Hawks' Problem Is Chemistry, Not Talent

icehogfan08

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 23, 2010
Posts:
5,227
Liked Posts:
1,551
Location:
Rockford, IL
Hawks' Problem Is Chemistry, Not Talent

In his Offseason Game Plan piece on the Blackhawks for tsn.ca, Scott Cullen hits on some really important points, and I suggest all readers here go check it out (then come back).

The Blackhawks have a lot of talent. In fact, when you look at how their talent matches up against other playoff teams, it begs the question: why the two consecutive first round playoff outs?

I'll submit this morning it's all about chemistry.

From 30,000 feet, one issue is purely positional: too much of the Hawks' forward talent is at wing instead of center.

The defense looks close to set and probably pretty good. After the late season addition of Johnny Oduya, the Hawks' GAA plummeted. Oduya took pressure off Duncan Keith the way Brian Campbell once did. Steve Montador, one of only two right-handed shots on the blueline, might not play part or all of the season due to repeated concussions. And overall, the unit is light on physicality.

In net, there appears to be a very solid backup in Ray Emery, and a questionable starter in Corey Crawford.

The other thing is, we might end up looking back on 2011-12 as a sort of transition year. Too much was expected of young, physically immature players like Nick Leddy, Marcus Kruger and Andrew Shaw; but each of those players also showed that they are going to be solid to good, perhaps very good, NHL players—and they gained valuable experience.

I'm going to also keep my rose-colored glasses on when I say that three to four more prospects appear to be on the cusp of making the jump to the NHL: Brandon Saad, Brandon Pirri, Philip Danault and Jimmy Hayes.

But, at some point, "developmental," "transitional" seasons need to give way to seasons where you're in it to win it. While Kruger, Leddy and Shaw are still on their learning curves, it would not be wise to start adding in another 2-3 rookies next year. And for the sake of his team, his fans and maybe his job, Stan Bowman needs to realize that right now.

"Playing the kids" is what you do once you've waved the white flag. It's not how you win Stanley Cups. The grind of the playoffs calls for maturity, smart decisions, guts and patience—the hallmarks of experience.

And that leads to the other chemistry issue: intangibles, character, toughness (physical and mental), putting the team first.

Last year, I wrote a blog on "tough guys" and the positive effect they were having on the Hawks. Two of those tough guys, Jamal Mayers and Emery, have been re-signed. Another "tough" guy added late in the season, was Brandon Bollig. And when I say tough, I allude not just to his pugilism, but to the spirit he seems to bring to the team.

I believe Emery and Mayers were, and Bollig will be, re-signed because a newly empowered Joel Quenneville likes what they bring, on and off the ice. I think he's right. And I've heard specifically, in fact, that Quenneville wants more experience, including possibly in net.

But toughness and character can't be aggregated just on your fourth line and in your backup goaltender.

Toughness means more than fighting, or hitting. It means consistency, self-sacrifice and putting team needs before personal goals and off-ice pursuits.

By these metrics, certain players seem to pass muster. An article earlier in the year cited a Hawk veteran's respect for Marian Hossa's not bringing attention on himself. There are two ways you can look at that: as praise for Hossa, but also perhaps a slam on other players' need for the limelight, literally and figuratively.

Brent Seabrook, Jonathan Toews . . . it's really hard to question their effort and focus.

But, let's face it, up to this point, June 2, Bowman has done nothing to change the roster. It's probably safe to assume he and Quenneville saw enough last year to say Andrew Brunette and Sean O'Donnell don't have enough tread left on the tires to help this season.

So maybe, in replacing those spare parts, some toughness and ability might be added.

But what about the rest of the roster—the consistency, selflessness and physicality of a number of key players?

1) Bryan Bickell

He can be a plus player when he decides to take the body and go to war in the corners. When he doesn't, he's a passenger, and that's been too often the case. Sure, he's cheap. But it's penny-wise and pound foolish to not spend another 500-750K on a more consistent;y physical player.

2) Niklas Hjalmarsson

Every once in a while, and more so in the playoffs, you get a glimpse of the Niklas Kronwall type player Hjalmarsson was projected to be. But more often than not, Hjalmarsson is a solid, positional, but non-physical defenseman on a team that needs him to be more.

