The moves over the past week have sparked a lot of talk about physical play and goonery. I wanted to unpack and share my perspective on this, consider the Hawk moves over the past week in light of this perspective, assess where the team is today, and consider what else we might expect for this season. I encourage anyone to patiently explain to me that I do not know what the fuck I am talking about. Thank you.

Up front, hockey is a very physical game (Hell, even basketball is a very physical game.) And as the playoffs approach and advance, the physicality is dialed up. There is a “line” between legitimate physical play and goonery, and when more is at stake, teams are gonna push that line. Any team that wants to succeed must have a strategy for dealing with this reality.

Also, my own preference is for the skill game. I could watch Patrick Kane all day. To suggest, however, that Kane (or even Honk or Donk) are wussies is absurd. To do what they do in a medium of violent mayhem only heightens the value of their artistry. Also, these guys have the puck on their stick a lot, and the rules for legitimate violence in hockey are mostly directed at the guy with the puck. You want the puck on your stick, you got stones, in my book. (Contrast so-called tough guys like Raffi Torres, who rarely handle the puck.)

When I put these two things together, I invoke those martial Romans and their crisp tongue: Si vis pacem, para bellum (If you want peace, prepare for war.)

Crude hockey player classification system

Type I: Skilled, big, physical

The best answer is to load up on skilled, physical players. Guys like Kesler, or Andrew Ladd (man, did I Big Yellow Taxi that one!), or, going way back, Al Secord. Genuine hockey tough guys AND genuine hockey skill players.  The advantage to having such players is two-fold: you’re not sacrificing a “hockey spot” to get physicality, and these guys are on the ice for meaningful minutes if and when the shit goes down. The problem with this answer is scarcity. Seabrook is prolly the only Hawk in this group.

Type II: Skilled, big

Second best are big, skilled but not overly physical players- think Toews, Hossa, Buff. Guys who can’t get pushed around but aren’t going to make the opposition hear footsteps much. Again, scarcity.

Type III: Kinda skilled, big, physical

Next best is a “poor man’s” version of big, skilled, physical. Guys who can play some and hit some. (Bickell, Brouwer, Hjammer from last year.)

Type IV: Physical

Descending another rung on the meathead ladder, we get to Eager level- guys who can play a bit and hit a lot. The Hawks didn’t have anyone like that last year.

Type V: In a class by himself

And at the far end of the spectrum is the Genial Giant.

Type VI: Primarily skilled

Most of the rest of the team was primarily skill guys, and while there is a continuum of physicality here, it’s not gonna make or break a team. Last year, in decreasing order of physicality: Sharp, Keith, Bolland, Frolik, Kopecky, Campbell, Stalberg, Leddy, Kane.

Type VII: “Guys”

…and of course, some plain old “guys”:  Pisani, Dowell, Campoli, etc. from last year.

How much red meat is not enough?

Framed this way, the question is: how important are “Type IV” players to a team? Not so important if your team has lots of Type I, II, and III guys, but looking at last year’s Hawks roster, they didn’t. We all knew losing Ladd, Buff, and Eager would hurt, but none of these holes were filled, making the Hawks one of the smallest, softest team in the league last year, although still highly-skilled.

Here’s why I think deterrence can be a factor.  Other teams will naturally try to exploit a team’s softness. You’d be crazy not to. I recall a clinic administered to the Hawks in Calgary last February. It was the perfect script for beating the Blackhawks this year and, knowing how things get dialed up in the playoffs, I found it ominous. Suppose though, that the Hawks had, say, Carcillo and Eager on the 4th line last year. Does it affect the opposition’s game planning? Maybe I’m naïve, but I think it does.

From an individual player’s perspective, suppose you know you have “immunity”- i.e. there’s no one on the other bench tough enough to scare you. Does that not allow for a bit more of a sense of abandon on the ice (remember, it’s the playoffs now and everyone is jacked), the extra oomph in finishing a hit, pushing the line just a bit farther?

Most of us haven’t played serious level physical hockey, and none of us have played on the NHL level, so I feel like we all can only speculate about this, but this seems consistent with what Quenville was trying to accomplish with the Great John Scott Experiment- to fill a gaping hole as cheaply as possible.

When I look at the past week through this lens, I approve of most of the moves. Brunette is a Type II player, Mantador and Olesz are Type III, Carcillo and Mayers are Type IV, and O’Donnell is big anyway, and the more dubious ones (other than Olesz) are cheap and expendable.

