players keep talking about "keeping it simple"... the product doesn't look "simple" to me either. I agree, it looks confusing as hell.



When they do commit, they are caught chasing because they second guess themselves and by the time they decide to commit its too late. When your playing well, you're not thinking, it just comes naturally. Looking at the way our game flowed in 2010 compared to now, it definitely looks like they are thinking way too much.

 

[Shantz My Pants]

The Hawks give the opposition too many quality shots. Our gap control is horrendous and teams get a free pass practically to the front of the net. I don't think our goalies are terrible, problem is they get left out to dry too much.



There is no puck possession in our game. The Hawks can't make more then 3 passes without turning it over or giving up a wasted effort on a weak perimeter shot. Watch the Wings play, they have the puck 75-80% of the game making simple but effective passes. Hawks break the puck out and it's typically in the other teams possession after it hits the first forward (unless it's that stupid hard wrap around the boards to the forward at center ice, then it gets picked off before hand).



When I brought up "hitting", I essentially chose the wrong word. Physical and aggressive style of hockey would have been much more appropriate and that is exactly what the 2010 team had. Our 3rd and 4th line were grinders and bangers, they made the other team have to work the puck out and look over their shoulder. It wasn't essentially hitting them, but finishing checks, showing more aggressiveness and as you stated Ton, this team is too passive.



Last year two of the most "aggressive and physical" teams in the NHL played for the Stanley Cup. This offseason the Hawks took a step in the right direction in adding aggressive players, but the ones we added weren't a fit (O'Donnell, Montador, Carcillo to an extent). Hopefully we can start at the deadline or offseason in adding younger grit that can help us.

 

[Shantz My Pants]

This is also why I would say in a best of 7 series, the Bruins would destroy the Hawks with how they are playing the last two years.

 

[Ton]

I don't know, I think the Hawks have been fine with puck possession. There are times where they are in the offensive zone and keep possession of the puck for the entire shift. They've had plenty of offensively dominate stretches this season where they possess the puck, but so has the opposing team.



Sometimes they create bad turnovers in the defensive zone, but as far as in the offensive zone, I don't see any problem with maintaining control of the puck for extended periods.

 

[the canadian dream]

This is also why I would say in a best of 7 series, the Bruins would destroy the Hawks with how they are playing the last two years.

A lot of teams..not just the Bruins. Canucks and Wings would fair well against us (as of right now both would beat us in a 7 game series). Rangers would also. Blues probably could as could the Preds the way they play us. Im not going to sit here and wear Hawk blinders and say this is a great team because I cheer for them..i watch and look at a whole shit load of other teams every night. Its simply not a good team outside of its core. There is absolutley zero 3rd line on this club with Bolland centering no one. There is not good depth on the blueline and there has not been good goalkeeping. No team wins shit without a good 3rd line and better blueline depth and good goalkeeping. No team.



Dont fool yourself. Its not ALL coaching. Def a lot to do with coaching but that isnt the entire problem. 80% of the teams in the NHL have a decent to good core group. About 65% to 70% of the teams in the NHL have better and seasoned depth players than us up front and at the back. Right now about 80% of the teams have better goalkeeping.



Hawks are a 2 line team up front whos coach cant even solidify the 2nd line by using the proper center there. Our 4th line is alright and thats due to Meyers only. Qès biggest fault up front is trying to balance lines with inadequate depth players he has been given to do it with. Thats up front. On the back end I agree Q has no idea what the **** he is doing with defense anymore.



Agree though the quality shots the Hawks give up are too many (at even strength). Disagree that goalkeeping doesnt have a responsibility in dealing with some of those shots though..its their job to stop some difficult shots and to not allow the easy ones in. Ours are not doing the best job at that right now and have been inconsitent all season..good defense or not.



im going to go to stats here which i dont like doing but in this case are pretty telling (or could be) and this is just going to be PK related because there seems to be a lot of talk about PK system and PK defense. I find it an interesting discussion.



Guess where Cory Crawford is in save percentages on the PK in the league. 61st in the league..unecceptable even if one wants to bring up the defense excuse.



Guess how many shots Cory has faced on the PK...... 156. In actual fact looking around at the rest of the league that is actually a very low number of shots faced on the PK. So it sort of trumps everything people are saying about Crawford being hung out to dry on the PK by bad penalty killing. I dont know how many of those shots would be counted as quality ones but im taking a guess that out of 156 shots it aint that high of a percentage compared to the quality shots other goalies are facing on the PK.



156 shots Crawford has faced on the PK. Goals allowed...25 save percentage.....840



Lets compare that to some other goalies in the league who are deemed starters.



Quick has faced 254 PK shots 21. Goals allowed....21 save percentage .917



Craig Anderson has faced 278 shots on the PK. Goals allowed...32 save percentage .885



Cary Price has faced 206 shots...Goals allowed...18. Save percentage .908



Jonas Hiller has faced 202 shots..goals allowed...25. Save percentage .882



Rinne (this is a fun one seeing people thing the Preds are the best defensive team in the league). has faced 214 shots..goals allowed..28. Save percentage .869



Need I go on here.



fact...Crawford hasnt faced a crap load of shots on the PK as compared to his counterparts around the league. Fact..Crawford has allowed more goals on less PK shots than a crap load of his counterparts. Fact every team gives up quality chances and assuming that one team is giving up over 200 shots and one around the 150 mark I am willing to bet both are giving up just as many quality shots. Fact..good goalkeeoing on the PK is vital to any teams success. Fact..we aint getting it.



I dont think Crawford can be given escape rights at least when it comes to PK production and helping the team out there.

 

[Ton]

That's a great point TCD, kind of makes me look at the PK in a new light. How does Emery fair?

 

[the canadian dream]

That's a great point TCD, kind of makes me look at the PK in a new light. How does Emery fair?

Ill check it out.



I was shocked when looking at the numbers. does put the PK in a certain different light. I didnt expect the shot counts to be so low on Crawford as compared to the other goalies (given he has played a few less games than a lot of starters i mentioned but the list could go on including back ups and those starters who have played the same amount of games as Crawford..the numbers are still not good in Crawfs favor.)



Ill do Emery

 

[the canadian dream]

Emery has faced 107 PK shots and has allowed 10 goals against for a good .907 percentage. (17 less games started than Crawford though so that has to be taken into account).



Interesting numbers here actually. Looks like Emery has faced more PK shots on average than Crawford has. Thats sort of odd. Actually would appear that the team on the PK could be playing worse on the PK infront of Emery than they do with Crawford. If we go by just these stats then Emery actually plays better than Crawford on the PK and is probably facing more quality shots also via laws of averages.



So in comparison of just save percentage on the PK Emery is 17th in the league (not taking into account games played) and Crawford is 61st. OUCH..somethings a miss here stats or not.



Strange.



i know stats dont say everything but this was an interesting study.

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

HIRE PAT QUINN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Ton]

Since Q likes to mix things up, maybe he should play Crawford until we are shorthanded, then put in Emery to kill the penalty... LOL