A Half Effort and Zero Reward: Nathan MacKinnon 6, Hawks 3

Oh, to have just ten minutes back from that game.
In that ten minutes (more like 11, but whatever) Colorado scored four times, took what seemed like half of their total shots and pulverized The Hawks in puck possession.
It didn't help that The Hawks were shorthanded most of that time but, hey, you make your bed, right?
Otherwise, The Hawks weren't completely terrible.
Some quick Bits:
* Anton Forsberg was not sharp.  Circumstances were not ideal, with the penalty parade and several coverage errors in front of him but, really, 3 of the 5 GA looked soft from my angle.  Another poor start will possibly cause a phone to ring in Rockford.
* Nathan MacKinnon simply ran amok.  When he decides that's what he wants to do there's not much you can do about that.

                                           This is not how it looks, but it may as well be.
* Poor Coverage and Soft Play - the first GA was a double-shot, with Rutta taking way too much time doing whatever he thought he was doing behind the net, while Forsling stood idly between two COL Players, not covering either of them.  On the third COL goal it was a gamble lost by Kempny that led to the Av's breakout, and he and Sharp were thereabouts when MacKinnon tapped the goal in, but as spectators, watching but not actively checking anyone.  It didn't help that Seabrook had given up his gap and resorted, yet again, to laying himself out.  On the fifth GA, the guy in the most dangerous place on the ice was the only one not being covered.  All small mistakes with big consequences.
* Too Many Odd-man Chances - yes, this again.  I have no problem with the D joining the rush, and they've been doing that a lot lately but, when the puck inevitably comes back toward The Hawks' zone there is One Guy Back more often than not.  It seems to me that the D needs to tone down their offensive adventures and/or The Hawks' forwards need to ensure that someone hangs back to support the lone remaining D-man.  As it is there appears to be very little communication in this regard.
* Forsling was hurt in the first period and left the game.  Truthfully, The Hawks played better after he left.  Coincidence?  Let's see.

                                                            Crow's lament.
Was there anything GOOD to say about this game?  Sure.
* Cody Franson was excellent, full-stop.  More, please.
* Crawford, in relief, was very good.  He didn't see a lot of action but he did make a tough pair of saves on a shot-rebound combo in the third.
* Shots-for and Possession - all very good.  The missing piece element here is turning those shots & chances into goals.  That, and not having every single error end up in a goal against.

"Despite The Outcome": Predators 2, Hawks 1

I have so much to say about this game I've actually been typing all night!  Okay, of course I haven't and, in fact, I missed half of the third period because of a sick puppers, but let me have a go, anyway.

* All Change: all four lines and each D-pairing were altered going into this game. It's tough to judge whether or not this gambit worked or not based on a single game.  A casual observer might remark "they lost - there's your answer", but of course it's not as simple as that.  Also, Coach Q shuffled his lines more or less back to how they were on Wednesday for most special-teams and in the late going when they were trying to net the equalizer, so there's that.  Despite the result, though, I saw some interesting things, some of which might be the result of the new line combos.  More on that in a bit.
* Shots!  The Hawks outshot NSH 44-30, which is possibly the first game in which they outshot anyone in weeks.  While that's quite encouraging, how come only one goal for?   How about...
1) Pekka Rinne was outstanding.  It's probably safe to say that his hip isn't bugging him any longer
2) More chucking by The Hawks, which I'm not entirely opposed to but, if that's the plan, you have to take a lot of shots to make it work, and...
3) Rebounds - Rinne did not yield many and The Hawks failed to pounce on more than a handful of the few he allowed

* Nick Schmaltz finally returned from his injury (despite "playing" the last four games) and was the best Blackhawk on the ice.  I don't know what changed, as I doubt Schmaltz' resurgence had much to do with Panik drawing in on his left, but it was terrific to see him moving with urgency and being so creative.  He should have notched his first point since Game One after flat-out taking the puck away from Subban.

