Second City Hockey

Morning Links 2/9

2012-02-09T14:27:56Z

Keep it simple [Chicago Tribune] [SunTimes]
Could the Defense really be this bad? [ ESPN]
A roundtable on this recent debacle [Cheer the Anthem]
Relax, it can get worse [Fifth Feather]
Stan deserves some more time [SunTimes]
Owen Nolan retires [San Jose Mercury News]
The worst kept secret in sports will become official! [Detroit Free Press]
This will probably incite more meathead trade talk. [SportsNet]

Grinds My Gears 2/8

2012-02-08T19:53:20Z

Don't know if this will be a regular feature or not, but we'll try it for now and see where it goes.

-I hope people have had a chance to calm down a little bit, though there should be a level of seething that won't go away for a while. I know I have it. But there is something I'd like to shoot down, or at least fill with a modicum of buckshot. On the twitters and comments in various places, I've seen a lot of "Stan Bowman is a complete moron who has no eye for talent" sentiment. I just can't agree with this.

His eye for talent is at worst incomplete. He's had two drafts, and none of those players have made a serious impact on the team. But it's not like he's had a top five pick. And his drafts have been generally well regarded. Both Hayes kids, McNeil, Saad, Danault, and maybe a couple others, while they may not be stars one day, all are regarded as having an NHL future. While Nick Leddy has obviously struggled, I still think he has a big NHL future. As for other trades, look at the player Stalberg has become and remember that he was acquired when Bowman had his hands completely tied in a cap purge. Jeremy Morin hasn't taken a step forward this year, partially due to injury, but no one's ready to give up on him yet. Everyone's favorite, most of all Q's, little fire-plugging turnover machine Andrew Shaw is a Bowman pick.

Ok, the offseason pickups have come in for criticism. At the time, we liked them , and I don't know that the disappointments they've been is due to wrongful signings more than coaching mishandling and a disconnect between the coach and GM -- which I'll get to in a bit here.

His midseason trades were Campoli, Frolik, and the corpse of Kim Johnsson. We never got a verdict on Johnsson due to injury (maybe), and Campoli was at least useful (or why would some be calling for him to be re-acquired?). Frolik has been a mess this year, but again, that could just as easily be coaching and use as much as actual talent.

To say that Stan simply has no idea what he's doing? I don't think that's fair, and very well may be factually incorrect.

-But let's get to what does worry me about the organization. I don't get the impression that Stan and Q ever talk, and I'm not sure that Stan isn't completely terrified of Q. Let's go back to the summer. While we all wanted a big splash, I was fine with Stan not making one if he didn't see anything he liked. It provided the cap space, if nothing else, he has to use now. Everything we saw then looked like it filled a hole. Most of all, Mayers and Brunette were advertised as Q players. They'd played for him before. Montador was exactly what he asked for. Carcillo was...a risk, but one you could see.

And from the word go, Quenneville has torpedoed almost all of them. The only one Q has seemed to like is Mayers, and he's playing center where he really shouldn't be. Q soured on Montador in training camp, and even started him as a forward in his first game. He's never got a glimpse on a penalty kill that sucks to high heaven. He used him as a forward on a power play, and while it goofed a few power play goals, his booming shot from the point that actually gets through is something the PP is screaming for. Q's completely shot his belief, and he gets benched with a hair trigger while Hjalmarsson only recently could find himself with reduced minutes. Montador simply hasn't been the abortion a lot of people claim he's been. Fuck, he hasn't even had the minutes to do that.

Brunette has been an odd fit, I can't deny that. But that doesn't mean he's a complete boob, and just needs the right situation to do what he does well. During Sharp's injury, Bruno found some real chemistry with Bolland, as they both do their best work around the goal line. As soon as Sharp got back, Q blew that up. And for reasons no one gets, because Marcus Kruger wasn't letting anyone down between Hossa and Sharp. There's no way that both Morrison and Mayers should both be playing center during a game.