RFAs: WTF?

Michael Frolik. You scored 11 goals last year. You will not be a top-6 forward on a team that doesn’t suck. If you think you’re so great, sign a one-year deal. If you want serious minutes on a seriously good line on a seriously good team, that would be Chicago. You don’t deserve $2 million- here’s $1.7.

Chris Campoli. You kinda screwed the pooch there, eh? The good news is, the Hawks want you back! I understand you also want to stay here- great. Here’s the deal- you’re the number 6 d-man, unless Leddy completely fucks up. Easy minutes, easy opposition, no special teams- $1.7 million- take it or leave it.

Viktor Stalberg. You’re a good kid- here’s $1.2 million.

Blackhawks: Do not cave in to stupid demands here- these decisions are where championships are made. These guys are all replaceable, and either they want a role on a team that is going places, or they don’t.

Next year’s roster as of now

Let’s assume the above sweet talking lands the Hawks their RFAs. At that point, the Hawks are prepared to go to battle with a better line-up than last year:

From here, whence?

But that’s not all. Under this scenario, Stan still has $3.8 mildo to throw around ($3.3 million if the Hawks keep Fluffy around, although it’s harder to defend with the above roster; $3 million even if they overpay their RFAs.)

Adding, say, Chris Drury or a similar hard-nosed veteran FO/PK 4th liner costs maybe a million net (sending Kruger down saves $0.9 million.)

With $2.8 million left, the Hawks could cover just about any size contract at the trade deadline. Alternatively, if Olesz doesn’t work out, or the Hawks can move him, there’s another $3 mildoish to land the elusive missing top-6 forward. None of these moves will leave Stan incapable of finding the extra $1.5 million or so he'll need to resign Sharp. 

Up until now, Stan has pretty much had his hands tied financially. Right now, that is not true. He has marshaled his resources well to this point, in my opinion, but how we handles the RFAs and what he does with his remaining swag will be his biggest tests so far.

Generally, I think statistics are most useful mid-season. Early on, the data just aren’t there, and by year-end, the lattice of potential collapses down to what actually happens, and you can just watch it.

But, there’s still 20 hours before puck drop, and I’m trying to figure out just how I feel about this team. Emotionally, I’m prepared for anything. Defeat is still a very good possibility, and, in retrospect, it would fit this season.  But can the Hawks take two straight here? At this point, it wouldn’t surprise me at all. And in that event, we could again look back on the season and see this as the logical next step.

In this way, the game(s) tomorrow and (I hope) Tuesday will define this team and this season, and regardless of what happens, it will all make sense.

 I like their chances- I think they’re better than the 25% chance you’d get on calling two straight coin flips. What I really like is when Toews, Kane, Sharp, Hossa, and Bolland all play. These are their five bona fide top-six forwards.

[Pause re Bolland: there are 180 top-six forwards in the NHL, by definition. No way Bolland is not in the top 100 forwards in the NHL, probably top 80. Anyone who disagrees can furnish their evidence in the comments.]

Which isn’t to say the Hawks need to cram these guys on the top two lines. On the contrary, spread out over three lines, they pose huge match-up problems for any team. This is my hypothesis.

Another thing about the data I’m looking at: I’m gonna consider only games after November 24, 2010. On that date, the Hawks were 11-11-2; afterwards, they never again touched hockey’s crappy version of ‘.500’. Prior to that time, Campbell had missed several games, Turco had played the majority of games, and the team was in the throes of a ‘hangover’. After this point, Crow was mostly in net and, other than our five heroes, the team suffered no serious injuries.

I think the subset I’m looking at is more relevant/indicative of what we might expect tomorrow, but you may disagree. If you rerun the numbers on the full season, however, the conclusions aren’t significantly different.

In the interest of full disclosure, however, here are the numbers for our Fab 5 through November 24th:

Remember Hossa and Sharp outta the box? I don’t recall Kaner producing so regularly, but there it is, and Toews made up for his customary slow start by Thanksgiving. On the negative side, ugly numbers outta Bolland and ugly +/- from Sharp and Kane.

After Thanksgiving (including playoffs), the Hawks have gone 35-21-7 in 63 games, good for a 100 point pace. Not shabby, but nothing to make a team with the mental toughness of Vancouver quake.