* Kane's Penalty - okay, that was 100% a screw up by the referees.  It happens and we'll all move on but, man, that call could not have been more poorly timed, as The Hawks had put together a short string of great shifts and having to endure another PK really messed up their momentum.
* Defense Not All There Yet - it was generally a better effort than in recent games, and I see the six guys that played last night as the "ideal" group at the moment, but there were still a handful of ghastly things that went on.  Early on it appeared that the Seabrook - Forsling duo might be okay, as Seabrook took a more conservative role as Goose was more often the one to carry the puck forward.  That kinda fell apart with all the penalties, though, as Q chose to reunite Forsling and Rutta again for PK duty.  Kempny & Murphy were alright, which I can accept, and Rutta with Keith was mostly good; Keith was fairly solid defensively but, hoo boy, did he struggle with his passes, the worst of which arguably costing The Hawks the game, in which he threw Calle Jarnkrok a rose right in front of Corey Crawford.  Meanwhile, Seabrook only performed his signature bellyflop "move" once last night, which is an improvement over recent games.
There were still a worrying number of odd-man rushes by The Predators, though, but some of these guys might need a game or two to establish how they're going to position themselves alongside a new D-partner.  It's a work in progress.

                                     I don't want to know what was going on here.

* At Forward....I dunno.  The Hawks were buzzing the NSH zone for much of the game, crushing The Preds in the possession dept., but only one of the tweaks among the forward lines really caught my eye.  DeBrincat looked perfectly at home with Saad & Toews and could, in time, be the guy who can dart into the gaps to take a pass from the aforementioned corner-men.  That said, my dog could pot 10 goals playing with Toews & Saad, but I thought DBC looked good there.
Panik with Schmaltz & Kane...also fine, but I kinda think Panik is going to do the same stuff, good or bad, no matter what line he's on.  He could maybe have kept his feet moving a bit more to make more of his rather deceptive linemates, as he was often content to simply park it up in front of Rinne.  Another work in progress, I suppose.
Hayden was alright on the third line but it wasn't a large sample as they actually didn't play together a whole lot with all the penalties to both teams.  That's probably worth another look.
And finally, Hartman.  I assume his placement on the fourth line is equally punishment and "he has to go somewhere". He hardly played and I hardly noticed him.  With only a single point in his last six games and, to be honest, far too much goofy histrionics, lately, he needed a change, too.

Press on, I say, give these lines and pairings another game or three.  Q persevered with the previous groups so long while they were accomplishing nothing one hopes he'll have the patience to see this experiment through.
Colorado tonight, with both teams having played and lost last night, although The Hawks' can take heart that they coulda shoulda got at least a point vs. NSH, whereas The Avs were tuned up 7-0 by VGK.  Two teams with lots to prove AND NOTHING TO LOSE, ho ho.

The New Normal: Golden Knights 4, Hawks 2

Last night's nightmare marks yet another garbage effort, making it something like six consecutive games in which The Hawks were found lacking.  This was a golden opportunity to get back into something like a groove, too: a game after a few days rest against a team still finding its feet, with their third-string goalie making his first-ever NHL start.  It should have been easy.
Yet, lately, The Hawks have made most things look difficult.  Quality chances have been scarce by their standards, defensive errors have been legion and I don't know when the last time someone in the top-six has collected a rebound.
I don't know what, exactly, is going on here, but of course I have a few ideas.

* The Hawks couldn't make a pass for the first half of the game and didn't improve much in the late going, either.  I lost count of the number of passes in players' feet, on the wrong side of their body and way-too-soft cross-point passes that left the recipient, who should have had enough time for a good shot or another pass, under pressure from a VGK forechecker.  As in the last game, also, there were far too many path of least resistance passes, in which the puck was dispatched to the nearest teammate, regardless of whether they were ready, being checked themselves or heading in the right direction.
* Were Nick Schmaltz' first couple of games a mirage?  Is he still not quite right after being banged up almost three weeks ago?  Has he lost what little nerve he had at the beginning of the month?  Since returning he's only shown brief flashes or creativity and hasn't won a board battle, period.  Patrick Kane has appeared utterly disinterested a lot, lately, and I dunno if it's because his line hasn't been clicking or if his line isn't clicking because he's only been pushing himself 10% of the time.