I still think Brunette can be a playoff weapon when games really tend to slow down, but only if Q gives him the chance. But before he was signed, did Q and Stan talk about him at all? Did Q either not know or didn't tell Stan his complete lack of speed might be a problem? Did Stan not listen to him? While a coach shouldn't be making personnel decisions, he certainly should have input, especially about a player he's already coached. On the flip side, a GM shouldn't be making lineup decisions, but Stan must have a strange look on his face when his blueprint was discarded so early.

Stan gave Q a perfectly reasonable 7th d-man in Sami Lepisto, and even kept John Scott on the roster I have to guess because Q wants him there. Your defense can't stop a paraplegic in the sand, and Lepisto's not even worth a look? How can that be?

I can't help but feeling like this is Jauron-Angelo all over again, though both of those guys were morons anyway. But Stan didn't hire Q, even if he was in on the process. Q then goes on to win a Cup with a roster that was almost completely not Stan's, and he must know now that he's pretty much untouchable. So that's why, or at least it's a theory why, Q has treated this season as a demonstration of what a genius he is. Because if the higher-ups decide that changes have to be made, it's really up for debate who they're going to side with: the coach who brought the Chalice here (whether he had that much to do with it or not) or the young GM hired under suspicious circumstances who provided two disappointing teams (if in fact this team ends the year disappointingly?) You can't say which.

-There's more with Q that I just don't get. We've been over all of them. The demotion of Kruger for no obvious reason. Stalberg can get benched for farting on the ice but Andrew Shaw can be a puck pitch-back and gets looks in all situations? The inability to convey what the hell he wants out of Michael Frolik. Look, Fro hasn't been anything like we wanted, but he hasn't been an affront to the lord either. He still does his best work with Bolland, shouldn't he stay there? Maybe maybe not. But it's another player who took a step back under Q.

Anyway, I'm out for the next few days. I started this streak in Nashville, so I feel a responsibility to go end it in San Jose. So I'm going to go do so.

Morning Links - (2/8)

2012-02-08T16:56:07Z

Blackhawks news and hockey notables.

Recaps. [Tribune] [CSN] [ESPN] [Hockeenight] [Cheer the Anthem] [Third Man In] [MyFoxChicago]
85 Years: Cliff Koroll remembers Keith Magnuson. [blackhawks.nhl.com]
Color anyone with brain cells unsurprised that Brendan Morrison is getting bounced around the lines. [Tribune]
The origins of Hawks/Wings hatred, with bonus old-timey pictures. [ESPN]
Friedman's Latest Thirty Thoughts. [CBC]
Thirty-two teams who want to go to Sochi. [PD]
E tackles NHL historiography. [The Score]

SBN's series of mini-strokes chewed up and ate the rest in protest of the losing streak. I'll edit this as I have free seconds. Leave salient links in the comments if you like.

Question Time For Mr. Quenneville: Hawks 2 - Avs 5

2012-02-08T05:17:52Z

I kind of feeling like Porky holding on by a thread to Planet X after Daffy and Marvin blew it up at the moment, that planet being the sanctuary of rationality and logic. My fingers are definitely slipping through the grease of rage and disappointment. But I'll try.

Before I get to the crux of this post, first this thought. I had remained reasonably assured this slide would stop because it hadn't really infected the top of the roster. While Kane hadn't scored, and neither has Hossa, they were still noticeable. Seabrook and Keith were reasonably assured, while the rot was incubating below them. But tonight, Toews had a turnover that led to a goal (though he was given a tough pass by Kane, though if there's one guy you'd trust in traffic...). Duncan Keith tripped the light fantastic on a bouncing puck which he probably should have just gloved forward or something. Brent Seabrook was on birding for Landeskog's winner, though obviously wasn't done any favors by Stalberg's turnover at the blue line. Then again, not every turnover at the blue line should go in the net. If whatever fungal infection has spread to those the Hawks count on and pay most, then it is absolutely panic time and a fight for just a playoff spot very well may be on the cards. However, they'll need to be bad for more than one game before we conclude that.

