Is the Blackhawk coaching staff mishandling Anton Forsberg—and the overall goaltending situation—in the absence of Corey Crawford?
Anton Forsberg is 2-1 with a 2.00 GAA and .931 save% over the last 3 games. 2-3 of the 6 goals allowed on 88 shots were unstoppable redirects. So by all means, let's start Glass tomorrow.
— The Amazing Rando (@jaeckel) February 2, 2018
It’s just a choice between two essentially backup goaltenders for a road game in February. Right?
But Jeff Glass starting the game in net for the Blackhawks tonight in Calgary—in microcosm— speaks volumes about a puzzling lack of clear direction for this team this season.
I am and always have been a big Joel Quenneville fan. Hard to argue with his Hall of Fame resumé. And yet, let’s just examine the present goalie situation.
Setting aside the bizarre, still mysterious, and overall not very encouraging goings on (or not goings on) with Corey Crawford’s absence, how Glass and Anton Forsberg are being handled defies logic.
Clearly, with the starts being split up between the two—a game, two or three for one, then the other takes over for a game or two or three—it suggests the Hawks believe (or are hoping) one or the other will get into a groove and take over, and neither has.
Now, that’s fine, but there’s an argument that Forsberg, especially over the last three games, has taken over:
2-1 record, 2.00 GAA, .931 save percentage
Further, in the worst of those three games, Thursday’s 4-2 loss in Vancouver, at least two of the goals were clear redirects, where Forsberg had no chance.
Let’s be clear. We’re not talking about a couple of guys at similar points in their careers.
Glass, at 32, is as good as he’s ever going to be. And let’s please, put to rest the “new Tim Thomas” narrative. Not happening. Glass is a testament to perseverance and hard work, to his credit, but he is also flawed and limited as a goalie.
Forsberg, however, can get better. Further, the Hawks have a lot invested in Forsberg. Maybe more now with the Crawford situation potentially dragging on longterm.
Allow me to sprinkle a little cynical reality on your breakfast this morning. Let’s assume the “official” reports (well, some of them anyway) are true, and Crawford is battling post-concussion syndrome (and nothing else). If that is the case, then judging by similar long absences of other players, this could be a career-limiting or career-ending situation.
Every player is different. But for every Sidney Crosby who bounces back from fairly severe concussion issues, there’s an Adam Deadmarsh, a Jason Allison, an Eric Lindros (etc) who doesn’t.
Plus, and I’ve said this since the day of the trade, Forsberg’s development into a possible number one golie for the Hawks would be the thing that ultimately redeems the Artemi Panarin-Brandon Saad trade for Chicago.
Listen, I am also a big Saad fan, in spite of his having a down year.
The “experts” have already proclaimed this deal highway robbery for Columbus—one Eastern Conference blogger went as far as saying on a podcast earlier this year that Panarin is not only better than Saad, but “younger and therefore has a better future.” Then I informed him Saad is actually a year younger than Panarin. Right.
And the deal may look a whole lot better for Chicago in three years— when Saad, still well in his prime, will likely be having a better year than he is right now, in a Hawk sweater—and Panarin will be making a boatload of money in a sweater other than that of the Columbus Blue Jackets.
But, much can also change between now and then. And Forsberg, as the Columbus throw-in—and immediately the default NHL backup for Chicago, replacing Scott Darling—was and is an important piece for the Hawks.
He just turned 25 and this is his first full season in the NHL (after leading the Lake Erie Monsters to the AHL championship last season).
If you read the scouting reports on Forsberg, much less watch him play, you see a big, reasonably athletic goaltender, who is more of a “blocker” stylistically, a positioning-reliant goalie in the traditional Swedish mode—very aggressive in cutting off angles—who has periods of brilliance, with occasional overplaying and mistakes handling pucks.
But those last two, the “yeah buts” in assessing Forsberg today, are correctable through playing time and coaching.
Yet, the Hawks are still fooling around with Glass. Why?
“Da playoffs!” Of course.
But yet, although Glass has marginally better won-loss numbers (and Forsberg was the hard luck loser in two OT games where he was 40+ shots early in the season), Forsberg’s overall GAA and save percentage are better than those of Glass—also accrued over more games.
And quoting former New Orleans Saints Head Coach Jim Mora, “Playoffs?!”
Seriously. Really?
Even if the Hawks get very hot (and probably very lucky) and make the playoffs, they likely aren’t going past the first round.
And since the records suggest Glass is no better than Forsberg anyway, if even as good, then how does this little goalie two-step even remotely impact those chances?
It doesn’t.
Another rationale: “Glass is from Alberta, so play him in hometown.” OK, yeah, but wait, I thought we were trying to make the playoffs? Or at least we’re trying to develop some young players at the NHL level?
Bottom line, Glass is not going to get better if he plays more. Forsberg very well could.
Maybe it’s just one game. But you have to wonder how much better Forsberg could be, how much more development he could have, if the Hawks gave him the reins until Crawford returns 100% healthy.
Again, I’m not one to lay the blame for this odd and likely counterproductive approach at Quennevile’s feet. But this is somewhat reminiscent of the Trevor Daley situation season before last, where sometimes Q’s personal likes and dislikes seem to defy explanation and end up hurting the team.
And in the long run, in terms of your backup goalie and a netminder many feel has longer term #1 potential, that could be the case here.
What do you think? Comment (or sign up for our forums to comment) below.
Follow @jaeckel