https://www.cbssports.com...ading-the-league-in-hits/

Nice little piece on Hayden leading the league in hits.

I like this guys' game. He's a leader, will play and throw the body(but not recklessly), and has enough skills to spot play on the top lines. Great find and development.

His deployment in the OZS too.

It's funny to me - some people dislike stats because people misuse them, like Powers tbh. I just dislike the person misusing the stats. Though only in this regard, I like Powers in general and esp his coverage of prospects, though he could do better when people point out his mistakes in terms of presenting numbers (BlackhawksBreakdown has shown me email exchanges with him that are infuriating lol).
- L_B_R

Powers can be an ass outside of his reporting. I guess he had a beef with the reddit Hawks group and was a total Richard about it. They didn't post his articles for a long time.

That is exactly what I said. Their plans will be dictated simply by how well they do this year. If they are in the race he's not going to be traded. Thus, at this time he is NOT on the vine, he has NOT been marketed and NO ONE in the Vegas organization has told ANYONE he is being moved. Logic tells me this. His face is all over that franchise, a brand new franchise who is starting strong with some good vibes going there. You do NOT market that player at this time, EVER. YES, as I SAID if they tank before the deadline McPhee will shop him and likely ask for a King's ransom, because he's McPhee and what will happen is no one will pay his price and he'll lose him anyway.

The moral of this story is this is a NON issue to discuss (Neal being traded here) and I don't think we need a winger anyway given our question marks elsewhere so it's even LESS of a pressing issue, but some people love to do XBOX LIVE Blackhawks management....

Lets put our heads together and come up with the most unrealistic trade scenarios we can come up with
- kwolf68

I sincerely apologize for trying to start a conversation about potential additions to bring this barely above average NHL team back into contention for a Stanley Cup. I'll make sure to run all my posts by you first via PM. Once I have your approval, I will share my thoughts. I mean come on man. Who pissed in your coffee this morning?

Forsling-Rutta were FAR better than the Keith-Seabrook pairing last night and both of those guys are only going to improve, unlike 2+7 who continue their slide into mediocrity. Kempny-Murphy are a very adequate 3rd pair that will only improve with more NHL action and more time playing together. Nick Schmaltz could not hold up 4 periods of 2nd line center duty, so a forward with grit, skill, and a great finishing touch might not be a bad addition to get Patrick Kane going again.

I sincerely apologize for trying to start a conversation about potential additions to bring this barely above average NHL team back into contention for a Stanley Cup. I'll make sure to run all my posts by you first via PM. Once I have your approval, I will share my thoughts. I mean come on man. Who pissed in your coffee this morning?

Forsling-Rutta were FAR better than the Keith-Seabrook pairing lat night and both of those guys are only going to improve, unlike 2+7 who continue their slide into mediocrity. Kempny-Murphy are a very adequate 3rd pair that will only improve with more NHL action and more time playing together. Nick Schmaltz could not hold up 4 periods of 2nd line center duty, so a forward with grit, skill, and a great finishing touch might not be a bad addition to get Patrick Kane going again.
- EnzoD

Deployment, my man. 2-7 are getting top line assignments.

Your argument is actually that the line is bad, not that AA-Kane is a bad combo. Because we know the latter isn't true, but a line isn't just 2 forwards. Balance of a full 3 player line matters and the addition of Hartman does not work. So if Q wants to keep AA-Kane together while Schmaltz is out, he should have changed the winger (Sharp, most likely); if he didn't want to break up Hartman-Kane, he should have picked a center that could transition more (Kero, I guess).

Though tbf the sample is still small and this is missing context of usage / deployment (we have no idea how Hartman-AA-Kane would do if given the same deployment that Hartman-Schmaltz-Kane was given the first couple of games with a lot of OZ because Q kept putting him in the DZ).
- L_B_R

That is completely my point. I stated AA with Kane can work IF the other wing is elite level (Panarin). Moving Hartman in for Panarin is a bit of a downgrade, thus I argue we need more from the center. Schmatlz is MUCH faster and a much better creater than Anisimov, thus his FIT with 38 and 88 is much better than 15s fit there. It's simple combinations. Yes, change the center if you have too. My issue with moving 15 to that line is it screwed that line up and the That's why I think AA seemed to have something working with 12 and 10. Its the styles that compliment each other.