Our best at work, being split by A Guy

* Team Defense: it's been poor.  Rutta and Forsling have been the most consistent pairing, recently, which is great for them but, holy shit, if that's the new reality on The Hawks' back end it's gonna be a long season.  Keith's performance has wobbled between "okay" and "brutal" and, as for Seabrook, when his killer move is to flop onto his belly and wave his stick about you really start to question why he's pulling 20+ minutes every game.
* The Toews Line has been posting shots and getting okay possession numbers, but the tangible results just haven't been there.  I wonder if they're leaning too hard on a crash-the-net kind of approach, as that's the line that stands out as being awfully bunched up in front of the opposing net, too close for a short pass or to get much in the way of rebounds.  It just feels like the rewards have not been in line with the effort.
* I've been critical of Coach Q going to the Line Blender™ too soon and too often, but this team is simply flailing and there's been surprisingly little done in terms of line adjustment.  At this point, would it hurt to try pushing DeBrincat up the order, as he's not self-actualizing with Sharp and Anisimov?  Since even the Toews line has failed to produce much, lately, maybe it's time to swap out Saad and Hartman, perhaps, just to see if a change there can spark something. The status quo isn't working, so whatcha' gonna do, Q?

And Foley was clearly drunk last night, wasn't he?

Better, Worse or Just Kind of The Same?: Hawks 4, Coyotes 2

A road win and another two points are always great, but let's not get too far ahead of ourselves, here, because The Hawks took the scenic route to victory and had to lean on some of their lesser lights to pull it off.  Let's get right to the Bits.
* The Opponent was not good.  They have a handful of promising forwards, one pretty good defenseman but a black hole where they thought they put their goaltenders.  With everything ticking along as it should The Hawks ought to destroy these no-hopers.  Yet...
* Shots against remain too high.  There's no way PHX should ever be even on shots with The Hawks, especially given that The Coyotes managed only a single shot on their 4+ minute powerplay.  This "come at me bro'" defensive posture has to change.  
* Coach Q teased us by starting Murphy with Keith but, after the first TV timeout it became clear that he was merely tossing Murph a bone by slotting him into the starting lineup in the barn he used to play in.  Status quo, sadly, was soon restored with Seabrook waddling back to Keith's side for the remainder of the match.
Keith, Rutta and Forsling were all okay with only a rough shift here and there, and even Seabrook wasn't awful if you discount the shot he took on his own goalie.  Murphy wasn't great though, falling all over himself as often as not and, while I previously complimented his willingness to take chances, Oesterle spent the evening writing cheques that his talent couldn't cover.  Against a better team (i.e. any other team) their effort would have been found wanting.

* The Forward lines were all over the place, with Toews' trio enjoying many dominant but unproductive shifts, Schmaltz' and Wingels' lines blowing hot & cold and the Anisimov group having a largely indifferent outing.  Toews' line looks ready to have an explosive game very soon, as their puck movement and awareness are tip-top at the moment, hampered only by some indiscriminate and often inaccurate shooting.  The second line had several great shifts and Hartman, in particular, pursued the puck with great determination all night, but Schmaltz and Kane weren't "there" for all of their shifts.  DeBrincat tried some interesting things but, alas, Sharp and Anisimov were nowhere to be found a lot of the time.  DBC's best play was his cross-crease pass to Rutta, his best option when 10 and 15 were swanning off, somewhere.
* The Penalty Kill got a good workout though, and apart from one lazy clearing attempt, Anisimov was very good in that role.

                                                    May I be excused?

* The Fourth Line had themselves a bit of a night.  Bouma and Wingels' over-exuberance handed PHX that 5-on-3 power play, which wasn't great, but they had enough effective shifts to offset that.  Bouma, of course, managed to keep it together sufficiently to sweep in a rebound for the game winner, while Wingels led the team in hits, put up a couple of points himself and, together, they formed the rush that led to Wingels' penalty shot.  A good effort from those guys.
And of course the penalty shot was a no-goal - Wingels had already lost control of the puck and Dominque had actually pushed it back to him, so shut up, intrawebz.

Next up: Vegas, baby Vegas and, with two days off in Sin City between now and then, it's gonna be a mess.

