Second City Hockey

Rangers v. Devils Game 6 Thread

2012-05-26T00:00:15Z

Use this to discuss the game tonight and your holiday weekend goings on.

Summer Reading - SCH's Season Review: Bruno

2012-05-25T19:06:25Z

I notice in the comments for these there's a lot of pointing out just how much I mention the handling of a player or the way he was utilized. It has come up a lot, I admit. I think it makes our overriding point to this season. Perhaps no player was a better example than Andrew Brunette (aside from maybe Steve Montador). Did Bruno have his faults? Oh god yes. Did he have some use for the team? I still think so. But it doesn't matter much now.

Andrew Brunette's Stats: 78G 12G 15A 27P -13 4PIM -1.40 Behind The Net Rating, -0.015 QofC, -0.75 CORSI

The Good: You might not believe it, but there was some. Early in the season, when the power play was actually something that didn't result in your dinner in your toilet via your mouth, Bruno was the crease and net monster we thought he would be. A couple tip-ins, a couple nifty passes around the net, and some cool nerves when packed in tight. You might also forget that in the last six weeks of the season, when Kane was moved to center and Hossa and Brunette were his wings, Hossa and Bruno combined on some beautiful hockey. Hossa could do the forechecking that allowed Brunette to get around the net and work together. Brunette's hands when down low and under pressure could still be a thing of beauty.

The Bad: Before we get to the handling, there were some other problems. And large ones. Brunette's concrete skates were always an odd fit for this team, as he couldn't play the 180-feet to the opponent's net with his teammates. He had to have Hossa or someone as ferocious on the forecheck with him to make him even matter. He only got to play with Hossa at the end of the season and in an emergency. Because of his inability to keep up, defensively his lines were kind of getting eaten alive, and they didn't create enough at the other end to compensate. He also didn't have the excuse of bad zone starts that Frolik or Bickell did. That led to him being on the 4th line for a long stretch of the season, which only made things worse. Because Brunette needed so much around him to be slotted right to make him effective, it made the team less flexible. Then he didn't get as much power play time, even though the Hawks needed plays made around the net. And of course, he was nowhere to be found against the Coyotes, a series the Hawks really could have used someone to make things happen around Smith.

Contract: Unrestricted Free Agent

Stick Around Or Hit The Bricks: Not that this is a hard decision, but Bruno's probably going to retire anyway. And yet he'll be a marker of the confusion around the relationship between Q and Stan. A player billed as a Q guy who Q rarely put in a position to succeed. I've asked this before, but did Q know that a player he coached before was being signed? If he did, did he voice his concerns about how he would fit? Did he recommend him to be a Hawk and then either was surprised at the odd fit or purposely didn't make him fit? None of these answers make me comfortable. I still think Bruno could have provided a little more if slotted correctly. But seeing as how it took so much to slot him correctly, it probably wasn't worth it.

Morning Links 5/25

2012-05-25T14:25:25Z

Stan Mikita on Billy Reay. [blackhawks.nhl.com]
Season reviews of Viktor Stalberg [CSN]
and Bryan Bickell. [Blackhawk Up]
Q & A with Patrick Sharp. [blackhawks.nhl.com]
Kings take note: throughout NHL history, a 12-2 playoff record hasn't ended well. Blackhawks fans know this. [CSN]
Rookie numbers this season. [blackhawks.nhl.com]
Rosenbloom: The Kings are great. The Blackhawks may be doomed. [Tribune]
Mac Carruth might come to Illinois. I've found nothing else on this, so, grain of salt. [Oregon Live]
Here's an old Q & A with Carruth, "The Truth", apparently. [blackhawks.nhl.com]
Great article on Anze Kopitar and what it means to make the NHL from a non-elite hockey country. [Backhand Shelf]
Hockey fans have complex opinions when it comes to fighting. [Globe]
Doan explains the handshake line. [PD]
Despite minor displays of penalty-related diaper babyhood, Drew Doughty has been great this post-season. [CBC]
Yzerman says he's not trading for Luongo, but Lu does want out. [PD]
Hockey Canada's registration numbers are dropping. [Globe]
Pierre McGuire should divulge more of what he hears "behind the glass". [SBN]

Summer Reading - SCH's Season Review: Dream Warrior

2012-05-24T19:55:21Z

We made a lot of fun of Marcus Kruger last season. It wasn't about him really, but about the way he was being sold and handled by the organization. It was kind of unfair on the player himself. This year, before the season started, we said there was no bigger question than Kruger and what he could do or what he'd be, and it would also determine what the Hawks would have to do at the deadline and now this offseason.