3) Michal Frolik

The issue with Frolik is what kind of player is he going to be, a 2nd line scoring winger or a third line checking winger. Frolik seems to be the kind of player whose game begins with defense, and his ideal role is on Dave Bolland's left wing, delivering a consistent forecheck. That said, Frolik, like Hjalmarsson, needs to thrive in that role over 82 regular season games, not just the playoffs.

4) Corey Crawford

At best, Corey Crawford is a solid, positional goaltender who you can win with—provided you play good defense in front of him. But he is not gifted enough to carry you by himself or steal games. And this past season, his struggles keeping form, and therefore keeping his job, pointed to a lack of mental toughness.

5) Viktor Stalberg

Stalberg has shown the ability to occasionally take over games against slower defenses. At times in 2011-12, he appeared poised to emerge as another star winger for the Hawks, and then he would vanish, most notably against the solid positioning and physicality of the Phoenix defense.

6) Patrick Kane

Internet message boards are ablaze with the argument over Kane's value on the ice. His talent is undeniable. However, there is ample evidence that he will disappear when games get very physical, including at times in the playoffs. He seems to need a legitimate power forward on his opposite flank, the kind of top six winger the Hawks really lack right now. The other issue with Kane is the constant and now proven distraction of his off-ice activities.

There are two ways you can address these players: "stay the course," and hope they grow, or cash in on their trade value right now, hopefully filling positional holes and adding character.

There's a lot of NHL "talent" the Hawks coud deal,not to mention a number of reasonably promising prospects for which the Hawks have no place in the NHL right now.

Two areas where the Hawks could be improved immediately—maybe vaulted back into legitimate Cup contention—are 2nd line center and starting goaltender.

Some believe the Hawks don't really need a second line center. Well, I am about to explode that myth.

The Hawks are a puck possession team. And puck possession starts with winning faceoffs, where the Hawks finished 12th in the regular season and 10th out of 16 playoff teams. Bear in mind also, Jonathan Toews was near the league lead in faceoffs. So when you subtract him, the Hawks' FO% takes a swan dive of a cliff. And I bring that up because Toews has now missed games in consecutive seasons recovering from concussions.

The need for a second line center is not only real, it's acute.

Sure, you can "hope" Kruger or "dream" Danault or Mark McNeill can fill that role more effectively this year. But that would likely be repeating the same mistake Bowman made last summer: slotting young players into roles they weren't ready for.

Hawk brass (and fans) need look no further than both conference finals this year to see the value of elite, reliable goaltending. There is an argument that great defense really only then requires adequate goaltending. The problem is, in spite of the post-March 1 improvement in the Hawk defense, Crawford pretty much fell apart in the playoffs. And the fact is, there are better, or potentially better, goalies available this summer.

And toughness. Maybe there are a couple of complementary skaters who can forecheck or clear the front of the net on a consistent basis.

That's the prescription, folks.

Staying the course, hoping (for a second consecutive summer) that 170 pound rookies will fill key roles? That's a recipe for another first round elimination.

Thanks for reading,

JJ
 
Last edited:

LonghornBob

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Jul 2, 2011
Posts:
485
Liked Posts:
165
Location:
Texas
On the topic of chemistry and not having any, I'm a firm believer that it's okay to juggle the lines in the first few months trying to (a) find out what works best, and (b) getting players accustomed to other players in the event you have an injury or suspension, but shortly after the all-star break you need to find your combinations and stick with them.

Are the Sedins that good, or do they simply always know where the other one is going to be?

Q juggles the lines far too often and far too late in the season for my taste.
 

TheChicagoFan

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Sep 15, 2010
Posts:
6,122
Liked Posts:
1,642
Location:
Misery
I think a big problem for the Hawks is that they have that really good core. But when that core isn't out there, it's kind of a big question mark. There's talent, but the Hawks are too top-heavy in my opinion.

And goaltending is obviously an issue. Nobody argues that.
 

DMelt36

Bolland > You
Joined:
May 27, 2010
Posts:
13,969
Liked Posts:
8,434
The Hawks have as much talent as just about anyone in the NHL. But waiting around for that talent to "click" is an awfully risky proposition in today's pro sports leagues. If it doesn't click, you have to make it click by moving players.