Ok, on to the main crux. While the frustration and disillusionment with Joel Quenneville has grown in some circles to the point of calling for his head -- at time spearheaded by compatriot and colleague McClure -- I'm not there yet. But I think I see how I people got there.

First up: The Hawks spent three days talking about shoring up the defense, and then went right back to doing everything they couldn't do. Turnovers at the opposing blue line, turnovers in their own zone, bad positioning. I believe you worked on it in practice, why didn't it translate? I guess that could be just as blamed on the players who didn't follow your instructions, but still.

But let's continue. You've basically tacitly admitted your bottom two pairs have sucked, which they have. You juggled them up. That's fine. Didn't really work, but at least you saw the problem. But if the problem is bad enough that you actually shake up the pairings, which you've been loathe to do for your entire tenure here (unlike the forwards), then what can you possibly be holding on to to not give Sami Lepisto a five-game run out? That's right, five games. Not one where he's on pins and needles, knowing that one mistake will land him another month in the hole. Then again, you've probably fucked yourself out of this option by keeping him on the shelf so long. Lepisto is no savior, but you're not asking for a savior. You're asking for 15 solid minutes per night. Again, what are you holding on to here? All of your bottom four d-men could be scratched justifiably, at least for a game here or there. And don't answer with John Scott, or I'm going to find a monk to light me on fire right in the middle of Lincoln Square.

Let's keep going, I'm starting to enjoy this now In Vancouver, Calgary, and tonight in Denver, your power play had a chance to bail you out and get you at least a point. Yet you continue to use a system that has proven without a doubt it doesn't work. Your umbrella, with four guys strewn from circle to circle, piles up bodies in the slot that Duncen Keith or whoever else can't get shots through. With all those bodies, you've taken Patrick Kane's best attribute -- passing and vision -- out of play. All he can see is blocked lanes. You need to stretch the killers. Two point men, or two guys below the goal line, or someone behind the net to get their heads to turn. Kane needs lanes to exploit, your point men need more than a hole only The Force can get a shot through. But you've never even thought of changing things around, except when injuries made you.

Not done yet. I'm on a roll. Besides the turnovers and a block against chipping bucks along the wall to get behind the Avs defense, you couldn't adjust to what the Avs did to you. It was clear that the Avs were putting all three forwards behind your forwards on the breakout, and the Hawks never bothered to close the lanes through the neutral zone to get the puck to them. You didn't send a second forward in on the forecheck to sap up the time those Avs blue-liners had to pick a pass. You didn't pull that one forechecker back and play something of a trap to close those lanes. Your three forwards were always above the red line when the puck entered the Hawks zone, consistently leaving two Hawks defenders to deal with three charging forwards. Your d-men couldn't move the puck well enough to go the other way. And yet you didn't change anything. Or maybe you tried and your players didn't listen? Neither is particularly encouraging.

If I didn't know any better, Q, I'd swear you're out of solutions. You juggled your lines, and that's all you ever do. No change in systems, no simplifying things, no nothing. Your team keeps making the same mistakes, and keeps trying the same things. Is it you or them?

Maybe you would answer that it wouldn't matter, this is the team you have with all its warts. Ok, reasonable argument. So I'll include Stan in this. Your coach is telling you that you basically need a whole new second pairing. That's right, you need two d-men now, even if it means demoting your pet Leddy. That choice that I wondered if you'd have to make, when you'd have to decide what's more important -- Leddy's development or a chance at this year's Cup -- very well may be upon you. What will you do?

It's not bomb shelter time yet. The big red button does not need its cover removed. Yet. But the distance to be covered to get there could be gained by a simple counter trap at this point. The Blues and and each got points tonight. The gap is widening. What's your response, Mr. Quenneville and Mr. Bowman? Do you have one?

