Jump to content
The Official Site of the Chicago Blackhawks
Sign in to follow this  
Madrose

11/09 Hawks vs Flyers

Recommended Posts

LordKOTL said on On 11/10/2017 at 5:50 PM:

Overall? No.  But my point was more "right tool for the job". Defensively Franson is Meh <moreso than Keith>, but a 5-3, D shoudn't be a major issue requiring the best defensive players.

what is true is Keith, on the PP, much like that brother in law with the mullet no one likes to talk to at family reunions, doesn't work.

the counterpoint of Franson and Keith mimicing Kane and Panain's failed Harlem Globetrotter act is well taken.  But at this point any grace to any skater star should be gone.  Best guy for the role should get it...regardless of tenure, salary, or if they wear a letter.

If that means no Keith on the PP, so be it.  If that means Kane gets 3rd line minutes because he doesn't give a rip, so be it.

I think you're wrong here. Just because it's a five on three, that doesn't mean a team can afford to throw a 3rd tandem D-man out there and think all is well and that there's nothing to worry about.

Keith is still the best guy for the role, with his play recognition, skating, keeps, passing, etc.

I don't know: I get people are mad about the core under-performing, but this solution falls in line with the typical responses of, "replace the top line with the 4th line," and I don't mean to rag on that thinking necessarily; but I do think it's just way too knee-jerky and not very realistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Granada said on On 11/13/2017 at 9:30 AM:

I think you're wrong here. Just because it's a five on three, that doesn't mean a team can afford to throw a 3rd tandem D-man out there and think all is well and that there's nothing to worry about.

Keith is still the best guy for the role, with his play recognition, skating, keeps, passing, etc.

I don't know: I get people are mad about the core under-performing, but this solution falls in line with the typical responses of, "replace the top line with the 4th line," and I don't mean to rag on that thinking necessarily; but I do think it's just way too knee-jerky and not very realistic.

I disagree.  His keeps are his only redeeming factor on the PP--and that's less of a necessity of the 1st unit compared to the 2nd, and even less when we're up 2 men.  His passing is not that good anymore, he hesitates too much for the pass and the shot, he (and everyone else) are planted in spot and immobile, and he can't hit the net.

The worst-case scenario is a shorthanded breakaway...which already happens when Keith is out there...which means the worst case is that we're dealing with shorthanded breakaways but we have a player who has a point-shot that can hit the net and generate a scoring chance.

For Keith right now IMHO his best role to help the team is on the PK.  He still excels there.

IMHO it's really low relative risk to see our lower-tier D-men out there on the PP (especially the 5-3) because right now Keith just isn't getting the job done.  And if it's same old-same old...we can always put Keith out there again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LordKOTL said on 18 minutes ago:

I disagree.  His keeps are his only redeeming factor on the PP--and that's less of a necessity of the 1st unit compared to the 2nd, and even less when we're up 2 men.  His passing is not that good anymore, he hesitates too much for the pass and the shot, he (and everyone else) are planted in spot and immobile, and he can't hit the net.

The worst-case scenario is a shorthanded breakaway...which already happens when Keith is out there...which means the worst case is that we're dealing with shorthanded breakaways but we have a player who has a point-shot that can hit the net and generate a scoring chance.

For Keith right now IMHO his best role to help the team is on the PK.  He still excels there.

IMHO it's really low relative risk to see our lower-tier D-men out there on the PP (especially the 5-3) because right now Keith just isn't getting the job done.  And if it's same old-same old...we can always put Keith out there again.

Franson was out there on the 5 on 3. He didn't look good. Who else is there? Rutta?

Toews and Kane have sucked on the PP also. Who should take their place? Or are we just replacing Keith?

Edited by Granada

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Granada said on 21 minutes ago:

Franson was out there on the 5 on 3. He didn't look good. Who else is there? Rutta?

Toews and Kane have sucked on the PP also. Who should take their place? Or are we just replacing Keith?

At this point I think all bets have to be off in terms of tenure or whatever.  The team has to go with whatever works--or barring that whatever works best.

Now, I do admit that part of that is the PP scheme...or lack thereof.  Right now our powerplay is as effective as the boxing strategy of battering the opponent's fists with your face.

Ideally, the PP scheme would be the 1st to change.  I don't think that happens until Q gets his walkin' papers.

Barring that, you take the pieces that aren't working and within reason, replace them with someone who is.

The reason I'm focused on Keith is that he hasn't been working for a long while--more than just this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever works best is Keith, Toews, and Kane on the PP units, even if they are underachieving -- because this team lacks depth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Granada said on 34 minutes ago:

Whatever works best is Keith, Toews, and Kane on the PP units, even if they are underachieving -- because this team lacks depth.

If they aren't scoring or contributing to scoring on the powerplay, and they depth guys are, the only way they're still the best is if the depth guys are giving up goals on the PP.

Right now Keith leads the team in PP missed shots--with 9.  He's made a SoG 10 time.  Only Rutta has a near 1:1 shot/missed ratio (1:1), and only forsling has a 0 shots/1 missed shot stat.  Every other player with a shot has a 66%-or-better chance at hitting the net.  Further, he's got the worst conversion rate.  He's shot the puck on the PP 19 time, he's missed the net 9 time, had a SoG 10 times, and never converted. Only Sharp is comparable (shot it 17 times, missed 5, SoG 12 times, and 0 conversions). 