In fact as soon as Schmatlz went down I stated on this blog I was opposed to moving 15 to Line 2. Q did it and first game out he was hitting the Line Rolodex. Kero doesn't excite me on Line 2...so that's why I didn't whine too much with AA there, but that line has been lackluster since that switch. can't wait to get 8 back so these debates go go bye bye.

Your argument is actually that the line is bad, not that AA-Kane is a bad combo. Because we know the latter isn't true, but a line isn't just 2 forwards. Balance of a full 3 player line matters and the addition of Hartman does not work. So if Q wants to keep AA-Kane together while Schmaltz is out, he should have changed the winger (Sharp, most likely); if he didn't want to break up Hartman-Kane, he should have picked a center that could transition more (Kero, I guess).

Though tbf the sample is still small and this is missing context of usage / deployment (we have no idea how Hartman-AA-Kane would do if given the same deployment that Hartman-Schmaltz-Kane was given the first couple of games with a lot of OZ because Q kept putting him in the DZ).
- L_B_R

IMO, what we know based on what we've seen in Chicago, AA looks like a 2C when he has a combination of Panarin, Kane or Hossa on his wings. Maybe AA could make it work with Kane/Hartman under the right circumstances, but is AA at 100% right now? I'm not sure about that.

Personally, I still think AA has been over-rated around here. He did well with two world class wingers and a lot of offensive zone draws. Can he be as effective without the duo of Kane/Panarin and their passing magic?

He looks like he should be slotted as what he is, a 3C.

Deployment, my man. 2-7 are getting top line assignments.
- JRoenick97

Yes, and getting beaten often...something that NEVER happened to Duncan Keith prior to 2015. Father Time is undefeated and looks to be winning again with 2 +7. They were putrid last night. Beat wide and to the net often.

Nisku is right next to my house (5 minutes down the road).
- breadbag

Haha, awesome. Yeah, there is a motor lodge there right off the highway, a few minutes from the airport, where we would overnight before jumping on First Air up to Yellowknife

His deployment in the OZS too.

It's funny to me - some people dislike stats because people misuse them, like Powers tbh. I just dislike the person misusing the stats. Though only in this regard, I like Powers in general and esp his coverage of prospects, though he could do better when people point out his mistakes in terms of presenting numbers (BlackhawksBreakdown has shown me email exchanges with him that are infuriating lol).
- L_B_R

Not disagreeing, but as an example, the Kane / Anisimov Corsi numbers do accurately depict their lack of progress in these few games, yes? Not to extrapolate about their long term success potential together.

That is completely my point. I stated AA with Kane can work IF the other wing is elite level (Panarin). Moving Hartman in for Panarin is a bit of a downgrade, thus I argue we need more from the center. Schmatlz is MUCH faster and a much better creater than Anisimov, thus his FIT with 38 and 88 is much better than 15s fit there. It's simple combinations. Yes, change the center if you have too. My issue with moving 15 to that line is it screwed that line up and the That's why I think AA seemed to have something working with 12 and 10. Its the styles that compliment each other.

In fact as soon as Schmatlz went down I stated on this blog I was opposed to moving 15 to Line 2. Q did it and first game out he was hitting the Line Rolodex. Kero doesn't excite me on Line 2...so that's why I didn't whine too much with AA there, but that line has been lackluster since that switch. can't wait to get 8 back so these debates go go bye bye.
- kwolf68

I know it was your point - that's what I said? Idk I feel like we're pretty much agreeing lol.

I sincerely apologize for trying to start a conversation about potential additions to bring this barely above average NHL team back into contention for a Stanley Cup. I'll make sure to run all my posts by you first via PM. Once I have your approval, I will share my thoughts. I mean come on man. Who pissed in your coffee this morning?