But the Hawks have only had the Fab 5 together for 24 of these 63 games. In those 24 games, the Hawks are 18-4-2. Let’s just pause and let this sink in for a minute. Since Thanksgiving, when the Hawks put their best players on the ice, they win 3 out of 4 games. Aha! Maybe this is why I feel like the Hawks have a better than 25% chance of taking the next two games- at full force, they are as good as anyone.

The flipside of this is that, when the Hawks do not dress the entire Fab 5, they are mediocre, going a mere 17-17-5. Considering that Bolland missed the last 15 games of the year, and, on top of that, Sharp was out for 8 of these games, I applaud the Hawks ability to scrape together 17 points during the stretch, just enough to squeak in.

Let’s consider the table below, which summarizes the Hawks success during the games after Thanksgiving:

This table tells us several things:

·         Having three guys out is not good (though you may argue: sample size!)

·         The Hawks suck when Toews doesn’t play (0-3-0, duh)

·         Bolland out hurts (10-11-2 in total)

·         Hossa and Sharp too, kinda (6-4-2 and 4-3-1 in total, respectively)

·         Obviously, Kane (6-2-1 in total) should be benched in favor of Scott.

I kid, of course, although if Patrick Kane reads this, feel free to interpret it as calling you out- that’s right kid, we need two tomorrow as a down payment. To me, though, these data suggest Bolland (largest sample size) is a very important piece to this team.

Next, I considered how well our heroes did in the 24 games when they were all out there, compared to how they did in other games (again, only since Thanksgiving.) My intuition tells me that a fully-operational death star is a terrible thing to behold, but one that’s only partly-built has these gaping holes where you can fly right in and blow the fucker up.

Here are the numbers, the first row for each player are the 24 games where all hands were on deck, and the second row is the other games that player played in:

I see four stories here:

·         Sharp and Kane are offensive players and, to their credit, produce points whether the team is at full strength or not. From a +/- standpoint, however, they suffer when one of the Fab 5 is out.

·         How many different ways can we say Toews is Superman? When the Hawks are at full strength, he recedes into the background offensively (sort of), but when someone’s out, he elevates his game.

·         Bolland and Hossa are monstrous when the team is at full strength, but fall off the table when the core is not intact, in both scoring and +/-. An intact Fab 5 is crucial to these two playing well.

·         When all five are out there, four of them are basically point a game players (Toews is the exception), and they’re all silly + players. That whimper you just heard was from Sideshow Bob.

Sometimes this year, the Hawks look great. They roll four lines and take it to teams like last year. Other times, they look disjointed, out-of-kilter. I believe this analysis helps explain why this has been the case, and why Hawks fans should be optimistic. They may not win the next two games, but I expect a top-flight performance in any case.

1. Booing this team at end of 2nd period is embarrassing and unacceptable...and puhleez, enough "Detroit Sucks". It's neurotic, defensive, and incredibly flattering to Scum (remember cheesebrains' "Bears still suck"? What a bunch of benders.)

2. Giving up the 3-goal lead was another peek over the edge into the abyss. Not quite as much a glass-chewer as first 57 minutes of Game 4 against Vancouver, but these experiences put steel into the spine of this young team. 3rd period draw was huge.

3. Huet v. Khabi. Slight edge to Khabi, but really, six of one, half-a-dozen of the other.

4. JHC out? Gulp. I thought it was a pretty clean hit.

5. Three goals is not enough to hunker down. Full speed every shift. Again, Scum proves they punish any let-up. Hawks are younger and maybe hit a little harder. Wear 'em down.

5. Game 4 winner takes series? Discuss.

6. I am so grateful for this team. Great ride so far, and I continue to believe.

Let me count the ways...

Patrick Sharp. Since returning from injury, he has given the team a couple of huge lifts, most recently during the dark days midway through game 2 in Vancouver, trailing 2-0 in the game and in danger of going down 2-0 in the series. Bang, bang, tie game, off to the races.

A year ago, he was the sniper on the Toews/Kane line and led the team with 36 goals. This season, despite missing 20 games and being moved around on offense all year, he netted another 26. During the playoffs, Qs most inspired move has been to put Sharp (at 27, a grizzled veteran on this team) with Burish and Eager, on the supposed fourth line.

Which is sick. Arguably, these are the three best hustlers on the team. Among key skill players (Sharp, Havlat, Toews, Kane) Sharp is far and away the most physical, and the kids are flying and banging out there with him. With Sharp developing into an all-around playmaker, look for Burish’s offense to continue to improve.