While the whole PP is stagnant...Keith is definitely not helping.  If they're going to get Seabs and Sharp off of the PP for not being good on it...Keith shouldn't be far behind.  After all, Rutta may have a 1 Sog: 1 MsS wich is close to Keith's...but he actually scored a PPG.  Keith's still goosegged.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Because he's out there the most and the others are out there the least.

Here's the thing: your best players are your players, for better or worse. People can say things like "insert so-and-so for Kane," or "insert so-and-so for Toews," etc. -- but that's a fool's errand.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Granada said on 33 minutes ago:

^ Because he's out there the most and the others are out there the least.

Here's the thing: your best players are your players, for better or worse. People can say things like "insert so-and-so for Kane," or "insert so-and-so for Toews," etc. -- but that's a fool's errand.

Kane and Toews have been the ones converting on our anemic PP when it has converted.  Ditto with Panik...and Ani.

Your best players aren't your best players in every given situation.  Kane, for example, should never see any PK time when the objective is to kill the penalty.  Cherry-pick at the red line for a goal?  Sure.  But that's only in the waning moments of the game when the team needs to score and definitely not when the objective is to kill the penalty; that's just courting disaster.

Keith hasn't done much of anything positive on the PP--not just this year but going back the last few.  His best asset is keeping the puck in the zone, but his passing and timing of his passes and shots have been question.  And I don't need to mention his point shot since it's "accuracy" is well-documented and has been for a few years back.

If the team is trying to score (which is the whole goal of the PP in most game situations), you need your best scorers out there, and right now that's not Keith.  Franson, Forsling, & Seabrook have generated the same amount of PP O on far less shots and far less missed shots, and Rutta has generated more in far less.  There's no reason that Keith couldn't be demoted to 2nd unit, or even off the PP, because the risk of doing so is low.  At worst, their numbers regress to Keith's and the goalie has to bail them out--which is exactly what's happening now--no net change.  At best, we get more offense on the PP blueline.  If it doesn't work, we can always go back to him on the point. 

Now, if it's late in the game and you want the PP to help the other team in their end, then Keith is the go-to guy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not every given situation, but some, like special teams and last minute scoring drill.

Keith is better than anyone we have. Franson is the only other option, and he's nothing but a bottom tier D-man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Granada said on 1 hour ago:

^ Because he's out there the most and the others are out there the least.

Here's the thing: your best players are your players, for better or worse. People can say things like "insert so-and-so for Kane," or "insert so-and-so for Toews," etc. -- but that's a fool's errand.

Why ? Is it a fools errand to yank CC from the net in the 3rd period because the players in front of him played like crap? Yeah CC's fault or is it the feel good thing for a coach to yank a core player who has been the best damn thing for your team this year to send a message to the rest of the core players who will never ever in the rest of their contract years see a pressbox because they don't deserve that treatment? Kane and Toews were coddled up to their big paydays by players who played through the bad years. Time for them to carry their weight and the baton that was passed to them to keep this organization successful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Creature1958 said on 1 minute ago:

Why ? Is it a fools errand to yank CC from the net in the 3rd period because the players in front of him played like crap? Yeah CC's fault or is it the feel good thing for a coach to yank a core player who has been the best damn thing for your team this year to send a message to the rest of the core players who will never ever in the rest of their contract years see a pressbox because they don't deserve that treatment? Kane and Toews were coddled up to their big paydays by players who played through the bad years. Time for them to carry their weight and the baton that was passed to them to keep this organization successful.

No, that's common.

It isn't common to insert a 4th line in place of a 1st line (unless you want the opposition to love you as a coach) or insert a 6th D-man in place of a top D-man.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Granada said on Just now:

No, that's common.

It isn't common to insert a 4th line in place of a 1st line (unless you want the opposition to love you as a coach) or insert a 6th D-man in place of a top D-man.

Does that come from the leaders of this team? Guess you don't remember the years when our 3rd and 4th lines were the shut down lines. Oh wait you were too giddy with Toews and Kane scoring and winning Cups to realize that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Creature1958 said on 16 hours ago:

Does that come from the leaders of this team? Guess you don't remember the years when our 3rd and 4th lines were the shut down lines. Oh wait you were too giddy with Toews and Kane scoring and winning Cups to realize that.

I remember that quite well -- it was when we had actual depth.

"Giddy with Toews and Kane scoring and winning cups to realize that"....um, okay. I think we all were, weren't we? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Granada said on 15 minutes ago:

I remember that quite well -- it was when we had actual depth.

"Giddy with Toews and Kane scoring and winning cups to realize that"....um, okay. I think we all were, weren't we? :lol:

Yes we were and hope to be revisiting it very very soon. I wish Q would just try the 4th line as the shut down line for a game or two I think they can do it then we can see if Toews and company can contribute offensively.

 

Dear Santa:

I would like as my present this year for Q to see if the 4th line can be successful as a shut down line against the opponents top scoring line. Just a game or two then if it is deemed a broken toy as many are after the first 2 or 3 hours after they are opened I will be OK with that.

 

Sincerely The Christmas Creature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×