The funny thing is now, after his first full season in the NHL, we basically have no answers to those questions.

Marcus Kruger Stats: 71G 9G 17A 26P +11 22PIM 0.68 Behind The Net Rating, -0.019 Quality of Comp., 6.92 CORSI/60

The Good: The questions about Kruger and where he fits aren't because we didn't see a lot of pluses from Kruger. We did. The most noticeable was similar to Andrew Shaw's most noticeable trait, a fearlessness to go where his size suggests he shouldn't. Kruger was never afraid of getting to the net, and his 9 goals probably didn't break 20 feet on the distance chart. He was also involved on the boards and in the corners, and what he didn't have in size he made up for with quick hands and smarts. Defensively, the kid was almost always in the right position, and at least dogged in his pursuit if not strong enough to always win those battles. Certainly useful on the penalty kill as well. There was a brief spurt where he actually made things happen on the power play as well.

The Bad: A lot of this is out of Kruger's control. The playoffs were a great finding out, as Kruger's size and strength, or lack thereof, was greatly exposed by a big team like Phoenix. He was a ghost. He doesn't win a lot of faceoffs. As a center, though he's smart, he's not a great playmaker or a great finisher. After a while, he continued to get power play time even though he wasn't doing anything with it, though that's not really on him. Could be a normal rookie wall, coudl be something else.

Contract: 1 year left on his entry level deal at 900K

Stick Around or Hit The Bricks: One of the larger questions facing the Hawks this summer, as Kruger has so many variables. It depends on what they do in other spots, whether Dave Bolland is truly on the block and is actually moved, whether a center is brought in anyway, and some other questions. You could argue that Kruger will grow from his rookie year, get a little stronger and maybe a little bigger, and look like a #2 center for longer stretches than he did this season. But in the end, I look at Kruger and I see a player who is just short of a top six role. He gets to the right areas, but isn't a lethal enough finisher to give you 25 goals. He has an eye for a pass here and there, but I don't see the vision or playmaking abilities to get you 40 assists in a season. And he may always have trouble with bigger opponents. So then what is he? A 4th line center next year? Is he really cut out for that? Maybe given two genuine fourth line wingers he could be, but he might be too skilled for that role.

I suppose the argument for trading Dave Bolland is that Marcus Kruger could take over that role, which he seems more suited for (or Phillip Danault will be in the near future). But Kruger doesn't have the snarl that makes Bolland so unplayable to opponents. And Bolland is a better offensive player and always will be.

It's not that Kruger is a bad player, far from it. But all the things the Hawks have needs, he seems just a bit short on. He's an allowance horse when the Hawks probably need a stakes one. To me, that means the Hawks should listen and shouldn't hesitate to make Kruger part of any package that nets them a genuine #2 center or a top second-pairing d-man (as silly as that sentence may seem). There are ready replacements for Kruger already in the system knocking on the door, such as the aforementioned Danault who may be more cut out to serve an apprenticeship on the 4th line.

However, I won't tear my eyeballs out if the Hawks make other improvements elsewhere and try and roll the dice with Kruger as the #2 again. He may grow into a 2-3 hybrid that Bolland already is. Maybe they don't see an offer worth giving up on Kruger for. But right now, he just doesn't fit the gaps the Hawks have perfectly.

Morning Links 5/24

2012-05-24T14:01:53Z

For all you young hockey players out there; represent your country: (CSN)

Breakdown of Jamal Mayers:(CSN)

Video of the Toews season breakdown:(CSN)

A game 5 recap from the Rangers side: (BB)

From the Devils perspective:(ILWT)

A nice piece on the late Brad McCrimmon: (SN)

More proof Don Cherry isn't the voice of most Canadians: (GnM)

The fourth line is making the difference for NJD: (TSN)

The Great One speaks: (GnM)

NHL 13 screenshots and teaser trailers: (OPS)

Wow...its 2012: (PD)

Coyotes Eulogy

2012-05-23T21:38:31Z

Coyotes Eulogy

You know the drill. Enjoy.