I think this "core" group of players has one more chance to prove that they deserve to stay together. Another first round exit (and maybe even a 2nd round one) could lead to some real, real big changes in the 2013 offseason. And that could come after heads roll in the front office.

2012-13 starting to feel like a make-or-break year.
 

southern_cross_116

New member
Joined:
May 24, 2010
Posts:
1,748
Liked Posts:
1,012
Location:
Australia
The goal of the league has been to create parity - which it has fairly well with the current salary cap system.

I don't buy that 'the need for a second line center is acute'. Or about juggling lines -ok, hear me out --- imo those are relevant and valid statements- but ... whose fault is it? The 2nd line center thing has been around for years now .... ok, so at that point, in my mind it becomes a front office responsibility for the inability to address...

Same thing with line juggling -although that one is on the coach -who has done it his entire time with the team (don't like it - then it is time to move the coach to find one that doesn't do that). And yeah I agree with your reasoning Bob.
 
Last edited:

Capt. Serious

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 17, 2010
Posts:
19,670
Liked Posts:
6,438
Location:
Chicago
Speaking of chemistry, Q needs to stop playing musical chairs with the damn lines every game.
 

TheChicagoFan

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Sep 15, 2010
Posts:
6,122
Liked Posts:
1,642
Location:
Misery
Right now there's a lot of young talent. Hayes brothers, McNeill, Danault, Shaw, Smith, Leddy, Pirri, Saad, etc.

But the problem is that with the veteran players that you have you can't really have a team with just the current vets and then depend on young guys to live up to everything you expect in order to build a team.

A trade for a player or two that can make a big difference that involves some of our really young talent would be something that I would go for as a fan.
 

southern_cross_116

New member
Joined:
May 24, 2010
Posts:
1,748
Liked Posts:
1,012
Location:
Australia
Right now there's a lot of young talent. Hayes brothers, McNeill, Danault, Shaw, Smith, Leddy, Pirri, Saad, etc...

I'm going to cherry-pick here ... I don't know that anyone can honestly call unproven NHL calibre talent as talent. It might be splitting hairs, but the majority of that list has proven exactly nothing at the NHL level, and I don't know about anyone else- but I don't think I would take my chances with that crew at the NHL level until any of those guys proves that they can play at that level.

In other words, -they are not young talent- just young at this point -as at the NHL level, the only talent that is actually worth anything at all is talent at the NHL level - not potential either ... but actual talent. Lots of guys with potential ... they make money for sports memorabilia sellers with their rookie cards - but not much else...

Or in other, other words -- anyone want some Lindros rookie cards (even the French versions?) .... Wha? No? Damn and he was 'The Next Next One..." What about Alexandre Daigle? Who? Exactly my point.
 

DMelt36

Bolland > You
Joined:
May 27, 2010
Posts:
13,969
Liked Posts:
8,434
Now, the only issue I have with this is that the complaints over Q's line shuffling are turning into the complaints over Lovie Smith's calm demeanor on the sidelines and Ozzie Guillen's mouth.

That is, people only complain about them when the Hawks lose. And since the Hawks' last game was a loss, this argument will be here until October.

I don't recall such complaints during the month of March when the Hawks were rolling. Don't like the way Q handles his lines? Fine. Just be consistent with it.

But I do agree with it. My biggest frustration is when a line has success for awhile, they have one bad period, then Q blows it up.
 

TheChicagoFan

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Sep 15, 2010
Posts:
6,122
Liked Posts:
1,642
Location:
Misery
I'm going to cherry-pick here ... I don't know that anyone can honestly call unproven NHL calibre talent as talent. It might be splitting hairs, but the majority of that list has proven exactly nothing at the NHL level, and I don't know about anyone else- but I don't think I would take my chances with that crew at the NHL level until any of those guys proves that they can play at that level.

In other words, -they are not young talent- just young at this point -as at the NHL level, the only talent that is actually worth anything at all is talent at the NHL level - not potential either ... but actual talent. Lots of guys with potential ... they make money for sports memorabilia sellers with their rookie cards - but not much else...

Or in other, other words -- anyone want some Lindros rookie cards (even the French versions?) .... Wha? No? Damn and he was 'The Next Next One..." What about Alexandre Daigle? Who? Exactly my point.