- EnzoD

Lovely sarcasm. Here is the thing you did NOT start a conversation about potential additions. Because Neal is NOT one. You started a conversation about well NOTHING, because a trade of Neal to Chicago is not happening at this time for a MULTITUDE of reasons. Look at that team, their situation, their potential, where they may/hope to be, how they are marketing their team, then look at what the Hawks actually need, the situation with their weakness, the cap, analyze it, think about it and decide if this is in ANY WAY a "potential" move. Last I heard about Neal is he has yet to transition to either Defense (our #1 weakness) or center (our #2 weakness).

I get it, you love to bring up fairy land trades and sometimes they are fun to discuss, but this one is a complete waste of time for all the reason I stated above. If you still believe Neal to Chicago is worthy of discussion I'll politely bow out now, and start my own little discussions about trading for Erik Karlson.

It literally says "legally carries or passes" - a carry and pass on offside has always meant the player is in possession / control of the puck. That's where the issue comes from because no one can claim Seabrook has any control during that situation.
- L_B_R

Well, if a puck nicks the blade of a Wild stick or skate at center iceon its way into the Wild zone, and Panik is parked in front of the Wild net waiting for it, is he going to be called offside. Think so.

I know it was your point - that's what I said? Idk I feel like we're pretty much agreeing lol.
- L_B_R

Well that's no fun. No, seriously, I think we are. YES, to your point if Q wanted to have Kane with AA then I'd have changed the winger. your idea of Sharp was a good one. Q took the safe route and I think mucked up two lines. But he's a smart coach, I trust he'll figure it out...hopefully Saturday.

I thought the young guys looked AVG last night. But I'm not sure I would say they cost us the win. 0-5 on the power play which really does not have rookies. AA looking slow and kane looking disinterested. Keith and Seabs looking like a AVG at best top pairing. Kane, keith, Seabs, Sharp,Teows, Saad were all -2 or greater. I assume empty net goals must count on +/-. Murpghy and kempny did not look great but they kept guys in front of them and battled on the boards. Forsling actually knows how to put a shot on goal compared to either pump fake and shot it into a defenders skate or 5' wide or 5' feet above. the young guys goal is not to hurt the team and the stars are supposed to win it. The young guys were closer to not hurting the team then the stars were to winning it.

Lovely sarcasm. Here is the thing you did NOT start a conversation about potential additions. Because Neal is NOT one. Your started a conversation about well NOTHING, because a trade of Neal to Chicago is not happening at this time for a MULTITUDE of reasons. Look at that team, their situation, their potential, where they may/hope to be, how they are marketing their team, then look at what the Hawks actually need, the situation with their weakness, the cap, analyze it, think about it and decide if this is in ANY WAY a "potential" move.

I get it, you love to bring up fairy land trades and sometimes they are fun to discuss, but this one is a complete waste of time for all the reason I stated above. If you still believe Neal to Chicago is worthy of discussion I'll politely bow out now, and start my own little discussions about trading for Erik Karlson.
- kwolf68

Pretty argumentative about not much. What's the point?

Pretty argumentative about not much. What's the point?
- Hawkjet

Pretty argumentative about an argument about noting. What's your point? If you're going to post silly trade ideas then maybe be prepared for someone to call them into question. I am sorry this hurts your feelings.

I still think we can get Karlsson. Buy low baby. He's hurt....Gustafson, Pokka and a 3rd. get it done Stan.

That is exactly what I said. Their plans will be dictated simply by how well they do this year. If they are in the race he's not going to be traded. Thus, at this time he is NOT on the vine, he has NOT been marketed and NO ONE in the Vegas organization has told ANYONE he is being moved. Logic tells me this. His face is all over that franchise, a brand new franchise who is starting strong with some good vibes going there. You do NOT market that player at this time, EVER. YES, as I SAID if they tank before the deadline McPhee will shop him and likely ask for a King's ransom, because he's McPhee and what will happen is no one will pay his price and he'll lose him anyway.