Hawks at Avs 3rd Period Thread

2012-02-08T03:45:02Z

Made the choice to go away
Drink the fountain of decay
Tear a hole exquisite red
Fuck the rest and stab it dead

Hawks at Avs 2nd Period Thread

2012-02-08T03:00:05Z

Lick around divine debris
Taste the wealth of hate in me
Shedding skin succumb defeat
This machine is obsolete

Hawks at Avs 1st Period Thread

2012-02-08T02:00:21Z

So impressed with all you do
Tried so hard to be like you
Flew too high and burnt the wing
Lost my faith in everything

Just Do It: Hawks at Avalanche Preview/Pregame Thread/Travel Lounge Brawl

2012-02-07T19:59:21Z

vs.
FACEOFF: 8pm Central

TV (otherwise known as bitching about the hit stats)/RADIO (otherwise known as the logical broadcast:

CSN, WGN Radio

KEEP THEM, LOVE THEM, LET THEM NAME YOU GEORGE: Mile High Hockey

Yeah, going real obscure with the Hawks picture, because I want to. Believe me, if you don't get it, it works.

We're not asking for much tonight. It doesn't have to be pretty, in fact I would almost prefer it isn't. A good road game is rarely that. It doesn't have to be dominant, though that would be nice. It barely has to be functional. All it has to do is end up with two points. Two points to quiet some of the lunacy those of us with a brain have had to put up with recently. Two points to start to instill anything resembling confidence that the Hawks can fully turn this around on the rest of the trip. They can't do that solely tonight, but they can plant the seeds. Two points just to remember what it feels like.

As I've said before, losing streaks are a terrible time to judge a team, just as winning streaks are. But I'm not wholly convinced this losing streak is as bad as some have portrayed. It started with two losses to the hottest team and goalie in the league, both without Toews. The next was more than acceptable performance in Vancouver that Cory Schneider held the dam against. But the last two have been disheartening, with the defensive and goaltending Seuss-ical in Edmo and the general questions they seemed to be asking themselves against Calgary. In the end, not a total collapse.

As you know by now, the lineup blender has been hit again. But when you lose five in a row, it probably should be. On first blush, these lines don't make any sense. It's two scoring lines and two fourth lines. But we know how this works. They go for two periods, and then generally they shake out to something that looks right. On defense, Hjalmarsson will continue his demotion to the third pairing, while Nick Leddy can return to his natural left side and play with Steve Montador, who once again will do nothing to warrant the bile spewed at him by the unwashed and I'll still be confused.

The power play will continue to be clown shoes.

Oh look, the Burgundy and Blue have lost five in a row too! But despite being in 12th, they're only three points back of eighth. As long as that continues to be the case, those of you wanting to scout J.S. Giguere tonight as a possible deadline pickup for the Hawks can probably forget it. The Avs are still without Matt Duchene, and the main story for their side tonight is the debut of prized defensive prospect Tyson Barrie. Avs fans are pretty excited about 2009's 3rd overall pick who has 72- and 54-point seasons in the WHL to his name (say, didn't Shawn Lalonde have those too?).

The past two years, the Avs have been a fissure where you don't want one for the Hawks. No secret why really. Since the Hawks D got all skittish, the speed and aggressiveness that the Avalanche attack it with has caused a ruckus. Tonight, I'm curious to see how Leddy deals with it now that he doesn't have a crash-test dummy for a partner. Or maybe Leddy was the problem all along, and brought Hammer down with him? Only one way to find out.

Won't be easy, Giguere has been excellent for the Avs and they'll be as desperate as the Hawks. But after a total heartbreaker of a loss to Vancouver on Saturday, there's every chance the Avs' mental state could be slightly fragile. An early lead could lead to it falling off the mantle. To get there, the Hawks might want to be less concerned with flying the zone to get to the neutral zone the Avs have a habit of leaving totally naked. Far too often we've seen the two defensemen isolated. The Hawks best performance recently in Rogers Arena came when the forwards and d-men were in unison, close to each other for quick passes to go the other way. Fuck the Hollywood shit, it's about puck support tonight, it's about simple tonight, it's about being correct tonight.

Let's Go Hawks.