The Blackhawks are now proving on a near nightly basis they aren’t a very good team. Everyone has ‘solutions.’ But is the answer more than just a quick fix?
Paraphrasing an old saying: “Kill ‘em all. Let God sort it out.” With the Hawks, it can be translated as: “fire, cut, trade ‘em all.”
Sure, that’s a bit extreme. But my suggestion is this, it’s too easy to run around the interwebs (as some self-styled hockey experts do) screaming for the promotion of the Great Vince Hinostroza, or firing Joel Quenneville, or trading Duncan Keith.
It’s also becoming apparent that something is seriously wrong with this Blackhawk team that extends well belong a necessary waiting period for a lot of new pieces to gel, or Corey Crawford being injured, or “Da Cat,” being relegated to third line minutes.
Do I have the answer(s)? No, but I think I may have the right questions.
Here (and this will be discussed at greater length on tonight’s Rink Cast) are some thoughts for your consideration:
Your best players have to be your best players
That is not happening with this team. The core of this team, in terms of skins on the wall, salaries, etc., is Patrick Kane, Jonathan Toews, Duncan Keith, Brent Seabrook and Corey Crawford. Only Crawford is giving you value commensurate with his salary. For Toews, Keith and Seabrook, this is now a two-year issue. Toews has shown some flashes of “the Old Toews” this year. But not enough. Seabrook has gone from terrible to “OK” most nights. Keith can only be described as “up and down.”
When was the last time Kane took over a game? He did it for years before Artemi Panarin came to Chicago, with the likes of Troy Brouwer and Bryan Bickell on his left wing. Why not now?
Depending on Richard Panik, Ryan Hartman, Nick Schmaltz, an ancient Patrick Sharp, and even Alex DeBrincat to be your go-to guys is a bad bet.
Your best players have to be your best players.
The power play is a “disaster.”
We can point to a lot of things. Two obvious issues, a lack of quick, unpredictable puck and player movement. Nothing new to see here. Why does this keep happening? Something hit me last night.
Watch what happens when the puck goes to Kane on the right halfboard.
Everything stops.
Except Kane, who twirls around, handling the puck—looking for options that typically aren’t moving—and are therefore very easy to defend. A much greater hockey mind than mine—that of Coach Bob Rose—suggested to me earlier this year that it is how the Hawks are using Kane on the man advantage (and not using him) that may be a big part of the problem.
Which leads to another question. This issue is nothing new. Are the coaches not seeing it (or whatever else the problem might be) or, worse still, are very well-compensated “stars,” like Kane, ignoring their direction/suggestion to try a different approach?
Empower Q or get rid of him
To paraphrase a former boss of mine, who had some epic non sequiturs, “there are two ways to go on this road—straight ahead, and that’s it.”
Classic stuff. But it applies here. If Quenneville is your coach, let him run the da– team. I have to think Q would love to sit Ryan Hartman for a week right now, or maybe alternately send a message to one of the stars.
Yes, there are increasing whispers out there that “Q has lost the room.” The problem is, it’s hard to trust some of the sources right now.
If that’s the case, and Q is feeling held back in order to keep his job or someone above him is telling him to hold back on some of these players, it’s time for a change—as much as it may cost in remaining term on his contract. You can always reassign him and perhaps get some value out of that money in that manner.
It’s (still) left wing, stupid
It was my (often shared) feeling all summer that the Hawks needed to add another top 6 left wing to the mix—after the Saad/Panarin trade.
With Panarin the previous two years, playing on Kane’s left wing, the Hawks, there was a revolving clown show audition on Jonathan Toews’ left wing. Now, with Saad back, it’s Kane’s left wing.
But here’s the problem. You will have to pay—trading a nice young asset like DeBrincat or Gustav Forsling perhaps—to get a legitimate left wing, preferably a power left winger to make up for another issue, a lack of ability around the net in the top 6.
Why mortgage the future—something I always maintained was worth it when the Hawks were legitimate contenders—a future that is looking more and more like the only hope, for a present that just isn’t going to happen this year?
You have to look at the GM, too
You can point to the depressed global oil market and a weak Canadian dollar as excuses for the Hawks’ cap situation, but Stan Bowman’s calling card when he took the reins of the franchise in 2009 was cap management. 29 other GMs had to account for economic factors as well, yet in the last few years Bowman has committed $32 million in annual cap hit to Toews, Kane, Seabrook, and Artem Anisimov—all with no trade clauses—and 3 of those players had at least one year before their current deals expired when the new deals were announced.
The other issue is Bowman has shown himself to be a pretty good maintainer as a GM—filling in around a core that was largely assembled by the two GMs who preceded him. The question that must be asked is if Bowman is a builder—like, say, Dale Tallon was and Columbus GM Jarmo Kekalainen is. Interesting to note, both of those GMs came out of a scouting background—at least spending some time as a pure scout/talent evaluator. Bowman did not.
Doom and gloom?
Maybe. But 12-11-5 is not acceptable for a team with Cup aspirations, much less even playoff aspirations. And nothing appears to be getting demonstrably better.
All this and more will be discussed tonight on the RinkCast. Look back here and on Twitter for a link.
Follow: @jaeckel