Follow me @jaeckel


Every year at the beginning of the season, every team has a prognosis. On paper.

Loaded with ‘ifs’ and ‘thens,’ it tells you how things might play out. Sometimes, they present an accurate portrayal; other times, they’re way off. And this is one of those prognoses. But what I will try to do is be fair, objective and thorough.

From 40,000 feet, let me start by saying this: the Hawks could be very good or very disappointing.

There’s more than enough talent, on paper, assuming some of the ‘ifs’ become ‘thens,’ for a deep playoff run. However, I also believe that without an upgrade or two sometime between now and the trade deadline in early April, this team can’t win the Stanley Cup.

There is also the possibility that the Hawks take a key injury or two, a player or two being counted on for a bounceback season fails to deliver, and the wheels could come off in a hurry.

Before I delve in to specific positives and negatives, and assuming there are no trades made between now and Friday, your opening night lineup looks something like this:

Dan Carcillo-Jonathan Toews-Marian Hossa
Patrick Sharp-Dave Bolland-Patrick Kane
Bryan Bickell-Andrew Shaw-Viktor Stalberg
Brandon Bollig-Marcus Kruger-Michal Frolik
Jamal Mayers

Brent Seabrook-Duncan keith
Johnny Oduya-Niklas Hjalmarsson
Michal Rozsival-Nick Leddy
Sheldon Brookbank

Corey Crawford
Ray Emery

The improvements for this team over last year’s first round and out club? A deeper defense and a lot more physicality and sandpaper upfront.

Say what you want about Brandon Bollig, he’s a much more useful player than the guy
he’s essentially replaced: John Scott. Together, Bollig, Andrew Shaw and Dan Carcillo give the Hawks a lot more agitation, intimidation and hits on opposing defensemen—they also give you more PIM and the potential for misconducts. Still, to my mind, the positives here outweigh the potential negatives—and it was evidenced by improved play from the Hawks after Shaw and Bollig came up last season.

The defense, adding Rozsival and Brookbank and subtracting Sean O’Donnell and Sami Lepisto, should be improved. Rozsival is a solid NHL defenseman who looked to still have some tread left on the tire in last season’s playoffs. Brookbank, according to my early reports, has been a pleasant surprise as far as his positioning and use of his stick in the defensive zone in Hawk practices.

And here’s the thing: between these two and Johnny Oduya, the Hawks have added a lot of shot blocks since last March. And Niklas Hjalmarsson is already one of the league’s best in that category.

This, in turn, should have a domino effect, helping a weak penalty kill and thus the confidence of one Corey Crawford (who we will discuss further in the, ahem, negatives).

I like the top line of Carcillo, Toews and Hossa quite a bit. And I like it even more stacked up with the second line of Sharp, Bolland and Kane. Now Joel Quenneville has some real options as far as matchups: two skilled lines, one loaded with power, the other with speed and finesse.

Bolland is the key to making this go. The team has long expressed the “belief,” if not the actual commitment, that Bolland could be a 2nd line center. Now he gets his chance, with a premier finisher on one wing and a premier setup guy on the other.

The third line of Bickell, Shaw and Stalberg is an area of concern. Although Shaw came up through junior as a C and took a draw now and then last year, he really has little pro experience in the pivot. That said, Shaw is a winner. A guy who makes things happen through force of will. And maybe his will is monumental enough to get decent production out of the talented but wildly inconsistent Bickell and Stalberg. If Shaw falters, watch for Kruger to take over here. Or if Bolland falters, Kruger could even vault back to 2C.

Kruger and Leddy, in particular, looked stronger, more confident and just plain better this year at Rockford.

And that leads me to the fourth line: Bollig, Kruger and Frolik could be surprisingly effective and able to produce some goals. Bollig can’t do much with the puck on his blade, except he has an elite (yes, elite) release on a laser wrist shot—and it will find the back of the net on occasion. Kruger is underrated as a passer and Frolik has potted 20 goals in two NHL seasons.

So, in theory, these lines could give Joel Quenneville a lot of matchup advantages and balanced production. Or not.

Now the negatives.

Aside from Toews near league-lead in faceoffs, this team is weak in the dot. This, in turn puts the team captain in a position where he has to work much harder than is desirable on the power play and the penalty kill.

GM Stan Bowman has done nothing to address this weakness.

Speaking of concussions, Toews and Hossa, the team’s two best forwards, took bad ones last year. Both say they feel great and Hossa allegedly looks as good as ever, but their health has to be a concern.

And then there’s Crawford.

I’ll be honest, I’ve never been a huge Crawford fan, although I, like many others, had started to buy in to him after an outstanding rookie season and playoffs in 2010-11.

Here’s what we know about Crawford, when he’s on, he can be pretty good. But the reputation he had early in his career as a mentally rock solid goalie who can shake off a bad goal with ease, was a fallacy. Crawford really struggled mentally all year and especially at the worst possible times in the playoffs, likely costing the Hawks two games. After Crawford, you have Ray Emery, playing on heart and an experimentally-repaired hip, and an AHL journeyman named Carter Hutton (who, like Emery, is a battler you might—outside chance might— be able to count on for brief stretches).

Here’s another thing that I am told is true of Crawford: the team is no longer very high on him. Rumors (from good sources) have swirled through the summer and in the last week or so that the team is trying to upgrade the goalie position.

Crawford, I’m sure, is a nice kid and a good teammate. But so was Cristobal Huet. And Huet had considerably more NHL success than Crawford did before being counted on to lead the team to the Cup.

In the end, I would not want to have to bet my job on Crawford carrying the team through a conference or Cup final. And I don't think Bowman does—but it remains to be seen if he can pull off an upgrade before April.

So I'm not making a prediction—there are too many ways this team could go.

All for now,



JJ

Join the Discussion: » 410 Comments » Post New Comment

» Thanks and Farewell

» Where do we go from here?

» Preds at Hawks Breakdown

» "All Teams Have Flaws"

» The Games You Should Win