Summer Reading - SCH's Season Review: The Same Old Bicks

2012-05-23T19:14:00Z

Yet another player who generates rabid debate among Hawks fans. Is Bryan Bickell a disappointing would-be power forward who simply will just flatter to deceive his whole career? Or is he a solid defensive forward with size who does fine work on the checking line?

Yes. To both.

Every fan of every team wants a fire-breathing, skull-crushing power forward on their team. It's one of if not the hardest thing to unearth for an organization. Scott Hartnell's simply don't grow on trees (and what a weird tree that would be). So any player who even bares the size of one and simply hints at a scoring touch, fans dream and beg for him to be that players. And they so rarely are. That doesn't mean what they actually are isn't valuable in some way, but the disappointment of what they aren't seems to override that. So it is with Bryan Bickell.

Bryan Bickell's Stats: 71G 9G 15P 24P -3 48PIM -0.56 Behind The Net, .051 Quality of Comp, 0.58 CORSI/60

The Good: As it was with last year, the playoff performance stands out. Though he only had the two goals in Game 2, Bickell was a forechecking and physical nightmare for the Coyotes. He also forced the Phoenix top line to hardly be a factor, though it's debatable how hard that actually is. Bicks was a steady presence on the 3rd line for most of the season, even if he wasn't spectacular in any way. Provided some of the limited net presence that the Hawks had. There was also that brief stretch, which we wanted to see more of, where Stalberg was dropped to the third line and he combined with Bickell to simply horse some opposing defensemen. Bicks definitely has some forechecking strength. And most of all, Bickell is one of the more defensively aware wingers the Hawks have, almost always in the right position.

The Bad: Whatever the complaints about Bickell are this year will come with caveats, or at least some of them will. A drop from 17 goals to 9 is obviously not what you want. But Bicks never got a chance on the top two lines, as seemingly every other forward did, and he did the previous season. Secondly, other than Dave Bolland no other Hawks started more shifts in the defensive zone. So Bickell's offense had to be generated from 180 feet away, and considering the troubles the Hawks had getting out of their zone at times, that seems a tall order (Bolland's 19 goals seem more and more miraculous when you consider that). Bickell also had a stretch of being a healthy scratch when he wasn't up to Q's standards, i.e. being a ghost and hardly providing anything out there. While that may have been a tad harsh, it certainly wasn't ridiculous. Of course, Bickell had many, many games where he did nothing with that size and was just kind of out there. After seeing him in the playoffs, you wonder why that keeps happening other than issues between the ears.

Contract: One year left at a hit of 541K.

Stick Around Or Hit The Bricks: In some ways, the Hawks are in a similar position with Bickell that they are Viktor Stalberg. What he gives you for what he's paid makes him pretty valuable, but it might make him valuable to other teams as well. If we ignore what Bickell isn't, what we'll see is a useful checking winger who can chip in some goals and maybe could do more on the power play. He's a unique checking winger in that he doesn't kill penalties, but I don't know that's a deal-breaker. And while 11 games in his career don't make him a genuine playoff performer, the signs are there that he's a playoff weapon. And while it's frustrating to watch him float through a great deal of the first 82, the fact that he can really be a force in the games that matter can't be ignored. If the Hawks get a great offer that includes him, of course they should listen. But if they don't, they shouldn't feel bad about installing Bicks on Bolland's wing once again.

Morning Links 5/23

2012-05-23T14:53:27Z

Season review of Sami Lepisto. [CSN]
Third Man In Radio. [TTMI]
Thoughts on Montador, Kane, attendance. [MyFoxChicago]
The fourth in a series about adjusted plus/minus and what it means. Includes information on Toews, Keith, Campbell. [Arctic Ice Hockey]
The Devils and Rangers are tied at two. [Globe]
Devils defensemen do good work. [NJ.com]
Zone starts effect on offensive production. [nhlnumbers.com]
Ken Dryden on Scotty Bowman, Steve Jobs, House, and winning. [Grantland]
After a controversial hit and a Dustin Penner OT goal, the Coyotes are done. [Globe]
Mike Smith compares the Brown hit to Torres', says he should be "done forever". [CBC]
The handshake line is no place for this, Shane Doan. [PD]
Is Mike Smith a good goalie or did he just have a fluke season? [Brodeur is a Fraud]
DGB on the difference between Lundqvist and Brodeur. [Down Goes Brown]