The moral of this story is this is a NON issue to discuss (Neal being traded here) and I don't think we need a winger anyway given our question marks elsewhere so it's even LESS of a pressing issue, but some people love to do XBOX LIVE Blackhawks management....

Lets put our heads together and come up with the most unrealistic trade scenarios we can come up with
- kwolf68

There is no wait and see. Vegas is NOT making the playoffs. They will be out of the hunt by Christmas if not sooner and in the basement by the trade deadline. That does not mean they ought to trade him now but let's be realistic while 3-0 is a very nice start there is no way they are going to be even a .500 team by season's end.

Wonder if he isn't very happy with his linemates. I think he needs someone with speed or someone who can also hold the puck and make plays on his line. Hartman nor Kero nor Anisimov can really do that consistently.

Hard for him to get into a rhythm if his line loses the puck 5 sec after entering the zone.
- bhawks2241

YThis may sound counterintuitive, but when Bouma and Wingels are outht there with 88, it's not just double-shifting Kane (I mean with those guys why bother?), and it's not just Q pulling names out of a hat. There is a reason. There was a lot of dirty and rough stuff and a lot of chatter last night and . . .

Kane.

Gets.

Targeted.

I will also add that Burish's comments about the Hayden fight were bang on, in spite of the genius blogger(s) at other sites who say that fights are stupid and don't matter.

Sometimes, though not always, they do. Marcus Foligno is in a world of pain this morning. getting punched in the face by him or a guy Hayden's size HURTS. So having a guy like Hayden who can skate a regular shift and join the play AND take care of business. HUGE. Because having him on the ice or even dressed and on the bench, gives guys second thoughts.

Hey, rule fighting out of the game completely Different story. but as the rules stand, while fighting is not the "on-ice" immediate deterrent it was before the instigator rule, it still can be a deterrent to a large extent.

Not disagreeing, but as an example, the Kane / Anisimov Corsi numbers do accurately depict their lack of progress in these few games, yes? Not to extrapolate about their long term success potential together.
- Hawkjet

Sure, the CF% so far does depict how they've been performing, but you can't ignore context in stats. The people who misuse stats are always the ones ignoring context. Hockey is too variable a spot to just not look beyond high level shot numbers. You can summarize and generalize but you can't try to make a huge point with just shots. That's silly.


Context includes but is not limited to:

Who is their linemate? We need to look at any information about AA-Kane with other wingers to compare or else it's just a weak WOWY. We know AA-Kane can work together from a large, two season sample size, so perhaps we can extrapolate that the other winger is an issue for them.

How were they deployed? We need to look at how they performed in different zone deployments. We know that players' zone deployment impacts their CF% at a pretty even rate. We know that from a large, two season sample size, that AA-Kane are effective when deployed in the OZS. They have not been deployed there much as a pair so far so all we can say is they don't work in the DZ. Which is a no brainer because Kane shouldn't be deployed there anyway.

And how were they used? We need to know the quality of lines in which they were matched in game. We know QOC impacts CF%, especially if it's combined with low OZS%. Again, we know from a large, two season sample size, that AA-Kane can face top QOC but in the OZS. In the small sample size so far, we can see that QOC in the DZ is a much tougher assignments and they are no good at it.

So context is important, even when looking at small samples. QOT has the biggest impact, so right from the start, if a line isn't balanced, it's going to be rough. Add in the flip of zone deployment while maintaining a matchup against high QOC, and it's just down right lazy and disingenuous to simply state that "AA-Kane don't work together anymore."