My point was that we could use those unproven players in a trade for the proven ones.

Because like mentioned in the article and my post, you can't have tons of young guys up on the team and expect them to help carry the team. Because who knows how they'll pan out.
 

TheChicagoFan

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Sep 15, 2010
Posts:
6,122
Liked Posts:
1,642
Location:
Misery
Yeah. With the line thing, I can understand trying new things out at the beginning of the year and seeing who works well together.

Once you see who works well together, you should stick with those guys. Let the linemates work it out.

It doesn't help players have good chemistry when they're with two guys one day and then two different guys the next.
 

DMelt36

Bolland > You
Joined:
May 27, 2010
Posts:
13,969
Liked Posts:
8,434
My point was that we could use those unproven players in a trade for the proven ones.

Because like mentioned in the article and my post, you can't have tons of young guys up on the team and expect them to help carry the team. Because who knows how they'll pan out.

But you can't have veterans in every single position. And at some point, you have to let guys that you've drafted be given an opportunity to shine on the big stage.

I'm going to use the 2008-09 Blackhawks as my example for this argument, the year before they won the Cup. Because they're closer to being that team than the 2009-10 version.

Kris Versteeg had only played 13 games in his NHL career prior to 08-09. He played 78 that year, with 22 goals and 31 assists.

Dave Bolland had 40 games of NHL experience. Played 81 games, posting career highs (up to this point, still) in goals, assists, and points 19 + 28 = 47.

Troy Brouwer played 69 games, just 12 before. Andrew Ladd played a full 82 after never passing 63 in previous years. (Granted, yes, he had won a Cup with Carolina prior to that year.)

The development of those guys, among others, was a HUGE reason for the Cup victory.

Campbell was the big signing before that season, filling a huge need on the Hawks 2nd pairing.

My point is this: You can't sign 10 free agents to fill out the roster. You MUST let some of these younger Hawks get a full season on the big roster and see if they can stick. Players like Hayes, Shaw, Smith, Saad, Olsen, etc. need to get a full year in the NHL and see what happens. If they don't pan out, you've got the deadline to add another vet or two.

And, oh yeah. Adding a top-4 D-man (just like the '08 offseason) would be a huge help, too.
 

TheChicagoFan

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Sep 15, 2010
Posts:
6,122
Liked Posts:
1,642
Location:
Misery
I know that you can't just have veterans.

I'm saying that you can't have a ton of young guys on the team.

You and Southern Cross think that I'm going to the extreme on both ends. But what I'm really saying is that the Hawks don't need all those young players right now. Keep the ones that have proven themselves at the NHL level and can play there and send away others for a veteran player in return that can help the team right now.
 

icehogfan08

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 23, 2010
Posts:
5,227
Liked Posts:
1,551
Location:
Rockford, IL
I know that you can't just have veterans.

I'm saying that you can't have a ton of young guys on the team.

You and Southern Cross think that I'm going to the extreme on both ends. But what I'm really saying is that the Hawks don't need all those young players right now. Keep the ones that have proven themselves at the NHL level and can play there and send away others for a veteran player in return that can help the team right now.

That works, but it will be a repeated thin over and over. I'd say it is better to just build in the system and get the younger guys to experiences Q's system. I'm fine with developing players In Chicago or in Rockford
 

DMelt36

Bolland > You
Joined:
May 27, 2010
Posts:
13,969
Liked Posts:
8,434
I don't have the statistical analysis for this, but I'll bet the overwhelming majority of Cup champions have a solid mix of young and veteran players.

It's a very difficult formula to develop, though. And, sometimes, you just have to get lucky on a few young players that out-perform their expectations.
 

icehogfan08

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 23, 2010
Posts:
5,227
Liked Posts:
1,551
Location:
Rockford, IL
This team also needs to be motivated again. Bickell needs to play 100% every game. Frolik needs his playoff form every night. We need another center, get Toews and Kane on that top line to get that chemistry back
 

Capt. Serious

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 17, 2010
Posts:
19,670
Liked Posts:
6,438
Location:
Chicago
Yeah, good luck getting a 100% effort from Bickell every game.
 

Top