Martin Havlat. Another veteran (28) who has grown into a complete player this year. Part of the only stable line all year (with Bolland and Ladd), these guys have been tasked with shutting down the opposition’s top line, which they have done all year, as you can tell from their ridiculous combined +74 during the regular season.

It wasn’t all shut down either. The three combined for 63 goals this year and another 11 in the playoffs. Havlat has been a beautiful playmaker and cold-blooded sniper (Calgary game 1, Vancouver game 4), but I’m most impressed with his backchecking and (yes) physical play alongside Bolland and Ladd on this big, tough, and productive line.

Toews, Kane, and Brouwer: If Toews has been a bit banged up but is now feeling better, look out. And Kane, in danger of picking up a "soft" tag, responded emphatically in the Vancouver series. Until Toews fills out, this line will need a bruiser like Brouwer. During the year, Q shook this line up, sometimes breaking up Toews and Kane, sometimes having Byfuglien, Versteeg, or Sharp join them. Sharp has a home now, but don’t be surprised if Byfuglien or Versteeg skate with the kids at some point if the offense lags.

Byfuglien, Pahlsson, and Versteeg. Still waiting to see what the big fuss over Pahlsson is. The latest is that he has a history of giving Detroit forwards fits. We shall see, but as of right now, he’s near the bottom of the Hawks list of forwards. Versteeg and Byfuglien just add to the sick offensive depth. Both can improvise and create their own space and chances. Buff’s a big body in front with a rocket shot from the circle, though he sometimes, mysteriously, disappears, and Versteeg is another great hustler/flyer/banger with offensive skills to boot, though he is prone to the occasional rookie mistake.

Keith and Seabrook. In the interest of full disclosure, I admit to a case of man-love for Duncan Keith. Along with Toews and Havlat, our MVP all year. His speed, vision, decision-making, passing, and defensive positioning are all about the best in the world, and when he’s on the ice, I got this warm fuzzy feeling, like I’m wrapped up in a blanket and Mom’s bringing me a mug of cocoa.

The Vancouver series may have been his worst stretch of the season, though his pass to Bolland for the shortie broke a couple Canuck vertebrae. He’s still +4 for the playoffs (+33 during the season), and he will benefit more than anyone from the six-day layoff. As a student of the game, Dunc will also come out with a trick or two up his sleeve against Scum. If only the guy could score (robbed a couple times by Luongo!)

Seabrook has been our best post-season defenseman, after having a great year. More the bone-crushing prototype with a rocket from the point, he has improved his passing and own zone decision-making immensely this year. Obviously, he’s learned from Keith.

I wouldn’t swap this duo for any other pair anywhere.

Brian Campbell. So, that’s what the $7 million was for. Leads the time with +5 in the playoffs, the guy has definitely turned it up a notch and shut up the critics for now. Instead of being a half-step behind the play, he’s breaking things up, taking hits like a man in order to make plays (was Vancouver running at him?) The last couple weeks must be awfully satisfying for Campbell, who should continue to deliver at both ends of the ice.

…and the rest. Barker has come back to earth after his offensive outburst against Calgary. The guy could still be great, but not this year. Hjalmarrsson, another kid, shows great potential, but made some worrying youthful mistakes against Vancouver. Still, Nick is the strongest defenseman of the three. Walker was more important to the team early in the year when everyone thought we’d be out-hit. Great fight in Vancouver series, but c’mon, the guy is too slow and has zero offensive punch. Anyone got Aaron Johnson’s number?

Khabibulin. Not a great year, not a great playoff so far, but the clear choice over Huet. Had the Hawks been successful in unloading Khabi last summer, they might not be here right now. Besides, look at how the mighty goalies have fallen. Brodeur, Luongo, Thomas. And those hot shot kids, like Hiller and Varlomov. Who’s standing? Osgood, Fleury, and Ward. Good, but not great, just like our guy.

It’s time for me to get behind the Bulin wall. The guy knows how to win a cup. If he bombs, the Hawks are in trouble. If he continues his current play, they have as good a shot as anyone. If he has his best two weeks of the year, they roll.

*************************************

Four solid, relentless lines, three absolutely first-rate defensemen, young legs everywhere, skill, speed, checking, proven, veteran goaltending. Both series so far were 2-2 before the Hawks put things to bed. They get stronger as each game and each series progresses. They have a great chance to steal one of the first two games in Detroit and, if they do, they oughtta win this series. If they knock off Detroit, nothing Pittsburgh or Carolina throws at ‘em could be a surprise.