Aight I am done fighting. Just pissed about some youth hockey crap going on with my team....ANY WAY...

as far as the Hawks, I was not in love with the game last night, but it's a long season. Flukey game last night. Move on. Lets get a few more games under our belts before demoting kids to Rockford, making wild line changes, cutting guys or trading guys...I win Saturday v. Nashville (PLEASE) puts the ship right back on course, but it's hockey this team is in transition, I am sure this team will look like a locomotive at times and then other times will look like a 1976 Gremlin....The key is to SURVIVE the long season and grow and be ready to roll for the playoffs. At this moment NO ONE knows what we really have here. That's kinda exciting and nerve racking. It's not 2013 where it seemed like the Hawks could pick the score.

Pretty argumentative about an argument about noting. What's your point? If you're going to post silly trade ideas then maybe be prepared for someone to call them into question. I am sorry this hurts your feelings.

I still think we can get Karlsson. Buy low baby. He's hurt....Gustafson, Pokka and a 3rd. get it done Stan.
- kwolf68

Not really the same thing since there was an actual article about Neal being available at the deadline. He also didn't make any low ball offers. It's not different than the clamoring for Duchene on here that happens every day, but you haven't gone after those posters as much...

Aight I am done fighting. Just pissed about some youth hockey crap going on with my team....ANY WAY...

as far as the Hawks, I was not in love with the game last night, but it's a long season. Flukey game last night. Move on. Lets get a few more games under our belts before demoting kids to Rockford, making wild line changes, cutting guys or trading guys...I win Saturday v. Nashville (PLEASE) puts the ship right back on course, but it's hockey this team is in transition, I am sure this team will look like a locomotive at times and then other times will look like a 1976 Gremlin....The key is to SURVIVE the long season and grow and be ready to roll for the playoffs. At this moment NO ONE knows what we really have here. That's kinda exciting and nerve racking. It's not 2013 where it seemed like the Hawks could pick the score.
- kwolf68

Thumbs up!

Not really the same thing since there was an actual article about Neal being available at the deadline. He also didn't make any low ball offers. It's not different than the clamoring for Duchene on here that happens every day, but you haven't gone after those posters as much...
- JRoenick97

Because Duchene fits a NEED (center, fast, can win draws) although I still would rather have a Top 4 D-man. IF we got Dutch then AA could move to wing so it would not only bolster our speed and faceoff game we'd bolser our wing position by moving a big solid player out there. I am done with it, but wanted to clarify because you called into question why I was reacting a certain way in different situations. Hope I cleared it up.

Not really the same thing since there was an actual article about Neal being available at the deadline. He also didn't make any low ball offers. It's not different than the clamoring for Duchene on here that happens every day, but you haven't gone after those posters as much...
- JRoenick97

Tbf the article about Neal being available was based on a comment where Dreger didn't say Neal was available, just that he could be. He literally says "why wouldn’t you want to trade James Neal to try and get something sweet back before [the TDL]?"

It kind of sounds like Dreger being like "if I was GM, this is what I would do" lol. And the quote was actually in relation to the Habs - they were talking about trade target for the Habs specifically. Quote finishes with "So maybe that’s another name Montreal checks out.”

YThis may sound counterintuitive, but when Bouma and Wingels are outht there with 88, it's not just double-shifting Kane (I mean with those guys why bother?), and it's not just Q pulling names out of a hat. There is a reason. There was a lot of dirty and rough stuff and a lot of chatter last night and . . .

Kane.

Gets.

Targeted.

I will also add that Burish's comments about the Hayden fight were bang on, in spite of the genius blogger(s) at other sites who say that fights are stupid and don't matter.

Sometimes, though not always, they do. Marcus Foligno is in a world of pain this morning. getting punched in the face by him or a guy Hayden's size HURTS. So having a guy like Hayden who can skate a regular shift and join the play AND take care of business. HUGE. Because having him on the ice or even dressed and on the bench, gives guys second thoughts.

Hey, rule fighting out of the game completely Different story. but as the rules stand, while fighting is not the "on-ice" immediate deterrent it was before the instigator rule, it still can be a deterrent to a large extent.
- John Jaeckel

I agree 100%. JJ, do you think Hayden could be effective as the LW with Schmaltz and Kane (not just as a protector but as a net front presence and forechecker?)