Repeating Myself: Oilers 2, Hawks 1

I really didn't feel much like typing this, not entirely because The Hawks lost, but as much because I'll be mentioning a lot of the same stuff as in the last post or two, which probably shouldn't be happening after fewer than ten games.  I'm also irritated that, even with the departure of TVR to I-don't-care-where, I again find myself droning on about one particular player. If you think reading the same complaints about the same guy over & over is tiresome well, try writing them.  Let's see if I can muster up any enthusiasm for some bits.

* Shots.  I had no idea that EDM had outshot The Hawks until long after the game, 'cos it looked to me as if The Hawks carried the play for the most part.  The possession stats kinda bear that out, as The Hawks were slightly better there...it was all those blocked shots and shots that missed the net, I guess, that has The Hawks' shot total so low.  That, to me, is a blip, but with a qualification.
* Shot Selection and puck patience were problems in this match.  A lot of Hawks were chucking, and that's mostly okay, but there wasn't a lot of attention paid to what their linemates were up to when they were shooting with such abandon.  Wait a fraction of a second before shooting and maybe your winger is there for a rebound.  Or how about not shooting at all if there are five players standing between you and the net?  I think if they had been a little more choosy there would have been some higher quality chances.
* The Jam was attempted 261 times and failed every time.  Get it right or just stop.
* Oesterle was in for Kempny and he was okay.  He looked slower when facing an actual NHL team and looked a little lightweight in board battles, but I like that he's got some nerve - dude carries on like he's Paul Coffey.
* Forsberg was fine except that he made poor decisions when handling the puck. After only two starts who knows if this is an actual weakness or just a bad night in that regard.  If the former, he'll need some coaching on what to do as much how to do it.
Okay, here's the part I hate.
* Seabrook was horrible, again. I get that Connor McDavid is good for one or more preternatural plays each game, and the pass through The Hawks' crease to Maroon for their first goal was just that but, holy shit, Maroon was Seabrook's guy.  He had one job, but chose to gawk at McDavid instead.
Yeah, he's getting older and we all know, and even expect, that he's getting slower, but what bugs me is that he's getting dumber, too.  Other old dudes like Hainsey, Chara and Orpik have also lost a step (or the entire gearbox in Orpik's case) but they've managed to keep their careers going by adjusting how they play so that they don't have to rely on speed to get by.  Seabs hasn't done that and, until he adopts a more cautious approach, he's gonna be gasping to keep up opposing forwards who just beat him and are skating off into the sunset.
And why does his speed drop-off have to be coupled with bad decisions?  I just don't get that.
Rutta took a lot of shifts with Keith after the halfway point of the game last night so that's some indication that Coach Q isn't entirely opposed to Seabrook sliding down the order, as he should.  Seabs has been a great Blackhawk and a clutch guy so many times, but I doubt he has that in him any longer, and I'm afraid the time to try to trade him has come.  Yeah, he has a no movement clause, so there's that hurdle, but Stan Bowman had better get cracking before the gap between Seab's reputation and his capability becomes so large that they won't get anything in return for him.

Ah well, The Hawks missed the net a lot, hit a few goalposts and got schooled a couple of times by the best player in the world .  Take the point and on to the next...

Rubbish: Blues 5, Hawks 2

It was only a matter of time before The Hawks coughed up a furball like this, but why did it have to be against St. Lewis?  I have gripes, so straight to 'em.
* While Crawford did make many fine saves, many of which he shouldn't have had to make if the guys in front of him had their act together, two goals were squarely on him, and were both borne of momentary indecision.  First, he half-challenged Schwartz, and then didn't really do anything at all, allowing the little fella to easily swoop around him.  Second, on the Brodziak goal, he seemed unsure whether to square up to the shooter or to pay attention to Tarasenko coasting into the slot. While Brodziak's shot was terrific and he might not have stopped it anyway, Crow has got to commit to the shooter in this situation.  If he was wavering because he didn't trust Forsling to take away the pass we've got a big problem.
* How many times in recent years have The Hawks played like garbage after anything more than two days off?  Does it really take 50 minutes to skate off four days' rust?
* TOO MANY unforced turnovers!  Every defenceman except Murphy (!) committed at least one and Seabrook looked determined to set a modern-day record for coughing up the puck under zero pressure.  His pass to an empty corner while on a power play was....breathtaking (or maybe I couldn't breathe because of all the vomiting).
* Only Toews' line was putting in consistent shifts, at least until the final ten minutes when Kane suddenly became interested, but even their efforts were undone repeatedly by their D making bad passes, lazy passes in which they just shoved the puck to their nearest teammate regardless of what direction they were heading or if that player was being forechecked, or simply looking at the puck until a Blues player relieved them of it.
* On the subject of lines, I sincerely hope that Coach Q didn't scratch Kero because he loves the chemistry of the fourth line, because they were beyond awful tonight.  It's also pretty crap that Kero was airdropped in 2C last weekend, it didn't work out, and then he gets scratched because the coach deployed him north of his talent level.

Still....
* Most of the final ten minutes were pretty good, assisted mightily by a power play, but they maintained power play-like pressure after that, causing The Blues to take more penalties.  
THAT.  DO THAT.  
They have to use their speed to force the other teams' hand, to wear them down and to generate chances.  Why does it so often seem like The Hawks figure this out only after a game is out of reach?
* Despite being held accountable for the turnover that led to the Tarasenko goal, Ansimov wasn't bad.  Why was Seabrook passing to a guy in traffic, anyway?
* DeBrincat was tremendous with the puck and a disaster without it.

Coming Up:  a stern talking-to, Edmonton tomorrow night and, we assume, Forsberg in net.  Get it together guys and let's not be The Oilers' huckleberry.

Two Halves of The Coin: Hawks 2, Predators 1

How can a team dominate for half of a game and be completely out-to-lunch for the other half?  It drives me nuts, but it is what it is, right, because we're stuck with Seabrook.

The Hawks came out in the first with a little fire and generated a few almost-chances, but then tripped all over themselves for the remainder of the period and all of the second.  And that second period was an absolute horror show, in which no one could make a pass and the puck was turned over countless times, all while Coach Q fiddled with the second and third lines.  Seabrook was the worst offender with several passes to no one, including a drop pass to....Corey Crawford while his teammates were poised to break out.  I expect he has "33" burned into his retinas as he was left huffing and puffing while Mags Arvidsson streaked away from him at seemingly every opportunity.
Yet, they hung in and hung on, and a timely keep-in by Franson followed by some fine board work by Hayden set up Sharp's backhand goal.  The momentum had swung in The Hawks' favour enough that, by the time they reached overtime, only a bad bounce or a gack of the highest order would deny them the win.  The four shifts in the OT period were their best all night, epitomized by the excellent give-and-go between Saad and Kane.
Here, have these bits.

* No Crow = No Chance:  Crawford was outstanding, once again, especially in close.  Maybe he'll finally get some credit for being one of a handful of truly elite goaltenders without the tiresome disclaimers about "the great defense in front of him" 'cos in recent years it hasn't been that great at all.
* Anisimov wasn't super but he was better than in recent games, getting a few looks whilst stationed in Pekka Rinne's kitchen, and his breakout pass to Panik was superb.  He was actually better when he slid down the order to join Sharp and Hayden.
* Hartman is no center-man but he did alright in the late going and, with DeBrincat alongside he and Kane, the second line put together a string of solid shifts in the third.  The indication is that Schmaltz will be back for the next game but, if not, I wouldn't mind seeing this trio again, or even DeBrincat in Hartman's spot.
* While Franson was caught flat-footed once or twice his offensive acumen was welcome in the late-going, as well.  He made several nice keep-ins and kept the puck heading toward the Nashville goal.  That oughta earn him another game, I'd say.
* Kero's fish-out-of-water state was never more evident than when he goofed up the three-on-two late in the second period.  He does what he does pretty well, but an offensive threat he is not, so to expect more than what he can realistically deliver is just unfair to everyone.
* Toews' line seemed on the wrong side of it for most of the night.  Toews looked creative on the power play with Kane, as well as in OT, but he and his usual linemates generated precious little.  That's just going to happen, sometimes, and I refuse to believe that their honeymoon is over.

Alright, job done, and a wee break before venturing to The Midwest's worst city.  Hey, at least David Backes won't be there to re-injure Schmaltz, right?